Chumph wants a special counsel to investigate the so called Russian Uranium deal.
The problem there is that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by Clinton.
The whole thing is nothing more than a political ploy and an attempt to suppress dissent through abuse of power.
Appointing a Special Counsel to do so is in itself an Impeachable act.
Yook long enough. Many of us see the Chumph’s election as illegitimate, not just because of voter suppression and Russian meddling.
About time someone comes out and says it.
It is also true the election never should have been that close. And that failure sits squarely on Hillary and her campaign staff’s lap.
In an exclusive interview with Mother Jones, Clinton says Russian interference and GOP voter suppression efforts may have cost her the presidency.
A year after her defeat by Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton says “there are lots of questions about its legitimacy” due to Russian interference and widespread voter suppression efforts.
In an interview with Mother Jones in downtown Manhattan, Clinton said Russian meddling in the election “was one of the major contributors to the outcome.” The Russians used “weaponized false information,” she said, in “a very successful disinformation campaign” that “wasn’t just influencing voters—it was determining the outcome.”
Republican efforts to make it harder to vote—through measures such as voter ID laws, shortened early voting periods, and new obstacles to registration—likewise “contributed to the outcome,” Clinton said. These moves received far less attention than Russian interference but arguably had a more demonstrable impact on the election result. According to an MIT study, more than 1 million people did not vote in 2016 because they encountered problems registering or at the polls. Clinton lost the election by a total of 78,000 votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
“In a couple of places, most notably Wisconsin, I think it had a dramatic impact on the outcome,” Clinton said of voter suppression.
Wisconsin’s new voter ID law required a Wisconsin driver’s license or one of several other types of ID to cast a ballot. It blocked or deterred up to 23,000 people from voting in reliably Democratic Milwaukee and Madison, and potentially 45,000 people statewide, according to a University of Wisconsin study. Clinton lost the state by fewer than 23,000 votes. African Americans, who overwhelmingly supported Clinton, were more than three times as likely as whites not to vote because of the law.
“It seems likely that it cost me the election [in Wisconsin] because of the tens of thousands of people who were turned away and the margin being so small,” Clinton said.
The DNC operated as a financial arm of the Hillary Campaign. And rigged the Primary against Bernie.
All to make the Chumph win.
I don’t now, and have never bought the conclusion that the vote wasn’t tampered with.
Considering that some of these state systems are “isolated” with no connection to the Internet, and their only common connection to the Federal Voting database – how exactly did these guys get in?
The extensiveness strongly suggests local help.
The “mystery” of how the Chumph “won” gets clearer every day.
A new report reveals that Russian hackers breached voting systems in 39 different states, which means that Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election appears far more widespread that what has been previously disclosed.
According to Bloomberg, Russian “incursions into voter databases and software systems” occurred in “almost twice as many states as previously reported.” Among other things, Bloomberg says that Russian hackers tried to delete or alter voter data in Illinois; successfully accessed software designed to be used by poll workers on election day; and accessed a campaign finance database in at least one state.
The report claims that investigators were most disturbed by failed Russian attempts to alter voter data in Illinois, as they believed that it was a trial run for what could have been a disruptive cyber attack on election day that would have thrown the entire process into mass chaos.
“That idea would obsess the Obama White House throughout the summer and fall of 2016, outweighing worries over the DNC hack and private Democratic campaign emails given to Wikileaks and other outlets, according to one of the people familiar with those conversations,” Bloomberg reports. “The Homeland Security Department dispatched special teams to help states strengthen their cyber defenses, and some states hired private security companies to augment those efforts.”
Read the whole report at this link.
There is now concrete evidence that Putin’s KGB hacked with the object of getting the Chumph elected…
Making it imperative to go back and look at those election results in Michigan, as well as a good half dozen other states.
I have said this here before – Trump didn’t win this election.
Treason!
A shocking secret CIA assessment has concluded that Russia interfered with the U.S. presidential election expressly to help Donald Trump win, according to an exclusive report Friday by The Washington Post.
Until now, intelligence sources have indicated that Russian hacking throughout the campaign that repeatedly exposed information overwhelmingly embarrassing for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was an effort to undermine Americans’ faith in their government.
Now the intelligence community has concluded that Russia was clearly after a Trump victory and manipulated information to that end, according to sources who spoke to the newspaper.
“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” a senior U.S. official briefed on the CIA assessment told The Washington Post. “That’s the consensus view.”
The Trump camp has dismissed the report — along with the credibility of the U.S. intelligence community. “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,” said a statement by the Trump transition team. “The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s time to move on and ‘Make America great again.’”
It’s no surprise Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted Trump in the White House. Trump praised the former KGB leader throughout the presidential campaign. He even called Putin a “more effective leader” than President Barack Obama.
Leaked information through hacking operations traced by U.S. intelligence to Russia was eerily silent on Trump and the Republican Party throughout the presidential campaign. Yet the same operations exposed troves of secret, sometimes embarrassing, personal communication involving Clinton and internal planning by the Democratic National Committee.
U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russia hacked the Republican National Committee but chose not to release the information, according to a report in the New York Times late Friday.
In addition, intelligence officials discovered breaches by Russian government-linked hackers into the voter registration databases of at least two states.
Links to hackers and the Russian government were detected by U.S. intelligence earlier this year. But Trump dismissed a Russian hand in the operations. He again this week blasted the intelligence findings, even before the latest assessment emerged, as politically motivated and not based on hard evidence.
“I don’t believe it. I don’t believe [Russia] interfered,” Trump told Time magazine in his “Person of the Year” interview released Wednesday.
“That became a laughing point, not a talking point,” he added. “Any time I do something, they say, ‘Oh, Russia interfered.’”
The hacking, he said, “could be Russia, it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.”
Yet at one point during the campaign in July, he appeared to appeal to Russia for hacking help, saying: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing” from Clinton’s email servers. The seeming request for a foreign government to breach U.S. internet security sparked a storm of controversy, and Trump later insisted he was only being “sarcastic.”
In a September intelligence briefing, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) reportedly expressed suspicion about Russian links to campaign hacking. He hasn’t commented on The Washington Post’s report on the latest CIA information.
The chilling assessment that it’s “quite clear” Russia’s goal was to get Trump elected was shared with key senators last week in a Capital Hill briefing, the Post reported. CIA officials cited a mounting body of evidence from several sources. Intelligence agencies have identified specific individuals with connections to the Russian government who are believed to have provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails, according to The Washington Post.
Obama has ordered a “full review” of Russian hacking in the campaign following pressure from Congress, the White House announced Friday. He expects to receive an intelligence report on any election interference before he leaves office. Congress will also be briefed on the report.
“We’ve seen in 2008, and this last election system, malicious cyber-activity,” Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser, Lisa Monaco, told reporters. “We may be crossing a new threshold, and it is incumbent upon us to take stock of that, to review, to conduct some after-action, to understand what has happened and to impart those lessons learned.”
Another indication that the Election of 2016 was hacked. The Chumph is in a mad panic and trying to stop the recounts…
The Trump campaign filed a legal petition Thursday to stop Michigan’s presidential recount, saying Jill Stein has no chance of winning and no grievance, and there’s no way a hand count can be done before the Electoral College meets December 19.
“Despite being a blip on the electoral radar, [Green Party nominee] Stein has now commandeered Michigan’s electoral process,” said Trump’s petition to Michigan’s Board of State Canvasser. “Indeed, on the basis of nothing more than speculation, Stein asks that Michigan residents endure an expensive, time-consuming recount, and the scrutiny and hardship that comes with it.”
The Trump campaign called the recount an “electoral farce,” ignoring that it has been filed in a state where its candidate leads Hillary Clinton by almost 11,000 out of 4.8 million votes cast, the smallest margin of the final three states that gave Trump an Electoral College majority after election night. (The Green Party is also seeking recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Wisconsin began its recount Thursday, while challenges continue in Pennsylvania as the Green Party is filing local petitions at county election boards.)
“She does not allege, let alone explain, how a fourth-place finisher could be ‘aggrieved’ by the election canvass,” Trump’s petition said, saying candidates must be harmed to seek a recount under Michigan law. “And even if that could be overlooked, Stein’s request would have to be denied because no recount can be reliably competed in the time required by state and federal law” (to meet the Electoral College’s deadline).
Trump’s objection comes just one day after state officials said they would do a full, statewide hand recount of all votes cast in Michigan, beginning Friday, December 2. Because of the filing, the state canvassers’ board, an appointed body that has already pledged its support of the recount, will have to postpone counting until it holds a hearing and issues a ruling within five days. If the recount goes forward, Trump’s objections will have delayed the process up to a week and made it that much harder to complete before presidential electors convene.
“You wonder why they are fighting it so hard,” said Bob Fitrakis, an Ohio-based attorney who was involved in that state’s 2004 presidential recount and has been advising the Green Party in 2016. “Michigan, with its thousands of undervotes [no vote recorded for president] in Democratic strongholds—these people voted the whole ticket but left off Hillary Clinton?”
“They are trying to run out the clock,” he said, saying that same delaying tactic was used in Ohio in 2004 when the Green and Libertarian parties filed for a presidential recount in the state where George W. Bush unexpectedly beat John Kerry, despite media exit polls and other indices suggesting the incumbent president would be defeated.
Stein issued a statement blasting Trump’s petition to stop the recount, calling it a “shameful” and “outrageous” attempt to verify the accuracy, security and integrity of the election…
Hillary won the popular vote by over 1.7%. Which actually is in line with a number of the polls prediction. Something which makes the Chumphs “win” in several key states even more questionable.
Clinton has registered 64,654,483 total votes, compared to 62,418,820 for Trump, according to a Cook Political Report analysis Monday. That represents a margin of 2,235,663 in the popular vote. Clinton garnered 48.2 percent of the popular vote, while Trump earned just 46.5 percent, good for a 1.7 point margin. Trump, however, picked up wins in key battleground states like Florida, Pennsylvania and Michigan, earning 306 Electoral College votes to Clinton’s 232.
What stands out is the Margin shift in the so-called swing states – massively in Trumps direction.
The Russians do good work.
| State | Clinton (D) | Trump (R) | Others | Clinton % | Trump % | Others % | Dem ’12 Margin | Dem ’16 Margin | Margin Shift | Total ’12 Votes | Total ’16 Votes | Raw Votes vs. ’12 | |
|
6
|
|||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
7
|
U.S. Total | 64,680,874 | 62,437,545 | 7,235,983 | 48.1% | 46.5% | 5.4% | 3.9% | 1.7% | -2.2% | 129,075,630 | 134,354,402 | 4.1% |
|
8
|
13 Swing States | 21,356,299 | 22,183,644 | 2,298,207 | 46.6% | 48.4% | 5.0% | 3.6% | -1.8% | -5.4% | 43,939,918 | 45,838,150 | 4.3% |
|
9
|
Non-Swing States | 43,324,575 | 40,253,901 | 4,937,776 | 48.9% | 45.5% | 5.6% | 4.0% | 3.5% | -0.5% | 85,135,712 | 88,516,252 | 4.0% |
A Republican Electoral College member from Texas has decided to step down because his conscience will not allow him to back Donald Trump for president.
Politico reports that Art Sisneros, a GOP elector who has been critical of Trump in the past, has resigned his position in the Electoral College because he simply believes Trump is not fit for the presidency.
“If Trump is not qualified and my role, both morally and historically, as an elected official is to vote my conscience, then I can not and will not vote for Donald Trump for President,” Sisneros wrote in a blog post late last week. “I believe voting for Trump would bring dishonor to God.”
The now-former elector went on to say that he’s stepping down from his role because he did not want to violate his pledge to support whoever won the popular vote in his home state.
“The people will get their vote,” he wrote. “I will sleep well at night knowing I neither gave in to their demands nor caved to my convictions. I will also mourn the loss of our republic.”
The ugly truth is there were a good half dozen States whose election systems were rigged for Trump. So far, they won’t let cyber-scientists look at the data and systems of the others. More than likely they are busily trying to destroy the evidence. The Chumph didn’t “win” this election, it was won with help from his Russian masters, the “usual suspects” of Republican hackers, and an unwillingness of the MSM to challenge the results.
The reason they picked the three (was four) states to request a recount, is the vote tally’s already show that votes were manufactured for Chumph. What has been uncovered so far is a number of counties in Wisconsin reporting more votes for the Chumph…Than they had voters. That is a fairly easy hack. All it requires is for the County Elections Supervisor to add votes to the tally which is sent up to the State and Federal level. What has been discovered in an initial forensic analysis of the electronic votes tallied (Wisconsin has a paper voting system, so there is actually an easy way to audit the real vote) is the blocks of as many as 10,000 votes were added to the electronic tallies. So we wind up in position where there are significantly more votes …Than voters.
Jill Stein as a Third Party candidate doesn’t want to say that publicly…Yet.
Now…Unless they get to the paper votes – and this turns out the way the cyber-scientists believe…
This will set off a firestorm.
Wisconsin’s election board agreed on Friday to conduct a statewide recount of votes cast in the presidential race, as requested by a Green Party candidate seeking similar reviews in two other states where Donald Trump scored narrow wins.
The recount process, including an examination by hand of the nearly 3 million ballots tabulated in Wisconsin, is expected to begin late next week after Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s campaign has paid the required fee, the Elections Commission said.
The state faces a Dec. 13 federal deadline to complete the recount, which may require canvassers in Wisconsin’s 72 counties to work evenings and weekends to finish the job in time, according to the commission.
The recount fee has yet to be determined, the agency said in a statement on its website. Stein said in a Facebook message on Friday that the sum was expected to run to about $1.1 million.
She said she has raised at least $5 million from donors since launching her drive on Wednesday for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania – three battleground states where Republican Trump edged out Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton by relatively thin margins.
Stein has said her goal is to raise $7 million to cover all fees and legal costs.
Her effort may have given a ray of hope to dispirited Clinton supporters, but the chance of overturning the overall result of the Nov. 8 election is considered very slim, even if all three states go along with the recount.
The Green Party candidate, who garnered little more than 1 percent of the nationwide popular vote herself, said on Friday that she was seeking to verify the integrity of the U.S. voting system, not to undo Trump’s victory.
While there was no evidence of tampering or voting errors in the election, only a thorough review of results from the three states at issue will reassure Americans, Stein said.
“This was a hack-riddled election,” she told CNN, pointing to various cyber-attacks on political organizations and individual email accounts before Election Day and media reports citing concerns raised by computer security specialists.
Experts urged extra scrutiny of the three states, Stein said, because their voting systems were seen as vulnerable. They also cited “unexplained high numbers of undervotes,” the close finish between the two nominees and “discrepancies between pre-election polling and the official result,” she said.
According to Stein, the Wisconsin commission confirmed receipt of her recount petition at 3:45 p.m. local time, just over an hour before the deadline for filing. The filing deadline is Monday in Pennsylvania and Wednesday in Michigan.
The Wisconsin board said Stein was joined in her petition by another third-party candidate, Rocky Roque De La Fuente.
Although Trump won narrowly in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, the margins make it highly unlikely any recounts would end up giving Clinton a win in all three states, which would be needed for the overall election result to change. Trump beat Clinton in Pennsylvania by 70,010 votes, in Michigan by 10,704 votes and in Wisconsin by 27,257 votes.
The presidential race is decided by the Electoral College, based on a tally of wins from the state-by-state contests, rather than by the popular national vote. The Electoral College results are expected to be finalized on Dec. 19.
Trump surpassed the 270 electoral votes needed to win, although Clinton will have won the national popular vote by more than 2 million ballots once final tallies are in.
A representative for Trump’s transition team on Thursday had no comment on Stein’s effort, and Clinton has not commented on Stein’s effort.
Looks like somebody else caught the grift…
They are catching it by the profiles of the voters. I am looking to go after it by looking very closely at those electronic machines, their data or USB chips and their data connections.
They claim electronic voting machine tallies in key states show discrepancies that hurt Clinton.
A group of computer scientists and election lawyers are urging Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to challenge her election loss, saying they have evidence the results in three key battleground states were compromised.
According to New York magazine’s Gabriel Sherman, the activists say electronic voting systems in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania produced discrepancies that hurt Clinton.
The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000.
Clinton needed to win all three states for an election victory. Wisconsin and Pennsylvania went for Donald Trump by the smallest margins of all the states that he won. The race in Michigan hasn’t been certified, but the state is likely to go to Trump. A Clinton win in all three states would give her enough Electoral College votes to claim the presidency.
The activists, who have not spoken publicly about their findings, presented their evidence to Clinton’s campaign team last week. An aide to Clinton told HuffPost the campaign is “not saying anything yet.”
Some data scientists and political statisticians, including FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver and The New York Times’ Nate Cohn, cast doubt on the claims, which compared voting in counties that used paper ballots with those that used electronic machines. Silver and Cohn said the suspicious results disappear when controlling for demographic factors like race and education.
Others, however, noted that the experts who want Clinton to challenge her loss include formidable figures.
The activists don’t have evidence that voting machines were hacked, only a statistical suggestion that something is off. Federal officials have said the Russian government hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s emails over the summer.
Clinton supporters have been using the hashtag #AuditTheVote on Twitter to advocate for a recount. They also have circulated petitions to force electors in the Electoral College not to vote for Trump, and to eliminate the Electoral College altogether.
The Electoral College system favors smaller and rural states. Clinton’s defeat is the second time in 16 years that a Democratic presidential nominee won the popular vote, but lost the election due to the Electoral College.
We’ve set up two petitions below that you can sign. The top one calls on Clinton to demand a recount and a forensic audit. The bottom one asks her to leave the election result as it stands and move on.
This is how the election was “cooked”.
Hillary not only won the popular vote, but won it by the largest margin in history for a candidate losing the Electoral College.
It’s been nearly two weeks since the November 8 general election, but the results have not remained static as ballots continue to be counted.
While the number of votes for both president-elect Donald Trump and his former Democratic rival Hillary Clinton continue to increase, the gap is widening, with Clinton expanding her popular vote lead over Trump.
According to new figures released by The Associated Press on Saturday, Clinton received more than 1.5 million votes than her Republican rival.
As of Saturday, Clinton had received 63,390,669 votes, while Trump received 61,820,845 votes — a difference of 1,569,824, according to The AP.
Rounded off to whole numbers, that translates to 48 percent vs. 47 percent.
A day earlier, on Friday, the vote difference was less, with Clinton getting 62,894,931 and Trump getting 61,580,333 — a difference of 1,314,598, according to The AP.
It is time for Donna Brazile to go, she has crossed the line one too many times, and at this point is doing nothing to help the Democrat Party.
She is just one of the “old line” which need to leave so the Party can move forward with a progressive agenda…And start winning office again against the racist Republican Party.
It’s time for Donna Brazile to go.
Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz before her, Brazile has lost credibility as an honest broker at the Democratic National Committee. The DNC chair should be evenhanded — but, thanks to leaked emails, Brazile’s cover is blown.
At the same time that Brazile was publicly claiming to be neutral in the fierce Clinton-Sanders primary battle, she was using her job as a CNN political analyst to give the Clinton campaign advance notice of questions that would be asked during a CNN debate between the two candidates.
Yet Brazile seems tone deaf about her integrity breach — just as the Democratic Party establishment has been tone deaf about the corrosive effects of servicing Wall Street and wealthy contributors.
As the Washington Post reported a week ago, “Donna Brazile is not apologizing for leaking CNN debate questions and topics to the Hillary Clinton campaign during the Democratic primary. Her only regret, it seems, is that she got caught.”
Consider Brazile’s response after the email hack exposed the chasm between her public claims of being evenhanded and her furtive effort to help Clinton gain an improper debate advantage over Sanders. “My conscience, as an activist, as a strategist — my conscience is very clear,” Brazile said in a radio interview, adding that “if I had to do it all over again, I would know a hell of a lot more about cybersecurity.”
But the current DNC chair’s lack of encryption knowledge is hardly the problem. Brazile has functioned as a shameless cog in the Clinton political machine.
That machine hasn’t just broken down; it is now kaput. In the wake of Donald Trump’s victory, the DNC must undergo a far-reaching shakeup. And — with no time to waste — we can’t wait several months until Brazile’s planned departure from the DNC chair job in March.
That’s why several hundred activists who were Bernie Sanders delegates to the Democratic National Convention just voted to “call for the immediate resignation of Donna Brazile as chair of the Democratic National Committee.”
A lopsided tally came in over the weekend, with 96 percent — 337 to 13 — in favor of pushing for Brazile to resign. The straw poll was conducted by the Bernie Delegates Network (which I coordinate), an independent group sponsored by the online activist organization RootsAction.org in partnership with Progressive Democrats of America.
“The DNC must either change or it will die,” says PDA executive director Donna Smith. “And that change starts with Ms. Brazile’s prompt resignation.”
This morning, RootsAction launched a nationwide petition campaign calling for Brazile to resign immediately.
In a reversal of a long standing difference, the active Military are donating near 3 – 1 in favor of Clinton.
Active and retired members of the military have been showing far more support for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton than for her Republican rival, at least as measured by the checks they’ve written to her campaign.
Individuals who listed their employers as the U.S. Department of Defense or major branches of the military, or who say they’re retired from one of those, have contributed a total of $972,709 to both nominees so far this year. Clinton has claimed $771,471 of the contributions, or nearly 80 percent.
All major branches of the armed forces – including the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard – have favored Clinton to a much greater degree than GOP nominee Donald Trump. Members of the Army have contributed more than other branches of the service this cycle, giving a total of $191,712 to the two presidential hopefuls, 72 percent of which went to Clinton.
Meanwhile, it’s the Air Force that has given the largest portion of its contributions to Trump, though it still favors Clinton by a lot. Trump received 39 percent of the $110,711 given to the two candidates by people connected to the Air Force.
(Our analysis includes donors giving more than $200; candidates don’t have to provide identifying information about smaller donors to the public.)
If this seems surprising, consider this: Up until the primaries were over, the military favorite was Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), who received $374,600. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) came in a close third after Clinton.
“People assume the military leans Republican, but I think that has fundamentally changed in the 21st century,” retired Rear Adm. Jamie Barnett said.
Barnett, who has contributed $600 to Clinton campaign so far this cycle, also said that since a single person in the Oval Office can commit the country to war, those in uniform are certainly willing to put some money on the line to help elect a leader they believe has the right skill set. “The last thing we want to see is our men and women in uniform going into a war we don’t need” due to ego, lack of judgment or some other personal flaw, Barnett added.
The donation numbers are in stark contrast to the Military Times poll of preferences.
Retired members of the military seem particularly aghast at the thought of a Trump presidency, based on their contributions this cycle. Of the $135,392 that came from former service members so far, only 2 percent has gone to the brash businessman’s campaign.
Of course, history has shown that campaign contributions don’t necessarily reflect the results at the polls. Despite Obama’s victory in contributions from the military, 2012 Gallup data showed that veterans preferred Romney by 24 points over Obama.
Ramapo College Professor Jeremy Teigen, who studies military and politics, warned that while Clinton — and before her Obama — may be more popular with members of the military who donate to candidates, “that does not mirror the partisan voting tendencies of the military overall. We know, for instance, that the officer ranks trend substantially toward the GOP while the enlisted ranks trend less so but still toward Republicans.”
That Republican leaning has become more pronounced since the draft ended in the 1970s, Teigen said. “Now that the military is entirely self-selected, mostly male, and somewhat more likely to come from conservative social contexts, the men in the armed forces vote for Republican candidates and identify with the Republican Party more than not,” he said. (Teigen noted that less is known about the political leanings of women in the military.)
The New York Times reported on Thursday that veterans are turning to Trump, feeling abandoned by establishment politicians. Veterans featured in the story have called the nominee, “genuine,” and “a breath of fresh air.”
But University of Maryland Professor Emeritus David Segal said he’s seen more veterans against Trump than for him.
“Honestly, there’s not much enthusiasm for Clinton either, but veterans around me seem to have far less distaste for [Clinton] than Trump,” Segal said. “Trump does not value veterans, and in fact, insults families of veterans who have died in combat,” a reference to Trump’s tirades against the Khan family, who spoke at the Democratic National Convention in July.
Segal, who directs the Center for Research on Military Organization, said there are also concerns among military members that Trump is likely to get the U.S. into another war. He said Clinton, though somewhat hawkish herself, has a good understanding of working diplomacy, having served as secretary of state,
Earlier this year, Trump showed strong support for the use of nuclear weapons during a television interview, saying, “Somebody hits us within ISIS, you wouldn’t fight back with a nuke?” He continued, “Then why are we making them? Why do we make them?”
The President of any corporation, or senior manager will tell you one of the more difficult parts of their job, and certainly uncomfortable is cleaning the outhouse – AKA firing non-performing employees.
The high-tech FBI you see on TV is all bullshit. There is literally little to anything true about the FBI’s technical prowess, or even utilizing technology of this century. It is one of the reasons hackers, international terrorists, and Wall Street Bankers can commit financial crimes almost with impunity. The FBI was quite literally the last Federal Agency to find out mainframe technology was dead. 15 years after the fact. The FBI had to pay an Israeli company $3 million to hack an iPhone. Something just about any “Ankle Biter” (a slang term for tweenies learning hacking) could/would do for $50.
Obama hiring a Republican to do a man’s job was a failure from the get-go.
One of the things that truly frustrates me about Obama’s Presidency, and makes me angry is his inability to chop Republican dead wood. Remember how fast he fired Shirley Sherrod?
Right about now, were I President, Bill Comey – and his entire Senior Staff would be frogmarched out of the FBI Building in handcuffs. As an executive, whether CEO, President, or VP – if someone forces you to pull the trigger though bad action, criminality, or talking out of school…You don’t aim for the foot.
No – you don’t necessarily fire a person for an honest screw up. But if they knowingly break the law, as Comey and his staff have done – you drop the Axe.
Get some cajones, Obama.
The Trump campaign isn’t even bothering to hide its ties to the FBI at this point
 | Karen Melton on Of Melungeons and Other Histor… |
| Impeaching Trump - R… on CBC To Take Up Trump Impe… | |
 | Sven Helms on Counter-terrorism Officer… |
 | btx3 on New Travels |
 | George on New Travels |
Politicians Who Have Been "Elected" By 12 Jurors
The New Jim Crow, More Sneaky Than the Old
Btx3's Blog 