Next up, Burns Strider, Hillary Clinton's faith and values adviser.

[SNC]

Don’t care, she’s not running again.

So you're OK with people in power protecting friends from being outed as sexual abusers, interesting.

 

[Starbuck1975]

You go ahead and read thru the thread there bud. I didn't bring it up out of the blue, and my statement is completely is context to what's going on.

Again, go look up whattaboutism. It's apparently not what you think it is.

so let's rewind, for just you and me. As a liberal, and a supporter of women's rights, if there's wrong doing...then pursue it.

You're better than this.

I did read the whole thread. There was a surprisingly rational exchange about context, but I disagreed with your conclusion.

I find the "pursuit of wrong doing" applied to an increasingly arbitrary and partisan driven narrative.

You are better than this as well. Don't @Victorian Gray the discussion.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I did read the whole thread. There was a surprisingly rational exchange about context, but I disagreed with your conclusion.

I find the "pursuit of wrong doing" applied to an increasingly arbitrary and partisan driven narrative.

You are better than this as well. Don't @Victorian Gray the discussion.

You didnt disagree with my conclusion. You just called it what about ism

I responded to someone else's assertion, with clear evidence that people don't necessarily care as long as it adheres to their tribalism. Sea evangelicals

 

[Fanatical Meat]

So you're OK with people in power protecting friends from being outed as sexual abusers, interesting.

No I'm not interested in it.

 

[SNC]

No I'm not interested in it.

Ohh, I'm sorry I took your post in a thread about a subject as having some interest in said subject. Carry on.

 

[Starbuck1975]

You didnt disagree with my conclusion. You just called it what about ism

I responded to someone else's assertion, with clear evidence that people don't necessarily care as long as it adheres to their tribalism. Sea evangelicals

Then we are in violent agreement, because I see the same tribalism coming from the Clinton apologists

 

[Puffnstuff]

You will never hear me say not to apply our legal mechanisms to one party and not the other, that's why I mock it. Cons will bend anything they can to attack a Dems, then support sexual deviants because there's an R next to their name.

Just making sure that I understood your position correctly. Unfortunately partisanship has a long history of influencing law enforcement in our country.

 

[umbrella39]

Something bad comes out of the Clinton camp, a couple of predictable posters try and make this about me. This thread is about how a guy with a "faith and values" adviser title is a creep and how Hillary protected him. Whining about Trump or me doesn't change that.

You are confused who is predictable. Facts and truth aren't whining.... Such a TrumpTard...

As for your OP: ZFG

Just more end arounds trying to detract from the current illegal activities going on in DC right now... I have suggestion for your next role...

Call it Old Faithful. I trust you'll be able to figure out why...

 

[Starbuck1975]

Something bad comes out of the Clinton camp, a couple of predictable posters try and make this about me. This thread is about how a guy with a "faith and values" adviser title is a creep and how Hillary protected him. Whining about Trump or me doesn't change that.

The apologists and enablers will never ackowledge that point, and will predictably derp about Trump

 

[Jaskalas]

whataboutism. Trump being disgusting has nothing to do with Clinton being an opportunistic hypocrite

The relation is that the "dirt on both sides" aspect helped blind the voters.

 

[umbrella39]

Some really need to come to grips with their Clinton's derangement syndromes. Neither will be running for office again and both will probably be dead in the next 5-10 years. They are political ghosts now. This inane OP is a perfect example of yet another who would be better served if they finally just pleased the court and showed us all on the doll exactly where Hillary touched them...

Who will be the faithful hey look a squirrel when she's gone...

 

[pmv]

So you're OK with people in power protecting friends from being outed as sexual abusers, interesting.

I'd have thought the point was 'let the legal system deal with it as appropriate'. It doesn't appear to be a political issue becuase Hillary is no longer a significant political figure (I personally hope the Clintons fade away rapidly). If it appears the legal system is falling down on the job in some major way then maybe others can take an interest. Otherwise, what is there to say?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Just making sure that I understood your position correctly. Unfortunately partisanship has a long history of influencing law enforcement in our country.

No, I get it. As a registered independent, I really try not to play the partisan games. The last 8 years have really soured my view on Republicans in this country.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Then we are in violent agreement, because I see the same tribalism coming from the Clinton apologists

Indeed, so if you concede my original reply to jasks, then I'm not sure what prompted you to respond to me.

Blaming Hilary and Dems for the election of Trump is akin to a child stomping his feet and screaming "but they made me!!!"

There's entire primaries that Trump made it thru, and in 2011-2012 he was laughed off the stage.

The election of Trump rests on the people that voted for him.

 

[Commodus]

The apologists and enablers will never ackowledge that point, and will predictably derp about Trump

Here's the problem: it's not that Clinton has a problematic history. It's that Trump worshippers like Slow have a pathological obsession with attacking her even though it will have zero effect on the politics of the country, since she's unlikely to run for President (or any political office) again.

At best, it's a perpetual attempt at justification: they can feel good about voting for the corrupt, incompetent, lying sexual predator because a Clinton advisor was scummy and she used a private email server for government business. If they had to actually focus on Trump, they'd face uncomfortable self-reflection that might involve admitting they made a mistake. At worst, it's a deliberate attempt at distraction: please don't look at our obviously corrupt President while he abuses power and hands control to the rich at the expense of everyone else.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Here's the problem: it's not that Clinton has a problematic history. It's that Trump worshippers like Slow have a pathological obsession with attacking her even though it will have zero effect on the politics of the country, since she's unlikely to run for President (or any political office) again.

At best, it's a perpetual attempt at justification: they can feel good about voting for the corrupt, incompetent, lying sexual predator because a Clinton advisor was scummy and she used a private email server for government business. If they had to actually focus on Trump, they'd face uncomfortable self-reflection that might involve admitting they made a mistake. At worst, it's a deliberate attempt at distraction: please don't look at our obviously corrupt President while he abuses power and hands control to the rich at the expense of everyone else.

That's a fair response, but from where I am standing, both parties would benefit from a little self reflection. Both parties enthusiastically nominated deeply flawed candidates.

Republicans need to take their medicine that they nominated a xenophobic racist misogynist scumbag liar who surrounded himself with traitors

Democrats need to take their medicine that they nominated a lying, opportunistic carpet bagging hypocrite who got burned for circumventing transparency and surrounding herself with waterboys

 

[Commodus]

That's a fair response, but from where I am standing, both parties would benefit from a little self reflection. Both parties enthusiastically nominated deeply flawed candidates.

Republicans need to take their medicine that they nominated a xenophobic racist misogynist scumbag liar who surrounded himself with traitors

Democrats need to take their medicine that they nominated a lying, opportunistic carpet bagging hypocrite who got burned for circumventing transparency and surrounding herself with waterboys

I agree on that. To me, the concern is the tendency for equivocation on the part of Trump fans: that a conventional weaselly politician is somehow as bad or worse as someone who's not only a corrupt liar (just in the private sector), but a clueless egomaniac who genuinely hates everyone that doesn't look like him, act like him or mindlessly do whatever he asks. The former is bad, but not disastrous; the latter screws over millions of people and threatens the basics of democratic government.

 

[interchange]

That's a fair response, but from where I am standing, both parties would benefit from a little self reflection. Both parties enthusiastically nominated deeply flawed candidates.

Republicans need to take their medicine that they nominated a xenophobic racist misogynist scumbag liar who surrounded himself with traitors

Democrats need to take their medicine that they nominated a lying, opportunistic carpet bagging hypocrite who got burned for circumventing transparency and surrounding herself with waterboys

Your premise is fine but seems to draw an equivalence which is not anywhere close to reasonable.

 

[Darwin333]

If it really happened that way then all concerned parties to it should face prosecution.

Sexual harassment isn't a crime... She can sue if she feels she was wronged enough to justify taking civil action.

The headline makes it sound like nothing was done about it, he was disciplined and they were separated in the workplace at which time I am assuming the harassment stopped.

 

[Puffnstuff]

The headline makes it sound like nothing was done about it, he was disciplined and they were separated in the workplace at which time I am assuming the harassment stopped.

He went to a different employer where his behavior continued. If Hillary's campaign failed to disclose this behavior to that employer they can be held liable for it.

 

[hal2kilo]

Some really need to come to grips with their Clinton's derangement syndromes. Neither will be running for office again and both will probably be dead in the next 5-10 years. They are political ghosts now. This inane OP is a perfect example of yet another who would be better served if they finally just pleased the court and showed us all on the doll exactly where Hillary touched them...

Who will be the faithful hey look a squirrel when she's gone...

I really think propaganda causes a kind of brain damage. Having to accept the propaganda, while your own eyeballs see a different reality must cause a loss of the ability to detect what is real permanently.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Your premise is fine but seems to draw an equivalence which is not anywhere close to reasonable.

I would never say they are equivalent. I would say they are opportunistically symbiotic.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I did read the whole thread. There was a surprisingly rational exchange about context, but I disagreed with your conclusion.

I find the "pursuit of wrong doing" applied to an increasingly arbitrary and partisan driven narrative.

You are better than this as well. Don't @Victorian Gray the discussion.

Aww, what a cute little troll. C'mon, smile. Coochie coochie coo!

 

[Victorian Gray]

Sexual harassment isn't a crime... She can sue if she feels she was wronged enough to justify taking civil action.

The headline makes it sound like nothing was done about it, he was disciplined and they were separated in the workplace at which time I am assuming the harassment stopped.

He wasn't disciplined in any meaningful manner. He lost a couple of weeks wages and refused to do the counseling program that he was asked to take.

 

[Darwin333]

He went to a different employer where his behavior continued. If Hillary's campaign failed to disclose this behavior to that employer they can be held liable for it.

Are they required to track every employee to disclose XYZ and for how long? Or is there an article out there that at least says they called the Hillary campaign to verify the reference?