Complete with the same advisor -- Kissinger.

them both.

Really? I wouldn't even expect a Hillary supporter to go that low.

You must be one of Hillary's other neocon friends.

Now look at this:

Two of the most disgusting politicians of my lifetime.
Just sickening.

THIS. THIS is what Bernie Sanders is fighting against.. I do not know how he does it..

Well, that's original.

Downfall.

to a real one from the perspective of one's opponents/enemies.

Purposes, Nixon was anything but a "moderate"

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/

Which is why real leaders will call that four decades of misguided, authoritarian clusterfuckerry what it is, namely a "failure"-- and work to end it for good.

Sadly, I've noticed though that some think it's "progressive" to support policies that send SWAT teams crashing into the homes of sick grannies for growing pot plants, and fill our prisons with drug users.

It has become glaringly apparent this cycle that some in our party have wildly different definitions of what constitutes progress.

Democrats have disavowed much of the drug war at this point. I suppose you want to hold their feet to the fire after they put it out already.

Seems to me the "fringes" were right on that one.

What do I want? For starts, I want real leadership on marijuana legalization, which is supported by a majority of Americans, a solid majority of Democrats, and an even more solid majority of Millennials, that's a good start. And real leaders in our party, like Newsom, Merkley, Blumenauer, etc. are already there.

Beyond that, cutting shitty, draconian mandatory minimum sentences in half means you still have drug users serving sentences in prison when we should be treating drug addiction (as distinguished from use) as a health issue, not a law enforcement one.

Meanwhile, the CHAIR of the DNC teams up with Sheldon Adelson to stop medical marijuana reform in Florida, so you get a medical marijuana patient with no other criminal record facing 10 years for some plants in her house that were found because the cops followed her home from the hydroponics store (although her first mistake may have been believing that publicly affiliating herself with the medical marijuana reform movement- despite being a protected 1st amedment activity- wouldnt put her on the local authorities radar screen)

http://www.wptv.com/news/region-martin-county/stuart/stuart-woman-faces-10-years-in-prison-in-medical-marijuana-case

in another thread that you were familiar with Hillary's platform policies. And I read your second paragraph to mean you don't think she is proposing good enough reforms on criminal justice. I don't know it by heart, but I will post a link to it for anyone interested in looking at it.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/

The only change in marijuana legalization I heard her talk about was something about reclassifying it on the federal drug laws, but not to the same extent as Bernie. I assume that as more states express their desire to legalize it, this will become a more talked about issue at the national level.

The case in Florida...is it involving State law or Federal?

In her capacity as congressperson, she voted against the rule (eventually passed anyway) telling the DEA to respect state medical marijuana laws and stop arresting medical marijuana patients in those states (not appreciating that, the DEA and DOJ decided that the legislation doesnt mean what it says, and they can continue to arrest patients anyway)


On the state level, however, DWS actively campaigned AGAINST measure 2, even working with Sheldon Adelson, the primary backer of the "no on 2" movement.

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/on-medical-marijuana-debbie-wasserman-schultz-sounds-like-a-republican-6544176

So yes, she is directly culpable in this florida state-level situation which is resulting in this medical marijuana patient facing 10 years (remember, Denny Hastert is only getting 15 months for abusing children) in prison.

She's a train wreck on this, and other issues as well.

I am not going to stake out a position right now.

Write the Great American Novel?

Yeah, it's all on the list.

nt

Just another day at DU.

Benghazi!

its been strangely absent lately.

Well played.

Well played, except for the fact you are oh so very, very fucking transparent.

Than Watergate was related to a third rate burglary.

Simply the first event stimulating an investigation.

More like the 38th event stimulating an investigation.

going back at least to his Senate campaign in California in 1950, where he first earned the moniker "Tricky Dick". Later, just before the 1952 election, he gave a speech on national TV (the so-called "Checkers speech&quot to convince voters that he was not a crook.

Octafish has been suggesting, that an entire network of secret spydom was operating under Hillary's Administration of the State Department, and Benghazi was supposedly part of that secret operation, than I am not sure why we shouldn't be discussing that tragedy.

And even if the "secret spy kingdom" is not verifiable, the fact remains that some of Ms Clinton's emails may have allowed hackers to determine that there was not very tight security at Benghazi. A situation which might have led to the Americans' deaths.

And finally, how is it so shameful to ask "RW questions" of a RW neo con like Ms Clinton?

A year-long FBI INVESTIGATION into clinton and her email server is not "right wing."

James Comey stating yesterday that Clinton's "security review" schtick is invalid and that this most certainly is an FBI investigation--isn't right wing either.

Democrats are concerned and trying to understand what is happening here. Our frontrunner could be indicted. Our election could be thrown into chaos.

Bernie doesn't benefit from this, because HRC would never release her delegates to Bernie.

Positioning this as a right-wing scandal is denial on your part. Who gives a flying fuck what the Republicans think? This is about serious issues that may affect the Democratic Party. If you ever want to come into the sunlight where the grown ups are, you're welcome to join the conversation.

Love your posts! The Clinton emails, private server, Foundation (and arms sales), etc have all the markings of the the early investigation into Watergate.

Our problem today in bringing forth the truth and depth of Clinton corruption (along with it's destruction of the d/Democratic Party) is much worse than the Nixon days because all the big money that shields her and buys silence, and because of the lack of a non-corporatized 4th estate with real investigative journalists.

But the truth will somehow out... eventually

It was very much partisan early on. And for deep partisans it colored their view for a lifetime. Persecution of a president, became a theme.

This is my recollection from studying it, and talking to a few people after the fact

then later it turned out to be true. And still partisan. But we got the turd out of the WH, to be replaced with a lesser turd.

they messed with the wrong Bush Familia

from Maine later Defense Sec - Cohen.

Clearly those 2 were impartial as I recall watching the Senate hearings and later the Impeachment hearings.

I think many GOP knew the country was watching and I only recal a handful who expressed faux outrage at a 'witchunt'

He played impartial in front of the cameras while behind the scenes he was coordinating with the Nixon White House on strategy.

But it is not because the Rs knew the country was watching. It is because the country overall was less partisan. I am on a phone. But the data on this is clear. We are now hyper partisan

While they got the majority of the fault. Dems are not free of guilt. It is an 80-20 kind of a thing.

We do not hear liberal radio (if there really is any these days) inciting people to racism, bigotry, violence, and perpetrating vile lies.

Where people hate Republicans because they are Republicans. There is literature in this. While it is not both sides do it, to the same extent, we have a rise in partisanship and enemy thinking among the Donkeys as well.

This is reflected in Congress. To a lesser extent in state houses and even in city councils.

What was different was that investigative journalism even by MSM was viable and went for the red meat.

The cover up orchestrated by Dean lead to Dean and several others being fired (and later jailed).

Dean told federal prosecutors about Nixon's white house tapes and the dam burst and in the public eye Watergate became much more than a political burglary.

Still the investigative journalists were key.

Nixon resigned when GOP Congressional leadership advised Nixon that the House would impeach and the Senate was convict.

Took about 18 (?) months from burglary to resignation.

Here is a piece of trivia. Those two were assigned to the city desk and assigned to courts. (Incidentally where I am right now, I promise, this case is hardly watergate) These days the WAPO, or any other major city daily, does not have the resources to assign a reporter to courts permanently. Nor the time to give them the space to do
that.

We have a few regional services who do. They have replaced papers, but all they do is beat reporting. An example is the City News Service

A few yrs back, there was an 8,000 acre fire raging a bit north of where I live.

I called a Sacramento TV station to ask them why they continuously covered 200 acre fires rather than sending up some reporters to cover a real story.

A few days later, they started having the Talking Heads to read reports issued by the Bureau of Land Management and the US Forest Service, as the 8,000 acre fire was on National lands. But apparently they lack the funds to send their copters and their news teams up to cover real stories.

And then we have Naomi Klein reporting that the lack of a decent and free media is one of the signs of Fascism.

we cover wild fires, and locally the only reason the big boys and girls actually cover the back country wild fires is... we scoop them regularly and I have to drive just as far. (We also happen to have a news vehicle that can hack it in those conditions, a jeep)

That said, even we little people need economic support to keep doing this.

But the other reason, shh... is that really some of the big boys and girls should NOT be on the fire line. They got no clue what they are doing. So the Fire Service has at times to keep everybody at the CP... and trust me with good safety wise reasons. But on a far bigger note, the news media is truly and really compromised. As to the choppers, news helicopters also need to be certified to share the space with fire fighting aircraft Here, they get that every year. But yes, our media...it is a sign of fascism.

Going to that court case. I took the time to look up the charges. I know exactly what this kid has been charged with. It is a locally hot case because if the county loses in superior court, it will cost them millions in civil court, federal. So they are even playing with fire with one of the charges. I understand why trying to say that pepper spray is lethal of force, can get tricky for cops. It is less than lethal. The DA is going there though. So while not watergate, this case could easily go all the way to the state supreme court.

My counterparts have no idea. I actually talked to the local UT reporter, and she does not get it why this case, might become precedent setting. Both the prosecution and the defense like our coverage, as small as we are, becuase we are presenting both sides, including the exchanges between the lawyers and the judge... and they both understand we have looked at this and read what he was he was charged with. These days it should be easier. I have a full legal library on the other side of the wire, on the google. Yup, the California Criminal Code is indexed fully online.

No fireworks today. I will be putting it up in a minute or so.

Glad you're there to cover it. Let us all know what is going on once it is resolved.

You rock, Lady. If only we had more truth tellers and people who understand the ramifications of all the in's and out's like you.

the links to the articles are at the bottom

https://reportingsandiego.com/2016/04/28/branch-bound-for-trial/

From there things sort of went downhill for Nixon because of newspaper reporting rather than from partisans pushing for hearings.

And the reporters were allowed to pursue the issue. These days I doubt there would have been reporters in the court for a bail hearing to be honest

Bezos, who clearly has no intention of disturbing the Powerful.

He is an expert manipulator who pulled off the transfer of the US Post office into the arms of Amazon.

The US Post Office is now simply part and parcel of the Amazon Shipping Department.

Amazon gets free US shipping and can have its packages delivered on Sundays or Holidays.

All of this was compliments of Bezos' lobbyists and the Democratic Majority in Congress, who helped Bezos achieve this in Spring of 2007.

Who pays for this? Small rate postal users, like the publishing company my household runs!

We are covering a somewhat high profile case. I was alone during the arraignment today.

organization backing you?

Very sad that today's "news media" is what it is.

that is our paper... the one that some here make fun off.

started out with the meme 'A third rate burglary'.......and maybe it was, except, one reporter attended the arraignment and wondered why things were happening* attorneys* who were present, and who was arraigned as well.

And then it was off to the races - it was long and arduous, but it was literally follow the money and know who all the players were.

Her server is giving off the same vibe.

Buckle up.

It is going to provide a lot of avenues for investigation.

Its was a way of minimizing the fact that any burglary in support of a political campaign is wrong and should disqualify the candidate. Ultimately, even republicans came to that conclusion.

Hillary set up a back channel information system to avoid FOIA and had a tenure where she mixed private foundation work with the purely public business of the country as SOS. Her claimed contention of "convenience" is somewhat of a joke. Setting up your own system as a pure amateur is not as convenient as allowing your IT department to give you what you want to the fullest extent while complying with record keeping and security requirements. Her desires were clearly related to shielding her communications from disclosure even though the FOIA makes such disclosure a requirement and is a policy and law that is favored and has been favored by democrats.

Her actions should disqualify her from being our standard bearer except for those who want to minimize Nixon's action to a third rate burglary or Hillary's to a rw attack on a minor mistake for convenience.

I said Hillary didn't set the server up for convenience; she had it installed to protect her communications from State Department eyes. She was running her own rogue State Department, including utilizing Sidney Blumenthal when she had been told from the beginning by Obama: no Blumenthal. So Blumenthal could not become a State Department employee, and he was subsequently employed by The Clinton Foundation. Additionally, Blumenthal did not have a classified security clearance, but his emails unquestionably revealed his discussions on classified matters and the possession of additional classified material.

Emails can be deleted but facts cannot.

Sam

using her own server, that she was getting around any sort of governmental scrutiny and then it turns out her server company has all her communications "up on their cloud," with none of them having been deleted!

So there is one other area where she lacked good judgement.

which may well foreshadow HRC 2016, just as so many other things have drawn comparison.
eerie.

If Hillary is so bad then why did she beat your candidate like a drum...Bernie can't even win a primary against this seriously flawed candidate. Obama managed it, and she was seen as inevitable then too...your candidate lost. Deal with that. Posting right wing crap will get you nowhere. We have heard it all before...the same place you get it...right wing hate sites.

First, in keeping with this OP, why did Nixon beat Humphrey "like a drum" in 1968? Did that make Nixon any less bad?

Second, you know perfectly well Hillary had it all stacked up for an easy primary win before Bernie even announced. She had it ALL: top donors, DLC backing, superpac, 33 states fully bought and sold, the MSM, and all the frightened Democrats lined up and ready.

Should have been a cakewalk.

Bernie had NOTHING, just truth and good character. And yet, as we speak, he has won so many primaries and delegates that your "shoe-in" candidate cannot close the deal!

And no, Hillary's problems are not the fault of rightwingers. They're her own fault.

Additionally, the first early states to vote where chosen for the perception they would all go for Hillary. Sanders at that time was a virtual unknown in that part of the Country. Most in the South had never heard his name or heard him speak. During that time frame, both Sanders and O'Malley were experiencing "The Big Ignore" from the MSM, which enhanced Hillary's odds. Those successive wins by Clinton allowed her to jump to an amazing early lead, after which she started staying she was inevitable.

Maybe someone should have told Hillary the only things inevitable are death and taxes.

Looking at the tools Bernie Sanders had on hand to compete with the Clinton machine, and looking at where he is now, it is clear what he has achieved is Herculean. The integrity, intelligence and the platform on which he stands has riveted the masses in a manner I personally have never before observed, and I have been watching for decades.

Sam

and oh so accurate response, senz!

Besides, she ain't won yet. And, with everything stacked in her favor, that speaks volumes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1926581

So much for your argument.

On the contrary, it establishes yet another parallel between Richard Nixon and Hillary Clinton.

Even though Nixon beat his opponent decisively, he was still a crook. Winning was no proof of his innocence.

how Nixon trounced McGovern.

And we are also aware that he was not able to stop the Watergate Affair from forcing him out of office.

In the wake of all that, Ford pardoned Nixon, which angered voters and set Carter up for a big win in 1976. Then the Church Committee hearings took place which tried to tighten up regulations over the secret government that the CIA was running.

Sadly it did turn out the the CIA and the secret government are not controllable entities.

McGovern won around 25% of the primary vote and still managed to weasel his way into the nomination...where he promptly lost. The supers were invented to prevent that from happening again. Watergate was not the big issue until after the election. And if Bernie managed to overturn the primary vote...he would lose just as badly. Cheaters never win and winners never cheat. Oh and I don't believe right wing crap...or follow conservative meme any Democrat ....for any reason

http://watergate.info/chronology/brief-timeline-of-events

After the debacle of the 1968 convention, the rules were rewritten to make delegate selection more democratic and inclusive. It was an inspiring thing to see. Instead of a hall filled with middle-aged white men, the 1972 Democratic Convention was remarkably diverse. Old people, young people, women, and people of color who had been grossly underrepresented in the past all took part in the process. For a change, it truly looked like America instead of a meeting of the Elks Club.

Unfortunately, the new rules alienated a lot of old-school politicians who were accustomed to automatically becoming delegates. As an act of petulant protest, they failed to mobilize on McGovern's behalf. That, along with a number of conspicuous missteps on the part of the campaign, such as selecting Eagleton without properly vetting him and letting the candidate deliver his acceptance speech at a time when most of the country had already gone to bed, pretty much doomed McGovern's bid for the White House.

Determined not to let that happen again, the Democratic Party rewrote the rules once again to accommodate an undemocratic upper echelon of elites called super delegates.

(I am writing this from memory, not by consulting some questionable reference, so any errors are the casualty of my own recollections.)

I don't frequent fox thus there is no parallel unless your beloved candidate is losing like Bernie...feel the Bern delusion.

Have you been taking bully lessons from Trump? Nobody on the Democratic side of the Democratic Party cares what he says, either! But keep trying - Hillary has taken tons of money from him, so we know what side of the aisle she really belongs with...

Even amidst today's news that the certification of Hillary's vote count there in Baltimore MD has to be de-certified, you come up with this as your thesis?

It has to do with votes that were not counted...and admin errors. There are primary results for loacal candidates that would be affected. This is the city...mostly Black votes...not many Bernie votes there. Hey, every election there are errors...when the election is close the GOP has stolen it...2000 and 2004 I fail to see how that means anything to Bernie or to you all except for it gives Bernie an excuse for his loss. You would think at 76 he would take some responsibility already.

It affects the local candidates unless you think Bernie can overcome a 63 to 33 loss in a diverse area? Feel the bern delusion.

School out already?

So? I am sick of the blackmailing. your candidate lost.

which SHOULD have gone the way of Watergate

But yup that explains it.

The GOP will impeach any Democrat if they can get away with it including Bernie. However, Hillary will serve two terms and be a great president. She won...that's that.

Let me show the dictionary KID

black·mail
ˈblakˌmāl/Submit
noun
1.
the action, treated as a criminal offense, of demanding money from a person in return for not revealing compromising or injurious information about that person.
"they were acquitted of charges of blackmail"
synonyms: extortion; More
verb
1.
demand money from (a person) in return for not revealing compromising or injurious information about that person.
"trying to blackmail him for $400,000"
synonyms: extort money from, threaten; informaldemand hush money from
"he was blackmailing the murderer"

Do point to me where exactly are you being blackmailed? WORD HAVE MEANING.

There were a few "I don't think that Nixon did anything wrong" but mostly people angry at being betrayed by him, and happy to see him leave.

Bear in mind, from the time that the DNC burglars were convicted and Nixon was reelected in a huge landslide until Nixon resigned was only 18 months.

Even if Clinton is elected, it's gonna be an unproductive 2017.

My In-Laws were staunch Nixon supporters and were simply besides themselves in DENIAL wrt to any WRONG DOING whatsoever,

Though they watched every minute of the hearings, yet still in denial that anything other than a partisanship witch hunt on the part of DP was at the heart of the matter.

Which of course was infact true.

Laws were broken, and they're broken by politicians holding high office all the time. It's just a question of how badly the opposition intends to make political hay out of, and how will it impact their own position and benefit.

But that's kinda the point here in so far as political contests and political legacy works. A lot of ethically, morally, and legally challenged baggage to play with for the opposition.

Another poster put it quite well, I forget the exact wording so paraphrasing:

'it's hard to save a party when it doesn't seem to want to save itself' .

Again, I'm astonished the party elite decided to throw their support behind a person that is deeply and closely connected to one of the most morally bankrupt individual in recent political history.

Astonishing.

again: 'it's hard to save a party when it doesn't seem to want to save itself'









.

the Savings and Loan gate.........

Oh that we would have an Senator with the integrity of Sam Ervin. Yes, HRC's campaign reminds me of the CREEP - rigged shadowy politics.

stand for.

What there was, however, was the secret oval office recordings which were disclosed by Alexander Butterfield. The transcripts from the recordings were heavily redacted and well as unexplained erasures. Nixon's secretary, Rosemary Woods was thrown under the bus on the erasures. The recordings confirmed John Dean's and other testimony before the committee.

I believe HRC's emails represent the recordings.

Quite frankly, I'm more appalled by the egregious rigging by the DNC / DWS in favor of HRC and sleazy funding raising of the Clinton Foundation.

The same is likely to be true for some of those the FBI is currently investigating.

hear the same.

Another liberal trashing my president, I can watch the liberal media...

Why do you think Fox came about? Similar thinking to yours on the part of Roger Ailes he has not come down from that point that it was the media that destroyed Nixon.

The parallels are actually astounding at certain points.

People were more easily shocked; we still held government in high regard, at least in the abstract. We took pride in our government. Most people took pride in the idea of America, not in the "USA USA USA" kickass sense, but because we thought America was noble and good (okay, not all of us thought that, but the vast heartland did).

The media was pre-Reagan, pre-Clinton, pre-cable, and of course pre-internet. Informationally, it was a different world. Walter Cronkite delivered the news in a straightforward professional manner; none of this MSNBC, FOX, CNN openly slanted, partisan, tabloid garbage. The news media seemed genuinely alarmed, in a grown-up way, by what was happening.

People took Watergate seriously. Republicans felt attacked and victimized as Republicans (and Hill fans) often do, but many Republicans were shocked. Even my brainwashed uber-capitalist Republican older brother expressed distaste for Nixon.

It seemed to me that those in control were deeply dismayed by what was happening at the top.

I don't see any of that anymore. We're cynical. We learned "greed is good, government is bad," we learned "everybody does it," we learned that those who do don't get rich are losers, and we're learning that the people of this country don't count for much. So when the top 10% is crooked as hell and we've got rich, shady characters running for president, we barely resist. (Well, some of us do, but we get laughed at for it).

Maybe eighteen months ago, I went through some old boxes in the garage, and they were from the early 1990's. The big topic at the time was "Did Bill or didn't Bill?" and "Will the First Lady of Arkansas stand by her man?"

The day I went through those boxes, I found the headlines almost laughable... Even in 1992, we hadn't yet been hoodwinked into two unwinnable wars, with the excuse of "USA USA" to set us against the people of Iraq in the Spring of 2003. (That nation had not done a single thing to us, except endure the dictator our CIA foisted on them.)

In 1992, we didn't yet have our landscape tainted with the earthquakes, foul water and disturbed and tainted soil of fracking policies. And it was easy to believe that the Two Parties were separate entities, and not One Big Money Party.

In 1992, we were somewhat concerned about Bill's infidelities and also with how Hillary styled her hair. And that was about it! Bankers were just people who gave us money for our mortgages, and Wall Street was just the place where people's retirement monies were managed.

How naive we all were.

So you can well understand how much more naive we were in 1968-1974 through the Nixon elections eventual depth of revelations about how that 3rd rate burglary at the DNC headquarters in the Watergate office complex. For those of us old enough to remember that time, it was true high drama that showed how corrupt those at the top can be. But we didn't lose our hope in the agent of good that government can be because we had a real fourth estate and true investigative journalists rather than stenographers, newsreaders, and corporate shill/pundits. We had a collective desire to get to the truth and hold people accountable... then

As far as "Reporting San Diego" -- that is all your reporting? Have you cloned yourself?

What a great effort to bring people information, left unfiltered by any need for celebrities or the "cute kitties on the internet tales."

It enriches this forum.

Sort of a consensus about what was good for our country and the average person. Lewis Powell manifesto started changing attitudes in 1971. And then of course Reagan came along...

and how it launched the corporate takeover of our government.

It was deliberate and intentional.

Therefore we can take it back for the people -- as the founders intended. Which is what Bernie is trying to do.

at that time the media was not as corporatized, profitized, celebrity focused, as the rather pathetic Media 2016 that informs US citizens.

The media at that time talked about massive military waste and fraud.
The media at that time reported on military atrocities being carried out in Vietnam.
The media reported on the protests at home.

Watergate, and the Pentagon Papers, could never have been covered in 2016 as they were at that time.

Not acquainted with any republics. However, there was no email, social media, none of that. We didn't even have a tv. We read the newspaper and laughed every day.

Nixon was re-selected that November.

Tricky was tossed out in August 1974. Six weeks later, all the lawyers had a sad as Jerry the Magic Bulleter Ford pardoned said unindicted co-conspirator.



The Game went on, though, Poppy Bush managed to be out of loop and the Oval Room when Mr. Butterfield clobbered Mr. Dick with the tape recorder.

do you know who was a Washington insider back then that should know a whole lot about Watergate?

staff during the Watergate scandal. Lessons learned?

that history is not well known

It's what's for lunch.

Do your research.

Clinton's supporters dismiss it a a right wing/left wing conspiracy.

As entertaining as this OP might be...it's complete fiction, wishful thinking, or paid spin.

No matter which, it will all be over soon.