Clinton blames FBI director for presidential election loss

[rooster59]

Clinton blames FBI director for presidential election loss 

LISA LERER, Associated Press

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton is blaming the FBI's decision to revive its examination of her email accounts for her devastating defeat in the presidential election.

 

On a call Saturday with top campaign donors, Clinton said her campaign was winning until FBI director James Comey sent a letter to Congress on Oct.

 

28 announcing that the FBI had uncovered emails possibly related to its earlier probe into her use of a private server as secretary of state. The new examination was sparked by an unrelated investigation into former New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, the estranged husband of one of her top aides.

 

The surprise announcement by the FBI came after three debates in which Republican Donald Trump was widely panned for his performance. Clinton told the donors that her campaign was leading by large margins in nearly every battleground state and was tied in Arizona, a traditionally Republican stronghold, until Comey released his letter.

 

Trump's campaign and Republican supporters seized on the news, even though it was unclear whether Clinton's correspondence was tied up in the probe.

 

Comey told lawmakers the Sunday before the election that the bureau had found no evidence to warrant criminal charges. His "all clear" message only served to further motivate Trump supporters, Clinton told donors on the call.

 

In the nine days between Comey's initial statement and his "all clear" announcement, nearly 24 million people cast early ballots. That was roughly 18 percent of the expected total votes for president.

 

While Clinton accepted some blame of her loss, said donors who listened to her call, she made little mention of the other factors driving Trump's victory: A desire for change by voters, possible sexism, the difficulty of a political party winning a third White House term, her campaign's all-but-dismissal of white working class voters and flaws within her own message.

 

Donors on the call were not authorized to discuss her comments by name and requested anonymity to describe them to The Associated Press.

 

Democrats have spent much of this week reeling for their loss, with many in the party beginning a process of soul-searching designed to sort out what exactly went wrong. Liberals like Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren say Democrats must embrace a more aggressive economic message — one Clinton largely shied away from during her campaign.

 

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-11-13

[ClutchClark]

Still in denial.

 

Still blaming everyone but herself and her own decisions.

 

it was either the FBI or racism or sexism or.....

 

Great example to send to her followers.

 

Take zero personal responsibility.

Edited November 13, 2016 by ClutchClark

[Ulysses G.]

He deserves blame all right, for not calling for an indictment which she obviously deserved.

[arithai12]

Always good to find someone to blame.

However, "her campaign was winning" also until one minute before they started counting. Most polls were giving her a 60 to 99 % chance of winning. Then she woke up.

[CMNightRider]

Hillary is still blaming others instead of looking at herself.  Gee, I wonder if any of her disastrous policies had anything to do with her loosing the election?

[Shot]

I just hope that's the last time we have to hear from the old bag.

[craigt3365]

Politics aside, he probably did break a law with his last announcement.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/30/did-james-comey-break-the-law-when-he-told-congress-about-clinton-related-emails-maybe/

Quote

 

Their line in the sand: the Hatch Act, a Depression-era law that prohibits government employees from using their taxpayer-funded office to play politics. Local government officials have gotten in trouble via the legislation for running for an elected, partisan office. Same with Cabinet secretaries who talk politics on the job.

 

It can be a career-ending error. The Office of Special Counsel, a federal watchdog agency, investigates and subsequently determines violations of the Hatch Act. Running afoul of the regulations can cost an official their position.

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

7 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Politics aside, he probably did break a law with his last announcement.

 

 

Maybe both announcements?

[mokwit]

I thought it was the racism and misogyny of the white males and  53% of white women who voted for Trump -  nothing to do with the fact that the electorate didn't agree that it was now Hillary's "turn" - in fact they clearly found it utterly repugnant that there was a clique of interconnected elites who decided who amongst them should be President based on which of their "turn" it was.

 

The people had this strange idea that who is President is decided by the people - the cheek of the little people! They'll be demanding things are debated next.

 

Also it couldn't have been her calling anybody who wasn't on the narrative a “basket of deplorables. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it.”

Edited November 13, 2016 by mokwit

[boomerangutang]

      I've had the same conclusion for the past 2 weeks.  The clincher was Guiliani grinning ear to ear while being interviewed on CNN, two days before Comey's letter was circulated.  The CNN interviewer asked several times why he was so happy.   All Guiliani could say (several times, while trying not to burst into giggles) was, "in two days, there will be a big surprise, but I can't tell you what it is."    Guiliani is in direct touch with fellow Republican Comey.  Connect the dots.  There may have been a giant payment involved.  

 

       Comey and Guiliani knew they were throwing the election in Trump's favor.   Of course there are many other factors re; the election results, but Comey's release of the letter was what put doubts about emails back in a portion of weak-minded Trump fans' minds .....is top of the list.

 

      9 days later, two days before the election, when Comey announced nothing was found, it was too late to matter.   Already, 24 million votes had been cast, nearly all in that week which began when Comey made the false-flag announcement.   

 

       Was HRC a flawed candidate?  Yes.  But comparing HRC's drawbacks with Trump's is like comparing a monkey with a sprained wrist with King Kong after falling from the Empire State Building.   It's not even apples and oranges.   One had a lapse of judgement which she apologized for repeatedly.   The other has such deep flaws, that there are sustained mass rallies against him in several major cities, .....and he has barely begun his four years of destruction.

[geriatrickid]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Maybe both announcements?

 

He screwed up big time and he will be gone under Trump. There are still some ethical members of the Republican party and many sitting  representatives and senators were dismayed by the FBI directors inappropriate conduct.  Trump will not want him around, and on this Trump will receive bipartisan support.

[Enoon]

Let us hope that the new Presidents "tenancy" is not ruined by having to spend the duration dealing with his own "skeletons".

 

ie: Fighting ongoing, consecutive attempted rape/sexual assault charges, launched as part of of a strategy which began formulating as soon as "Grabgate" (you heard it here first) began to reveal itself.

 

But nobody would do that just to "spoil" things would they?

 

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by Enoon

[Ulysses G.]

7 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

    

   Was HRC a flawed candidate?  Yes.  

 

Indeed and she paid the price for being a very flawed candidate. She is a loser and her opponent is a winner. The electorate has spoken.

[maoro2013]

Blame yourself Hillary, you did it.

[impulse]

If your opponent is as unpopular as Trump, and a few points one way or the other would lose you the election, there's probably a dozen more glaring factors that lost it for you.

 

Still, it's probably likely the election would have gone the other way had the 11th hour FBI revelation not happened.

 

Edit:  But in fairness, it may have gone the other way if the weather had been different, or if there had been a terror attack, or any number of factors had changed the makeup of the voters who made their way to the booth that day.  It was a squeaker.  And it should have been a slam-dunk for any untainted candidate- on either side.

 

Edited November 13, 2016 by impulse

[daveAustin]

28 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

      The other has such deep flaws, that there are sustained mass rallies against him in several major cities, .....

 

There are sustained rallies against him because the snowflakes that are protesting are loser cry-baby hypocrites that are as democratically minded as the current regime in a certain part of Southeast Asia. These mollycoddled sheep probably have nothing better to do anyway. 

 

Comey could have kept quiet and Trump could have been videoed with his hand down someone's nickers and he would have still won. Hillary lost because she is Hillary.

[boomerangutang]

20 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

He screwed up big time and he will be gone under Trump. There are still some ethical members of the Republican party and many sitting  representatives and senators were dismayed by the FBI directors inappropriate conduct.  Trump will not want him around, and on this Trump will receive bipartisan support.

 

        I don't think Trump will move to fire Comey.  He may not like Comey, but he sure likes how Comey skewed fickle 2% of voters' opinions - which gave Trump the nod.   More than any single person, Comey (working behind the scenes with Guiliani) handed Trump the win.   

 

15 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Indeed and she paid the price for being a very flawed candidate. She is a loser and her opponent is a winner. The electorate has spoken.

 

         The electorate voted for HRC.  The Electoral College tallied more votes for Trump.  HRC didn't dispute the outcome.   Trump said, numerous times, that he would dispute findings which didn't give him a victory.  In other words, he was gearing up to be a sore angry loser (and calling the whole system flawed) even before the votes were counted.   You and I both know, if the results had been the other way around (if Trump got the popular vote but lost the electoral votes, with a few states still being tallied),  .....he and his ugly players would be freaking out with lawsuits everywhere.

[coma]

This is one thing I do agree with her on. They were blatantly gunning for her. Which leaves her with the question........

What did I [or my husband] do to pi$$ the FBI off ??  There must have been a reason. Anyway she deserved to be cut down for dishonesty.

[hdkane]

The entire matter could have been avoided if she did not try to thwart law and establish a private server, destroy evidence, and then lie about for 3 years...

[impulse]

4 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

 The electorate voted for HRC.  The Electoral College tallied more votes for Trump.  HRC didn't dispute the outcome.   Trump said, numerous times, that he would dispute findings which didn't give him a victory.  In other words, he was gearing up to be a sore angry loser (and calling the whole system flawed) even before the votes were counted.   You and I both know, if the results had been the other way around (if Trump got the popular vote but lost the electoral votes, with a few states still being tallied),  .....he and his ugly players would be freaking out with lawsuits everywhere.

 

When a poker player across from you warns you he's got a great hand, do you believe him?  Say what you want, but Trump's a great poker player/ negotiator.  We don't have a clue what he would have done had he lost.  He was just putting his opponents on (very public) notice that he was expecting dirty tricks- and he has the resources and demeanor to call them on it.  

 

That's the guy I want sitting across the table negotiating with the Chinese and with Putin.

[JHolmesJr]

2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

When a poker player across from you warns you he's got a great hand, do you believe him?  Say what you want, but Trump's a great poker player/ negotiator.  We don't have a clue what he would have done had he lost.  He was just putting his opponents on (very public) notice that he was expecting dirty tricks- and he has the resources and demeanor to call them on it.  

 

That's the guy I want sitting across the table negotiating with the Chinese and with Putin.

 

As Ive said before you cant  beat the Donald at mind games.

[atyclb]

18 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

      I've had the same conclusion for the past 2 weeks.  The clincher was Guiliani grinning ear to ear while being interviewed on CNN, two days before Comey's letter was circulated.  The CNN interviewer asked several times why he was so happy.   All Guiliani could say (several times, while trying not to burst into giggles) was, "in two days, there will be a big surprise, but I can't tell you what it is."    Guiliani is in direct touch with fellow Republican Comey.  Connect the dots.  There may have been a giant payment involved.  

 

       Comey and Guiliani knew they were throwing the election in Trump's favor.   Of course there are many other factors re; the election results, but Comey's release of the letter was what put doubts about emails back in a portion of weak-minded Trump fans' minds .....is top of the list.

 

      9 days later, two days before the election, when Comey announced nothing was found, it was too late to matter.   Already, 24 million votes had been cast, nearly all in that week which began when Comey made the false-flag announcement.   

 

       Was HRC a flawed candidate?  Yes.  But comparing HRC's drawbacks with Trump's is like comparing a monkey with a sprained wrist with King Kong after falling from the Empire State Building.   It's not even apples and oranges.   One had a lapse of judgement which she apologized for repeatedly.   The other has such deep flaws, that there are sustained mass rallies against him in several major cities, .....and he has barely begun his four years of destruction.

 

"    Was HRC a flawed candidate?  Yes.  But comparing HRC's drawbacks with Trump's is like comparing a monkey with a sprained wrist with King Kong after falling from the Empire State Building.   It's not even apples and oranges.   One had a lapse of judgement which she apologized for repeatedly.   The other has such deep flaws, that there are sustained mass rallies against him in several major cities, .....and he has barely begun his four years of destruction. "

 

Flawed candidate vs career criminal .

 

factual documentary

 

 

[cooked]

Last week it was the Russians. Just another professional victim

[JLCrab]

17 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

When a poker player across from you warns you he's got a great hand, do you believe him?  Say what you want, but Trump's a great poker player/ negotiator.  We don't have a clue what he would have done had he lost. <snip>

That's the rub I guess -- we don't have a clue what he's going to do now that he's won. Trump was a great poker player when he was playing with a stacked deck and willing to stiff his partners because there always were new partners wanting in. Not so here.

Edited November 13, 2016 by JLCrab

[williamgeorgeallen]

be a gracious looser and let it slide. the polls were false, she was probably never winning. even before trumpie told the wold he likes to grab them by the p#ssy. the fact she could not beat trump, a man hated by so many should tell that she was not much of an opponent.

[craigt3365]

12 minutes ago, cooked said:

Last week it was the Russians. Just another professional victim

Victims for good reasons.  The Russians hacked the democrats email system and made them public.  A crime for sure.

[craigt3365]

9 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

be a gracious looser and let it slide. the polls were false, she was probably never winning. even before trumpie told the wold he likes to grab them by the p#ssy. the fact she could not beat trump, a man hated by so many should tell that she was not much of an opponent.

Trump was the lesser of two evils.

[alocacoc]

Send her to Guantanamo Bay and let her exercise the popular water sport.

[impulse]

11 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

That's the rub I guess -- we don't have a clue what he's going to do now that he's won. Trump was a great poker player when he was playing with a stacked deck and willing to stiff his partners because there always were new partners wanting in. Not so here.

 

The beauty of Trump is that his ego is so big, he's going to do his dead level best to leave a good legacy.  He may fail miserably, but he may surprise us all.

[JLCrab]

11 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

The beauty of Trump is that his ego is so big, he's going to do his dead level best to leave a good legacy.  He may fail miserably, but he may surprise us all.

And I for one am not hoping that he fails as did many Republicans when Obama took office. I lived in New York City from mid to late 70's when Donald Trump first became a public figure and  have somewhat followed him ever since. However I live in Thailand and  for the next 4 years for me I'll just kick back and see what's what.

 

Sometimes I question just how many on here actually live in Thailand as so little of consequence, at least for me, that goes on in USA affects me on a daily basis whether it was GWBush, Obama, or the soon to be President Trump.

Edited November 13, 2016 by JLCrab