Hillary listened to phone calls of Clinton critics breaking the law

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Seriously I don't care how far back we have to go to discredit the great Communist Cvnt.

I think that crosses the line.

But they are allowed to cross that line.

The Swiftboating has begun and will get a whole lot worse.

Hopefully it backfires on the America Haters this time.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,195
126
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
LOL, 1992? For real?
Hillary's actions as First Lady are certainly relevant and fair game in her bid for the Presidency. Many on this forum are rather ruthless in their criticism of the Bush Administration in its total disregard for ethics and morality, yet the Clintons always seem to get a free pass in this regard.
Free pass? Bill got impeached for lying about a BJ.
I hope the American people will come to recognize that comparing Democrats to Republicans, Clintons to the Bush Family, is a zero sum game...there are plenty of cases where politicians from both sides of the fence have engaged in unethical or unlawful behaviors.
Even if that was the case, which it isn't, Republicans have screwed up their actual job of governing, ethics aside, a lot more than Clinton could ever try to.
I am getting weary of the mudslinging and dirty politics that seem to dominate our political stage. I am reaching a point where none of the Presidential candidates excite me, and I have lost faith in both parties.

We need someone, or something, to mix things up.
Good, I hope you don't vote, since you don't really like anyone. I will vote for Hillary. :D
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
The desperate scavenge for umbrage material is strong with this noob. Where can I get a subscription to the FOEL, the fake outrage email list? I just have to see which ones PJ decides NOT to post here because they appear too desperate or too unsubstantiated. Should be a hoot.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
This book and its allegations are from two Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times reporters.

The war in Iraq is from a sitting President of the United States of America, but your TRAITOR IN CHIEF squandered that credibility... along with the lives of 3829 as of 10/15/07 11:43 pm EDT in his war of LIES in Iraq.

Amazing how you guys close your eyes and try to deny this ever happened.

Who's denying it? OTOH, where's the proof? Talk about it when you've got some. Without it, as usual, you're blowing smoke out of your fart hole. :roll:

Better yet, answer my previous question -- If you're so outraged over this, why aren't you even more outraged by the Bushwhackos' gross criminality? :shocked:

What point are you trying to make? PJ did not make a post about this because he is outraged (at least thats how it looks, I could be wrong), he made this post because the left wing whackos are NOT outraged about this. Are you even going to address the OP, or are you just going to keep going on your insane BDS rants?

You are wrong, and you should be begging... make that deeply grovelling... for my pardon. You open your mouth just enough to change feet without bothering to read my previous post:

Assuming it's true, a more interesting question would be why an allegedly "conservative" supporter of the Constitution would NOT be outraged by such violations of our Constitutional rights, whether it was by Hillary or the neocon Bushwhackos.

Come on, PJ -- Where's the outrage? :Q

Where in that do you read that I condone the unsubstantiated allegation against Hillary Clinton or that I didn't directly address PJ?

How do you not see my points that:
  1. He has shown NO outrage over ANY of the Bushwhackos' numerous acts of TREASON in violating the Constitutional rights of all Americans, let alone any concern for the thousands of Americans they have MURDERED in their war of LIES. In fact, he and the rest of you Bushwhacko sycophants have done nothing but pimp excuses, dodges and distractions for them since day one of their criminal adminstration.

    Unlike his attack on Hillary, the charges against the administration are well documented.
  2. When he runs out of current talking point dogma, he falls back to attempting to excuse their six year reign or criminalality or distract attention from it by shouting, "OMFG... Clinton, Clinton, Clinton did it!
Why do you give Hillary a pass on this? You go insane when Bush does it, but when Hillary does it you ignore it, what gives?

Please show us where I gave her a pass. You can't because I didn't. Like others, I questioned the credibility of PJ's unsupported and undocumented source, and I asked him why he hasn't shown similar outrage at six years of the Bushwhackos' crimes.

Originally posted by: Genx87
Quite obviously because partisan hacks like to only show outrage when it isnt their candidates breaking the law. People like Harvey are a lost cause. When the good leader tells them to jump, he asks how high.

:lips: my (_|_).
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Free pass? Bill got impeached for lying about a BJ.
Free pass in that the Clintons certainly have a lot of skeletons in their closet, yet some on this forum tend to dismiss such allegations because "the economy was good under Clinton in the 90s."

Even if that was the case, which it isn't, Republicans have screwed up their actual job of governing, ethics aside, a lot more than Clinton could ever try to.
That is a subjective conclusion...take Clinton out of the equation, and factor in governance under Democrats in general...the cities of New Orleans and Detriot are prime examples of Democrat controlled incompetence, corruption and stupidity.

Good, I hope you don't vote, since you don't really like anyone. I will vote for Hillary.
It will probably be a lesser of two evils vote for me...I can't fathom why anyone would want the same two families to dominate American politics for over two decades...didn't we fight a Revolution to free ourselves of such elitist government control?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Of course, the better question is why feign outrage over this, versus a far more serious civil liberties violation in the formerly covert NSA wiretapping program, which according to the former Quest CEO started before 9/11? You kind of have to question your existence if you're that partisan.

How do you know that the pre 9/11 allegation is more "far more serious"?

There were no details as to what the "request" involved. AFAIK, we still don't know what was requested.

The allegation that it was "illegal" come from a person charged with a serious crime, who said it was a company lawyer that thought it was illegal. We haven't even heard from the lawyer (So far it's heresay There hasn't been any confirmation that there was really a lawyer who thought it was illegal. And since when is some company lawyer the arbiter of wht is illegal?) . We don't know what it was, or why that company lawyer considered it illegal. Could it be more vague?

The incident occured so quickly after GWB was sworn in (less than a month) one has to wonder whether the NSA request was from a Clinton authorized program.

Yet many of the same screaming for GWB's impeachment in that thread are here now pooh-poohing this. Others already saying the whole is a false allegation, a product of some Repub slime machine etc.

Fern
 

Sinsear

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2007
6,439
80
91
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Seriously I don't care how far back we have to go to discredit the great Communist Cvnt.

I think that crosses the line.

Get used to it. If she gets elected you'll hear it for years like the constant insults put up here about our President and Commander in Chief.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
*Fixed*

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Get used to it. If she gets elected you'll hear it for years like the constant insults put up here about our President Cheney and Commander in Chimp, Dubya.

 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Seriously I don't care how far back we have to go to discredit the great Communist Cvnt.

I think that crosses the line.

Get used to it. If she gets elected you'll hear it for years like the constant insults put up here about our President and Commander in Chief.

Typical Repuglican "family values." It is too bad Anandtech permits such vulgarity.
 

Sinsear

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2007
6,439
80
91
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Seriously I don't care how far back we have to go to discredit the great Communist Cvnt.

I think that crosses the line.

Get used to it. If she gets elected you'll hear it for years like the constant insults put up here about our President and Commander in Chief.

Typical Repuglican "family values." It is too bad Anandtech permits such vulgarity.

As if you're any better. Sorry, it was an emotional not well thought out response, but the current President has been trashed here for a long time. I don't see you standing up against that, or maybe that's okay because it fits your views? It's one thing to criticize, another to name call and put down; and vulgarity is a relative term open to interpretation and perception.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Originally posted by: Fern
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Of course, the better question is why feign outrage over this, versus a far more serious civil liberties violation in the formerly covert NSA wiretapping program, which according to the former Quest CEO started before 9/11? You kind of have to question your existence if you're that partisan.

How do you know that the pre 9/11 allegation is more "far more serious"?

There were no details as to what the "request" involved. AFAIK, we still don't know what was requested.

The allegation that it was "illegal" come from a person charged with a serious crime, who said it was a company lawyer that thought it was illegal. We haven't even heard from the lawyer (So far it's heresay There hasn't been any confirmation that there was really a lawyer who thought it was illegal. And since when is some company lawyer the arbiter of wht is illegal?) . We don't know what it was, or why that company lawyer considered it illegal. Could it be more vague?

The incident occured so quickly after GWB was sworn in (less than a month) one has to wonder whether the NSA request was from a Clinton authorized program.

Yet many of the same screaming for GWB's impeachment in that thread are here now pooh-poohing this. Others already saying the whole is a false allegation, a product of some Repub slime machine etc.

Fern

Not sure what you mean here; we know the NSA wiretapping was far more serious based on the evidence we have today. Whether the program started before 9/11 we don't know for certain; obviously the Quest CEO's claims can't be confirmed true yet since that'll take a lot of time to fully divulge with details and in this court system that may mean years. Though, I do take that allegation seriously because we have zero reason to believe the former Quest CEO has any reason to lie. Plus, I thought it was well known by now that Quest rejected the NSA's requests because it came without a FISA warrant, and that they were vindicated to be in the right legally?
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Seriously I don't care how far back we have to go to discredit the great Communist Cvnt.

I'm convinced you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground about what a "communist" OR a Communist is, let alone the difference between them, depending on whether it's spelled with a capital or lower case "c." :roll:

You could prove me wrong by looking them up and posting it. In fact, please do. You may learn something about the world... for a change. :p
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
The word "Apologist" gets a thrown around a lot here - for instants, any time Harvey points out the mis-deeds of Fred Thompson during Watergate the refrain tends to be "That was years ago, and it doesn't matter now." And this comment comes from many of those in this thread that are now shaking their little fists, their lips quivering with mock anger - all over something that's hearsay.....

So why the fake out rage now?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Not sure what you mean here;

We don't have any info on what the pre 9/11 request was about. So, how can we judge the seriousness?


Though, I do take that allegation seriously because we have zero reason to believe the former Quest CEO has any reason to lie.

The exec was convicted on numerous charges of insider trading etc. He made these claims in his defense etc (If I understand the article correctly). That's generally considered motive.

(note: OP's comments heavily edited by Fern)


Fern
 

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
There were alot of accusations thrown up against the clintons, but you can read where it stems from here

http://www.amazon.com/Blinded-...&qid=1192659177&sr=8-1

Yes, the David Brock who runs Media Matters. Some very well funded conservatives went looking for everything under the sun against clinton, and most of it didn't stick. With Bush, there is no equivalent rabid and well funded machine to dig into his past. On the other hand, despite having more secrecy, there is so much credible evidence against bush on so many different counts.

There never was any equivalence between bush and clinton in terms of wrongdoings. People keep saying "there's something fishy about the clinton's" but really have nothing to back it up with. Remember, Billy also killed vince foster and smuggled drugs in arkansas. These claims are equivalent to "Bush did 9/11 himself!" in terms of substantive support.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, 1992? For real?
Did you LOL over the Bush DUI charge story? Or how about the Bush AWOL story? Both of those go back even farther than this and yet the left tried to make a big deal out of them.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
So why the fake out rage now?
Because we wouldn't have much to discuss in this forum if someone didnt get outraged by something, fake or otherwise.

Let's face it...Bush supporters will apologize for his alleged misdeeds, yet jump at every opportunity to criticize the Democrats for theirs.

The anti-Bush crowd and Democrats will start a thread every time Bush crosses his eyes, yet dismiss similar allegations when directed at the members of their own party.

If common sense, equity and consistency dominated the mindset of posters here, this would be a boring place to visit.
 

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Mediamatters is a group Hillary help set up... why not just quote a Hillary campaign spokesman and cut out the middle man... :roll:


A campaign spokesman was quoted, and there's no real point there. Somebody said Hillary never denied the claim even though she DID.

Besides, do you even know David Brock's history? You should read the republican noise machine and the conscience of an ex-conservative.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, 1992? For real?
Did you LOL over the Bush DUI charge story? Or how about the Bush AWOL story? Both of those go back even farther than this and yet the left tried to make a big deal out of them.

Jonney Jonney Jonney---------wake up and smell the coffee. You ask the following question.

"Wonder how much outrage this will produce on the left?"

Well maybe it might produce some outrage on the left, but compared to the crap GWB&co.
is pulling right now, for the left, citing the mild itch of Hillary compared to pain greater than organ failure in GWB leaves Non Prof John with a pedophile's chance in hell at a mothers against pedophile rally.

Non Prof John, this is not some matter of trading indigestion for an upset stomach question.

GWB&co. is totally toxic. Other things may be comparative.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, 1992? For real?
Did you LOL over the Bush DUI charge story? Or how about the Bush AWOL story? Both of those go back even farther than this and yet the left tried to make a big deal out of them.

You have marginalized yourself again. Leave already.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Originally posted by: umbrella39
You have marginalized yourself again. Leave already.

He has a point. Dismissing an allegation from one side 15 or 20 years ago while wild-goose chasing the "other side" for the same thing smacks of hypocrisy and partisan hackery.
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: umbrella39
You have marginalized yourself again. Leave already.

He has a point. Dismissing an allegation from one side 15 or 20 years ago while wild-goose chasing the "other side" for the same thing smacks of hypocrisy and partisan hackery.

Originally posted by: Pabster

Come on Harvey, you can do better than that.

If an error in judgement nearly 35 years in the past were enough to disqualify a candidate...

Thompson is coming on strong and I suspect we've only seen the beginning of these. The Dems are terrified of Thompson.