Hillary Clinton, former US Secretary of State

[happy_eagle]

Unfortunately probably a lot of this in politics I'd say

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/...op-adviser-accused-of-harassment-in-2008.html

WASHINGTON — A senior adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign who was accused of repeatedly sexually harassing a young subordinate was kept on the campaign at Mrs. Clinton’s request, according to four people familiar with what took place.

Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager at the time recommended that she fire the adviser, Burns Strider. But Mrs. Clinton did not. Instead, Mr. Strider was docked several weeks of pay and ordered to undergo counseling, and the young woman was moved to a new job.

 

[Jello_B]

Unfortunately probably a lot of this in politics I'd say

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/...op-adviser-accused-of-harassment-in-2008.html

Based on the recent Hollywood incidents appears like it is happening in a lot of industries. Hopefully the next generations intuitively understand that this type of behaviour is unacceptable.

 

[Chief]

Comey talks about his decision to announce emails case reopening before the election:



Unbelievably, he still seems to think that he didn't alter the entire election with the announcement.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

happening too much by those identifying themselves as neoliberals

hypocritical really

they want everybody to act in the way that they themselves don't behave

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Comey talks about his decision to announce emails case reopening before the election:



Unbelievably, he still seems to think that he didn't alter the entire election with the announcement.

I doubt it was deliberate, but there is an odd strength in having a candidate that people don't take seriously. The FBI, the media, and a large proportion of the voters (seemingly), did not take Trump seriously and acted as if would lose.

 

[AM]

 

[smokingjacket]

Cursed boomer meme

 

[Osho]

Hillary had, Hillary had, Hillary had it in her veins.
Jokes aside, well worth a listen if you dare...

 

[BlueE]

Hillary had, Hillary had, Hillary had it in her veins.
Jokes aside, well worth a listen if you dare...

But ... but ... but that's not what Wikipedia says!

 

[Osho]

But ... but ... but that's not what Wikipedia says!

I haven't looked at WikiPedia. I assume on contested political issues they come down on the side of the new puritannicals of the faux left.

I do, though, find Wiki excellent when reading bios of new bands I've discovered, and such like.

For more erudition on Hillary, from the iconoclastic Robert Scheer's website, here's Matt Taibbi's take, enjoy!

Matt Taibbi: Shouldn’t Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now?

Trial testimony reveals Hillary Clinton personally approved serious election misinformation. Is there an anti-Trump exception to content moderation?

scheerpost.com

 

[BlueE]

I haven't looked at WikiPedia. I assume on contested political issues they come down on the side of the new puritannicals of the faux left.

I do, though, find Wiki excellent when reading bios of new bands I've discovered, and such like.

For more erudition on Hillary, from the iconoclastic Robert Scheer's website, here's Matt Taibbi's take, enjoy!

Matt Taibbi: Shouldn’t Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now?

Trial testimony reveals Hillary Clinton personally approved serious election misinformation. Is there an anti-Trump exception to content moderation?

scheerpost.com

You assume correct, with a few notable exceptions.

That video brings home how hard and often almost all the media promoted and supported the massive Russiagate fraud.

Even in Australia, 4 corners ran a 3 part series on Russian Collusion.



The second source of early collusion claims was the preposterous Alfa Bank story. This drama is almost too dumb to recap, but the gist is Clinton’s lawyer Sussmann worked with academics who’d improperly accessed non-public data from a federal contract to build a case that a “Trump server” was communicating with a Russian bank, in what the New York Times later described as a “mysterious computer back channel.” The problem was, it was all hooey. According to Sussmann’s indictment, researchers worried they “couldn’t make any claims that would fly public scrutiny,” with one complaining: “The only thing that drives us at this point is that we just do not like [Trump]… Folks, I am afraid we have tunnel vision. Time to regroup?”

No such luck: instead of regrouping, the campaign boldly submitted the nonsense to the FBI, along with a white paper by Fusion-GPS, before leaking this bilge to the media with, we now learn, the explicit approval of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

 

[GreyCrow]

Sussman has been cleared.

It's another nothing burger

 

[BlueE]

Michael Sussmann has been acquitted

DC Jury and DC Verdicts

technofog.substack.com

The acquittal is no surprise.

On the facts, the evidence was more than sufficient to prove Sussmann’s guilt. Sussmann lied to then-FBI general counsel James Baker via text message in order to get a meeting to pass the Alfa Bank hoax materials to the FBI.


Sussmann lied again during the meeting – stating he was not there on behalf of a client – in order to get the FBI to open an investigation into the Trump Organization’s purported ties with Alfa Bank.


Later, during testimony to Congress, Sussmann admitted he met with Baker on behalf of a client.




Billing records proved he had been working on the Alfa Bank project on behalf of the Clinton Campaign. Evidence also demonstrated that Sussmann billed the Clinton Campaign for the thumb drives passed to Baker during the meeting. How was the Clinton Campaign billed? Sussmann referenced the “confidential project” - the Alfa Bank project.


In large part, the prosecution of Sussmann was hamstrung by the FBI’s investigation into the Alfa Bank allegations. That goes to materiality. How can the lies be material if the FBI’s investigation was so sloppy?

That was always an unconvincing defense, as Sussmann’s lies helped trigger the FBI’s investigation into the Trump/Alfa hoax. How does Sussmann convince the skeptical New York Times to take another look at the Alfa Bank story? By showing them that the FBI is investigating the matter. How can Sussmann convince the FBI to start the Alfa Bank investigation as soon as possible? By orchestrating leaks of the information to the press.


Continuing on the issue of materiality, look to the testimony of FBI Special Agent Curtis Heide, whose repeated requests to interview the source of the Alfa Bank information were denied by headquarters.

Relatively early on in the investigation - on September 26, 2016 - Agent Heide sent a message to Pientka, requesting an interview of the source of the Alfa Bank white papers. By that time, Heide knew the white paper was bunk. He received no response from Pientka. He repeated this request on October 3, 2016. Agent Heide’s requests were rebuffed by his liaison at FBI headquarters.

That’s not the say the public hasn’t benefited from the trial. The information disclosed during the trial was important to understand the broader Clinton/Fusion GPS/Perkins Coie effort to poison the public, the press, and the FBI with their Trump/Russia lies.

This included;
6. After reviewing the evidence, the FBI leaned “towards this being a false server not attributed to the trump organization.”


7. An unbelievable confirmation of the shoddy FBI investigation into the Russian “hacking” of our election. As of October `13, 2016, the FBI did not have the Crowdstike images relating to the purported DNC/DCCC hack. Message from FBI agent via their internal messaging system: “really, I just want images of what crowdstrike has.”

8.And - Hillary Clinton herself approved of the strategy to disseminate the Alfa Bank allegations to the media. Per Robby Mook:

Q: Mr. Mook, before the break you had testified that there was a conversation in which you told Ms. Clinton about the proposed plan to provide the Alfa-Bank allegations to the media; is that correct?
A: Correct.
Q: And what was her response?
A: All I remember is that she agreed with the decision.

 

[BlueE]

After the verdict was announced, the jury’s forewoman held court before the media and expressed her displeasure that the Special Counsel prosecute a false statement case: “There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”

This juror was never impartial - despite her assurance to the judge.

 

[GreyCrow]

He was cleared . 2 long posts won't change that

 

[Balls In]

Corruption is corrupt

 

[CM86]

He was cleared . 2 long posts won't change that

The courts clearing it PROVE that it was true, cos the systim is coruput.
Also, if the courts hadn't cleared him, it would PROVE that it was true. And the sestim is corrrupt!


Do ur own reseech!

 

[BlueE]

He was cleared . 2 long posts won't change that

Found not guilty of lying to the FBI, in denying he was working for Clintons. Peddling their already discredited Russian collusion delusion.

A single count of lying to the government during a Sept 19, 2016, sit-down with Baker at FBI headquarters. There was a text from Sussman confirming he wasn't there on behalf of a client, when the evidence showed he was.

But then Baker showed it was not a big deal to Comey's 7th floor top officials who were happy to use the information to spy on Trump and get their media contacts to discredit him.

"If the people who were lied to by the defendant didn't care, why is the jury going to care?"

Lost because of jury instructions. Once Judge ruled that the lie must be "relevant" then it was over.

 

[BlueE]

Corruption is corrupt

But you have to believe what the media tells you to believe.

Nothing about the acquittal proves the DNS info/White Papers weren't hoaxed political opposition research the Clinton campaign funded and then introduced to the FBI for the sole purpose of creating an investigation.

 

[Maggie5]

This juror was never impartial - despite her assurance to the judge.

The eleven other members of the jury weren't impartial either.

Am I doing it right?

 

[BlueE]

Statement by the Jury's forewoman.

"THAT is called Nullification. She didn't care if he lied or if the lie was material. She disagreed with the bringing of the case."

 

[GreyCrow]

'I can't wait for the truth to come out and I support the hearings into the actions of Sussman '

' I don't support the finding of the hearings '

 

[mcnulty]

Statement by the Jury's forewoman.

"THAT is called Nullification. She didn't care if he lied or if the lie was material. She disagreed with the bringing of the case."

Wrong again. When asked about the question of guilt she said:

“The government had the job of proving beyond a reasonable doubt,” she said, declining to give her name. “We broke it down...as a jury. It didn’t pan out in the government’s favor.”

Comments about the merits of the case were in response to a subsequent question. Both things can surely be true.

Sussmann acquitted on charge brought by special counsel Durham

The jury acquitted him on a charge that he lied when he allegedly denied he was acting on behalf of any client in alerting the FBI to claims that a secret server linked Trump and a Moscow bank.

www.politico.com

 

[BlueE]

Wrong again. When asked about the question of guilt she said:

“The government had the job of proving beyond a reasonable doubt,” she said, declining to give her name. “We broke it down...as a jury. It didn’t pan out in the government’s favor.”

Comments about the merits of the case were in response to a subsequent question. Both things can surely be true.

Sussmann acquitted on charge brought by special counsel Durham

The jury acquitted him on a charge that he lied when he allegedly denied he was acting on behalf of any client in alerting the FBI to claims that a secret server linked Trump and a Moscow bank.

www.politico.com

Why am I not surprised you jump in and get triggered for the sake of it without understanding what the post was about!

The quote on nullification ("THAT is called Nullification. She didn't care if he lied or if the lie was material. She disagreed with the bringing of the case.") was a quote I linked from Bill Shipley, 22 years as federal prosecutor and 6 year defence veteran attorney, in response to the jury forewoman's statement after the trial, "If the people who were lied to by the defendant didn't care, why is the jury going to care?"

Why is that not correct?

Otherwise I said I'm not surprised by the verdict of not guilty to the one charge of lying to the FBI in the Baker interview in 2016, because of the Judge's direction to the jury.

 

[BlueE]

Hillary had, Hillary had, Hillary had it in her veins.
Jokes aside, well worth a listen if you dare...

x 1.5

Michael Sussmann acquitted | AM Live

DNC/Clinton attorney Michael Sussmann is found not guilty in the first Durham case to go to trial. Guest: Hans Mahncke @HansMahncke https://twitter.com/HansMahncke Article links: As Durham closes in, FBI's Trump-Russia origin story is harder to believe...

www.callin.com