New Clinton email controversy

[Pat Mustard]

[Alex K]

Maybe...probably.  But Bill was still a good president. I'm tired of smear jobs and sex scandals on all sides. I'm not trying to minimize sexual harassment or abuse. I just think they are parallel issues to governance. I haven't seen any evidence that a leader's sexual integrity has impeded their ability to govern.

I think if you're a leader and you're representing something greater than yourself, you have to be held to certain standards. Not only did Bill cheat on his wife, but he lied about it to the American people, and was also accused of sexual assault. 

It's like in the Air Force. If one of the pilots (or whoever) cheats on their wife, their career is pretty much over. It's considered illegal. "Conduct unbecoming of an officer" and all that. If our military members can't do it, there's no reason why our president should get a pass, IMHO.

To me the the rule for your air force officers seems grossly outdated as it is. I don't see the point of extending it to even more people.

[A Theist]

[Catholic_Lady]

I think if you're a leader and you're representing something greater than yourself, you have to be held to certain standards. Not only did Bill cheat on his wife, but he lied about it to the American people, and was also accused of sexual assault. 

It's like in the Air Force. If one of the pilots (or whoever) cheats on their wife, their career is pretty much over. It's considered illegal. "Conduct unbecoming of an officer" and all that. If our military members can't do it, there's no reason why our president should get a pass, IMHO.

To me the the rule for your air force officers seems grossly outdated as it is. I don't see the point of extending it to even more people.

I like it personally because it promotes the importance of good family life and gives off the idea that we want people with integrity for this sort of job.... since it is the sort of job that requires possibly having to kill ppl, etc.

[abaris]

I like it personally because it promotes the importance of good family life and gives off the idea that we want people with integrity for this sort of job.... since it is the sort of job that requires possibly having to kill ppl, etc.

Yet you know it's an archaic rule. We had similar ones in our late empire. It's all about keeping up appearances instead of real values. (Obviously I don't mean your personal situation but the rule in general) Integrity at the job got nothing to do with cheating or not cheating. It's got everything to do with doing your job properly with your private life being a private matter.

Our officers were expected to take the consequences when losing at the cards table, meaning that they had to shoot themselves or face dishonorable discharge if they couldn't pay their debts. If they promised marriage and didn't go through on their promise, dishonorable discharge was also on the table. In Germany this led to one of the most infamous careers of all time. Reinhard Heydrich fell victim to that rule and went for the SS after being sacked by the navy.

It's keeping up appearances in a field that really doesn't concern the job, since it's got nothing to do with it. Cheating on your wife or husband doesn't mean you're cheating at the job. There's lots and lots of marriages breaking apart without the ones being at fault being faulty at their jobs.

[Aractus]

[Pat Mustard]

[Aractus]

And it looks like what I was saying about Comey's decision regarding the emails is true. Turns out he was unwilling to release concrete information that Russia is interfering in the election on behalf of Trump "for fear of influencing the election".

(emphasis added)

Even if Russia is behind the leaked hacked emails, it would be for their own agenda not because they're acting "on behalf of Trump"!

I suspect the FBI has evidence that Russia hacked the email server. But they may not have been the same hackers who released them to Wikileaks.

[abaris]

So we now know that Comey is willing to demonise Clinton on the flimsiest of grounds, yet unwilling to tell the truth about Trump. Is that enough to bring him up on charges of treason?

As I said before, I think it's probable that Russia's behind the leaked emails, but I don't think that Trump's got anything to do with it. They're using Assange as a tool, but it's not Trump doing it. It's someone in Russia thinking that a Trump presidency would be more adventageous than a Clinton presidency.

I don't share the outrage in any case, since it's intelligence business as usual and America has done it's fair share of that in the past and is probably still doing it. Dirty business for sure, but everyone's doing it to move their chess pieces where they want them to be.

[Aractus]

As I said before, I think it's probable that Russia's behind the leaked emails, but I don't think that Trump's got anything to do with it.

See, we can agree on stuff!

They're using Assange as a tool, but it's not Trump doing it. It's someone in Russia thinking that a Trump presidency would be more adventageous than a Clinton presidency.

Again, I really doubt Russia would trust Assange. Yes he has a great record for the past ten years that he keeps going on about - but there are other Journalists connected to the mainstream media who have records stretching back 30-40 years of having never leaked a source, and they would get the emails published in far more prominent media. Furthermore Wikileaks only has around 5 or 6 people in total working on this, the mainstream media can mobilise a much larger task-force as was done for the Panama papers, allowing them to publish everything much faster. So if Russia wanted to have the biggest possible impact on the US election then they should have leaked them to mainstream media.