NY Post: Valerie Jarrett leaked Clinton email details to media
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:16:17 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  NY Post: Valerie Jarrett leaked Clinton email details to media
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: NY Post: Valerie Jarrett leaked Clinton email details to media  (Read 3070 times)
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,451
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2015, 04:16:22 PM »

It's absolutely hilarious that Obama would be concerned that Hillary isn't a true "liberal" when their positions are the same on 95% of the issues. It's not like Obama is a Warren or Sanders progressive who goes after Wall Street and could attack her from the left.

The only thing he ever had over Hillary was Iraq, on which he had the convenience of not being in the Senate at the time to vote on. That didn't stop him from proclaiming himself the anti-war candidate and saying he opposed the war when it was "politically unpopular" to do so, even though at the time Obama was serving in a 90% Democratic district, and therefore wouldn't have to bare the consequences of a politically unpopular decision.

He has shown himself to be an absolute coward in every sense since then, from his gay marriage flip flop in 2008, to lying to primary voters about NAFTA while assuring Canada behind their back, to his embarrassing off-mic comment about having more flexibility with Russia after the election. So I think it's pretty clear how he would have voted had he been in the Senate in 2002. I truly despise this man.

Your simply wrong about Iraq, Obama was opposed to it from the start, and in fact you can see the speech he made in 2002 which was against the war.

And please, Obama won in 2008 because he offered a vision for the country, and didn't make stupid comments to the press about Robert Kennedy

I'm talking about 2002. You are aware that the Iraq Senate vote was in 2002, right? Not sure what point you're contesting.

Obama offered no "vision" for the country, just lame platitudes that his hipster base gobbled up.

FFS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po

Do you now accept that Barack Obama opposed the war in Iraq from the start?

10 million more Americans with health insurance, unemployment down, open relations with Cuba, support for LGBT rights, passed the Stimulus act, reformed Wall Street, tried to close down GITMO (something the GOP stopped)

And please, Obama won in 2008 because he offered a vision for the country, and didn't make stupid comments to the press about Robert Kennedy

Neither did Clinton, but believe what you must.

Yes she did, do you remember her comments that she was staying in the race because Bobby Kennedy got killed in '68. She always was a Eugene McCarthy fan though

Uh, what "Wall Street reform" are you talking about?
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2015, 04:37:45 PM »

First Obama says Hillary is a jalopy with too many miles, and now his aide blows the lid off the e-mail scandal.

This is a fine kettle of fish.  

All is not well in the Democrat dorms.

Do you believe everything you read on the internet? Just curious.

No, just the stuff that says Romney losing the election was the greatest tragedy ever to befall this nation.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,611
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2015, 05:06:43 PM »

It's absolutely hilarious that Obama would be concerned that Hillary isn't a true "liberal" when their positions are the same on 95% of the issues. It's not like Obama is a Warren or Sanders progressive who goes after Wall Street and could attack her from the left.

The only thing he ever had over Hillary was Iraq, on which he had the convenience of not being in the Senate at the time to vote on. That didn't stop him from proclaiming himself the anti-war candidate and saying he opposed the war when it was "politically unpopular" to do so, even though at the time Obama was serving in a 90% Democratic district, and therefore wouldn't have to bare the consequences of a politically unpopular decision.

He has shown himself to be an absolute coward in every sense since then, from his gay marriage flip flop in 2008, to lying to primary voters about NAFTA while assuring Canada behind their back, to his embarrassing off-mic comment about having more flexibility with Russia after the election. So I think it's pretty clear how he would have voted had he been in the Senate in 2002. I truly despise this man.

Your simply wrong about Iraq, Obama was opposed to it from the start, and in fact you can see the speech he made in 2002 which was against the war.

And please, Obama won in 2008 because he offered a vision for the country, and didn't make stupid comments to the press about Robert Kennedy

I'm talking about 2002. You are aware that the Iraq Senate vote was in 2002, right? Not sure what point you're contesting.

Obama offered no "vision" for the country, just lame platitudes that his hipster base gobbled up.

FFS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po

Do you now accept that Barack Obama opposed the war in Iraq from the start?

10 million more Americans with health insurance, unemployment down, open relations with Cuba, support for LGBT rights, passed the Stimulus act, reformed Wall Street, tried to close down GITMO (something the GOP stopped)

And please, Obama won in 2008 because he offered a vision for the country, and didn't make stupid comments to the press about Robert Kennedy

Neither did Clinton, but believe what you must.

Yes she did, do you remember her comments that she was staying in the race because Bobby Kennedy got killed in '68. She always was a Eugene McCarthy fan though

I never contested that he opposed the war from the start. If you read my post you would see that I was simply stating that his view on the war was not comparable with Hillary's. He did not cast a vote on it, he was not a national politician and and he was serving in a 90% Democratic district.

He basically implied that he put his career on the line to oppose the war, which was blatant lie. And he has shown none of this supposed "courage" since he's been a national figure.
Logged
Panda Express
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,578


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2015, 05:24:23 PM »

It's absolutely hilarious that Obama would be concerned that Hillary isn't a true "liberal" when their positions are the same on 95% of the issues. It's not like Obama is a Warren or Sanders progressive who goes after Wall Street and could attack her from the left.

The only thing he ever had over Hillary was Iraq, on which he had the convenience of not being in the Senate at the time to vote on. That didn't stop him from proclaiming himself the anti-war candidate and saying he opposed the war when it was "politically unpopular" to do so, even though at the time Obama was serving in a 90% Democratic district, and therefore wouldn't have to bare the consequences of a politically unpopular decision.

He has shown himself to be an absolute coward in every sense since then, from his gay marriage flip flop in 2008, to lying to primary voters about NAFTA while assuring Canada behind their back, to his embarrassing off-mic comment about having more flexibility with Russia after the election. So I think it's pretty clear how he would have voted had he been in the Senate in 2002. I truly despise this man.

Stop being whiny.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2015, 05:25:41 PM »

Coming from the guy that said Hillary is a lesbian and conceived Chelsea after being raped by Bill, and that Obama is a Kenyan-born practicing Muslim, I'm going to go ahead and say this is probably not true.
Logged
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2015, 08:31:21 PM »
« Edited: March 15, 2015, 09:00:34 PM by "'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted" »

And please, Obama won in 2008 because he offered a vision for the country, and didn't make stupid comments to the press about Robert Kennedy

Neither did Clinton, but believe what you must.

Yes she did, do you remember her comments that she was staying in the race because Bobby Kennedy got killed in '68. She always was a Eugene McCarthy fan though

She said no such thing. She was asked why she was staying in the race, and she pointed to other primaries that dragged into June, and mentioned, as examples, 1968, which because of the sad circumstances is the most famous June primary in history, and 1992, when her husband was still fighting Brown.

In fact,

“It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June.  I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband’s 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June.  I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.” -RFK, Jr.
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2015, 08:57:47 PM »

This sounds more like Jarrett acting on her own dislike of Clinton than anything else...If only because Obama has already proven to be far less petty than any Clinton.
Logged
BlueSwan
blueswan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,290
Denmark


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -7.30

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 16, 2015, 07:42:35 AM »

Bullsh**t story from Ed Klein (no surprise).

The whole Obama-Clinton dual praise/interview thing after the retired as secretary of state, or even Obama insisting that Clinton become secretary of state, makes zero sense if they really hated each other or the white house wanted to stop Hillary at all costs.

Now Jarrett - or other WH operatives/advisors - not liking Hillary, I can believe that, but I don't believe it goes further than that.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: March 16, 2015, 10:34:51 AM »

And please, Obama won in 2008 because he offered a vision for the country, and didn't make stupid comments to the press about Robert Kennedy

Neither did Clinton, but believe what you must.

Yes she did, do you remember her comments that she was staying in the race because Bobby Kennedy got killed in '68. She always was a Eugene McCarthy fan though

She said no such thing. She was asked why she was staying in the race, and she pointed to other primaries that dragged into June, and mentioned, as examples, 1968, which because of the sad circumstances is the most famous June primary in history, and 1992, when her husband was still fighting Brown.

In fact,

“It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June.  I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband’s 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June.  I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.” -RFK, Jr.

I don't take RFK Jr's word as gospel. Fair enough if he didn't get offended by it, but it was a bloody stupid thing to say which pretty much summed up Hilary in 2008. And yes she did say that extact thing, she alluded to Obama getting killed
Logged
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: March 16, 2015, 11:43:05 AM »

I don't take RFK Jr's word as gospel. Fair enough if he didn't get offended by it, but it was a bloody stupid thing to say which pretty much summed up Hilary in 2008. And yes she did say that extact thing, she alluded to Obama getting killed

Ok, find me the quote.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2015, 12:50:11 PM »

I don't take RFK Jr's word as gospel. Fair enough if he didn't get offended by it, but it was a bloody stupid thing to say which pretty much summed up Hilary in 2008. And yes she did say that extact thing, she alluded to Obama getting killed

Ok, find me the quote.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defended staying in the Democratic nominating contest on Friday by pointing out that her husband had not wrapped up the nomination until June 1992, adding, “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.

Politicians tend to talk in code. I used the word 'allude' because Hilary is basically saying 'the popular, energetic candidate who had the lead in 1968 got killed, so it could happen in 2008 where there's another popular, energetic winning candidate. Barack was Bobby, she was Humphrey

It just shows off how desperate Hilary was, and how the Clinton's tarnished the reputation of the Kennedy Family
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: March 16, 2015, 01:08:00 PM »

lol is someone really arguing that Hillary wasn't winking and nudging about Obama meeting RFK's fate?
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: March 16, 2015, 02:03:34 PM »

lol is someone really arguing that Hillary wasn't winking and nudging about Obama meeting RFK's fate?

Everyone knew what Hilary meant when she said that, but of course it was some vast right wing conspiracy
Logged
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: March 16, 2015, 02:15:49 PM »

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defended staying in the Democratic nominating contest on Friday by pointing out that her husband had not wrapped up the nomination until June 1992, adding, “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.

Politicians tend to talk in code. I used the word 'allude' because Hilary is basically saying 'the popular, energetic candidate who had the lead in 1968 got killed, so it could happen in 2008 where there's another popular, energetic winning candidate. Barack was Bobby, she was Humphrey

Yeah, that was the spin by Obama supporters because "Hillary is zomg evil!" But "Vote for me because my opponent might get assassinated  (because he's black)" doesn't even make sense as a coded, Machiavellian strategy, especially at a time when the race was functionally over (late May).

I'm pretty partisan, didn't even support Hillary for a lot of the race, but stuff like this is why I had a hard time voting Obama that year. It was like a segue into left-wing, "#cancelColbert" Twitter idiocy.

Also, Humphrey was more likely to be the nominee in '68, even before the assassination, so the historical comparison doesn't work either. 
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: March 16, 2015, 02:20:58 PM »

Wait, people seriously think that Hillary discussing multiple primaries that stretched into June meant that she was dogwhistling for someone to kill Obama? lmfao. You guys never cease to amaze me.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: March 16, 2015, 03:10:52 PM »
« Edited: March 16, 2015, 03:16:38 PM by Speaker Blair »

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defended staying in the Democratic nominating contest on Friday by pointing out that her husband had not wrapped up the nomination until June 1992, adding, “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.

Politicians tend to talk in code. I used the word 'allude' because Hilary is basically saying 'the popular, energetic candidate who had the lead in 1968 got killed, so it could happen in 2008 where there's another popular, energetic winning candidate. Barack was Bobby, she was Humphrey

Yeah, that was the spin by Obama supporters because "Hillary is zomg evil!" But "Vote for me because my opponent might get assassinated  (because he's black)" doesn't even make sense as a coded, Machiavellian strategy, especially at a time when the race was functionally over (late May).

I'm pretty partisan, didn't even support Hillary for a lot of the race, but stuff like this is why I had a hard time voting Obama that year. It was like a segue into left-wing, "#cancelColbert" Twitter idiocy.
Also, Humphrey was more likely to be the nominee in '68, even before the assassination, so the historical comparison doesn't work either.

No, Humphrey wasn't likely to be the nominee in '68. Kennedy had the support of Mayor Daley, the man who pretty much decided the Nomination, plus the fact that the convention was in Chicago. McCarthy would have withdraw after California for SOS, and endorsed Kennedy. RFK had massive momentum after the primary victories-he even beat Humphrey in his home state.

Everyone knew that she was comparing Obama to RFK for a certain reason

[/quote]
Wait, people seriously think that Hillary discussing multiple primaries that stretched into June meant that she was dogwhistling for someone to kill Obama? lmfao. You guys never cease to amaze me.

Yes, that's what the Media was saying at the time yk. It's pretty well detailed in the Game Changer book that the comment was the low point of Hilary's campaign. But nah right wing conspiracy

What primaries? 1992 was virtually over by March. Hilary basically stayed in because she hoped that Obama may implode.

If Hilary wanted to talk about staying in for a long campaign purely for political reasons , why didn't she mention 1972 or any other race? But no she mentions the one where the popular and frankly better candidate got killed, and a spineless establishment candidate steps in
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: March 16, 2015, 03:31:29 PM »

I don't take RFK Jr's word as gospel. Fair enough if he didn't get offended by it, but it was a bloody stupid thing to say which pretty much summed up Hilary in 2008. And yes she did say that extact thing, she alluded to Obama getting killed

Ok, find me the quote.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defended staying in the Democratic nominating contest on Friday by pointing out that her husband had not wrapped up the nomination until June 1992, adding, “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.

Politicians tend to talk in code. I used the word 'allude' because Hilary is basically saying 'the popular, energetic candidate who had the lead in 1968 got killed, so it could happen in 2008 where there's another popular, energetic winning candidate. Barack was Bobby, she was Humphrey

No, because the chances of Obama getting killed were virtually nil. Besides, even if Obama had been killed, that wouldn't have been a reason for Hillary to stay in the race, since an alternative nominee would have had to be found, and Hillary would have been the logical choice whether she was in the race or not.

So even if you take that statement at what the media claimed it was, it makes no sense.

Clearly, Hillary was saying that Bobby Kennedy getting killed in June was a memorable event, hence why "we all remember" it, and that we all remember it was in June, so a nominating process lasting until June isn't unprecedented. This is because, the context of her remarks was her defense of staying in the race until June, and not dropping out earlier. She also used the example of her husband staying in the nomination until June 1992. This was a way of pointing out two historical precedents of nominating processes that lasted until June.

This is the only interpretation that incorporates all of the parts of her comment (including the "we all remember" part) so that they logically fit together, as well as the context and purpose of her remarks. In scientific theory (since common sense is insufficient in this case), it would definitely win because it elegantly explains the largest portion of the data.

The people from the Sioux Falls Argus Leader who were the ones who actually conducted the interview and were in the room, also put out a statement supporting that interpretation, although it was barely reported. However, I don't expect that to sway Hillary's detractors any more than the full transcript, JFK Jr.'s comments, or logic would.

In the larger context of the issue, Hillary was most certainly correct and vindicated. At the time, the Obama people were screaming hysterically that by staying in the nominating contest until June, Hillary would divide the party and open the way for a Republican victory, and hence she must drop out immediately. There was even a cartoon that someone here at Atlas sported (I don't remember who it was) that showed McCain being inaugurated, with Obama and Clinton sitting on the sidelines wrapped up in casts and with bruises all over.

In retrospect, the consensus is that the long Democratic nominating process in 2008 was a positive that tremendously helped energize the party.

The real irony is that when Ted Kennedy ran for president in 1980, he lost far more decisively to Jimmy Carter than Hillary Clinton lost to Obama, yet when he got to the convention he gave a speech harshly criticizing Carter that was widely seen to have damaged the party nominee. In contrast, when Hillary got to the convention, she folded all of her delegates into Obama's camp to make the nomination unanimous (against the wishes of many of her own supporters) and gave a full-throated endorsement of Obama.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: March 16, 2015, 03:36:28 PM »

The media assumed the absolute worst about something Hillary Clinton said? Wow, knock me over with a feather!

In the very same sentence she discusses how Bill didn't clinch the nomination until June. Obama hadn't clinched the nomination yet either. If you actually read the remarks in their context, it's clear there's nothing malicious about them.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: March 16, 2015, 03:43:47 PM »

The media assumed the absolute worst about something Hillary Clinton said? Wow, knock me over with a feather!

In the very same sentence she discusses how Bill didn't clinch the nomination until June. Obama hadn't clinched the nomination yet either. If you actually read the remarks in their context, it's clear there's nothing malicious about them.

Bill Clinton had the nomination wrapped up by march, it was just Jerry Brown hanging around in the same way that Paul didn't withdraw his delegates in 2012
Logged
heatmaster
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,244
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: March 16, 2015, 03:44:53 PM »

Well if that's the case, then Obama's ingratitude is fundamentally with out equal. He obviously isn't enamoured with Hillary's candidacy and there's little doubt that Valerie Jarret was taking her cues from Barack on the question of the email leak. Obama has no class & is really a ghetto troll of the worst order.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 13 queries.