Most Transparently Hypocritical Administration Ever

With Obama as a lame duck and Hillary not yet installed the NY Times editors breathe the air of freedom:

Let Inspectors General Do Their Job

In the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, Congress in 1978 passed the Inspector General Act, establishing independent watchdogs whose job it is to uncover waste, fraud or abuse across scores of federal departments and agencies.

These public servants are “our eyes and ears within the executive branch,” as Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa described them in December.

Under the 1978 law, inspectors general, who are based in the agencies, have access to “all records” needed to do their job. But since the early days of the Obama administration, many agencies have systematically thwarted that access for whole categories of information — including, most notably, grand jury testimony, personal credit data and information from wiretaps.

The effect has been to slow down investigations into, among other things, the shooting of civilians during Drug Enforcement Administration raids in Honduras, sexual assaults in the Peace Corps and the F.B.I.’s antiterrorism powers. Inspectors general have spent time and taxpayer dollars arguing for access to documents they should, by law, have in hand — denying the American people the robust scrutiny of their federal government.

Congress is bipartisanly bothered:

Congress is currently considering a bipartisan bill [RCP link], sponsored by Mr. Grassley, to make clear once again that inspectors general may not be hindered in performing basic, critical review. The bill has been held up in the Senate since last year for unexplained reasons.

It is no surprise that government officials don’t want their wrongdoing or incompetence made public. Inspectors general are on the front lines of ensuring the transparency needed if government is to be held accountable. They should have unfettered access to the materials they need to do their job.

The betting line is that if the Times can't figure out who is obstructing the bill, it is the Democrats. Et voila - this is from Sen. Grassley's office last Dec. 15 but the lack of unanimous Senate consent on a procedural question is surely not in dispute:

Senator Chuck Grassley today on the Senate floor asked unanimous consent for the Senate to begin consideration of a bill to ensure that inspectors general across the federal bureaucracy have timely access to all records needed to complete a thorough and independent investigation.  Grassley’s unanimous consent request was objected to by Senate minority leader Harry Reid in an effort to hide the identities of members who are holding up passage of the bill.  The objection was made in violation of the spirit of the Standing Order of the Senate that says members who have holds on legislation must be identified.

At a guess, this might be tangled up with the investigation into Hillary's emails so running out the clock is critical for the Dems.

Comments

[Porchlight]

He just ran the Megyn Kelly--Debbie Washerman Schultz clip from last night.

That's Washerperson to you, daddy.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Niraj Warikoo ‏@nwarikoo 17h17 hours ago
ALERT: Trump has won Dearborn, city with highest concentration of Arab-American Muslims in the U.S., 38 to 33 over Kasich.

#MichiganPrimary

So, Dearborn . . . DEARBORN . . . voted for both the Jewish candidate in the D primary and the Don't Let Foreign Muslims in the Country candidate in the R primary.

#WhathehuAkbar #MaybeWeFoundTheModerateMuslims

[Theo]

Okay folks. I guess it is too much to ask you to put aside your political feelings. But look at it this way. Suppose that there were a conservative superstar candidate for president who had a very good chance of being elected. Suppose that that candidate had in fact done something improper/illegal in a bit of very bad judgment. Suppose further that people who do this improper/illegal thing are not usually drawn and quartered, but get some kind of a plea deal with fines, community service, maybe probation. Suppose further that a criminal prosecution would probably derail the candidate's chances.

Again, we are talking about a CONSERVATIVE and viable candidate. You are the prosecutor. What you think is the appropriate prosecutor thing to do is to get the candidate to plea bargain and get probation, community service, a fine, etc. in line with what others have gotten for the same offense. But the candidate fears that a plea will destroy his or her campaign and refuses.

You have two options here. You can (a) indict and inflict a much bigger penalty on the person, a conservative presidential nominee, than anyone in that position would ever likely suffer, (i.e., losing their political career) or (b) let them walk and leave it up to the voters to decide whether the violation was such as to deprive the candidate of their vote.

Are you all so sure that you would argue in that situation that the candidate should be boiled in oil? Really? How many of you thought that Scooter Libby's prosecution was unfair, even if he might have been guilty, because it was no harm no foul and really just a political witch hunt?

[Old Lurker]

Dave, the thing is Trump keeps his yacht, I am sure, in pristine condition. Keel Hauling is most effect where years of barnacles have built up.

[Old Lurker]

"I guess it is too much to ask you to put aside your political feelings."

That is a pure BS Strawman if I have ever seen one.

Every non-troll JOMer here pines for a simple return to the rule of law, politics be damned.

[Miss Marple]

Theo,

Have you missed the prosecutions of Tom Delay and Rick Perry? The ones in which the harshest penalty was sought by the prosecutors? The ones in which no plea bargain was offered?

[Theo]

OL =

So you felt that the prosecution of Scooter Libby was justified?

[Theo]

Miss Marple --

Those are good examples of improper use of prosecutorial discretion for political purposes. I think that they bolster my point. Prosecutors should not always bring a case just because they can and certainly should not do so when the real objective is political.

[daddy]

Rush now explaining how the GOPe has the authority to change the RNC Nominating Rules up to the last instant at the Convention, so that whatever current rules make it impossible for anyone but Trump, and at the outside Cruz, to win the Nomination, that ultimately makes no difference whatever, and it all depends on what the GOPe/RNC Brain-trust decides to do in the Smoke Filled Rooms at the last minute.

Personally I think, just for the symbolism, they ought to move the 2016 RNC Convention from Cleveland to the Battlefield at Gettysburg, Pa.

[Old Lurker]

Theo, I'm not getting sucked further into this rathole with you. The Scooter Libby screwing was political through and through. The question that started it was innocent perhaps on W's part but the handling of it was politics and self promotion, pure and simple.

[Old Lurker]

Daddy, where did you get that print of the Dem Convention in Chicago, 1968?

[jimmyk]

Are you all so sure that you would argue in that situation that the candidate should be boiled in oil?

Theo, the premise is bad for a couple of reasons. First of all, virtually no candidate not named Ronald Reagan is irreplaceable. So if some conservative has a legal problem, out he goes. Second, you can't equate the behavior of Rs and Ds. Rs tend to be almost too 'clean toga' in going after their own. So it would never come to the situation you describe. Ds, on the other hand, tirelessly close ranks and defend the most despicable liars and thieves.

So your scenario is really so counterfactual as to be irrelevant.

[jimmyk]

Meant to add to my 4:12 that the reason Ds have this problem with Hillary is that they anointed her as next-in-line years ago, and froze out all viable competition. As bad as the Rs have been with their ultimate nominees, there's always been competition in non-incumbent years.

[new lurker]

I have not been lurking enough. Just when did THEO appear? He seems very much a dem.

[Buckeye]

I think if Trump goes into the convention with a majority or a plurality and get screwed, more than the Cuyahoga will be burning.

[jimmyk]

nl, Theo's been around on and off for years, and he's not a Dem. He has almost TK-like persistence in posting his views on certain topics. (And I say that neutrally, not derogatorily.)

[BlueOx]

What would YOU recommend happen to her? Prison time? A big fine? Community service?

Send Bill and Chelsea an invoice for the bullet. I hear they can afford it.

[NK]

harsh

[squaredance]

Moreover, if together Trump and Cruz have an overwhelming majority of the delegates, and they try to put one of their "boys" in then the GOP will have willfully thrown the election and acted with treasonous recklessness and irresponsibility, and done so right in the faces of their constituents.

The arrogance and sheer stupidity of this is staggering. In fact, if they hand any brains at all the would come out right now and pledge that nothing of the sort will happen, and stick to that pledge.

IT is fairly obvious that is should be either Trump or Cruz at this point. They should now be rallying to keep the Senate. As it is they are likely to loos both the WH and the Senate if they do not wise up.

[Old Lurker]

Well the AG is not asleep on using the DOJ to go after bad guys, you betcha:

"Attorney General Loretta Lynch acknowledged Wednesday that there have been discussions within the Department of Justice about possibly pursuing legal action against so-called climate change deniers. “This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on,” Lynch said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Justice Department operations."

[Momto2]

I would like to see Hillary get the same punishment I would have gotten when I was in the AF for, over a period of years, intentionally giving TS nuclear info to people not authorized to see it and for storing it in places not authorized to store it and then stonewalling, lying and denying it when caught; a stretch in Leavenworth.

Amen, Iggy - this whole idea that she (or anyone) in this country should be treated differently because they are _______(fill in the blank) is outrageous! She should be treated no more harshly NOR more leniently than any other American citizen! Didn't we fight a Revolutionary war to eliminate a special royal class that is above it all???

[Old Lurker]

Per my 4:22 I get it. When the prize is under the FBI shell, we look to the DOJ for action. If the prize is under the DOJ shell, then we look to the FBI.

Is that about right?

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

--Suppose that that candidate had in fact done something improper/illegal in a bit of very bad judgment.--

Your supposition is wrong.
She engaged in a systematic and intentional attempt to bypass well known safeguards of classified info and has a long history of similar deceptive and intentionally illegal behavior [Rose billing records, FBI files].
She has also lied about it repeatedly and deleted 30,000 emails without anyone elses review of what was being deleted.

Bad judgment is forgetting some classified info you leave on your desk or take home to review. Setting up an insecure email server to circumvent the law and transmitting classified info on it and instructing underlings to send classified info over it are intentional criminal acts.

--Suppose further that people who do this improper/illegal thing are not usually drawn and quartered, but get some kind of a plea deal with fines, community service, maybe probation.--

This supposition is also incorrect. Any line officer or enlisted chump who systematically engaged in behavior this egregious would be prosecuted and imprisoned and quite properly so.

The only politicization is that there is any question of her prosecution.

[clarice]

Shocking videos of Finicum shooting:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWLHiU8gYWY

[daddy]

That's Washerperson to you, daddy.

My mistake Porch, No excuse, I'll try to do better in future:(

I blame it on Time Zone changes. That's the ticket! Too hard to keep up with the currently acceptable JOMjargon.

BTW, Give us a fun story please about something my namesake, young Robby Porchlight has done naughty lately. I need to know if you're "projecting" against Robby's:)

ON a different note, Dana Perino last night made the point that she thought the 'Fait accompli' done by Obama and the Supremes re: Gay Marriage, had effectively removed that great Lib-Conservative Talking point from the table, and as a result of removing that easy polarizer of Lib-Conserve view points, now the Electorate was having to view the rest of Conservative viewpoints without that easy to use whipping boy/talking point. In effect, she was saying that it wasn't as easy to find ways to demonize Conservatives viscerally anymore, and without such easily effective demonizers it's become tougher to smear Conservatives and people are less fearful of supporting someone like Trump or Ted Cruz, since they don't feel as physically/emotionally cowed into supporting him if for example Gay Marriage was still on the table.

That makes sense obviously in the new desperate push by Cokie Roberts and the MSM to paint Whites "of both Parties" now as simply being unalloyed Racists, voting for Klan Master Donald with the residual bigotry they've kept hidden in their breasts these last 50 years while they pulled the Dem lever. I thought it a good point from a member of the non-existent "Establishment."

[jimmyk]

there have been discussions within the Department of Justice about possibly pursuing legal action against so-called climate change deniers.

Just for argument's sake, not to begin to give this to be anything other than contemptible and unconstitutional, what possible pretense of a legal issue could they have?

And if they went ahead with this, could a Cruz administration retaliate by going after, say, economists who claim that a $15 minimum wage won't increase unemployment, or that wasteful government spending can be good for the economy? It might be worth it just to see Krugman in manacles.

[Theo]

Ignatz --

With all due respect, my hypothetical cannot be "wrong." I did not represent, nor would I, that this was an accurate summary of Rodham's misconduct. It was just a hypothetical in the hope that folks may come to see that prosecutorial discretion is real and necessary and not always easy to determine how it should be used.

We have seen prosecutors go after people for political reasons. Libby, Delay, Perry, etc. and it is an abuse of that discretion to be sure.

If you believe that a prosecution of Rodham is fully justified on non political grounds and that her status as a presidential candidate has absolutely nothing to do with your zeal to have her prosecuted, so be it.

[Theo]

jimmyk --

Increasingly the environmentalists seem to have the same view of their righteousness and the wickedness of anyone who holds a different view that was last evident during the Inquisition.

[daddy]

The Scooter Libby screwing was political through and through

You heard that too?*

*Joking reference to the supposed smoking gun uttered by either Rove or Libby as proof of the conspiracy.

[Jeff Dobbs]

jimmyk:
Theo's been around on and off for years

Well, only 9 years. Theo's first comment was Feb 7, 2007.

FTSAH: that first comment was 1,292 words. For comparison, his 3:50 comment is 282 words. :)

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

You're hypothetical is "wrong" if you think it yields any light on Hillary's situation, which I thought was what we were discussing.

[Jeff Dobbs]

'BOUT DANG TIME: Been waiting for the Carly email from an @tedcruz.org address. Finally came.

[clarice]

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/fbi-agents-investigated-in-showdown-with-oregon-occupier/

As they should be

[NK]

here's a summary of Obummer Justice Department prosecutions and CIA discipline actions. EVERY SINGLE one of these has less indicia of deliberate criminality than Hilligua, especially Petraeus. Some CIA pros believe Petraeus got of light because he was a retired 4-star. Perhaps. But he was prosecuted, and he did not destroy evidence, or deliberately send classified info to circumvent secure channels. It would be a gross abuse of discretion to not prosecute her: https://shadowproof.com/2015/11/13/leak-hypocrisy-cia-employee-contractor-who-committed-security-breaches-werent-prosecuted/

[Theo]

Ignatz --

Sorry if I was not clearer. I was giving a total hypothetical. It cannot be "wrong," because it is just a made up scenario. It was not intended to be an accurate summary of Rodham's case.

My point was that it is not easy being a non political prosecutor in every case. I did not mean to necessarily suggest that it would be difficult in Rodham's case.

[pagar a bacon, country ham and sausage supporter]

Maryrose@ 02:59.
"Most people voting for Hillary are just like her in their personal lives and in their total lack of a conscience"

IMO, there is no way one can be a Democrat and have a conscience.

http://www.numberofabortions.com/

Can not happen.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Here is a specific instance of attempting to criminalize "climate denial" already underway by the delightful Lynch's DOJ.

And here is one of the bizarrely idiotic nuisance suits these kind of creeps clog the courts up with; retired state agitprop chief James Hansen, now a private gun agitprop shill for the enviro-industrial complex, being one of the chief creepy litigants. Thank you NASA.

[Theo]

And let me say, at least for the benefit of New Lurker, I feel very strongly that that woman should NOT be president. There are a very very long list of reasons (aside from her views on the issues) such as cattle futures and law firm billing records and fantasies about being shot at and lies, lies, lies about things great and small over the years. If I agreed with her on every policy issue I would say that she should not be president.

In addition to all of that, her use of the private email server to get around public disclosure and accountability rules, whether criminal or not and regardless of what level of criminal punishment is appropriate, is one more reason why she should NOT be president.

[cathyf]

The scandal is not the emails, or her "Foundation", or her husband taking huge fees whilst his wife was still holding office; it is the very fact that she has gotten as far as she has in the race. Nowhere in our entire history have we seen such a openly corrupt, incompetent and outright dangerous person stand for POTUS as a member of a major party. Given what we know now about her--as opposed to what was publicly known about even Obama before he ran--the fact that she has such broad support shows that the nation is in deep moral and intellectual decline.

Should she win, that will be it for the USA. It is doubtful that we ever recover.

I have to agree with squaredance here. The Clintons stole money contributed to disaster relief to Haiti. The poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Who suffered a devastating natural disaster. Who are some of the darkest-skinned inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere. And 47% of the country will vote for her. And tell you, completely without any self-awareness, that Republicans are greedy, heartless and racist.

[narciso]

The lawfare that has been deployed against worthy candidates is too numerous to fully enumerate here, not to mention the crump/Julian machine.

[clarice]

Theo, dear--could you put a little asterisk at the beginning of your posts, so I can save time? Thanks.

[Porchlight]

BTW, Give us a fun story please about something my namesake, young Robby Porchlight has done naughty lately. I need to know if you're "projecting" against Robby's:)

Ha, daddy, let's see. Beyond the usual running into the street, trying to climb into cupboards to find candy, playing with cigarette lighters, and writing his name in yellow highlighter on the white dining room wall (I left it there and Mr. Porch hasn't seen it yet even though it's been weeks), he has gotten interested in knives. We really need to get them up out of his reach (if that is possible) now.

But in the meantime, he has been told that he is allowed to use a butter knife.

The other day he asked for our regular sharp Fiskars scissors which I use fifteen times a day and keep out of his reach in the dish cabinet. I said no, you can't have those, they're too sharp (he likes to cut paper on his lap which means he ends up cutting his clothes).

"Can I have the butter scissors?"

"Butter scissors?"

"The ones in the crayon box."

He meant the little kid scissors with the rounded tips. The ones he is allowed to use. Heh.

[Jane]

They just found a stole $10m rock from Apollo 14 mission in Clinton (BJ) files. Once a criminal, always a criminal.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040589/Missing-Apollo-17-moon-rock-worth-10m-Bill-Clintons-files.html

[Porchlight]

Is that rock one of the things Sandy Berger stuffed into his socks in the National Archives?

[Buckeye]

Theo

You OK with a wooden stake through the heart?

[Jane]

I think it was too heavy Porch. But I wouldn't be surprised. Actually he stole it when Governor of Arkansas.

[Appalled]

Theo:

there is no way to look at your proposition in the abstract. There is such a thing as equality under the law. If I prosecute a 4 star general under that law, and fail to prosecute the Secretary of State who reckless with that very same law -- I send a message on who loses and who wins under an administration.

One of the reasons we must endure Trump is rule of law has been chucked out the window by the elite.

[Theo]

I hope that we do not have to endure Trump. HE should not be president either.

[jimmyk]

Here is a specific instance of attempting to criminalize "climate denial" already underway by the delightful Lynch's DOJ.

Wow, that's pretty discouraging. I guess it's of a piece with all their extortion of banks, to get them to cough up money for La Raza and the like.

The private lawsuits aren't surprising, as we've seen with Steyn, as anyone can so anyone for anything. But when the government gets involved it's time to reach for our revolvers (not that I have one).

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

--My point was that it is not easy being a non political prosecutor in every case.--

IMO it would easy in the case you describe. If the prosecutor has the guy dead to rights as you describe and gives him the option of a plea deal and he refuses, then the conservative miscreant has made the decision easy.
And a prosecution would have the salutary effect of letting the nation see that the big cheese get the same treatment as the rest of us, because when a prosecutor has some Joe Schmoe dead to rights and they turn down a plea deal they get prosecuted.

The key difference with Libby is that his claim of simply misremembering conversations from years before was entirely plausible. It was no "in fact" kind of a case.

[daddy]

John Bolton being interviewed on FOX Business about his opinion on Iran's reply to Biden being in Israel. Abbas has refused to condemn the murder attack on an American in Israel during Biden's visit. Segment leads off with Biden's statement against Abbas's refusal to condemn the murder:

Joe Biden: "This cannot be viewed by civilized leaders as an appropriate way in which to behave...it's just not tolerable in the 21st Century."

FOX Host: In the midst of Joe Biden's visit to Israel, Iran has reportedly test fired 2 more Ballistic Missiles, this time with the phrase "ISRAEL MUST BE WIPED OUT" written in Hebrew, on the missiles. Here to weigh in, Former Sec John Bolton...Ambassador, it couldn't be just coincidence that this missile was tested on the day that VP Biden was in Israel, could it?

Bolton: Look, the Iranian Ayatolah's have contempt for the Obama Administration. These Missile launchings violate the Security Counsel Resolution that authorizes the Anti-Nuclear deal. They know it's in violation. They know...

Host: Excuse me for interrupting, Ambassador, but why are they doing it now? Why are they tweaking the US so deliberately? (Show's Missile launch video)

Bolton: I think for several reason. First, It shows that they will do what they want to do when it comes to their Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Program. Second, they know that relations between the Obama Administration and Israel are about as bad as has ever existed between the United States and Israel. And they're in competition for dominance within the region, in the broader battle with the Arab and Sunni powers. So I think this is kind of, it's more than propaganda, every time you test a missile you are verifying it's capabilities, expanding it's capabilities, to put your nuclear weapon on top of it when you get it.

Host: But it was also a deliberate humiliation of the United States, a humiliation of our Vice president when he was visiting Israel, similar I should say to the humiliation that happened with our Sailors when they were caught, the way that they paraded them before the cameras. Humiliation is used, is it not, as a weapon in the Middle East, (Shows captured Sailors video) a weapon that they prize highly against their enemies, right?

Bolton: Right. Given the Obama Administrations posture, Iran's activity is like a sadist persecuting a masochist---the more they do, the more the Obama Administration loves it. They're not going to stand up to Iran, and the Ayatolah's know it.

[clarice]

And the same doofuses who praise Comey's "independence", told us what a fiar , not mad dog, Fitzgerald was when Comey appointed him special prosecutor.

[Captain Hate]

Personally I think, just for the symbolism, they ought to move the 2016 RNC Convention from Cleveland

This puts me in my happy place.

[maryrose]

Clinton broke the law pure and simple and deserves the consequences of her action as do her compliant staff

[Jeff Dobbs]

This is for Jane in case she is still weighing her options on the vote next Tuesday. I'm not saying this should settle the question for her, just offering it up as a data point.

[jimmyk]

Actually he stole it when Governor of Arkansas.

Much as I believe the Clintons habitually steal whatever isn't locked down and guarded 24/7, in this case it sounds like some movers just boxed up everything in his office and it sat in some box for 35 years without anyone actually being aware of it.

[Theo]

Jeff --

But what about the reports that Rubio had racked up some impressive numbers in early voting? Switching now wastes those votes and makes a Trump win easier.

[daddy]

Theo,

Ask that same question you're asking not of a Candidate, but of a President in power.

If a person who breaks the Law as a Candidate should be exempt from prosecution because it might interfere with his/her ability to be President, shouldn't a President be exempt from prosecution because it might interfere with his/her ability to act as president?

Since President Nixon was technically a candidate for Re-election when Watergate happened, he'd probably love your idea, correct?

Your suggestion strikes me as as nutty as the rule that in DC if a Congressman Kennedy gets pulled over for Drunk Driving at 2 AM, he beats the rap by saying he were technically heading to the Senate to Vote, so therefore he can't be pulled over and charged and is free to go. If so, I'm tossing my name in the Hat for President and me and my VP choice Iggy are going to knock off the Lodi 7-11 at noon on Tuesday. Ig, I'll meet you in the parking lot with 2 black ski masks. Bring an extra 45 handgun for me, OK?

"No Officer, 'we're Candidates for President."

[Dore]

"I hope that we do not have to endure Trump."

And we hope that we do not have to endure many more posts from Theo.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

There is so little of the stories demonstrating Trump's horrible nature that turn out to be true I'm getting more interested in what on the surface sounds like an open and shut case with the Trump U deal.
Trump's NY tax credit for his penthouse was applied in error, apparently by the city itself and demonstrates nothing about his income except it is over $500,000.

[Jane]

Thanks Hit. Today I want Marco to grow a pair and drop out.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Theo is just engaging in the discussions so many lawyers like to do.

[Thomas Collins]

Theo, The Hill as Secretary of State chose to try to avoid FOIA scrutiny over the national security interests of her country. Were I the one making the decision, I would prosecute. If Obama decides that poor Hill has suffered enough, he can pardon her in return for her pledging never to run for any office in which she might be reasonably expected to have access to classified information. Ideology has nothing to do with it. If John Bolton did what The Hill did, my view would be the same.

[Theo]

Daddy --

Whoa! I made no suggestion that ANYONE, whether a president, a congressperson, a candidate or a Pope, should be exempt from prosecution. That would indeed be a nutty suggestion.

My point is that politics can play a role in either a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute. I think that there is no easy bright line test to determine when a prominent person (or candidate) should be prosecuted. Independent, professional and non partisan prosecutors have a tough task in some cases.

I will repeat that I think that Rodham's behavior here, whether criminal or not, should disqualify her from office because the voters should see that behavior as unacceptable. Unfortunately, in our LIV world with our media, it may take an indictment to actually disqualify her.

[Miss Marple 2]

The one thing Rubio had going for him was his inspirational and soaring rhetoric. When he descended into the wet pants and small hands signifying you-kn-what, he destroyed his image, pure and simple.

He could have attacked Trump on any one of a number of issues without sounding like he was an obnoxious 13-year-old. Once he did that, he destroyed his image.

I personally think it is another proof of his lack of judgement, like Gang of 8, Libya, rape bill. He is a mark for anyone who wants to get him to do someting, in this case, the GOPe. I wouldn't be surprised if Jeb Bush's speechwriters wrote it for him, as a "favor."

[jimmyk]

Iggy are going to knock off the Lodi 7-11 at noon on Tuesday.

Wait, I thought that was Janet's gig.

And speaking of Janet, I hope everything is ok and that we'll hear from her soon.

[Miss Marple 2]

I know Janet's mother was sick. Does anyone have her email or phone number and could check on her?

I miss her comments, because they were so penetrating and to-the-point.

[jimmyk]

When he descended into the wet pants and small hands signifying you-kn-what, he destroyed his image, pure and simple.

I think that's right, though it seems a bit unfair, as nothing Trump does seems to destroy his image. It's all dog bites man if you start with an image that you're a dog, so to speak. Just as Cruz gets vilified for his small charitable donations, while Dems who donated even less get off scot-free. They're Dems, whaddya expect?!

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Oh lord, stuck in Folsom again.

[Thomas Collins]

The politics can be considered at the Presidential level, Theo, as in Ford's pardon of Nixon. The appropriate level to deal with the politics is at the POTUS level, not the Department of Justice level.

[Theo]

jimmyk --

Yes, no one held it against Trump that he acted like a vulgar fourth grader. That is who he is and that is what he does. Rubio had tried to establish a more elevated brand and dropping down to Trump's level hurt him more than it hurt Trump.

[Jane]

Theo I understood what you meant. I actually play that game with myself. (Would you feel the same way or recommend the same thing if you liked the person?) It's a good exercise.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

If a circus seal balances a beach ball on the end of its nose it's doing what you expect a circus seal to do.
If Marco Rubio does, people rightly decline to vote for a guy who apparently thinks he's a circus seal.

[Theo]

TC --

Again, I think you miss the point. Look at the politically inspired prosecutions of the past -- Scooter Libby, Tom Delay, Rick Perry and I am sure others. Don't you think that those prosecutions should not have been brought? Is your position really, well wait and see if they are convicted and then maybe they can be pardoned?

Prosecutors have to make these decisions. We want honest and non partisan prosecutors to do so.

But again, regardless of technical legal guilt, Rodham's behavior was such that the voters should reject her.

[Texas Liberty Gal]

This is a surprise - http://therightscoop.com/meghan-mccain-carly-fiorina-endorsement-convinced-me-to-support-ted-cruz/

[narciso]

And I say, nothing Nixon did rose to the level of impeachment, political surveilance is what had been three meals of the day.

[Rick Ballard]

"I will repeat that I think that Rodham's behavior here, whether criminal or not, should disqualify her from office because the voters should see that behavior as unacceptable."

Comrade Sanders' win in Michigan may be evidence that her behavior is, in fact, unacceptable. Her unfavorables may actually be translating to "hell no" votes.

I can go along with "Better Red Than Red Witch" as a Comrade Sanders' campaign theme.

[Michael (fpa Patriot4Freedom)]

I often thought those skits were making fun of the racialists by jokingly attributing to them this sort of mindset.
But maybe I'm giving SNL too much credit.

Posted by: jimmyk | March 09, 2016 at 02:36 PM

jimmyk - I probably should have mentioned that I was sure SNL *was* making fun of those who believed in some sort of special 'white privilege' that all whites supposedly possessed. Eddie Murphy clearly played it for laughs at those who felt that way.

I wonder if it is our 'PC Age' that prevents people from calling out such nonsense nowadays, or a fear of cries of 'racism!'?

Or maybe it's just fear that the Dems will use criticism of the claimed 'white privilege' for yet more political advantage over the Repubs?

[Miss Marple 2]

jimmyk, I agree some of Trump's attacks have been over the top.

However, I don't believe I ever heard him accuse a candidate of wetting his pants or having too small an accessory.

I have never heard stuff like that before in a presidential campaign. There were lots of attcks Rubio could have used, many of which have been discussed here, including the Trump U lawsuit and the tax returns.

So why drag in that really low-class stuff when there was so much other material?

Bad judgement, perhaps egged on by the GOPe.

[narciso]

Kirikaou leaked information to the terrorist's lawyers, a distinction that should be noted.

[Thomas Collins]

Theo, may I respectfully suggest that you are the one missing the point. This involves America's national security and the lives of our agents and foreign assets. Do you think Bob Gates was being politically motivated when he asserted that foreign powers have the info that went into and out of the server?

[Theo]

Rick B --

I think that the Sanders win in Michigan might have a lot more significance than the media seems to be giving it. The polls just flat out belly flopped on this one.

A few possible explanations. One is that young people turned out in MUCH greater numbers than expected. Two, young voters were even more pro Bernie than expected. Third, Bernie more than doubled his support among black voters than in other contests (to about 30%). Four, they did not poll after Sunday and there was a debate on Sunday.

As the old song goes, "something's happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear." But whatever it is, it cannot be good news for Rodham.

[Momto2]

I will repeat that I think that Rodham's behavior here, whether criminal or not, should disqualify her from office ...

If her behavior is not criminal then I need a new dictionary!

Webster:
CRIMINAL
adjective crim·i·nal \ˈkri-mə-nəl\
Definition of criminal
1 being or guilty of an act that is unlawful, foolish, or wrong
2 relating to unlawful acts or their punishment

[Theo]

TC --

With all due respect, nothing I said indicated that her transgressions did not involve national security or foreign assets or contradicted anything that Bob Gates said.

My point was the one that Jane picked up on.

[Miss Marple 2]

http://www.freedomworks.org/content/house-acts-save-american-brick-industry

This is another attack on small industries in an effort to destroy the middle class. This one brought to you by the EPA.

[Thomas Collins]

And what in my posts, Theo, indicated that I didn't pick up on the point Jane mentioned, especially in light of my pointing out that my assessment would be the same were it John Bolton being investigated?

[James D.]

My point was that it is not easy being a non political prosecutor in every case. I did not mean to necessarily suggest that it would be difficult in Rodham's case.

Here's the thing. If officeholders/appointed officials OF BOTH PARTIES were systematically hammered by prosecutors EVERY SINGLE TIME they broke the law, there would be no dilemma for prosecutors in a case like Rodham's (or your hypothetical situation with Trump or Cruz).

[daddy]

Charles Payne says Trump in some FOX Poll is leading Rubio in Florida by 23% Wow! I had not heard that.

Kasich is apparently leading Trump in polls by 5%.

In the long run that tells me about Trump's strength.

Monica Crowley says about Rubio and the Florida Poll:
This Florida poll is striking to me because the gap is so huge between Trump and Rubio. We've known that Trump has had a substantial lead for a very long time, so this is nothing new, but the fact that Marco Rubio has essentially collapsed over the lass week is reinforced by this poll in his home state. If he is trailing by this much, it's not just over for him in this race, but it might be over for his political career going forward...

Tammy Bruce adds that these numbers do not take into account what happened over the last day or 2, with things like Carly endorsing Cruz, so it might be even worse.

[daddy]

Oh lord, stuck in Folsom again.

I told you not to waste time going behind the counter to make a Slurpie for our Getaway!@#$

[cathyf]

The problem with Theo's scruples about prosecutions with political effects is that in the last few decades this has become an entirely one-sided scruple with enormous political effects. Look at the Ted Stevens prosecution: What you have is that the Constitution set things up so that Washington, DC has zero senators while Alaska, with just about the same population, has two. So the citizens of Washington, DC, got together and decided to take one of Alaska's senate seats for themselves.

They charged Ted Stevens with bribery, and the form of this "bribe" is that the contractor who built an addition on his house supposedly undercharged him. They got the trial moved to Washington, DC, even though real estate values are the most notoriously local things ("location, location, location"). Every Alaskan juror would have known just by looking at the place that the contractor actually ripped Stevens off. But even an honest DC juror would have been swayed by the personal experience that a refrigerator box under a bridge in DC is worth more than a nice house in Alaska.

The end result was that Stevens was out and the DC candidate was in. This was the one vote that made Obamacare the law.

Getting all prissy about political effects but ONLY when it disadvantages the Democrat is part of how we got in this mess. And it WILL destroy the country.

[daddy]

Porchlight,

Is young Robby available as a partner for robbing 7-11's? I need a new partner.

Great kid. Good job Momma Porch. Thanks for the update.

[Porchlight]

I have never gotten over the Stevens prosecution. If he hadn't been wrongly hounded out of office, he might be alive today. So sad.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Theo:
But what about the reports that Rubio had racked up some impressive numbers in early voting? Switching now wastes those votes and makes a Trump win easier.

I don't believe it. Unless I missed something, it wasn't reports plural - it was one poll that asked respondents if they had already voted, and if they had, who they voted for. Turns out is was a sample of 72 voters.

Even assuming all 72 people told the truth (both about voting and who they voted for), I don't think that is a significant enough data point to draw the conclusion that Rubio has a lead. I think it safer to assume the FL early vote trend matches other states that have already had early voting...Trump's been winning those.

I've come to the conclusion that Rubio should drop out and get behind Cruz. If FL is lost, it's lost - I think it's a longer shot for any non-Trump to win FL than it is possible Rubio getting out could help pick up delegates in IL, MO and NC (he's not running, Cruz gets those most of those votes, Cruz as the single, undisputed conservative Trump alternative also shakes loose some Kasich and Trump votes as well).

Those states may not be worth a combined 99 delegates, but, my thinking is...

I'd put keeping Trump from winning FL at <20%.
I'd put swinging ~60 delegates out of IL, MO and NC at >50%

99 delegates at 20% = 19.8
60 delegates at 50% = 30

Better risk/reward scenario to cut FL loose with Rubio getting out and getting behind Cruz, imo.

(but i've also been on record more than a few times stating that "strategic voting" is repulsive to me, so i may just be easily swayed by the idea that "strategic voting" is a bad idea)

[Porchlight]

Thanks, daddy! He will happily be your partner in crime, especially if your dogs are involved. He is desperately lobbying us for a dog.

He is really really fast so he can be your getaway artist.

[Buckeye]

I think Carly stumping with Cruz might help in Ahia and cut into Kasick's lead. Hope she comes with him for a rally.

[daddy]

Steve Rogers on a good segment on Charles Payne's show just pronounced "GOP" the Gop (rhyming with Cop).

I always thought if you said it as a word insead of as the "Gee Oh Pee," that you pronounced it as Gope, rhyming with Dope.

Whats the dope on that?

[Rick Ballard]

Potential reasons for Clinton performance in Michigan:

1. Democrat voters disgusted by her dishonesty.

2. Failure of Clinton campaign check to clear into OFA account in a timely manner.

3. FSA members seduced by Comrade Sanders' offer of a bigger free lunch.

4. ?

[Miss Marple 2]

4. Long memories of union voters, who saw their jobs leave after Bill got NAFTA passed.
Bernie made a point of saying he had not voted for any trade bill.

[Miss Marple 2]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/272451-rubio-regrets-attacks-my-kids-embarrassed

[daddy]

Thanks, daddy! He will happily be your partner in crime,

"You were good Iggy, see, real good, see, but just not good enough, see. It wuz you that fumbled 'dat 7/11 job, you 'dat ratted out Marlowe, you 'dat squealed to the coppers, you 'dat tried to sell me down the river, and now wit' Robby Porchlight on the job d'ere just a'int room for the 2 of you in 'dis racket, see."