I Ran the C.I.A. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton.

[2aguy]

This should make any principled person refuse to vote for the reality show host

"During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.


I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.


No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.


Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.


I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary’s commitment to our nation’s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all — whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way."


more at link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

I go by the ringing endorsement of Ambassador Stevens and the 3 men of his security team........what do they say about hilarys leadership and attention to detail.......hmm....what?.......she let them die after refusing 600 requests for increased security and after embassy security experts said that embassy was going to be a death trap........

Well...I guess they can't be reached for comment then...right?

 

[2aguy]

Has there EVER been a couple who have made more money from their elected positions than the Clinton's have? Even close? I can't think of any...

But Jillian is convinced that Hillary is here to fight for the little guy!

You a socialist and against people making money?

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

her husband's speaking fees increase the day she got her job as secretary of state and hundreds of millions of dollars poured into the clinton foundation when she assumed office.....

 

[jillian]

One has to be absolutely clueless, stupid, and devoid of any patriotism to the United States to give anyone from the CIA since Tenet took over under Bill Clinton any credibility at all. The CIA has done nothing but lie to us in order to manipulate us to fight wars to help ISRAEL.

Hillary won't reign in the CIA. Hillary will allow the CIA to continue to lie us into wars, and Hillary will strategically start such wars whenever her next scandal occupies the media.

ANYONE but Hillary. Anyone... OJ Simpson, David Duke, Charles Manson anyone....

Awesome, we have another nutter in this forum. Welcome.

I think you're confused....he's not a liberal.

which is why he's a nutter

you're welcome

 

[jillian]

This should make any principled person refuse to vote for the reality show host

"During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.


I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.


No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.


Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.


I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary’s commitment to our nation’s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all — whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way."


more at link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

I go by the ringing endorsement of Ambassador Stevens and the 3 men of his security team........what do they say about hilarys leadership and attention to detail.......hmm....what?.......she let them die after refusing 600 requests for increased security and after embassy security experts said that embassy was going to be a death trap........

Well...I guess they can't be reached for comment then...right?

actually, loon, ambassador steven's family says you're all fos.

just saying.

but please cry crocodile tears for the 50 who died when baby bush was president and there were 13 benghazi.

dum dum.

 

[IsaacNewton]

You a socialist and against people making money?

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

her husband's speaking fees increase the day she got her job as secretary of state and hundreds of millions of dollars poured into the clinton foundation when she assumed office.....

He was paid for speaking. Any laws that prohibit that? Any laws that prohibit someone married to a government employee from speaking for a fee?

This is just another fake con meme that continues to float around the conservatives echo chamber. it is meaningless outside your bubble.

 

[Grizz]

This should make any principled person refuse to vote for the reality show host

"During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.


I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.


No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.


Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.


I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary’s commitment to our nation’s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all — whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way."


more at link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

I go by the ringing endorsement of Ambassador Stevens and the 3 men of his security team........what do they say about hilarys leadership and attention to detail.......hmm....what?.......she let them die after refusing 600 requests for increased security and after embassy security experts said that embassy was going to be a death trap........

Well...I guess they can't be reached for comment then...right?

actually, loon, ambassador steven's family says you're all fos.

just saying.

but please cry crocodile tears for the 50 who died when baby bush was president and there were 13 benghazi.

dum dum.

You'd also vote for Mao or Stalin. Jus sayin.

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

her husband's speaking fees increase the day she got her job as secretary of state and hundreds of millions of dollars poured into the clinton foundation when she assumed office.....

He was paid for speaking. Any laws that prohibit that? Any laws that prohibit someone married to a government employee from speaking for a fee?

This is just another fake con meme that continues to float around the conservatives echo chamber. it is meaningless outside your bubble.

"Fake con meme"? Really, Issac? The fact of the matter is that the Clinton's have raked in millions of dollars from "speaking fees" from the rich and powerful who will now expect for that largess to be paid back with political favors. If you don't have a problem with THAT then I guess you don't have a problem with corruption in general? Because what the Clinton's have been doing is CLASSIC pay to play!

 

[Oldstyle]

Has there EVER been a couple who have made more money from their elected positions than the Clinton's have? Even close? I can't think of any...

But Jillian is convinced that Hillary is here to fight for the little guy!

You a socialist and against people making money?

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

You're either one of the board's more naive dimwits, Isaac...or you've chosen to wear blinders so you can ignore the obvious! Which is it?

 

[IsaacNewton]

You a socialist and against people making money?

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

You're either one of the board's more naive dimwits, Isaac...or you've chosen to wear blinders so you can ignore the obvious! Which is it?

Your beliefs don't line up with reality. You can't defend a position so you resort to ad hominem attack.

 

[dblack]

This should make any principled person refuse to vote for the reality show host

"During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.


I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.


No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.


Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.


I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary’s commitment to our nation’s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all — whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way."


more at link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

This has certainly convinced me to not vote for Hillary! Thanks for the info.

 

[2aguy]

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

You're either one of the board's more naive dimwits, Isaac...or you've chosen to wear blinders so you can ignore the obvious! Which is it?

Your beliefs don't line up with reality. You can't defend a position so you resort to ad hominem attack.

Yes.....tell me that ABC news is part of Trump love.....

Bill Clinton Cashed In When Hillary Became Secretary of State

After his wife became Secretary of State, former President Bill Clinton began to collect speaking fees that often doubled or tripled what he had been charging earlier in his post White House years, bringing in millions of dollars from groups that included several with interests pending before the State Department, an ABC News review of financial disclosure records shows.

Where he once had drawn $150,000 for a typical address in the years following his presidency, Clinton saw a succession of staggering paydays for speeches in 2010 and 2011, including $500,000 paid by a Russian investment bank and $750,000 to address a telecom conference in China.

“It’s unusual to see a former president’s speaking fee go up over time,” said Richard Painter, who served as chief ethics lawyer in the White House Counsel’s office under President George W. Bush. “I must say I’m surprised that he raised his fees. There’s no prohibition on his raising it. But it does create some appearance problems if he raises his fee after she becomes Secretary of State.”

 

[2aguy]

I'm against people who hold public office making millions from the power they wield. That's who the Clinton's ARE! What's laughable is that they've raked in millions over the years yet can still convince people like you and Jillian that they are here fighting for the little guy!

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

You're either one of the board's more naive dimwits, Isaac...or you've chosen to wear blinders so you can ignore the obvious! Which is it?

Your beliefs don't line up with reality. You can't defend a position so you resort to ad hominem attack.

And here...from ABC news.....

In October 2010, for instance, Clinton accepted $225,000 to give a speech in Jamaicasponsored in part by the Irish telecom firm Digicel. Just weeks earlier, Digicel had submitted an application to USAID, an agency overseen by the State Department, for millions of dollars in grant money to fund a mobile-phone money transfer service in Haiti. Two months after the speech, Digicel received the first installment of grant money. The company’s chairman, Irish billionaire Denis O'Brien, was also a major contributor to the Clintons' charitable enterprises.

A spokeswoman for Digicel told ABC News that its sponsorship of the Jamaica speech had nothing to do with the company’s other projects. To imply otherwise, said spokeswoman Gillian Power, “suggests an association of unrelated events which create a misleading representation of Digicel and its founder, Denis O’Brien in relation to their collaboration with President Clinton in developing Haiti.”

 

[Oldstyle]

The've made money making speeches. And you are going to say supporting a self-proclaimed billionaire is fighting for the little guy?

Har har, hardee har har.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Isaac! Hillary Clinton isn't that gifted a speaker! They made money trading political favors to the well connected. The "speeches" you speak of are just the way that they laundered the money. You know it and so does anyone else with any common sense!

Show the information that they made money trading political favors. Not an Alex Jones or Hannity dimwit opinion, actual factual information.

Conservatives have to at some point finally take a needle and pop this con-meme bubble they live in and return to reality.

You're either one of the board's more naive dimwits, Isaac...or you've chosen to wear blinders so you can ignore the obvious! Which is it?

Your beliefs don't line up with reality. You can't defend a position so you resort to ad hominem attack.

And here...from ABC news.....

In October 2010, for instance, Clinton accepted $225,000 to give a speech in Jamaicasponsored in part by the Irish telecom firm Digicel. Just weeks earlier, Digicel had submitted an application to USAID, an agency overseen by the State Department, for millions of dollars in grant money to fund a mobile-phone money transfer service in Haiti. Two months after the speech, Digicel received the first installment of grant money. The company’s chairman, Irish billionaire Denis O'Brien, was also a major contributor to the Clintons' charitable enterprises.

A spokeswoman for Digicel told ABC News that its sponsorship of the Jamaica speech had nothing to do with the company’s other projects. To imply otherwise, said spokeswoman Gillian Power, “suggests an association of unrelated events which create a misleading representation of Digicel and its founder, Denis O’Brien in relation to their collaboration with President Clinton in developing Haiti.”

Yeah, we wouldn't want any "misleading representation" going on, 2aguy! I mean just because Bill cashed in big time and then the State Department came through with millions in grants is an "unrelated" event! How dare anyone think it's anything else! (eye-roll)

 

[IsaacNewton]

Again, if there was illegal activity why haven't authorities acted? If anyone committed a crime they should pay for it.

Where is the prosecution? You certainly aren't going to tell us that Republicans in Congress would ever pass up a juicy opportunity to prosecute the Clintons are you?

 

[Oldstyle]

Again, if there was illegal activity why haven't authorities acted? If anyone committed a crime they should pay for it.

Where is the prosecution? You certainly aren't going to tell us that Republicans in Congress would ever pass up a juicy opportunity to prosecute the Clintons are you?

We can't get the Obama Justice Department to indict when there is blatant evidence of corruption and cover up yet you expect that they'll prosecute Slick Willie and Crooked Hillary for walking the fine edge of legality? Oh wait...is this where you demand to know why there hasn't BEEN an investigation...and then turn around later and complain about the COST of an investigation?

 

[P@triot]

Rather than voting for an unstable reality tv show joke, or an even more unstable career criminal - here is the most viable option for the 2016 election...

 

[P@triot]

Here are the devout Hitlery Clinton supporters. This is convincing evidence for why liberals destroyed public education in America. They need an ignorant electorate to get Dumbocrats elected. And if this is how dumb their most dedicated voters are - just imagine how astoundingly ignorant the typical liberal voter is...

 

[P@triot]

Here are the facts about the current economy. All of the stuff that Barack Obama and the Democrats cover up with their propaganda.

• First, “real” unemployment that considers discouraged workers has increased 0.1% to 9.7%

• African American participation rates for ages 16-19 decreased 1.5% to 27.7%

• Their Latino peers saw a 0.8% point decrease to 30.3%

• Neither groups have recovered from President Barack Obama’s “recovery;” young African American participation rates never went over 30 percent since February 2009 while the young Latinos’ is still five percentage points lower than it was at that same period

There is nothing to brag about where the jobs come from either:

• Nearly 250,000 of them are parasitical (i.e. government) while the self-employed lost 110,000 jobs.

• In the meantime there are 100,000 new part-time workers for economic reasons, mostly because of “slack work or business conditions.”

• There is also a total of 160,000 new multiple-job holders, a 0.1-percentage point increase, showing that the Obama recession is already lurking around the corner.

• It’s especially true if you are part of the demonized extractive industry (mining, oil and gas, etc.) which shed another 7,000 jobs.

Finally, one indicator that doesn’t fail to show that the economy is going in the wrong direction is duration of unemployment. The average duration is now 28.1 weeks, a 0.4 week increase and still 8 percentage points higher than it was in February 2009.

The mean duration increased 1.3 percentage points to 11.6 weeks, barely below its February 2009 level but on an upward trend since mid-2015.

These figures reflect the increase in long-term unemployment 15 weeks and over, which increased 1.2 percentage points to 41.7% of all unemployed workers. In particular, very long-term unemployment over 26 weeks increased 0.8% to 26.6%, on an upward trend for about a year.

The Obama Recession is Coming Soon

 

[candycorn]

This should make any principled person refuse to vote for the reality show host

"During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties — three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush’s side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.


I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.


No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.


Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president — keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.


I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary’s commitment to our nation’s security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all — whether to put young American women and men in harm’s way."


more at link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/o...ia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0

The reasons not to vote for Ms. Clinton are dwindling; right Cons?

 

[P@triot]

This should make any principled person refuse to vote for the reality show host

The reasons not to vote for Ms. Clinton are dwindling; right Cons?

Still waiting for a single reason to vote for Hitlery Clinton. Kind of funny that after 6 years of ranting about how she would be the next president none of you can give even one compelling reason to vote for her. We have dozens of compelling reasons not to.

By the way - Hitlery is married. It's Mrs. Clinton, genius.