Republicans in Congress are doing to Democratic Party Presumptive Nominee for President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton...as they did in 1998 to President Bill Clinton...when he was wrongly impeached. Witch-hunt, witch-hunt, witch-hunt. It's a word that I will use multiple times throughout this commentary.But before I get to Mrs. Clinton, let me respectfully educate certain people - mostly "Clinton haters" - who argumentatively continue to use the word "impeachment" as a criminal act. That is a falsehood. Impeachment is a process in which a government official is accused of unlawful activity. Let me repeat that. "ACCUSED of unlawful activity." It does not necessarily mean the removal from office or any punishment. Therefore, a President being impeached is equivalent to any civilian citizen being indicted. And just because a person is indicted does not, in any way, mean that the individual committed a crime or is guilty.
As all school kids in America are taught - perhaps as early as 2nd or 3rd grade - the United States Constitution provides everyone...who is charged with a crime...to have his or her so-called..."day in court"...and to proceed through a course...of a trial by judge and jury. Or, in the case of a Presidential impeachment...a trial by the United States Senate. And only after one of those actions...can the guilt or innocence of a person be determined.
So the next time one of you refers to President Bill Clinton's impeachment...as a "crime"...know what you're talking about... because Mr. Clinton was not convicted. He was acquitted. He was NOT guilty.
Now to Secretary Clinton and the federal government's e-mail investigation.
After FBI Director James Comey presented the Bureau's findings...in his nationally televised speech...on Tuesday, July 5th, 2016...this matter should have been closed. There should not have been...and there should no longer be...any more talk about Hillary Clinton's e-mails. Republicans in Congress should have stopped any further investigation, interrogation or - as I noted earlier - witch-hunt...about Mrs. Clinton's e-mails and home-based servers.
But instead...just two days after Director Comey's statement...he was grilled, under oath, for more than four-and-a-half hours - on Thursday, July 7th - by Republican members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee...and this honorable public servant's decision to not recommend criminal prosecution of Secretary Clinton...was questioned in front of the entire nation via television. And although Comey explained in his Tuesday announcement - and several times before Congress on Thursday - that Mrs. Clinton did "nothing unlawful"...the infuriated GOP Representatives hounded the FBI Chief...to near harassment...in the hope by Republicans...that Comey would either slip-up with an answer...or change his mind.
James Comey is a distinguished lawyer, FBI Director - appointed by President Barack Obama - and former U.S. Deputy Attorney General under President George W. Bush...and this graduate of the prestigious University of Chicago Law School...was not going to blunder and bungle during a sworn testimony before Congress.
"We don't want to put people in jail unless we prove they were doing something they shouldn't do," Comey told the Oversight Committee. "That is the characteristic of all the prosecutions involving mishandling of classified information," he said. Yet Republicans continued to push him for answers...that THEY...wanted to hear. But America's "top cop" remained - except once - totally cool, calm and professional... when - at other times - I truly think he probably wanted to rip off the heads of a couple of the GOP Congressmen.
That being said...after answering some redundant questions by Republicans... Director Comey - in that one instance - was close to flying off the handle...as he was visibly angry...showing much frustration...when he looked straight in to the camera...and answered Florida Republican Congressman John Mica on Thursday...who had insinuated that there “was
Comey noted that there is a law which allows for felony prosecution...when classified information is mishandled due to "gross negligence"...but only when there is evidence of "intentional or willful" wrongdoing...obstruction of justice...or disloyalty to the United States. I will echo those two words - "intentional" and "willful"...or variations thereof...throughout this column. And I will do so...to emphasize my point. Furthermore, the FBI Director was very clear that the "gross negligence" statute has been used in a case only one time in the 99 years since it was enacted, back in 1917. And that involved espionage. Therefore, Comey explained that such a law was never considered in the Hillary Clinton investigation because the Department of Justice feared it was possibly unconstitutional. "Before you're going to lock somebody up...you prove they knew they were doing something wrong," he reiterated.
Comey expressed definitively to Congress...that there is "no evidence" that Secretary Clinton...or her staff..."willfully"...or "intentionally"...did anything "unlawful." He testified that that there is no proof whatsoever that Mrs. Clinton...or any State Department employee...knew it was illegal to use private servers and private e-mail addresses.
Secretary Clinton - for more than a year - has realized...and recognized publicly...that she made a mistake. Every single American has made mistakes. Mrs. Clinton has also acknowledged that she regrets the error...and would never do it again. Each of us has uttered those same words after doing something we should not have done. And we've all done things that we'd like to forget. Hillary Clinton should be given the same courtesy that you would hope others would give you.
My one objection to Director Comey's Tuesday announcement and his Thursday testimony...was that his investigation - and his report to Congress and the nation - should have been limited to legal facts...and not his opinion. Comey should not have expressed that Secretary Clinton was "extremely careless." When the FBI came to the absolute conclusion that Mrs. Clinton did not break any law, as it is written, then Comey should have left it at that...and not offered any views unrelated to the law itself.
But here is what Republicans don't want to embrace... and what additionally disturbs me about the GOP witch-hunt. Republicans - including their Presumptive Nominee, Donald Trump - want to compare Secretary Clinton's e-mail controversy with the case against former CIA Director and retired U.S. Army General David Petraeus...who pleaded guilty in federal court to a crime. Petraeus admitted to providing classified documents to his biographer...who was also his girlfriend...and who did not have government clearance to receive such information. Petraeus "willfully and intentionally" gave such material to an individual who had no business receiving it...and for that...a judge sentenced him to two years probation plus a fine of one-hundred-thousand 
The e-mails sent by Secretary Clinton - or received by her from others - were all done through a network of people...each of whom had clearance to be part of such transmissions. That - and the fact that Mrs. Clinton did not do anything "willful" or "intentional"...are the keys to this entire issue. The Democratic Party Presumptive Nominee did not disclose classified materials to anyone who was outside of that network of State Department officials and staff. And Comey stated that "We have no basis to conclude that (Secretary Clinton) lied to the FBI. There is no basis that she was untruthful to us."
Congress - as a whole - has much more important matters of monumental concern...rather than focusing their time...and taxpayers money...on an insignificant amount of information that was shared among parties who had classified clearance. And Republicans need to stand in solidarity with their Democratic colleagues in the House of Representatives and Senate...and with President Obama...to do whatever is necessary...to pass a commonsense gun control law...to ban the sale of all assault weapons...and to prevent ISIS-directed and ISIS-inspired terrorism from attacking the United States or any other countries on Earth.
And the press - the media overall - needs to slam on the brakes...shift gears...and stay far away from the fast lane of this Republican witch-hunt. That is why - after this editorial - I will not ever again be writing about Hillary Clinton's e-mails. And I encourage all journalists...to do the same.
This entire mess should never be mentioned again. Our nation needs to put the matter of Secretary Clinton's e-mails behind us. It makes no sense to have any further discussion or conversation about it. It's time now for Democrats...as well as
Republicans and Independents who are against Donald Trump...to focus one-hundred percent...on electing Hillary Clinton, the 45th President of the United States. It's what we need to do. It's what we must do. To summarize...Republicans must put a halt on the witch-hunt against Secretary Clinton...but instead...move full speed ahead on stopping gun violence in our country...and terrorism worldwide. We cannot become numb to thinking...or accepting...that the norm in our nation...and around our globe...are mass murders by deranged madmen and radicalized terrorists...good, brave and heroic police officers being killed...and African-American men being shot to death for no justifiable reason by bad cops...who don't deserve to wear a badge...and shouldn't be carrying a firearm. There is nothing normal about any of this...or of any other heinous bloodbath tragedies. America is better than that. Americans are better than that. At least I always thought we were. I hope we still are.
And that's The Controversy for today.
I'm Gary B. Duglin.
"We'll talk again."
The Controversy is a publication of GBD Productions. Founder and Editor-In-Chief of The Controversy is Gary B. Duglin.
One of the chief goals of a blog...one of the major reasons to publish a blog...is to entice others to express their opinions about the subject for which the author is writing. The Controversy is being read by a tremendous amount of people throughout the United States of America and all around the world. If you agree or disagree with my commentary...your views are welcomed. Tell me that you love what I write...or that you hate it. Give your name...make up one...or remain anonymous if you prefer. The Controversy is your outlet to speak your mind and to say what you want about the topics discussed. Please share The Controversy with others by posting it on Facebook, Twitter and on other social media forums. Please also pass a link to everyone in your e-mail directories. The Controversy wants to know your thoughts on the column above or on any other editorial or essay written on this blog.
Now, please express your opinions. Just click on the word "Comments" below and write your remarks in the box that appears. Make sure please that when you finish your statement that you click on the word "Publish." Thank you for your thoughts and thank you for reading The Controversy.
Photo credits: 15minutenews.com and The New York Post (Democratic Party Presumptive Nominee for President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton #1), vipwiki.org (former President Bill Clinton #1), okdemocrats.org (former President Bill Clinton #2), sentinelblog.com (FBI Director James Comey #1), bet.com (President Barack Obama), georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov (former President George W. Bush), wonkette.com (FBI Director James Comey #2), conservativeangle.com and ljreview.com (Congressman John Mica), texarkanagazette.com and wehco.com (President Barack Obama with Democratic Party Presumptive Nominee for President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton), pressdemocrat.com (Attorney General Loretta Lynch), theonion.com (Republican Party Presumptive Nominee Donald Trump), wsj.com (former CIA Director and retired U.S. Army General David Petraeus), fortune.com (FBI Director James Comey #3), youfacebookclip.com and youtube.com (Congressman Matt Cartwright) and csmonitor (Democratic Party Presumptive Nominee for President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton #2)
Copyright 2016 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net. All Rights Reserved.
GBD,
ReplyDeleteIt is very clear to everyone that knows you that Hillary walks on water. (In your eyes.) I just can't vote for Monica's ex-boyfriend's wife.
I don't believe anybody walks on water. As for your stereotypical comment about the former President...haven't you ever made a mistake? Haven't you ever done anything...that you regret? It's been more than 20 years. Let's give it a rest. GBD
ReplyDeleteGBD,
DeleteMistake? Oh, yes I have made many. None that involved the sacred trust of the American people. The Clintons together have made enough "mistakes" that I, for one, cannot believe a single word either of them utter. Daily, not 20 year old lies.
We will never see eye to eye on anything regarding Bill and Hillary Clinton. I trust them both. President Clinton was an outstanding President who kept our nation safe...and our country was economically sound. And Secretary Clinton will also be an outstanding President who will amaze Republicans and others who don't like her when they see that she truly does have tremendous skills and is the best person to be occupying The White House. Add to it, that the former President will be there too...is a big bonus. "Mistakes?" Sure. But we all make them. And ALL Presidents have too. I believe EVERY WORD that Bill and Hillary Clinton say...and I look forward to Mrs. Clinton...First Lady Clinton...Senator Clinton...Secretary of State Clinton...being President Clinton. GBD
DeleteIt amazes me that you and the left only hear what you want to hear, I listened to Director Comey and read the full transcript of his statement and I never heard him say Mrs. Clinton did “nothing unlawful” if FACT he stated “there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information” that is unlawful! You are wrong again with your statement about General Petraeus the woman he shared information with Paula Broadwell, she is a West Point graduate, was Major in the US military with a Top Secret Security clearance. Mrs. Clinton gave classified emails to her attorneys who had NO government clearances which was “willful” and with “intent” and unlawful! The statute on classified information does not require criminal intent, just intent. Clinton intended to setup her own server she intended to give access to un-cleared personnel, Director Comey said somewhere between 2-10 un-cleared persons were given access by Clinton which is also unlawful and done using your words “willfully and intentionally”! Director Comey also said her actions were “extremely careless”. So Comey said there was “evidence of potential violations” she acted “extremely careless” and she did these things intentionally but we are going to let her off scot free. She is unfit to be President. Anyone else would have been charged especially if they were not a left wing democrat; a republican would have been in jail by now!
ReplyDeleteMade A mistake ? a ? as in one? Gary? you are surely delusional Clinton was a serial philanderer and he lied.. plain and simple again and again as Hillary has done ..
ReplyDeleteAll I can do is cackle over your hateful and untrue remarks. There is nothing plain and simple as President Clinton was not convicted. And there is no proof of anything...or at anytime...that Secretary Clinton lied. You Republicans need to stop hating. GBD
DeleteYou truly fall in to the category that I discussed in my column. You are a "Clinton hater." And as a "Clinton hater" - you would hate her - Hillary -...or him... - Bill - if they wiped out cancer...completely destroyed every ISIS, al-Qaeda and terrorist cells worldwide...and if they brought peace and prosperity to every single person on the planet Earth. You just hate. You are a hater. And it's a shame. It's obvious that you did not watch the entire testimony of FBI Director James Comey before the House Oversight Committee. It's obvious that you did not read the entire transcript. Because if you did, you would have heard Mr. Comey say...or you would have read that he said...that Secretary Clinton did "nothing unlawful." The fact is...as the law is written...Mrs. Clinton did absolutely nothing illegal. As for Director Comey's comment about Secretary Clinton being "extremely careless"...I mentioned that in my commentary. However, that was Mr. Comey's "opinion." It had nothing to do with the statute. And he should never have used the words in his statement or his testimony. Director Comey also expressed definitively to Congress, as I quoted in my column...that there is "no evidence" that Secretary Clinton...or her staff..."willfully"...or "intentionally"...did anything "unlawful." As for your comment about General David Petraeus...and his giving classified documents to Paula Broadwell...you must be living in a cave. The reason that General Petraeus pleaded guilty was because he admitted to giving such classified materials to someone who did not have clearance to receive the information. The fact that she had served in the military was irrelevant. She was the General's biographer and girlfriend. And General Petraeus lied to the FBI...which Comey stated Mrs. Clinton did not. And as Director Comey also stated before the Congressional Committee...Petraeus performed "willfully" and "intentionally." Secretary Clinton did not. And Comey said it over and over again. Hillary Clinton is absolutely "fit to be President" of the United States...and she will be elected on November 8th. Director Comey was very specific - repeatedly - that nobody - given the same circumstances - would have been charged or prosecuted for this e-mail mistake. So your remark that "a Republican would have been in jail by now" is not only untrue...but ludicrous...and laughable. Stop hating. It's an awful emotion. Stop hating. You'll be a much happier and healthier person. GBD
ReplyDeleteMy comment above seemed to fall out of chronological order. It is the response to the reader who replied on July 16th at 10:10 A.M. GBD
DeleteGBD you are wrong again, I don’t hate the Clintons, I don’t know them. I hate what they stand for and what they have done, they are both liars, she has put this country at risk and didn’t care. Her policies are beyond terrible and have helped with Obama to create ISIS, her leadership at the State Dept was disgraceful, she did nothing to help when brave Americans were being killed in Benghazi, and she was in on the start of the Iran deal that has only made the world more dangerous. It is not the FBI’s job to decide if a prosecutor will take a case. Comey said and I quote “there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information”, it was his job to ask for charges and then it was up to the Justice Dept to get a Grand Jury or to file charges. Hillary was being protected so the rules weren’t followed. These are things that happen when you have a private chat on an airport tarmac. As for Paula Broadwell at the time she was a Major in the US Army Reserves and had top secret clearance, she was not cleared for those documents. He pled guilty so they would not go after her. Clinton is UNFIT to be President; she could win but still UNFIT! Once again I don’t hate the Clintons but I LOVE my Country and maybe sometimes loving the USA may look like hating the Clintons!
ReplyDeleteI can play the same game, so this is going to be all that I will say on this subject. You say you don't hate the Clintons, but if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...well, you know the rest. Neither Bill or Hillary Clinton are liars. There has never been any proof that either has ever lied. That's number one. Hillary Clinton has never put our country at risk and she probably cares more about the United States than just about anybody. Her policies are outstanding and her leadership at The State Department was superior. ISIS was not created by either Secretary Clinton or President Obama, but instead as an off-shoot of al-Qaeda, which President George W. Bush is to be held responsible for not listening to advisers before 9/11. Again, you and other Republicans want to blame Secretary Clinton for Benghazi when she did everything she could when she learned the facts. The Iran Deal has not made the world more dangerous, but it will put a stop to the possibilities of danger. Your arrogance amazes me. To think that you're now going to dictate the role and the job of the FBI and its director. I'm not going to repeat myself with the items I noted earlier, except to say that Director Comey said there was "no evidence" that Secretary Clinton did anything "unlawful." And that nobody else in the same circumstances would have been charged or prosecuted. And Secretary Clinton did nothing "willful" or "intentional." My column is 100% accurate based on what Comey stated. He also was very definite that there was "no outside influence." So do not try to make up your own story or some sort of a conspiracy theory that "Hillary was being protected so the rules were not followed." That's hogwash. I believe both President Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch that NOTHING was discussed on Lynch's airplane to sway her one way or the other regarding Mrs. Clinton. As for General David Petraeus...if you truly believe the drivel that you wrote above, then you have no clue as to anything about that case. The facts are - exactly as Comey spelled them out - that the General's girlfriend/biographer did not have clearance to set her eyes on any of the material that he gave her. Paula Broadwell should never have been given such documents. Plus, Petraeus lied to the FBI. For you to say that "(Petraeus) pled guilty so they would not go after her" is totally ridiculous and absolutely false. And once again I will say that Hillary Clinton is positively FIT to be our President. I too love my country...and so does Hillary Clinton. We are done here. GBD
ReplyDeleteTo you it maybe a game but it is not. In April 1999 U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright ordered that she was holding President Bill Clinton in contempt of court for lying under oath he was fined $90,000 and had his law license suspended, he lied to America saying “I never had sexual relations with that women” check Merriam-Webster dictionary, oral sex is sexual relations. Hillary has lied so many times we can’t list them all. I’ll give two examples: first she lied to the families of four dead Americans on the tarmac telling them that their loved ones were killed because of a video, second she said she never sent or received any classified emails, Director Comey was very clear that “110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received” As for your lie about President Bush, we know you are a Bush hater “walks like a duck” I sent you a blog reply listing many actions the Bush Administration took after the Clarke memo and others but you didn’t have the guts to publish it. You keep saying “no evidence” why did Comey say on his Tuesday announcement state “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information”? You say my arrogance amazes you, you don’t know me, I have over 35 years in law enforcement and a Masters plus 30 from NYU in Criminal Justice, I think I know better then you! Anyone who believes she was treated the same as anyone else must believe in little blue fairies and the Easter bunny. I never said you didn’t love your country, but I think the world has seen the failures of the left and that the Obama/Clinton policies are bad for America and the world.
ReplyDeleteThis will be a two-part response. This is Part One. Random House Dictionary defines oral sex as "sexual contact between the mouth and the genitals or anus." NOT SEXUAL RELATIONS. Therefore, President Bill Clinton did not lie. President Clinton can practice law now if he wants to do so. His license in Arkansas was only suspended for 5 years. As for Democratic Party Presumptive Nominee for President and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, there is no proof whatsoever that she has ever lied. And she certainly did not lie about Benghazi. That was proven after a 14-hour tesimony before Congress. As soon as Secretary Clinton learned the FACTS about Benghazi, she told the families. The e-mails you refer to were "up classified" after the fact. They were NOT classified at the time they were sent or received by Mrs. Clinton. Again...no crime. No lies. Regarding President George W. Bush, I have written this over and over and over again to so many readers that I'm tired of repeating myself. I DO NOT HATE PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH. I don't hate anybody. It's an emotion I don't subscribe to. It makes no sense to hate anyone. But my statements about Richard Clarke's memo are total facts. Therefore, if Mr. Bush had taken the advise of his counter-terrorism adviser, 9/11 could have possibly been avoided. I have never received any blog reply about President Bush that was not published. So don't tell me I don't have the guts to publish. I publish all reader responses except for those that include profanity. I cannot publish links to Web sites or other people's columns. FBI Director James Comey indeed told the House Oversight Committee that there is "no evidence" of anything "unlawful" by Secretary Clinton. Please learn to get your facts straight. I do. You can spell out your resume all day long, but I will believe the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. So yes...Hillary Clinton was treated as anyone else should be and - according to Director Comey - that is why she was not indicted for anything, because there was no crime committed - and, as the statute is written, neither Secretary Clinton nor anyone on her staff performed in a "willful" or "intentional" fashion with regards to the e-mails and servers. Therefore, no "blue fairies" and no "Easter Bunny." And no...I don't think this is a game. I take my column very seriously. My reference was to our back and forth and not getting anywhere. It is obvious that we will never see eye to eye on anything that pertains to Bill and Hillary Clinton...President Obama...or, for that matter, anything political. Part Two to follow. GBD
ReplyDeleteThis is Part Two of my two-part response. I am amazed by something else, though, since you mentioned your "over 35 years in law enforcement and a Masters plus 30 from NYU in Criminal Justice." What I'm amazed at is that you're quick to criticize my commentary regarding the Clintons and President Obama, but you don't comment positively about my support of the police and all law enforcement officers. I have written editorials in the past that support our police and I briefly mentioned my support in the column above. I have spent numerous years, throughout my career, working directly with Chiefs of Police, Sheriffs and other law enforcement officers as a broadcaster, writer and producer...and I have done so that the public recognizes the brave and heroic work that these men and women do everyday to protect the people of their communities and to do their very best to keep everyone safe. With all that has tragically gone on recently in Dallas and Baton Rouge, my next commentary will focus on our nation's police officers and that there is a small fraction of these men and women in blue who are "bad cops." The vast majority are "good cops." Excellent cops who deserve to be treated with respect, admiration and to not in anyway be hurt. What happened in Dallas and Baton Rouge are tragedies that, please God, will never ever happen again. Unfortunately, I fear there are too many other sickminded people who will "copycat" the deranged nutjobs who shot and killed 8 innocent, decent police officers who did not deserve to die. To summarize, I truly believe that the policies of the "left"...including those from President Obama and Secretary Clinton are excellent for the United States of America...and for the world. As I said previously...we are now done with this subject. If you care to comment about my positive remarks about our country's police, I will be happy to publish it, but if you're going to be critical about the same issues concerning President and Secretary Clinton...as we have discussed already...it's silly for you to comment further, as there's nothing more to say about any of that. GBD
DeleteOnce again GBD you are wrong, the legal definition of “sexual relations” is the following: Sexual relations refer to physical sexual activity that does not necessarily end up in an intercourse. It involves touching another person in his/her private parts. This is the legal definition used by the Federal Court that ruled that Bill Clinton lied in the case with Paula Jones. To use your source “RANDOM HOUSE KERNERMAN WEBSTER'S College Dictionary Online” defines “sexual relations “as the following: sex′ual rela′tions, n. 1. sexual intercourse; coitus. 2. any sexual activity between individuals . You looked up “oral sex” not “sexual relations” you can look it up, “ANY SEXUAL ACT BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS” your wrong and he lied! FACT
DeleteI think you're totally missing the point, Gary. It doesn't matter in the least that Hillary was not found guilty. Not in the slightest. She was found to be "extremely careless". That is all the fodder the Republicans need to use against her in the next few months.
ReplyDeleteYes, Trump is a complete blowhard and an asshole. However, he is perceived as "straight talking", even though that "straight talk" is completely insane. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, was already perceived as calculated and fake, and now there is even more evidence of that in this FBI report. She was not forthcoming in the way she said she was.
I hate to say "I told you so.", but we wouldn't be having any of these problems with a Bernie Sanders candidate for president. What is really sad is that we may actually lose this election to a complete lunatic, narcissistic individual.
I fear Democrats like you who don't take this FBI inquiry seriously do so naively.
No you are totally missing the point. As the law is written, Hillary Clinton did nothing "unlawful." Those were FBI Director James Comey's words. As for Comey stating publicly - before Congress and the nation - that Secretary Clinton was "extremely careless"...he was wrong to do that. That is his opinion. It has nothing to do with the statute. And I state that in my column. The Republicans are going to spew their venom no matter what, so there's nothing Mrs. Clinton or any Democrat can do about that. It always amazes me when someone says that Secretary Clinton is "calculated and fake." She is far from that. And she will make a superb President of the United States. Since I don't know who you are - since your comments are listed as "Unknown" then your "I told you so" makes no sense to me. However, Senator Bernie Sanders would never have been elected President. This country doesn't elect a self-proclaimed socialist - even though I - and thankfully, Mrs. Clinton - do agree with some of his thinking. And we have seen those points since Senator Sanders' endorsement of Mrs. Clinton. I am completely confident that Hillary Clinton will not lose this election, but that she will win and beat Donald Trump in a landslide. Trust me...I am not naive. When push comes to shove on November 8th...the "FBI inquiry" will not mean much...if anything...at all. GBD
DeleteOnce again GBD you proved yourself to be as biased as the mainstream media. You had two replies that contradicted your statements with real facts and you have apparently decided not to publish them. You rather publish the DNC lies and misstatements then the truth.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all...as I have written numerous times over the last nearly 4 years since writing columns for The Controversy...all comments from readers are published - except when there is use of any profanity. Since there have been very few of them - and none in quite some time - all comments are published. Your remark that I "had two replies that contradicted (my) statements" but that I "apparently decided not to publish" is not true at all. Everything that comes in to The Controversy is published - except as I said - if there was profanity used...or...if there are threats...and other similar verbiage that is not appropriate. I, myself, am not at all "biased as the mainstream media." I believe in what I believe. And I believe President Obama, Hillary Clinton and the DNC do not lie...and their statements ARE the truth. GBD
DeleteI remain firmly confident that I am not wrong, based on the fact that President Bill Clinton was not convicted following his wrongful impeachment. Therefore, there is no proof...and no truth...that President Clinton lied. End of story. Let's move on. GBD
ReplyDeleteMy above response from July 19, 2016 at 12:23 PM was somehow published out of order. It is a comment to the reader reply from July 18, 2016 at 10:36 AM. GBD
DeleteThis is now the fourth time I have sent this, there is no profanity or threats, it only proves you should stop telling your lie about President Bush and 9/11. As we see with you the left never wants the truth to be told only your Bush hating lie:
ReplyDeleteOnce again your facts are wrong and or incomplete. From the 9/11 report: based on the intelligence from Clarke and the CIA and others the following are the full FACTS of what was done to try and prevent an attack by al Qaeda based on that information: July 5, 2001 - The FAA issues another warning, specifically the threat of "using explosives in an airport terminal." July 5, 2001 - President George W. Bush requests more information about the recent upswing in terrorist threats and "chatter" from National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. July 2001 - The CIA warns the White House of possible attacks against President George W. Bush during the July G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy. July 18, 2001 - The FAA issues another warning to airlines concerning possible terrorist attacks. July 31, 2001 - The FAA issues another warning to airlines advising that "terror groups are known to be planning and training for hijackings." August 6, 2001 - President George W. Bush receives a CIA report about al Qaeda and the possibility of airline hijackings. The warning is passed on to embassies and other overseas facilities. August 16, 2001 - The FAA issues an alert about "disguised weapons." Airlines are alerted the terrorists might use common objects such as cell phones or clothespins as weapons. August 23, 2001 - CIA director George Tenet, concerned that an al Qaeda attack is imminent, orders the CIA to search their files for leads. An urgent cable is sent to the FBI, State Department, Customs and INS, alerting them to the CIA's concerns about Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar. After the INS reports that Almihdhar re-entered the country on July 4, the FBI begins searching for them. September 4, 2001 - The national security advisers to President George W. Bush approve a draft version of a plan to combat al Qaeda. It includes provisions for $200 million to arm the enemies of the Taliban. The advisers plan to present the draft to President Bush on September 10, however the president is traveling and does not see it. September 10, 2001 - The National Security Agency intercepts two communications from Afghanistan to Saudi Arabia. One says, "Tomorrow is zero hour," and the other says "The match begins tomorrow." The messages are not translated until September 12. Stop blaming and hating President Bush. Stop acting like the liberal media and tell the complete sorry not sound bites. The above are the true FACTS!