I found out about Hillary's servers on the news like everyone else, so claimed Obama

[whirlingmerc]

It appears that Obama and Hillary both have ever increasing truth gaps. It appears Obama used a pseudonym to send emails to Hillary's server and was quite aware.

A politically correct lie?

see http://eheadlines.com/more-proof-th...t-knowledge-of-clintons-private-email-server/

which reports

quote
Shortly after Obama’s statement, top Clinton aide and attorney Cheryl Mills emailed Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta saying, “We need to clean this up. He has emails from her. They do not say State.gov.” ..... Fast forward to summer of 2016 and FBI documents released about the criminal probe show President Obama regularly emailed Clinton under a pseudonym, proving he knew all about the server.

unquote

 

[McBell]

3.7

 

[Quetzal]

I wish I had a dollar for every time this topic was drummed up in an attempt to smear Clinton while other, more alarming cases, by Trump are largely ignored. I would have retired by now!

 

[Revoltingest]

I wish I had a dollar for every time this topic was drummed up in an attempt to smear Clinton while other, more alarming cases, by Trump are largely ignored. I would have retired by now!

Ignored?
Anti-Trump threads are breeding like rabbits around here.

But I have a solution for you!
You must stop paying attention to all the noise.
The other option is to stop caring too much.

 

[Notanumber]

It appears that Obama and Hillary both have ever increasing truth gaps. It appears Obama used a pseudonym to send emails to Hillary's server and was quite aware.

A politically correct lie?

see http://eheadlines.com/more-proof-th...t-knowledge-of-clintons-private-email-server/

which reports

quote
Shortly after Obama’s statement, top Clinton aide and attorney Cheryl Mills emailed Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta saying, “We need to clean this up. He has emails from her. They do not say State.gov.” ..... Fast forward to summer of 2016 and FBI documents released about the criminal probe show President Obama regularly emailed Clinton under a pseudonym, proving he knew all about the server.

unquote

What a tangled web she weaves!

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/absolute-power-corrupts-absolutely.html

 

[Quetzal]

You must stop paying attention to all the noise.

I do not define rape accusations of a girl who was a minor as "noise".

 

[Revoltingest]

I do not define rape accusations of a girl who was a minor as "noise".

Were they credible charges which affected your vote?
If no, then it's noise, & not something to get riled about.

 

[Quetzal]

Were they credible charges which affected your vote?
If no, then it's noise, & not something to get riled about.

I am pretty disappointed with your response regarding the specific situation I am referring to. Considering when she wanted to make a public statement she had to withdraw due to death threats and that there is a formal investigation tells me this deserves some attention and discussion. I believe these accusations are serious.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am pretty disappointed with your response regarding the specific situation I am referring to. Considering when she wanted to make a public statement she had to withdraw due to death threats and that there is a formal investigation tells me this deserves some attention and discussion. I believe these accusations are serious.

Why believe these things which reflect poorly upon Trump, yet not believe bad things about Hillary? To give weight to an anonymous accusation which won't even change your vote will reinforce your position. But viewing all thru the lens of reinforcement isn't good for a person. To treat it all as noise will allow one greater equanimity & objectivity. There are bigger issues than Trump's & Hillary's sexual misdeeds....war, economy, taxes, big government, regulation, corruption, etc.

 

[Quetzal]

Why believe these things which reflect poorly upon Trump, yet not believe bad things about Hillary?

Because Hillary has been under formal investigation since this thing has begun and they have come up empty. When Trump's trial date arrives and if he is cleared, then you won't hear a peep from me. But for someone to say it shouldn't be considered and dismissed because it is "noise", well... I think that is a very poor way to approach it.

To give weight to an anonymous accusation which won't even change your vote will reinforce your position.

This isn't about a vote, this is about a woman who claims she was sexually assaulted. Don't you think it should be looked in to?

To treat it all as noise will allow one greater equanimity & objectivity.

I am having a really hard time understanding why this case of sexual assault accusation is noise to you? Or is it because it is against the political candidate you support? This door swings both ways and given he has a formal court date, I think it is worth mentioning, even if you don't.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because Hillary has been under formal investigation since this thing has begun and they have come up empty. When Trump's trial date arrives and if he is cleared, then you won't hear a peep from me. But for someone to say it shouldn't be considered and dismissed because it is "noise", well... I think that is a very poor way to approach it.

Given the massive corruption in government, there is a very real question whether Hillary has been investigated with more than the sanitizing appearance thereof. And new emails are released daily.
I'm not saying she's guilty of anything in particular, but neither has she been cleared.

This isn't about a vote, this is about a woman who claims she was sexually assaulted. Don't you think it should be looked in to?

The authorities or parties involved will do what they think is worth doing.
But you & I can't look into it, other than reading what appears in the media.

I am having a really hard time understanding why this case of sexual assault accusation is noise to you? Or is it because it is against the political candidate you support? This door swings both ways and given he has a formal court date, I think it is worth mentioning, even if you don't.

We're facing an election with 2 main contenders who could wreck or help the country.
Will Hillary make Iran glow in the dark?
Will Trump allow Russia to conquer its neighbors?
Will taxes rise....health care become less available?
This all matters far more than all the emails & anonymous accusations.
So which should occupy your thoughts?

 

[Quetzal]

The authorities or parties involved will do what they think is worth doing.

Worth doing it, in fact, to the point of issuing him a summons. (This is according to what I read, of course.)

So which should occupy your thoughts?

Why can't it be both? Why is this particular case of sexual assault accusation not important enough for you to at least think about? Is it really so hard for you to say "If this turns out to be true, this is a horrible situation." Instead, it is just "noise". I would have expected a more balanced response from you regarding this particular incident. Disappointing.

 

[Underhill]

Why believe these things which reflect poorly upon Trump, yet not believe bad things about Hillary? To give weight to an anonymous accusation which won't even change your vote will reinforce your position. But viewing all thru the lens of reinforcement isn't good for a person. To treat it all as noise will allow one greater equanimity & objectivity. There are bigger issues than Trump's & Hillary's sexual misdeeds....war, economy, taxes, big government, regulation, corruption, etc.

I can't speak for Quetzal, but I believe Hillary used bad judgement on the email issue.

But when I weigh that bad judgement against the sleaze that we know (facts) about trump, then if I deduce that just 10% of the accusations are true (probably a safe bet)... I wouldn't trust the guy to clean our pool, let alone be president.

 

[Quetzal]

I can't speak for Quetzal, but I believe Hillary used bad judgement on the email issue.

I would agree with that.

 

[Revoltingest]

Worth doing it, in fact, to the point of issuing him a summons. (This is according to what I read, of course.)

A summons has no inherent significance other than requiring one's appearance in court.
But some will leap to confirmation of wrongdoing.

Why can't it be both?

It could.
But is it wise to give great weight & cromulence to a peripheral controversy of one candidate instead of controversies of the other candidate? This would be to build one's own personal echo chamber.

Why is this particular case of sexual assault accusation not important enough for you to at least think about?

It's an unadjudicted case by an anonymous accuser in a time of rampant accusations....some fake...some real. And it's a narrow focus upon one troublesome candidate without comparable examination of great sins by the other.

Is it really so hard for you to say "If this turns out to be true, this is a horrible situation."

If true, it would indeed be horrible.
But is it worth focusing upon one possible thing, & ignore other possible things which are equally terrible?

Instead, it is just "noise". I would have expected a more balanced response from you regarding this particular incident. Disappointing.

Is it balanced to make this single accusation a major issue in this election?
Why not consider Hillary's enabling of Bill's sexual assaults?
Is it because of thinking more like a trial lawyer prosecuting someone?
Ref.....
http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/20...roach-more-like-a-scientist-or-a-trial-lawyer

 

[Quetzal]

If true, it would indeed be horrible.
But is it worth focusing upon one possible thing, & ignore other possible things which are equally terrible?

I would love to, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it would just be dismissed as 'noise' (unless it is against Hillary, of course), and would rather not bother having that fruitless discussion with you.

 

[Quetzal]

Why not consider Hillary's enabling of Bill's sexual assaults?

This hypocrisy proves my point clearly when I don't have to. Need I remind you that the right wanted Bill impeached on the moral high ground of decency. Yet, that same crowd wants to elect Trump president. It is kinda sickening, really.

 

[Revoltingest]

I can't speak for Quetzal, but I believe Hillary used bad judgement on the email issue.

But when I weigh that bad judgement against the sleaze that we know (facts) about trump, then if I deduce that just 10% of the accusations are true (probably a safe bet)... I wouldn't trust the guy to clean our pool, let alone be president.

If one looks only at Trump, one would certainly find him a boorish bully.
If one looks only at Hillary, one would certainly find her corrupt & incompetent.
But it would be a grave mistake to decide upon one's vote with comparing them by the same standards.
Many accusations are leveled against each.
We see thread after thread attacking one but not the other.
Such polarization is mind numbing.
No one gets any useful knowledge from buying into an echo chamber.
It's all noise.

 

[Underhill]

Is it balanced to make this single accusation a major issue in this election?
Why not consider Hillary's enabling of Bill's sexual assaults?
Is it because of thinking more like a trial lawyer prosecuting someone?
Ref.....
http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/20...roach-more-like-a-scientist-or-a-trial-lawyer

Even if Bill did those things, and that isn't known, she didn't. It's ironic that you keep bringing this up. This is noise. The accusations were years ago and have gone nowhere. Besides, if Hillary had divorced Bill, now you would be playing the old Tammy Wynett song, "Stand by your man..." and *****ing about her jumping ship.

This is an accusation about the candidate. Not how he reacted to accusations about his wife.

 

[Underhill]

If one looks only at Trump, one would certainly find him a boorish bully.
If one looks only at Hillary, one would certainly find her corrupt & incompetent.
But it would be a grave mistake to decide upon one's vote with comparing them by the same standards.
Many accusations are leveled against each.
We see thread after thread attacking one but not the other.
Such polarization is mind numbing.
No one gets any useful knowledge from buying into an echo chamber.
It's all noise.

So we should ignore who they are and simply look at what they say? I think the exact opposite.