If Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary, he will lose all shred of credibility

[NotfooledbyW]

CrusaderFrank 14522365

Hillary wanted Iraq as much as Dubya.

Such a lie:

Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—


Dot Com 14539108

better in national security in 2008? lol Even SHE HERSELF is trying to distance herself from her record I get it, you're voting for her based on her gender

Distance herself from her record? That's BS.
She reiterated what I've been telling mostly right wing morons for years.

​

In response, Clinton acknowledged, as she has on previous occasions, that she’d made a mistake. But she also offered an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites. In other words, Clinton was now claiming she voted the way she did in the interests of diplomacy; the problem was that Bush went back on his word—he invaded before giving the inspectors enough time.

Listening to her rationale Wednesday night, I didn’t know whether she was telling the truth. I had written many Slatecolumns about the Iraq debate and the ensuing war, but I couldn’t remember the details of then-Sen. Clinton’s position. Looking up those details now, I have come to a conclusion about the rationale she recited at the New Hampshire town hall: Hillary was telling the truth.

This fact doesn’t vindicate her vote back in 2002—far from it. But it does take some of the sting out of Sanders’ attack. In short, her vote on Iraq, under the circumstances, should not be seen as the indicator of her stance or judgment on armed intervention generally.


The evidence is clear. On Oct. 10, 2002, during the Senate debate on a resolution to authorize the use of force in Iraq, Clinton rose to express her highly qualified support. First, though, she criticized the idea of attacking Saddam then and there, either alone or “with any allies we can muster.” Such a course, she said, “is fraught with danger,” in part because “it would set a precedent that could come back to haunt us,” legitimizing invasions that Russia might launch against Georgia, India against Pakistan, or China against Taiwan.



“So,” she continued, “the question is, how do we do our best to both diffuse the threat Saddam Hussein poses to his people, the region, including Israel, and the United States—and, at the same time, work to maximize our international support and strengthen the United Nations.”

She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

“If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”

Hillary Clinton Told the Truth About Her Iraq War Vote


Clinton admits it was a mistake to take Bush at his word. Bush is a liar. I do not fault her for that.

Why not quote what Clinton said:


Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—

 

[Disir]

This Sanders- supporter will not vote for the crony Repub- lite candidate- hiLIARy

That's too bad. A non-vote for her is a non-vote for what Bernie wants to do. If Trump can't incentivize you to vote for a Democrat then you simply must not really care about the future of this country.

Or you simply do not understand the argument.

There is nothing beyond my understanding - a non vote for a Democrat candidate or wasting your vote on some Schluck third party is a vote for more Republican regressive anti-working class policies.

That's anti-progressive if you don't quite understand that.

Here is a little newsflash for you: H1B visas (Democrats), TPP (Democrats), more immigration than the country can handle (Democrats), outsourcing (Democrats).

Do you have any facts along with a comparative Republican record on those issues?

Those are the facts.

 

[Disir]

Shall we go back and study the Democrats shipping R&D overseas as well? More lip service to unions?

You think Trump an a Republican controlled congress would doing anything to reel in U.S. Corporations on that topic?

Let me see, faux privatization of the public education, screwing over the post office.............the Democrats should have thought this through.

Oh, well, what are you going to do......

 

[NotfooledbyW]

That's too bad. A non-vote for her is a non-vote for what Bernie wants to do. If Trump can't incentivize you to vote for a Democrat then you simply must not really care about the future of this country.

Or you simply do not understand the argument.

There is nothing beyond my understanding - a non vote for a Democrat candidate or wasting your vote on some Schluck third party is a vote for more Republican regressive anti-working class policies.

That's anti-progressive if you don't quite understand that.

Here is a little newsflash for you: H1B visas (Democrats), TPP (Democrats), more immigration than the country can handle (Democrats), outsourcing (Democrats).

Do you have any facts along with a comparative Republican record on those issues?

Those are the facts.

Those are broad general topics for discussion of the facts. Apparently Bernie supporters cannot dig deeper into the facts.

 

[HenryBHough]

Up to now the "Nutty Old Uncle Bernie" appellation was affectionate. But things are looking serious............though sanity might yet prevail........a write-in campaign would tilt things that way.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

If you weren't actually supporting a candidate so completely corrupt and incompetent that she's under a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION by the FBI, I might give a single fuck

Who told you the Clinton is under a criminal investigation?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Stop wasting my time!!!

What are you going to do in November? Vote for Trump, third party, ignore Sanders eventually endorsement of Clinton?

They don't need a voting plan to improve the lives of working class Americans. They have Bernie purity to wallow in if the country gets put through more Republican hell.

Democrat no-voters, protest voters and party switchers gave us the first four years of Bush and Bush held off his Iraq lies long enough to barely win the second term.

Democrats should spank Teabagger Republicans really hard if Dot Coms are few and far between come Election Day.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you weren't actually supporting a candidate so completely corrupt and incompetent that she's under a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION by the FBI, I might give a single fuck

Who told you the Clinton is under a criminal investigation?

The FBI did

 

[HappyJoy]

Stop wasting my time!!!

What are you going to do in November? Vote for Trump, third party, ignore Sanders eventually endorsement of Clinton?

They don't need a voting plan to improve the lives of working class Americans. They have Bernie purity to wallow in if the country gets put through more Republican hell.

Democrat no-voters, protest voters and party switchers gave us the first four years of Bush and Bush held off his Iraq lies long enough to barely win the second term.

Democrats should spank Teabagger Republicans really hard if Dot Coms are few and far between come Election Day.

I think Dot Com is few and far between. Democrats will vote for the Democrat. Anybody Sanders brought in outside of the Democratic party I do not see shifting to Trump as they are polar opposites. Some I think will support Clinton, either because Clinton is more aligned politically with Sanders or that they will listen to Sanders when he says Trump is not acceptable.

 

[Dot Com]

Up to now the "Nutty Old Uncle Bernie" appellation was affectionate. But things are looking serious............though sanity might yet prevail........a write-in campaign would tilt things that way.

It can happen before the FBI Convention

 

[Tehon]

Stop wasting my time!!!

What are you going to do in November? Vote for Trump, third party, ignore Sanders eventually endorsement of Clinton?

They don't need a voting plan to improve the lives of working class Americans. They have Bernie purity to wallow in if the country gets put through more Republican hell.

Democrat no-voters, protest voters and party switchers gave us the first four years of Bush and Bush held off his Iraq lies long enough to barely win the second term.

Democrats should spank Teabagger Republicans really hard if Dot Coms are few and far between come Election Day.

They don't need a voting plan to improve the lives of working class Americans.

Because Hillary always represents the interests of the working people.

Leaked State Department cables revealed that the U.S. ambassador in Honduras pleaded with Clinton to call what happened in Honduras a military coup, as did members of Congress. But sherefused, and worked instead to broker a deal that elected a new government that was much friendlier to multinational corporations and the U.S. military.

Jesse Freeston, a Canadian documentary filmmaker and reporter, told ThinkProgress what he witnessed on the ground in Honduras in the months following the coup. “What I saw was a huge cross-section of Honduran society, the indigenous community, the black community, farmers, the LGBT community, all in the streets protesting every day. And I saw daily teargassing of those protests,” he said. “There were also what appeared to be targeted assassinations.”
Hillary Clinton Claims Honduran Government ‘Followed The Law’ In Ousting Its President in 2009

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Tehon 14536754

Liar, it wasn't OK, the Foreign Affairs Manual is clear on the matter.
And she doesn't get to police herself.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2842429/ESP-16-03-Final.pdf
According to the current CIO and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, Secretary Clinton had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices, who in turn would have attempted to provide her with approved and secured means that met her business needs. However, according to these officials, DS and IRM did not—and would not—approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business, because of the restrictions in the FAM and the security risks in doing so.

From your link:


(In a letter to the Department, her representative stated that it was the Secretary’s practice to email Department officials at their government email accounts on matters pertaining to the conduct of government business. Accordingly, the representative asserted, to the extent that the Department retained records of government email accounts, the Department already had records of the Secretary’s email preserved within its recordkeeping systems.15)



And this:



(Methods of Preservation: According to NARA regulations, an agency “must ensure that procedures, directives and other issuances ... include recordkeeping requirements for records in all media, including those records created or received on electronic mail systems.”28 )


The second cite was in 2009. It means government servers were not mandatory.

And you are still saying no one at DS and IRM could figure out that HRC was using a private server to conduct non-classified government business.




CrusaderFrank 14541459

If you weren't actually supporting a candidate so completely corrupt and incompetent that she's under a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION by the FBI, I might give a single fuck

Who told you the Clinton is under a criminal investigation?

The FBI did

To you personally?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

(((Supreme Court Justice Rosalinda Cruz said that, as a sovereign and independent nation, Honduras had the right to freely decide to remove a president who was violating Honduran laws. She added: "Unfortunately, our voice hasn’t been heard."[47])))

So you wanted the U.S. To over-ride the Honduran Supreme Court?


You have gone insane with hatred of Hillary Clinton.




Tehon 14541539

Stop wasting my time!!!

What are you going to do in November? Vote for Trump, third party, ignore Sanders eventually endorsement of Clinton?

They don't need a voting plan to improve the lives of working class Americans. They have Bernie purity to wallow in if the country gets put through more Republican hell.

Democrat no-voters, protest voters and party switchers gave us the first four years of Bush and Bush held off his Iraq lies long enough to barely win the second term.

Democrats should spank Teabagger Republicans really hard if Dot Coms are few and far between come Election Day.

They don't need a voting plan to improve the lives of working class Americans.

Because Hillary always represents the interests of the working people.

Leaked State Department cables revealed that the U.S. ambassador in Honduras pleaded with Clinton to call what happened in Honduras a military coup, as did members of Congress. But sherefused, and worked instead to broker a deal that elected a new government that was much friendlier to multinational corporations and the U.S. military.

Jesse Freeston, a Canadian documentary filmmaker and reporter, told ThinkProgress what he witnessed on the ground in Honduras in the months following the coup. “What I saw was a huge cross-section of Honduran society, the indigenous community, the black community, farmers, the LGBT community, all in the streets protesting every day. And I saw daily teargassing of those protests,” he said. “There were also what appeared to be targeted assassinations.”
Hillary Clinton Claims Honduran Government ‘Followed The Law’ In Ousting Its President in 2009

gallop poll 2009;

Did Zelaya's actions justify his removal from office? Yes 41% / No 28% / NR 31%

Zelaya violated the constitution and

(Still, many people in Honduras, including most of the country's official institutions, claimed that there was a constitutional succession of power. In a statement to a subcomittee of the US House Committee on International Affairs, former Honduran Supreme Court Justice, Foreign Affairs minister, and law professor Guillermo Perez Cadalso said that all major governmental institutions agreed that Zelaya was violating the law.[46] Supreme Court Justice Rosalinda Cruz said that, as a sovereign and independent nation, Honduras had the right to freely decide to remove a president who was violating Honduran laws. She added: "Unfortunately, our voice hasn’t been heard."[47]She compared Zelaya's tactics, including his dismissal of the armed forces chief for obeying a court order to impound ballots to be used in the vote, with those of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez: "Some say it was not Zelaya but Chávez governing."[6])

 

[Disir]

Or you simply do not understand the argument.

There is nothing beyond my understanding - a non vote for a Democrat candidate or wasting your vote on some Schluck third party is a vote for more Republican regressive anti-working class policies.

That's anti-progressive if you don't quite understand that.

Here is a little newsflash for you: H1B visas (Democrats), TPP (Democrats), more immigration than the country can handle (Democrats), outsourcing (Democrats).

Do you have any facts along with a comparative Republican record on those issues?

Those are the facts.

Those are broad general topics for discussion of the facts. Apparently Bernie supporters cannot dig deeper into the facts.

Why do I need a comparative record? I'm not a right wing. The answer, which again, you don't grasp is that this is not about republicans. You don't get to point fingers at the Republicans. That's a Wasserman-Shultz response and another reason people ditched.

Let's see, I don't know if I mentioned this here or not.
H.R. 6407 (109th): Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (2006 - H.R. 6407)

H1BVisa's
U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote
H1 Base Report on 10 of the Top H1B Visa Sponsor Employers. H1Base.com 2013
Hillary Clinton’s Position on Increasing the H-1B Visa Cap

Archive of GTW Latest News and Alerts
Fact-Checking the Obama Administration on Trade:
Debunking Data Distortions from Obama's Trade Representative
Debunking Trade Myths

 

[Dot Com]

NotfooledbyW appears to be another Cl1nton Syndicate blind follower. Sad

 

[Disir]

I don't care who he votes for. Look, you wanna be a corporate whore than say so.
Public Education: Who Are the Corporate Reformers? | BillMoyers.com

Privatizing public education.

But, don't then pull this shit and talk about how the deal is way better going for Clinton and the Dems. They don't give a shit about the middle class or the working class.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Disir 14541830

Why do I need a comparative record? I'm not a right wing. The answer, which again, you don't grasp is that this is not about republicans. You don't get to point fingers at the Republicans. That's a Wasserman-Shultz response and another reason people ditched.

Really? When they ditched where did they go?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Disir 14542038

But, don't then pull this shit and talk about how the deal is way better going for Clinton and the Dems. They don't give a shit about the middle class or the working class.

Then which Party does?

 

[Vigilante]

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Disir 14542038

Public Education: Who Are the Corporate Reformers? | BillMoyers.com

Starting to get how a 'ditcher' thinks.

Bill Gates is evil. Therefore Dems are evil. The Gates Foundation is evil. Anyone who takes money from Gates is evil. Anyone who uses Microsoft technology is evil.

Tell me if I got it wrong.