Author Topic: Hilary's Crimes  (Read 131 times)

Offline Draconic Aiur (OP)

Hilary's Crimes
« on: December 22, 2017, 03:50:01 AM »
So my dad is an active supporter of Hillary and he told me The Emails, and Benghazi were bullshit. I'm starting to believe him. How can they be Bullshit? She was set up. Can anyone explain further in layman's terms?

Offline Baruch

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2017, 06:55:24 AM »
Once you believe in conspiracy, then everyone is not only innocent, they are victims of their political opponents.

1. The Elite make the laws ... and exclude their favorite activities from censure.  Witness Clinton Foundation vs Rosie O'Donnell.  The Clinton Foundation followed some kind of ass-covering technicality, and avoided clear evidence of bribery.  Rosie just offered millions to Congressmen to vote against the Tax Reform.  Her action is criminal, because the government says it is bribery, but not what the Clinton Foundation did for years.

2. The Elite avoid enforcement of the law.  Witness all the court judgements against the banks for malfeasance .. but no bank officer is charged, the fiction of the corporate person is charged, and that is fined.  But the banks get to take those fines as tax deductions.

So not unlike Nixon, on technicality (and overly broad interpretation) the Clintons have probably never seriously violated any laws.  And they have the lawyers to prove it.

In a Latin-American corrupt country, all sorts of immoral things happen, many committed by government officials.  This is done with impunity.  The US is a corrupt Anglo country (with lots of Latin-Americans too).  If your conscience tells you, that if you did what X is accused of doing (but did they?), then it is probably corrupt if not illegal.  Many things the Clintons have done, both Bill and Hillary and Chelsea ... violate my conscience.  See my recent post on the universal gag reflex.  My only recourse is to never vote for them.  They (and many other public officials in the US) violate my standards of conduct so much, I have phobia over their continued freedom from jail.  It is lie Al Capone walking free (he didn't kill too many people himself, he had employees do most of that).  It is Chicago, 1928.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 07:09:17 AM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline SGOS

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2017, 07:02:53 AM »
So my dad is an active supporter of Hillary and he told me The Emails, and Benghazi were bullshit. I'm starting to believe him. How can they be Bullshit? She was set up. Can anyone explain further in layman's terms?
They are certainly evidence of poor judgment, but if someone wants to accuse Hillary of crimes, he would do well to produce actual evidence, lest he appear to be an ignorant hypocrite.  And if anyone does have insider knowledge unknown to the authorities about Hillary's criminal activity, they need to report it.  They should not sit there like a dumb ass slinging baseless accusations, but go to the police and file a written complaint. Until they can do that, they should quietly try to figure where their delusions are coming from.

Offline Baruch

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2017, 07:12:51 AM »
They are certainly evidence of poor judgment, but if someone wants to accuse Hillary of crimes, he would do well to produce actual evidence, lest he appear to be an ignorant hypocrite.  And if anyone does have insider knowledge unknown to the authorities about Hillary's criminal activity, they need to report it.  They should not sit there like a dumb ass slinging baseless accusations, but go to the police and file a written complaint. Until they can do that, they should quietly try to figure where their delusions are coming from.

All humans are ignorant hypocrites.  But I will admit to being a criminal (at least in some jurisdiction somewhere), because there are so many BS laws.  And evidence will never be forthcoming ... unless there are two unimpeachable witnesses who turn State's evidence.  In rabbinical Jewish view, it is almost impossible to convict anyone of a crime, not even murder, because of the lack of those two witnesses.

So yes, unless you were in the Presidential box in April 1865 .. John Wilkes Booth didn't shoot Lincoln.  And yes, the Law is an Ass.  All of it.  But go ahead and claim, as an atheist no less, that Trump is the anti-Christ.  Epistemological argument (how do you know what you know) is a black hole of fruitless arguing.  Socrates was the only one to get it right on epistemology.  People know nothing.

And this OP is about crimes, not differences in public policy (as opposed to private behavior either).  What can we do, except look at public reputation.  Is the reputation deserved?  Is there variance in reputation or are most people in agreement?  Baseless accusation is the style in politics, particularly during the current paranoid witch-hunt.

As a matter of their public policy, I hate Bill and Hillary Clinton.  Their policy is in writing, in completed public law or enforcement, in speeches.  How the policy came about, is less known.  As to their public reputation for their business dealings, family affairs and personal peccadilloes ... there is only speculation.  What I have read is very negative.  I feel shame (collective guilt) on anything connected with them, or the Bush family, or the Kennedy family, or the Obama family.  I am sure I will feel the same way about the Trump family.  I hate political dynasties, they seem un-American to me, they are monarchial.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 07:28:48 AM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline Atheon

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2017, 07:42:38 AM »
Yes, they were bullshit. The Republicans for some reason have had a rage-boner for her ever since the 1992 campaign, and since that time have constantly told lie after lie after lie about her. Sadly, many liberals started to believe these lies over the last few years.

Lesson: Never believe a Republican.
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca

Offline SGOS

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2017, 08:13:17 AM »
And this OP is about crimes, not differences in public policy (as opposed to private behavior either).
The OP is about bullshit and confusing criminal activity with bullshit.  It uses emails and political policy as examples that are often conflated with criminal activities.  The OP asks how one determines bullshit from a criminal activity.  Your hatred of Bill and Hillary and the shame you feel over them is an example of how bullshit is conflated with criminal activity, and it helps answer the question of how the conflation occurs, but doesn't actually identify a criminal behavior.

Offline SGOS

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2017, 08:37:02 AM »
So my dad is an active supporter of Hillary and he told me The Emails, and Benghazi were bullshit. I'm starting to believe him. How can they be Bullshit? She was set up. Can anyone explain further in layman's terms?
Hillary actually used her personal computer to send emails.  This appears not to be bullshit.  Did it compromise national security?  We don't know, so it may or may not be bullshit.  The FBI investigated Hilary's emails to find evidence of wrong doing.  This was not bullshit.  But they didn't find anything, so claims that they did would be bullshit.  Also, the fact that the FBI read her personal computer messages is irrelevant.  Politicians can use government computers to commit fraud and wrong doing.  It doesn't make using a personal computer to break the law any worse.  So there is a lot of bullshit, probably mostly bullshit, but not all bullshit, certainly not enough to get your panties in a knot.  If it does, I would consider that more of a personal problem, because you are wasting your time drawing conclusions from bullshit.

Offline trdsf

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2017, 12:10:27 PM »
I might also add that when it came to email security, it was State that got hacked, not Hillary.


Yes, they were bullshit. The Republicans for some reason have had a rage-boner for her ever since the 1992 campaign, and since that time have constantly told lie after lie after lie about her. Sadly, many liberals started to believe these lies over the last few years.
True, and true, and true.  The partisan witch hunt has been ongoing for a quarter of a century, and it's important to note that the only accusation that's held any water is that Bill got a blowjob from someone that wasn't Hillary.  Even Witchfinder General Ken Starr, who'd been hired to investigate the Whitewater matter, ended up admitting there was no wrongdoing -- so of course he ran off and investigated whatever he damn well felt like.  His job was never to determine the truth; it was to find something, anything, the Repubs could use to bring down Bill Clinton.  Starr, as some of you may recall, was foisted upon the nation by a troika consisting of noted right-wingers Judge David Sentelle and Senators Jesse Helms and Lauch Faircloth.  Their complaint about original prosecutor Jim Fiske?  Fundamentally, that he was actually conducting a proper investigation, and they couldn't stand the idea that a Republican prosecutor might return no indictments.

Truth was never what the GOP wanted, and what they still don't.  And the sad fact is, there really did used to be conservative Republicans with whom one could honorably disagree and still get things done -- some of us are old enough to remember Watergate, and Howard Baker (he of the famous query "What did the president know, and when did he know it?"), and even the pre-Reagan George H.W. Bush.

The neocon takeover and its insistence on a) ideological purity and b) total destruction of anyone who disagrees have made the modern GOP a legitimate danger to the Republic -- unlike whether Bill got a hummer in the Oval Office, or Hillary might've sent an email on a non-State server.
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning." -- Calvin and Hobbes
"I thought I committed regicide today, but I committed deicide!" -- Sadie Doyle, Beyond Belief

Offline Baruch

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2017, 01:14:40 PM »
The OP is about bullshit and confusing criminal activity with bullshit.  It uses emails and political policy as examples that are often conflated with criminal activities.  The OP asks how one determines bullshit from a criminal activity.  Your hatred of Bill and Hillary and the shame you feel over them is an example of how bullshit is conflated with criminal activity, and it helps answer the question of how the conflation occurs, but doesn't actually identify a criminal behavior.

All political activities are criminal activities, but most of which are not illegal.  Don't confuse illegal with criminal.  Doesn't matter, I hope Cuthulhu comes and eats all the Democrats and Republicans ;-)
שלום

Offline Baruch

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2017, 01:15:22 PM »
Hillary actually used her personal computer to send emails.  This appears not to be bullshit.  Did it compromise national security?  We don't know, so it may or may not be bullshit.  The FBI investigated Hilary's emails to find evidence of wrong doing.  This was not bullshit.  But they didn't find anything, so claims that they did would be bullshit.  Also, the fact that the FBI read her personal computer messages is irrelevant.  Politicians can use government computers to commit fraud and wrong doing.  It doesn't make using a personal computer to break the law any worse.  So there is a lot of bullshit, probably mostly bullshit, but not all bullshit, certainly not enough to get your panties in a knot.  If it does, I would consider that more of a personal problem, because you are wasting your time drawing conclusions from bullshit.

Partisans ... same as Caligula ... psychotics anonymous.

I wasn't going to drag up old accusations.  Wasn't going to be partisan.  I let you D-R Cuckistanis do what you do best.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 02:32:00 PM by Baruch »
שלום

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2017, 01:52:00 PM »
The OP is about bullshit and confusing criminal activity with bullshit.  It uses emails and political policy as examples that are often conflated with criminal activities.  The OP asks how one determines bullshit from a criminal activity.  Your hatred of Bill and Hillary and the shame you feel over them is an example of how bullshit is conflated with criminal activity, and it helps answer the question of how the conflation occurs, but doesn't actually identify a criminal behavior.
Wait. You actually read Baruchistani? Why?
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

Offline Baruch

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2017, 02:06:19 PM »
Wait. You actually read Baruchistani? Why?

Still supporting Hitler, Stalin, Tojo, Mussolini?  Character assassination at least presupposes one has character.

So how many of you know ... His Name Was Seth Rich?  Anyone who voted for either Hillary or Trump last year ... was a demon.  They like the heat and fire, they will love Hell.
שלום

Offline trdsf

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #12 on: December 22, 2017, 02:21:12 PM »
I would also add that this technique is called 'The Big Lie': say it loudly enough and often enough and whether or not it's true some of it will stick just from the sheer repetition of it.

Especially if you have the collusion of the media to pass the lies along unexamined.
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning." -- Calvin and Hobbes
"I thought I committed regicide today, but I committed deicide!" -- Sadie Doyle, Beyond Belief

Offline Cavebear

Re: Hilary's Crimes
« Reply #13 on: December 26, 2017, 03:05:31 AM »
I would also add that this technique is called 'The Big Lie': say it loudly enough and often enough and whether or not it's true some of it will stick just from the sheer repetition of it.

Especially if you have the collusion of the media to pass the lies along unexamined.

I have it on the least of authority that the org chart at the White House now officially lists Fox News as the "Office of Communication".  And waaaayyyy over on the side, in very small print, "Trump's Brain"
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!