Free for All: 03/04/15

What’s on your mind?

34 Responses to “Free for All: 03/04/15”

  1. Do I need a WordPress.com account to change the email address I am currently using for notifications that there is a new ICN post?

    I tried changing my email addy at the Subscription Management page at https://subscribe.wordpress.com/?option=settings
    to no avail.

    P.S.
    I am using my Twitter account to post this.

  2. Never mind…I believe I have solved the email notification addy change.

  3. So Mike Barnicke said this morning on MJ that the HRC IS “precluded” from acting like a normal human being because of all her years in politics. Her isolation is just too overwhelming.

    Now Jonathan Capehart says HRC needs to step forward and say how this email situation happened! This did not happen TO HER, it happened because SHE ALLOWED IT TO HAPPEN AND/OR SHE ASKED FOR IT! How stupid do they think we are? As stupid as this country has behaved for many years!

    So….I guess we ought to just move on, right?

  4. savefarris Says:

    Mrs. Matthews to run for the House:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/kathleen-matthews-to-run-maryland-chris-van-hollen-seat-115788.html

    Would Chris be allowed to stay on the air to prevent equal time violations?

  5. “Would Chris be allowed to stay on the air to prevent equal time violations?”

    ^^It’s a good question farris. I can’t think of a previous example but there must be a few cases out there. Senator Sherrod Brown is the only one I can think of who is married to someone in the media, but she works for a newspaper.

    If it were Chris running, there’d be no question but with a close family member (wife, husband, child, parent), and a job as a cable news host, it’s a harder question to answer.

    My guess is; unless he takes on an actual role in the campaign, he’ll be able to keep his show. But it will be difficult for him to keep the two things separate.

  6. Andrea Mitchell just got punked by a fake passenger in the NY airline crash happening now. I’m amazed news networks can’t figure out how to screen for these idiots. It’s all about the rush to be first I guess.

  7. I agree with fritz. I doubt the race would affect Chris’ show.

  8. Matthews addressed his wife’s potential candidacy here:

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-promises-to-be-transparent-and-fair-about-wifes-potential-campaign/

    As much as he loves politics, I bet he’s beyond ecstatic.

  9. Matthews promises to to be transparent and fair? Just like the Obama administration and its’ employees like Hilary Clinton?

    Can hardly wait!

    I am still amazed how no one here, from the owner of this blog on down has not much yo say about the Hilary Clinton email issue. If you don’t talk about are you hoping it will go way? You better talk to the NYT and Washington Post to STOP, STOP, STOP, the presses because it is NOT only Republicans that are concerned about this.

  10. The Hillary Clinton email scandal is unlikely to do any real damage to her run for POTUS. These process ‘scandals’ rarely, if ever, do.

    If there was a ‘smoking gun’ email or emails; that showed she committed a crime or made a serious ethical breach when SOS in the HC personal SOS emails; then Republicans would be justified in their outrage. The problem is there are no emails, that are going to be made public before the 2016 election, that are ever going to do that.

    Republicans will bluster and whine that hidden in these emails is the evidence that will prove whatever ‘scandal de jour’ they are uncovering is real. The Democrats did the same thing with the Bush administration. It almost never works because either those emails don’t exist or they’re gone into the clouds.

    In this case Hillary, just like past email hoarders, will say she is all for making her emails public and that she is just doing what other SOS’s in the past have done. Eventually millions of emails will be made public but nothing of importance will be found. No one outside of the right wing press and Republican Congressional committees will care.

    Voters will decide the next election on jobs, the economy, foreign affairs, other policies and electing the first women POTUS; not a process argument on email discloser. This could even be a deliberate plan by the Clinton campaign to distract the Republicans into fighting the election on a process argument rather than real policies. Who knows.

  11. erich500 Says:

    Fritz:
    This is potentially more than a “process” scandal; it’s possibly a “purpose” scandal. Purpose as in why did she go through this runaround? Among other things, it fits into the view of the Clintons, certainly Hillary, as too secretive and manipulative. Which, frankly, they are.

    The libertarianish columnist Megan McArdle put it pretty well:

    “What can Hillary Clinton have been thinking? On January 13, 2009, she — or, more likely, someone on her staff — registered a new domain: clintonemail.com. And for her entire term as secretary of state, she would use private e-mail instead of government accounts for all her electronic correspondence. She never even got a government e-mail address, which must have taken some doing, because in most organizations, those e-mail accounts are created before the new employee even arrive.”

    Why?
    “It’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that this was an attempt to avoid transparency and accountability for whatever it is she wrote. Such manipulations should severely hurt her presidential aspirations. Odds are, however, that Democrats will rally around her, because what choice do they have?”

    Severely? No but slightly; and yes, the Democrats in the media and outside have no alternative so they’ll rally around her.

  12. I’m not one to get outrageously outraged but this Clinton thing is pretty bad. It stinks of corruption.

  13. erich500 Says:

    The question is: Why? Why did she go through this elaborate run around?

    It’s not the how she did it – the process; it’s the why – the purpose.

  14. “This is potentially more than a “process” scandal; it’s possibly a “purpose” scandal.”

    ^^Whether it’s a process or purpose scandal doesn’t matter. Why she did it can be argued until the cows come home. Republicans and her other political foes, will think there is a conspiracy to hide something and Democrats and her supporters will ,mostly, think she is being persecuted.

    She says, as ever person in this situation in the past has done, she wants everything, that can be released, out in public. The problem is (as she well knows) it will take many months for the State Dept. to clear these emails for security reasons. It’s what happens in all these cases.

    “Purpose as in why did she go through this runaround?”

    ^^Because she could. There are lots of reasons, good and not so good, to do this and it does appears to be technically legal.

    “Among other things, it fits into the view of the Clintons, certainly Hillary, as too secretive and manipulative. Which, frankly, they are.”

    ^^I agree but that fact is already cooked in the cake. It’s not going to change votes in 2016; which is what this is all about.

    Megan McArdie:“It’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that this was an attempt to avoid transparency and accountability for whatever it is she wrote.”

    ^^Yeah probably. So what? If she didn’t say anything that proves she committed a crime (or an ethical equivalent) then it’s just about having a personal email account.

    “Such manipulations should severely hurt her presidential aspirations.”

    ^^In a perfect world, maybe, but in the real world not so much.

    “Odds are, however, that Democrats will rally around her, because what choice do they have?”

    ^^Exactly.

    The Clinton team already has said they want ‘every’ email made public ASAP and the Jeb Bush has only released 10% of his emails thus attempting change the subject and muddy waters. Will they succeed? Probably. Will independent voters care in either case? I don’t think so.

  15. “The question is: Why? Why did she go through this elaborate run around? It’s not the how she did it – the process; it’s the why – the purpose.”

    ^^Being a Clinton; I assume she wanted to be able to control the emails and their eventual distribution. I’ve also heard the State Dept. email system, like most email systems in government, was very slow and cumbersome. Maybe she just wanted to deal with a email system from the 21st century.

    Neither of those reasons are great excuses if you believe in transparency but they also don’t mean she was not acting in the best interest of the country.

    My best guess is the reasons I list above are probably close to the real ones and that she knows there’s nothing really damaging in the emails per-se; so having Republicans fight over getting them for the next two years is OK with her – just like Republicans fighting for the Benghazi emails has been waste of time for the last two years.

  16. savefarris Says:

    My best guess is the reasons I list above are probably close to the real ones and that she knows there’s nothing really damaging in the emails per-se; so having Republicans fight over getting them for the next two years is OK with her – just like Republicans fighting for the Benghazi emails has been waste of time for the last two years.

    The fight over Benghazi emails has been a “waste” precisely because up until 4 days ago, HRC, State, and the WH hadn’t verified that Clinton had a private email account. And the very emails they were searching for would never be found because they were looking on the wrong server.

    And I’m sure there’s nothing “really damaging”, because all the damaging ones are hidden under lock and key. And since they’re on a private email server, we can’t get to them. Which is the whole point.

  17. savefarris Says:

    Remember that time Bob Menendez criticized the Obama Administration for their tact in the Iranian Negotiations?

    Payback’s a b**ch.

  18. savefarris Says:

    I also find it hilarious that Valerie Jarret thinks she can get away with claiming that she had no idea SoS Clinton had a private email account?

    Really ValJar? You never even got a email cc: from the Secretary of State in 4 years?

  19. Valerie Jarrett can claim whatever she wants. Who cares. What’s hilarious is you guys trying to tie everything that happens in the world to the WH.🙂

  20. “Payback’s a b**ch.”

    ^^Menendez has been a thorn in the side of the administration for years now. So as you say; “Payback’s a b**ch.”

    What I’m waiting for is how FNC and the right wing blogs blame Obama and Holder for Menendez’s problems. It’ll be hard but I’m sure they’ll find a way.🙂

  21. “The fight over Benghazi emails has been a “waste” precisely because up until 4 days ago, HRC, State, and the WH hadn’t verified that Clinton had a private email account. And the very emails they were searching for would never be found because they were looking on the wrong server.”

    And yet, they will the next two years in a futile attempt to get the new emails in which, as you say, “I’m sure there’s nothing “really damaging”.

    “we can’t get to them. Which is the whole point.”

    ^^The whole point is not for the Republicans to not get the emails but to do it after they’ve wasted two years battling the State Dept. (who will actually have them) and Hillary has been elected POTUS; because as you say; I’m sure there’s nothing “really damaging”, in them. The Repubs are being punked by the Clintons.🙂

  22. savefarris Says:

    “State Dept. (who will actually have them) ”

    You haven’t been keeping up with current events apparently. The whole point is State DIDN’T have them: they were being housed in Chappaquwa. Against regulation.

  23. “You haven’t been keeping up with current events apparently. The whole point is State DIDN’T have them: they were being housed in Chappaquwa.”

    ^^I realise they are in the Clinton’s possession at the moment but they have to be screened and approved for release by the State Dept. before they can be passed on to the public. It should take many months- at best.

    “Against regulation.”

    ^^Apparently’ and I know you’ll disagree, that’s a matter for discussion and debate.

  24. Oh you are an idiot. Hilary has released 55,000 PAGES of emails. Each one is not an individual email. They are most likely email chains. In addition, these emails are ones HRC and GANG have determined to be released. So…….are you so dense to not think that she would want to hold back the emails which might be troublesome to her? Are we REALLy supposed to believe that she will release every email that she had on her home server? If you do, you truly have a screw lose and there is absolutely no help for you.

    You can’t believe Hilary herself went through all those emails. Most likely it was Huma and Phillipe who DECIDED and then got Hilary’s PERMISSION. Good golly, sometimes you just can’t make up the ridiculousness of people. And I am NOT talking about ME!

  25. “Oh you are an idiot.
    So…….are you so dense
    you truly have a screw lose and there is absolutely no help for you.”

    ” Thanks for your concern about my mental health pam but I think your mistaking this site for one that allows name calling. Have a nice evening.

  26. savefarris Says:

    I realise they are in the Clinton’s possession at the moment but they have to be screened and approved for release by the State Dept. before they can be passed on to the public.

    Please enlighten me as to how State will “screen and approve” the emails that Hillary DOESN’T give to them.

    See the issue yet?

  27. “See the issue yet?”

    ^^Sure I see what your saying. but it’s still a he said she said about how many emails there are and who has them.

    Hillary will say she gave everything to the State Dept. and Republicans will say she didn’t because no ‘smoking gun ’email has been found. It’s never going to be resolved to the Republican’s satisfaction because they know there must be some damning email out there and the Clintons are happy to just say there isn’t and let the Repubs spend countless months and millions of dollars searching for their holy grail email.

    You and your Tea Party pals will keep going on blogs like here because you sincerely believe the Clintons are the spawn of the devil and if you just keep searching you will find the email that will bring them down.

    The thing is the majority of 2016 voters will eventually tire of this debate just like they tired of the Benghazi debate. That’s what the Clinton’s are waiting for and my bet is that’s what will happen.

  28. I was checking out the HLN channel guide today and was surprised to see that aside from the weekend morning news shows and Robin Meade’s show weekday morning shows they have totally abandoned news coverage.

    Weekdays, noon till 5PM, is The Daily Share, a social media/lifestyle show. Nancy Grace and DR. Drew still have PT shows but everything else appears to be just reruns of Forensic Files. I’m finding it hard to see how you can justify calling HLN a cable news network anymore.

  29. Nancy Pelosi kinda threw a grenade into the GOP House caucus yesterday when she said she would support Boehner’s Speakership in the future if the Tea Party crowd in the House attempted a leadership coup.

    We may actually get to see how that plays out soon as the debt ceiling vote is coming up again in a few weeks. I expect we will see a replay of the recent DHS funding circus, with the same results, but with the added drama of Tea Party types going ballistic over this latest move by Pelosi. I’ve got my popcorn ready.🙂

  30. savefarris Says:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-weighs-in-hillary-clinton-private-emails/

    Does anyone actually believe this? He’d have us believe that the most tech-saavy president in the history of the universe never once in 4 years received an email from his SecState. Not even Josh Earnest tried to float that one.

    But Obama did. And Bill Plante let him.

    CBS: Hard Hitting Journalism.

  31. savefarris Says:

    Politico literally gives away the playbook:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/clinton-emails-115847.html#.VPu-y003Opp

    Democratic Party Operatives with Bylines.

  32. Farris: democrats/liberals will believe ANYTHING this President/Hilary/democrats tell them. They still believe it was “a video” that caused our Ambassador in Libya to be killed.

    As a country, we are doomed.

  33. imnotblue Says:

    When we talk about “FOX Haters,” these are some of the people we’re talking about:

    http://twitchy.com/2015/03/07/news-to-us-fox-news-slammed-for-not-covering-selma50-interviewing-crazy-black-lady/

  34. “When we talk about “FOX Haters,” these are some of the people we’re talking about:”

    ^^You may really have something there blue. A few anonymous tweets , culled from millions related to the Selma coverage, from idiots who probably really do ‘hate’ Fox News must represent all liberals and Democrats; just like those on this website, who trash liberals, Democrats, and Obama, represent all of America – in their warped minds anyway.🙂.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: