Understanding the United States of America (USA) - III

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 01 Nov 2016 03:55

ramana wrote:
Raja Bose wrote:
A VC supporting HRC? They are the most staunch capitalist republicans in the PRC. I really doubt any startup or VC is idiot enough to let politics get between the business of making money. Killary supporters among FB employees who wanted to censor Trumpanzee posts on FB....those chimpanzees are a different bunch of monkeys.

Maybe you might rebut NPR Steve Inskeep instead of ?

He was on NPR today AM.

VCs primarily reside in Woodside followed by Hillsborough and Atherton and if Mr Inskeep knew what he was talking about he would know that those are the 3 most heavily republican towns in PRC's Bay Area. Those rich VCs like to keep the gobermint's grubby hands off their riches.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 01 Nov 2016 04:23

Spread
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 47 Trump +4
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 46, Trump 45, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +1
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 49, Trump 47 Clinton +2
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 45, Trump 44, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +1
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 45, Trump 43 Clinton +2
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Rasmussen Reports Clinton 45, Trump 42, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Clinton +3
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC News/SM Clinton 47, Trump 41, Johnson 6, Stein 3 Clinton +6
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton NBC News/SM Clinton 51, Trump 44 Clinton +7
Pennsylvania: Trump vs. Clinton Remington Research (R)* Clinton 45, Trump 43 Clinton +2
Pennsylvania: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Gravis Clinton 47, Trump 44, Johnson 3, Stein 2 Clinton +3
North Carolina: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Remington Research (R) Clinton 45, Trump 47, Johnson 2 Trump +2
Georgia: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson WXIA-TV/SurveyUSA Trump 49, Clinton 42, Johnson 3 Trump +7
Colorado: Trump vs. Clinton Remington Research (R)* Clinton 45, Trump 44 Clinton +1
[/b
]New Hampshire: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein WMUR/UNH Clinton 46, Trump 39, Johnson 6, Stein 1 Clinton +7
Nevada: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson Remington Research (R) Clinton 44, Trump 48, Johnson 4 Trump +4

Jeff Gauvin
‏@JeffersonObama

PollyVote election models currently forecasts a national major-party vote share of 53.9% for Clinton and 46.1% for Trump.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ele ... ry-twitter

About 15 percent of the electorate isn’t yet committed to Clinton or Trump, as compared to just 5 percent who weren’t committed to President Obama or Mitt Romney at this point in 2012. That’s one of the reasons why our models still give Trump an outside chance at victory.

These undecideds, however, aren’t distributed evenly across the various states. Florida and North Carolina have relatively few of them, for example, while New Hampshire and Colorado have more.

STATE CLINTON TRUMP 3RD PARTY OR UNDECIDED
Florida 46.2% 42.8% 10.9%
North Carolina 45.3 42.7 11.9
Georgia 42.6 45.2 12.2
Pennsylvania 46.8 40.0 13.2
Nevada 44.8 41.8 13.4
Ohio 43.5 42.7 13.7
Missouri 40.2 45.3 14.5
Texas 40.2 45.3 14.5
Virginia 46.5 38.1 15.3
Arizona 42.1 42.0 15.9
Wisconsin 45.8 38.3 15.9
Indiana 38.4 45.3 16.3
New Hampshire 45.8 37.4 16.8
Minnesota 45.1 38.0 16.9
Iowa 41.3 41.7 17.0
Colorado 44.6 38.1 17.2
Michigan 45.1 36.9 18.0
Maine 44.9 36.6 18.5
New Mexico 43.7 33.3 23.0
Alaska 35.4 40.4 24.2
Utah 25.4 31.4 43.2

Nate Silver ‏@NateSilver538 7h7 hours ago
Either polls are having trouble capturing a random sample, or voter preferences are quite volatile. Either way, lots of uncertainty.

Nate Silver ‏@NateSilver538 7h7 hours ago
Esoteric hot take: If polling swings are exaggerated by non-response bias, that suggests a significant risk of systemic polling error.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 04:31

NRao wrote:
BRF HiC bhakts itne khamosh kyon hai?
That is an easy one.

Everything is going according to plan. As I have said, a damaged or compromised HRC is the best option.

But, this is not a done deal yet. The duck could make a come back. Unfortunately for him some 21+ million have already voted.

The 21 million are the hard core supporters on both sides. Evidence is anecdotal which they went despite MSM pronouncements.

Trumpanzee orange could say something about some nasty person and put this in play. As I said, he has adult ADHD, but we love him anyway.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 01 Nov 2016 04:31

Wow! That's predicting a wipeout. The FreeBiscuits better seek asylum in ~~Sweden~~ or Ecuador.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 01 Nov 2016 04:49

So there is a huge chance for upset by Trumpazee or blowout for Shrillary. Either way, we are in for an exciting finish like Super Bowl 49 when my PATS edged out Seattle.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 01 Nov 2016 04:50

more than the email stuff wonder if the Donna B's (and earlier Wasserman) support for Hillary cause Bernie supporters to abstain or change vote...

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 01 Nov 2016 05:08

Most SuperBorewls end in the first 5 minutes....

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 01 Nov 2016 05:12

UlanBatori wrote:Most SuperBorewls end in the first 5 minutes....

not my PATS. They won or lost every SB in last 1 min

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 01 Nov 2016 05:35

Clinton Noose Nutwerks begins to row away and put distance from the Titanic?

Donna Brazile ... resigned from her role as a CNN contributor earlier this month. Her departure was announced Monday amid fresh revelations that she sent questions to Hillary Clinton's campaign in advance of a CNN debate and a CNN-TV One town hall. In a statement, CNN said it was "completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the Clinton campaign while she was a CNN contributor." CNN said it "never gave Brazile access to any questions, prep material, attendee list, background information or meetings in advance of a town hall or debate... The Brazile email foreshadowed a question asked by TV One host Roland Martin at the town hall. Earlier this month, when asked by CNNMoney about the email, Martin did not deny sharing information with Brazile. Then on Monday, Wikileaks released more emails indicating that Brazile sent a question to the Clinton campaign, then wrote: "I'll send a few more."

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Nov 2016 05:37

Mathematician Peter Woit at Columbia University:
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=8864

To those planning on voting for Donald Trump:

Please don’t. I see two main arguments for doing this and I think they’re both misguided.

* You agree with Trump more than Clinton on important policy issues. Whatever policy issue you have in mind, I think if you look into it you’ll find that whatever Trump says now, at some other point he was saying something different. There’s little evidence Trump has fixed views on any policy issue (other than the desirability of better tax treatment for real estate development projects). If you think Trump will, for instance, appoint Supreme Court justices that share your moral values, note that he has reportedly told Peter Thiel that he would like to appoint him to the Court. Thiel is a gay, radical libertarian Silicon Valley billionaire from San Francisco with highly eccentric views. I doubt you share his moral values (since virtually no one else does, right, left or center).

* You’re angry at well-off coastal elites who you feel look down on you and your culture, and you want to spit in their face by voting for Trump. If so, you are quite right to feel the way you do. From a lifetime spent among such elites I can tell you that, yes, they do look down on you. Most people here in New York City probably do think you’re an ignorant racist. Your problem though is that Donald Trump is one of us. He’s a well-off New Yorker through and through, looks down on you every bit as much as others. If elected he will govern in the interest of his tribe, not yours. If you think otherwise, you’ve been conned. All you will accomplish by a vote for Trump is to convince people in New York, Washington D.C. and California that you really are even more ignorant than they thought, a racist fool taken in by an obvious con.

From talking to various people I realized that one reason some Democrats and those on the left don’t see the “top secret email” business as being as absurd as I do is that they have no idea what these emails were. For that story, see this from the Wall Street Journal and this from the Washington Post.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Nov 2016 05:37

Here is what I have (via some web site):

SOLID DEMOCRATIC: California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington state (213 total electoral votes).

LEANS DEMOCRATIC: Colorado, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin (65 total electoral votes).

TOSS-UP: Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Maine 2nd District, Nebraska 2nd District, North Carolina, Ohio, Utah (87 total electoral votes).

LEANS REPUBLICAN: Alaska, Georgia, Missouri, Texas (67 total electoral votes).

SOLID REPUBLICAN: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming (106 total electoral votes).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Nov 2016 05:55

And, I say, its about time ........................

This professor devotes her life to countering dangerous speech. She can’t ignore Donald Trump’s.

When Susan Benesch began looking at how speech could incite mass violence, her research took her to far-flung places like Kenya and Burma.

Lately, she’s been unable to ignore a case study at home in the United States.

No Philippines?

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 06:09

NRaoji,

These were some of the same arguments the pseudo seculars used against Modi. The best argument for voting against Trumpanzee orange is that the stock market will tank. Before I vote next weekend, I will move my money to treasuries - then vote for the orange orangutan. Who will go on to be the best president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 06:10

Radical Islam enabler and radical Islam insider.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 01 Nov 2016 06:11

Clinton presidency will be a disaster for India

Clinton presidency will be a disaster for India

By Arvind Kumar | New York | 30 October, 2016

presidential election, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Clinton Foundation, Barack Obama, Robin Raphel, Donald Trump
In this file photo, Hillary Clinton is seen speaking with classical dancers after they performed Bharatanatyam at the Kalakshetra cultural centre in Chennai in 20 July, 2011. Photo: REUTERS
Hillary, during her tenure as the Secretary of State, picked up where Bill Clinton and his Cabinet members had left off and did not waste any time in pursuing anti-India activities.

Every four years, during the presidential election process in the United States, a question invariably comes up, "Which candidate is better for India?"
This question is best answered if one realises that American politics has been a massive stage-managed show based on an illusion of choice, with the illusion mesmerising an entire population into believing that they choose their political leaders and vote on issues that are dear to them. In reality, the Republican Party and Democratic Party work together behind the scenes and act in tandem on important issues. Voters are asked to make the choice between these two parties only on issues that do not matter to those in power. Even in these cases, the voters are manipulated into voting along racial and religious lines so that there is an appearance of the two parties having an equal share of the vote and competing against each other. Occasionally, when it appears that a candidate who is not part of the system could win an election, those in power are not beyond using illegal means to keep out such people from succeeding.

The share of American voters, who have seen through this game, has grown in recent years, and the support for Donald Trump in the Republican Party and Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party during the 2016 primaries was the direct result of an increase in the number of voters who have gained an understanding of the system. Even though it is possible that neither candidate is actually against the existing setup, there is no denial that the support for them is from people who are opposed to the system. Among the candidates representing the two dominant parties who have made it past the primaries, Donald Trump is perceived as the candidate who is against the corrupt establishment, while Hillary Clinton is seen as part of the establishment and as the most corrupt candidate to run for President in the history of the country.

The fact that the Clintons have used politics to make hundreds of millions of dollars and have funnelled vast sums of money from around the world to the Clinton Foundation, has only strengthened the belief that they are extremely corrupt people who sell influence in exchange for money and power. The most famous case related to the Clinton Foundation is their effort to raise money ostensibly to help the victims of the 2010 Haiti earthquake. However, the money was not used to help the victims, but for other purposes including investments in insurance businesses and luxury hotels. Bill and Hillary Clinton, as the UN Representative and the US Secretary of State, respectively, also controlled the flow of money from other sources into Haiti, and the contracts to rebuild the country in the aftermath of the earthquake were given either to friends and relatives like Hillary Clinton's brother or to firms that donated money to the Clinton Foundation. It is little wonder that the moniker "Crooked Hillary" has stuck to Hillary Clinton and even her official campaign has not made any efforts to counter it. Instead, they have admitted in emails that Hillary Clinton suffers from problems related to trustworthiness among the people.

Republican Hindu Coalition chairman Shalli Kumar (2nd R) helps Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump light a ceremonial lamp before he speaks at a Bollywood-themed charity concert put on by the Republican Hindu Coalition in Edison, New Jersey, US on 15 October. REUTERS

Republican Hindu Coalition chairman Shalli Kumar (2nd R) helps Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump light a ceremonial lamp before he speaks at a Bollywood-themed charity concert put on by the Republican Hindu Coalition in Edison, New Jersey, US on 15 October. REUTERS

A Hillary Clinton win in the election would bring back the hostility of the 1990s towards India that existed under the presidency of Bill Clinton. India's relationship with the US took a sudden downturn after Bill Clinton took office in 1993. For nearly a year, Clinton did not bother appointing an ambassador to India even as he went about opposing India on a number of fronts, leading to resentment in the Indian establishment. He first set about the task of disarming and weakening India by preventing access to technology and simultaneously mounted a sustained attack on the Indian economy by imposing several economic sanctions.

In 1991, Senator Joe Biden, who is now the Vice President under Barack Obama, introduced an amendment in the bill granting aid to Russia, making the aid conditional on the fact that Russia could not sell cryogenic engines for India's space programme. The Clinton administration persisted in taking measures intended to retard the development of India's space and technology sectors and blocked the sale of Cray supercomputers that had been approved under the Ronald Reagan administration. This was done even as the Clinton administration allowed the sale of these supercomputers to China. India was also targeted for several economic sanctions and was threatened under what was called the Super 301 clause of the American trade law.

The Clinton administration specially targeted the Indian textile and carpet industries for destruction. Throughout the 1990s, the terms "Dunkel Draft", "Super 301", "WTO" and "patent laws" became synonyms for the US attempting to destroy the Indian economy and led to many protests in India. In one famous episode, the Clinton administration declared Indian skirts to be flammable and banned them after an official ignited a skirt in front of television cameras.

On the security front too, the Clinton administration was consistently anti-India and pro-Pakistan. Members of the Clinton Cabinet supported terrorists in India, with Clinton's Vice President Al Gore using the term "Khalistan" to describe Punjab. Bill Clinton's close friend Robin Raphel was made the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, and under her, the US State Department pursued an agenda that supported violent anti-India groups in Jammu and Kashmir, while offering F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan. The State Department also propped up the Taliban regime in Afghanistan during this period.

More recently, when Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State, Robin Raphel was appointed to oversee a $7.5 billion aid package to Pakistan, but ended up being investigated by the FBI for spying on behalf of Pakistan and lost her security clearance. The charges against her were dropped only after Hillary Clinton herself ended up being investigated by FBI for using a private email server for classified emails. Had Robin Raphel been prosecuted, it would have been impossible for the FBI to justify dropping the charges against Hillary Clinton.

By 1996, India was justified in believing that Indo-US relations had hit the lowest point, but things took a dramatic turn for the worse during Bill Clinton's second term in office. Warren Christopher was replaced by Madeleine Albright as the Secretary of State and she made no efforts to hide her hostility towards India and her weekly outbursts on television even bordered on racism. Even after leaving office, Albright continued her attacks on India and called for a plebiscite in Kashmir, thus justifying the actions of violent groups. Albright's cynical action of bombing Yugoslavia and then getting her investment firm to attempt a takeover of mines in that country is an example of the abuse of power by people close to the Clintons. Albright also justified the deaths of half a million Iraqi children and claimed that the deaths were "worth it". Recently, Albright threatened women in America and claimed that there was a special place in hell reserved for them if they did not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as the Secretary of State, picked up where Bill Clinton and his Cabinet members had left off and did not waste any time in pursuing anti-India activities. Within weeks of Hillary Clinton assuming office, Teesta Setalvad, an activist involved in framing Narendra Modi using false charges, was paid a handsome donation by Vikram Chatwal, whose father Sant Chatwal was at one time a trustee of the Clinton Foundation. Emails leaked by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks show that Sant Chatwal also had a role in the infamous cash-for-votes scam in which money was paid to purchase votes in the Lok Sabha. Other emails leaked by WikiLeaks show that the US government intended to fund Teesta Setalvad's NGO and use her claims in the so-called human rights reports that could be used against India and Hindus.

Given Hillary Clinton's background, these actions are not unexpected. Investigative reporter Jeff Sharlet has exposed the fact that Hillary Clinton is part of a secretive group in Washington DC variously known as the Fellowship, the Family, or the C Street House. This group is known to use religion to further their geopolitical agenda around the world and evangelical Christians are their main tool when it comes to interfering in other countries. The separation of East Timor from Indonesia using religious persecution as the excuse was one of their achievements under Bill Clinton, and when Atal Behari Vajpayee became the Prime Minister of India for a few days in 1996, Bill Clinton acted at the behest of this group and set up an advisory committee that would supposedly deal with religious freedom around the world.

Curiously, this committee had members from every faith except Hinduism, and it recommended the creation of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a government agency that has used, since its inception, fictitious claims to attack Hindus and India. It was the USCIRF that was responsible for demonising Narendra Modi using false charges and recommending that he not be permitted to enter the US. According to emails leaked by WikiLeaks, Preeta Bansal, the USCIRF commissioner, who was the main person responsible for this action, has also pressured Vietnam into accepting proselytism by American missionaries and is close to people in the Hillary Clinton campaign.

It is not just the past record, but the future too portends a disastrous era for Indo-US relations should Hillary Clinton end up becoming the President of the United States. There is already talk of Joe Biden being tapped by Hillary Clinton for the position of the Secretary of State. Biden would definitely pursue his agenda of thwarting the development of India's space programme and other technological advancements. Even more worrisome is the fact that Hillary Clinton's closest confidante is Huma Abedin who is of Pakistani descent and whose family has links to radical Islamist elements in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Abedin could end up playing an important role in determining American foreign policy.

Another point against Hillary Clinton is that the war hawk Henry Kissinger has come out in support of her and has praised her stint as Secretary of State. Kissinger's hostility towards India is no state secret, as many of his racist, anti-India statements have been recorded on tape.

It is in the light of this background that many Indian-Americans have opposed the candidacy of Hillary Clinton and have come out in support of Donald Trump. In contrast to the policies of the Clintons, Trump has promised to make India the best friend of the US and has stated that he looks forward to working with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Trump has also reached out to Hindus in US. While there is always a risk of the unknown and it is not clear if Trump can succeed in cleaning up the system even if he intends to do so, a Hillary presidency will certainly be an unmitigated disaster for India.

Despite these facts, some Indian-Americans support Hillary Clinton, but their support is not based on sound analysis but on flawed information fed to them by the media. Most such supporters are highly qualified when it comes to educational degrees, but fall under the category of what is known in American parlance as "low information voters". Most educated Indian-Americans typically demonstrate very little interest in politics and have almost never been part of even informal political discussions. America has made many things accessible to most people and politics is no exception. Usually, the process of making things accessible to a large number of people has involved dumbing down the system and controlling the behaviour of people.

Just as education has been dumbed down in US in order to make it easy for everyone to be part of the school system, politics too has been dumbed down and simplified so that even the most ignorant voter can have a sense of making a choice and being politically empowered. The educated class among Indian-Americans are especially suited to this model as they have no inclination towards politics but have been conditioned to refer to books as the source of their knowledge. They have thus internalised the idea of treating the printed word and assertions they hear from "authoritative sources" as the ultimate truth. They are told through television channels and newspapers that politics consists of exactly two groups, with one group consisting of heroes and the other group consisting of villains, a simplification that they readily embrace. They even use labels like "progressive", "liberal" and "conservative" to describe themselves, even though they do not really comprehend the meaning of these terms and do not realise that these labels are handed out by politicians. In contrast, many supporters of Donald Trump discuss political issues and seem aware of the situation.

In order for India to build a constructive relationship with US, it requires people in both countries to have good intentions. It is clear that India cannot have a good relationship with the US if Hillary Clinton is at the helm of affairs. On the other hand, Donald Trump has articulated the right intent and his tenure holds promise for India.

Arvind Kumar is a political analyst based in the US

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 06:21

A_Gupta wrote:Mathematician Peter Woit at Columbia University:
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=8864
<snip>

Guptaji,

This is the problem with mathematicians as they always like to talk about the general case, but not the specific case. "The mathematician only deals with the structure of the reasoning and do not care about what they're talking..." What you want to do is solve the specific case on hand, and then solve for the general case. In this instance we can discount Peter Woit's opinions.

See what my herrow Richard Feynman said about mathematicians.

Dinesh S · Post by **Dinesh S** » 01 Nov 2016 06:39

chetak wrote:Clinton presidency will be a disaster for India

Clinton presidency will be a disaster for India

By Arvind Kumar | New York | 30 October, 2016

presidential election, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Clinton Foundation, Barack Obama, Robin Raphel, Donald Trump
In this file photo, Hillary Clinton is seen speaking with classical dancers after they performed Bharatanatyam at the Kalakshetra cultural centre in Chennai in 20 July, 2011. Photo: REUTERS
Hillary, during her tenure as the Secretary of State, picked up where Bill Clinton and his Cabinet members had left off and did not waste any time in pursuing anti-India activities.

Every four years, during the presidential election process in the United States, a question invariably comes up, "Which candidate is better for India?"
This question is best answered if one realises that American politics has been a massive stage-managed show based on an illusion of choice, with the illusion mesmerising an entire population into believing that they choose their political leaders and vote on issues that are dear to them. In reality, the Republican Party and Democratic Party work together behind the scenes and act in tandem on important issues. Voters are asked to make the choice between these two parties only on issues that do not matter to those in power. Even in these cases, the voters are manipulated into voting along racial and religious lines so that there is an appearance of the two parties having an equal share of the vote and competing against each other. Occasionally, when it appears that a candidate who is not part of the system could win an election, those in power are not beyond using illegal means to keep out such people from succeeding.

The share of American voters, who have seen through this game, has grown in recent years, and the support for Donald Trump in the Republican Party and Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party during the 2016 primaries was the direct result of an increase in the number of voters who have gained an understanding of the system. Even though it is possible that neither candidate is actually against the existing setup, there is no denial that the support for them is from people who are opposed to the system. Among the candidates representing the two dominant parties who have made it past the primaries, Donald Trump is perceived as the candidate who is against the corrupt establishment, while Hillary Clinton is seen as part of the establishment and as the most corrupt candidate to run for President in the history of the country.

The fact that the Clintons have used politics to make hundreds of millions of dollars and have funnelled vast sums of money from around the world to the Clinton Foundation, has only strengthened the belief that they are extremely corrupt people who sell influence in exchange for money and power. The most famous case related to the Clinton Foundation is their effort to raise money ostensibly to help the victims of the 2010 Haiti earthquake. However, the money was not used to help the victims, but for other purposes including investments in insurance businesses and luxury hotels. Bill and Hillary Clinton, as the UN Representative and the US Secretary of State, respectively, also controlled the flow of money from other sources into Haiti, and the contracts to rebuild the country in the aftermath of the earthquake were given either to friends and relatives like Hillary Clinton's brother or to firms that donated money to the Clinton Foundation. It is little wonder that the moniker "Crooked Hillary" has stuck to Hillary Clinton and even her official campaign has not made any efforts to counter it. Instead, they have admitted in emails that Hillary Clinton suffers from problems related to trustworthiness among the people.

Republican Hindu Coalition chairman Shalli Kumar (2nd R) helps Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump light a ceremonial lamp before he speaks at a Bollywood-themed charity concert put on by the Republican Hindu Coalition in Edison, New Jersey, US on 15 October. REUTERS

Republican Hindu Coalition chairman Shalli Kumar (2nd R) helps Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump light a ceremonial lamp before he speaks at a Bollywood-themed charity concert put on by the Republican Hindu Coalition in Edison, New Jersey, US on 15 October. REUTERS

A Hillary Clinton win in the election would bring back the hostility of the 1990s towards India that existed under the presidency of Bill Clinton. India's relationship with the US took a sudden downturn after Bill Clinton took office in 1993. For nearly a year, Clinton did not bother appointing an ambassador to India even as he went about opposing India on a number of fronts, leading to resentment in the Indian establishment. He first set about the task of disarming and weakening India by preventing access to technology and simultaneously mounted a sustained attack on the Indian economy by imposing several economic sanctions.

In 1991, Senator Joe Biden, who is now the Vice President under Barack Obama, introduced an amendment in the bill granting aid to Russia, making the aid conditional on the fact that Russia could not sell cryogenic engines for India's space programme. The Clinton administration persisted in taking measures intended to retard the development of India's space and technology sectors and blocked the sale of Cray supercomputers that had been approved under the Ronald Reagan administration. This was done even as the Clinton administration allowed the sale of these supercomputers to China. India was also targeted for several economic sanctions and was threatened under what was called the Super 301 clause of the American trade law.

The Clinton administration specially targeted the Indian textile and carpet industries for destruction. Throughout the 1990s, the terms "Dunkel Draft", "Super 301", "WTO" and "patent laws" became synonyms for the US attempting to destroy the Indian economy and led to many protests in India. In one famous episode, the Clinton administration declared Indian skirts to be flammable and banned them after an official ignited a skirt in front of television cameras.

On the security front too, the Clinton administration was consistently anti-India and pro-Pakistan. Members of the Clinton Cabinet supported terrorists in India, with Clinton's Vice President Al Gore using the term "Khalistan" to describe Punjab. Bill Clinton's close friend Robin Raphel was made the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, and under her, the US State Department pursued an agenda that supported violent anti-India groups in Jammu and Kashmir, while offering F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan. The State Department also propped up the Taliban regime in Afghanistan during this period.

More recently, when Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State, Robin Raphel was appointed to oversee a $7.5 billion aid package to Pakistan, but ended up being investigated by the FBI for spying on behalf of Pakistan and lost her security clearance. The charges against her were dropped only after Hillary Clinton herself ended up being investigated by FBI for using a private email server for classified emails. Had Robin Raphel been prosecuted, it would have been impossible for the FBI to justify dropping the charges against Hillary Clinton.

By 1996, India was justified in believing that Indo-US relations had hit the lowest point, but things took a dramatic turn for the worse during Bill Clinton's second term in office. Warren Christopher was replaced by Madeleine Albright as the Secretary of State and she made no efforts to hide her hostility towards India and her weekly outbursts on television even bordered on racism. Even after leaving office, Albright continued her attacks on India and called for a plebiscite in Kashmir, thus justifying the actions of violent groups. Albright's cynical action of bombing Yugoslavia and then getting her investment firm to attempt a takeover of mines in that country is an example of the abuse of power by people close to the Clintons. Albright also justified the deaths of half a million Iraqi children and claimed that the deaths were "worth it". Recently, Albright threatened women in America and claimed that there was a special place in hell reserved for them if they did not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as the Secretary of State, picked up where Bill Clinton and his Cabinet members had left off and did not waste any time in pursuing anti-India activities. Within weeks of Hillary Clinton assuming office, Teesta Setalvad, an activist involved in framing Narendra Modi using false charges, was paid a handsome donation by Vikram Chatwal, whose father Sant Chatwal was at one time a trustee of the Clinton Foundation. Emails leaked by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks show that Sant Chatwal also had a role in the infamous cash-for-votes scam in which money was paid to purchase votes in the Lok Sabha. Other emails leaked by WikiLeaks show that the US government intended to fund Teesta Setalvad's NGO and use her claims in the so-called human rights reports that could be used against India and Hindus.

Given Hillary Clinton's background, these actions are not unexpected. Investigative reporter Jeff Sharlet has exposed the fact that Hillary Clinton is part of a secretive group in Washington DC variously known as the Fellowship, the Family, or the C Street House. This group is known to use religion to further their geopolitical agenda around the world and evangelical Christians are their main tool when it comes to interfering in other countries. The separation of East Timor from Indonesia using religious persecution as the excuse was one of their achievements under Bill Clinton, and when Atal Behari Vajpayee became the Prime Minister of India for a few days in 1996, Bill Clinton acted at the behest of this group and set up an advisory committee that would supposedly deal with religious freedom around the world.

Curiously, this committee had members from every faith except Hinduism, and it recommended the creation of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a government agency that has used, since its inception, fictitious claims to attack Hindus and India. It was the USCIRF that was responsible for demonising Narendra Modi using false charges and recommending that he not be permitted to enter the US. According to emails leaked by WikiLeaks, Preeta Bansal, the USCIRF commissioner, who was the main person responsible for this action, has also pressured Vietnam into accepting proselytism by American missionaries and is close to people in the Hillary Clinton campaign.

It is not just the past record, but the future too portends a disastrous era for Indo-US relations should Hillary Clinton end up becoming the President of the United States. There is already talk of Joe Biden being tapped by Hillary Clinton for the position of the Secretary of State. Biden would definitely pursue his agenda of thwarting the development of India's space programme and other technological advancements. Even more worrisome is the fact that Hillary Clinton's closest confidante is Huma Abedin who is of Pakistani descent and whose family has links to radical Islamist elements in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Abedin could end up playing an important role in determining American foreign policy.

Another point against Hillary Clinton is that the war hawk Henry Kissinger has come out in support of her and has praised her stint as Secretary of State. Kissinger's hostility towards India is no state secret, as many of his racist, anti-India statements have been recorded on tape.

It is in the light of this background that many Indian-Americans have opposed the candidacy of Hillary Clinton and have come out in support of Donald Trump. In contrast to the policies of the Clintons, Trump has promised to make India the best friend of the US and has stated that he looks forward to working with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Trump has also reached out to Hindus in US. While there is always a risk of the unknown and it is not clear if Trump can succeed in cleaning up the system even if he intends to do so, a Hillary presidency will certainly be an unmitigated disaster for India.

Despite these facts, some Indian-Americans support Hillary Clinton, but their support is not based on sound analysis but on flawed information fed to them by the media. Most such supporters are highly qualified when it comes to educational degrees, but fall under the category of what is known in American parlance as "low information voters". Most educated Indian-Americans typically demonstrate very little interest in politics and have almost never been part of even informal political discussions. America has made many things accessible to most people and politics is no exception. Usually, the process of making things accessible to a large number of people has involved dumbing down the system and controlling the behaviour of people.

Just as education has been dumbed down in US in order to make it easy for everyone to be part of the school system, politics too has been dumbed down and simplified so that even the most ignorant voter can have a sense of making a choice and being politically empowered. The educated class among Indian-Americans are especially suited to this model as they have no inclination towards politics but have been conditioned to refer to books as the source of their knowledge. They have thus internalised the idea of treating the printed word and assertions they hear from "authoritative sources" as the ultimate truth. They are told through television channels and newspapers that politics consists of exactly two groups, with one group consisting of heroes and the other group consisting of villains, a simplification that they readily embrace. They even use labels like "progressive", "liberal" and "conservative" to describe themselves, even though they do not really comprehend the meaning of these terms and do not realise that these labels are handed out by politicians. In contrast, many supporters of Donald Trump discuss political issues and seem aware of the situation.

In order for India to build a constructive relationship with US, it requires people in both countries to have good intentions. It is clear that India cannot have a good relationship with the US if Hillary Clinton is at the helm of affairs. On the other hand, Donald Trump has articulated the right intent and his tenure holds promise for India.

Arvind Kumar is a political analyst based in the US

Meh. Most Indian Americans will still vote in the soulless ghoul because they are a minority.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 01 Nov 2016 06:40

Good grief! They show Feinman and Dubya next to each other. Great minds travel in pairs, I suppose. For all his greatness, Feinman never did manage to become POTUS unlike Dubya.

Dinesh S · Post by **Dinesh S** » 01 Nov 2016 06:45

Btw, i don't know why this hasn't been discussed before. USA has a rape rate 20 times that of india. This is despite their better income, judiciary, police etc compared to india . So as responsible human beings , shouldn't indians there take some measure to reign in this barbarous culture? Seriously, don't you guys have the moral conviction to save the white women from the barbarous rapist whites in USA? think how much whites love to save indian naxals and other terrorists from human rights abuses by the indian government and people because of their moral convictions(they show in Guantanamo bay)?

Why don't you indians have the same moral conviction and save the white women from being raped by these barbarous rape pasand white men there? Find your humanity folks. Seriously.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 01 Nov 2016 06:45

SwarajyaMag:

1. New FBI Enquiry Takes Us Back Into The Sketchy Past Of Clinton, Her Top Aide And The Foundation

2. Crown Of Thorns: Why Both Trump And Clinton, If Elected, Will Have Troubled Presidencies

3. Now Five FBI Field Offices Are Probing Clinton Charity, Adding Fuel To The Fire

4. Jihad Meets The Crusades: This Is The New Global Nexus, And US Is Inseparable From It

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Nov 2016 06:46

MWji,

That vid is cheating. He had just landed after a few nights out in Las Vegas. With that many drinks anyone can say such things.

Keep us infoed about the Treasury stuff. I mean, just in case you chicken out and don't tell us simple folks, we would be stuck.

{On serious(er) note: Please check out a book, if you have not come across it: "Quantum" by Manjit Kumar}

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 01 Nov 2016 06:47

xxxxx

I thought it is Arvind Kumar of CAPEEM fame. Organizer of the PA Trump rally among other things.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 01 Nov 2016 06:57

Trump Took Lead Before FBI Announcement- By Dick Morris on October 30, 2016

History will undoubtedly say that the Comey announcement that the FBI is reopening its investigation into Hillary’s emails that turned the 2016 race around and brought Hillary down. But that’s a false narrative. And to grasp what is happening, we must put it aside and concentrate on the real reasons Trump began to overtook Hillary in the week leading up to Comey’s announcement on Friday, October 28th.Polling suggests that Trump’s gains predate Comey’s announcement. Most dramatic was the heavily Democratic biased ABC poll that began the week giving Hillary a 12 point lead and ended the week with Mrs. Clinton clinging to a one point margin. Most ABC interviews were conducted well before Comey spoke.So what happened?

• Trump’s negative ads began to hit in swing states. Until this week, Hillary’s attacks on Donald had been dominating the airwaves for months. But, during the past ten days or so, his negative ads — devastatingly effective — began to make their impact felt.
• ObamaCare premiums increases began to hit. While the full impact of the price hikes won’t be felt until after November 1st — in time for the election — the early notices that they would go up by an average of 25% with many even higher, had a big impact on the race. And Trump moved adroitly to exploit the increases in his speeches.
• Before the Comey bombshell, the drip-drip-drip of WikiLeaks emails had been taking a daily toll on Hillary’s vote share. The coup de grace was the memo from Doug Band that was written in response to Chelsea’s accusation that she had not done enough for her father. Stung by the first daughter’s charges, Band ticks off the deals that led to a $60 million personal profit for Bill Clinton, a list that vindicates the direst of the pay-for-play accusations.
• Hillary’s illness prevented her from campaigning more vigorously and her campaign staff, obtuse as ever, failed to give her new issues and material to use on hitting Donald. Once they ran out of abused women to complain about Trump, they had nothing to say.

Ulterior motive of Author : Plug his new book on HILLARY !

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 06:58

NRao wrote:MWji,

That vid is cheating. He had just landed after a few nights out in Las Vegas. With that many drinks anyone can say such things.

Keep us infoed about the Treasury stuff. I mean, just in case you chicken out and don't tell us simple folks, we would be stuck.

{On serious(er) note: Please check out a book, if you have not come across it: "Quantum" by Manjit Kumar}

Thank for the info the book. ~~Will definitely check it out.~~ Just ordered it on my Kindle.
Well, RPF had a high tolerance for liquor and even then he's much smarter and correct than most even in an inebriated state.

Aiyoo...I'm not a millionaire, just trying to protect my savings and 401K. By Thursday it should be clear about HiC's fate, then start moving things into a more secure position.

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 01 Nov 2016 07:09

Ex-FBI Official Calls Clintons a 'Crime Family' – Reports

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — James Kallstrom, a former assistant to FBI director, also criticized Attorney General Loretta Lynch for hindering the investigation into Clinton’s private email use, saying that "this investigation was never a real investigation". "The Clintons, that’s a crime family, basically … It’s like organized crime. I mean the Clinton Foundation is a cesspool," Kallstrom was quoted as saying by the Hill newspaper.

Clinton has been criticized for using the private server and email account for official business during her tenure as the United States' top diplomat.U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton arrives to boards her campaign plane at Miami international airport in Miami, Florida, U.S., October 26, 2016 © REUTERS/ Carlos Barria Can't Touch This: FBI Lacks Search Warrant to Review Clinton’s Emails On Friday, FBI Director James Comey informed the US Congress that the FBI discovered new emails sent from Clinton's private server during the course of an unrelated investigation. Comey said investigators would review the new emails to determine if they contain classified information.

Clinton has been criticized for the use of a private email server and account for official business during her 2009-2013 tenure as secretary of state. In July, Comey described Clinton’s conduct as extremely careless but said it did not warrant criminal charges.After the initial FBI probe, Comey in September described Clinton’s use of a nongovernment email system for official business while the top US diplomat as "extremely careless," but he recommended against filing criminal charges against her. In 2014, Clinton released more than 55,000 emails from the private server to State Department investigators, claiming the documents contained only work-related information. She has admitted to erasing 33,000 emails.

DUCK TEST:
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks as a duck, then it probably is a duck or a .....

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Nov 2016 07:21

Mort Walker wrote:Radical Islam enabler and radical Islam insider.

Shame on you for leaving Donna Brazile out.

A Caucasian Methodist, a hybrid Indo-Pak Muslim and African American. And, all females. Can never beat that combo.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 07:49

^^^But Donna never broke any laws. The Clinton News Network (CNN) was already in the tank and they needed to ditch Donna before their credibility goes further down the latrine.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Nov 2016 08:16

Oh, so, there is a law eh?

Glad to hear that. I was scared the 2nd amendment deplorables would have descended on us all. With exceptions of course.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Nov 2016 08:27

Serious stuff!!!!

FBI in Internal Feud Over Hillary Clinton Probe

The surprise disclosure that agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation are taking a new look at Hillary Clinton’s email use lays bare, just days before the election, tensions inside the bureau and the Justice Department over how to investigate the Democratic presidential nominee.

Investigators found 650,000 emails on a laptop that they believe was used by former Rep. Anthony Weiner and his estranged wife Huma Abedin, a close Clinton aide, and underlying metadata suggests thousands of those messages could have been sent to or from the private server that Mrs. Clinton used while she was secretary of state, according to people familiar with the matter.

It will take weeks, at a minimum, to determine whether those messages are work-related from the time Ms. Abedin served with Mrs. Clinton at the State Department; how many are duplicates of emails already reviewed by the FBI; and whether they include either classified information or important new evidence in the Clinton email probe.

Officials had to await a court order to begin reviewing the emails—which they received over the weekend, according to a person familiar with the matter—because they were uncovered in an unrelated probe of Mr. Weiner.

The new investigative effort, disclosed by FBI Director James Comey on Friday, shows a bureau at times in sharp internal disagreement over matters related to the Clintons, and how to handle those matters fairly and carefully in the middle of a national election campaign. Even as the probe of Mrs. Clinton’s email use wound down in July, internal disagreements within the bureau and the Justice Department surrounding the Clintons’ family philanthropy heated up, according to people familiar with the matter.

The latest development began in early October when New York-based FBI officials notified Andrew McCabe, the bureau’s second-in-command, that while investigating Mr. Weiner for possibly sending sexually charged messages to a teenage minor, they had recovered a laptop. Many of the 650,000 emails on the computer, they said, were from the accounts of Ms. Abedin, according to people familiar with the matter.

Those emails stretched back years, these people said, and were on a laptop that hadn’t previously come up in the Clinton email probe. Ms. Abedin said in late August that the couple were separating.

The FBI had searched the computer while looking for child *****, people familiar with the matter said, but the warrant they used didn’t give them authority to search for matters related to Mrs. Clinton’s email arrangement at the State Department. Mr. Weiner has denied sending explicit or indecent messages to the minor.

In their initial review of the laptop, the metadata showed many messages, apparently in the thousands, that were either sent to or from the private email server at Mrs. Clinton’s home that had been the focus of so much investigative effort for the FBI. Senior FBI officials decided to let the Weiner investigators proceed with a closer examination of the metadata on the computer, and report back to them.

At a meeting early last week of senior Justice Department and FBI officials, a member of the department’s senior national-security staff asked for an update on the Weiner laptop, the people familiar with the matter said. At that point, officials realized that no one had acted to obtain a warrant, these people said.

Mr. McCabe then instructed the email investigators to talk to the Weiner investigators and see whether the laptop’s contents could be relevant to the Clinton email probe, these people said. After the investigators spoke, the agents agreed it was potentially relevant.

Mr. Comey was given an update, decided to go forward with the case and notified Congress on Friday, with explosive results. Senior Justice Department officials had warned the FBI that telling Congress would violate policies against overt actions that could affect an election, and some within the FBI have been unhappy at Mr. Comey’s repeated public statements on the probe, going back to his press conference on the subject in July.

The back-and-forth reflects how the bureau is probing several matters related, directly or indirectly, to Mrs. Clinton and her inner circle.

New details show that senior law-enforcement officials repeatedly voiced skepticism of the strength of the evidence in a bureau investigation of the Clinton Foundation, sought to condense what was at times a sprawling cross-country effort, and, according to some people familiar with the matter, told agents to limit their pursuit of the case. The probe of the foundation began more than a year ago to determine whether financial crimes or influence peddling occurred related to the charity.

Some investigators grew frustrated, viewing FBI leadership as uninterested in probing the charity, these people said. Others involved disagreed sharply, defending FBI bosses and saying Mr. McCabe in particular was caught between an increasingly acrimonious fight for control between the Justice Department and FBI agents pursuing the Clinton Foundation case.

It isn’t unusual for field agents to favor a more aggressive approach than supervisors and prosecutors think is merited. But the internal debates about the Clinton Foundation show the high stakes when such disagreements occur surrounding someone who is running for president.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Mr. McCabe’s wife, Jill McCabe, received $467,500 in campaign funds in late 2015 from the political-action committee of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a longtime ally of the Clintons and, until he was elected governor in November 2013, a Clinton Foundation board member.

Mr. McAuliffe had supported Dr. McCabe in the hopes she and a handful of other Democrats might help win a majority in the state Senate. Dr. McCabe lost her race last November, and Democrats failed to win their majority.

A spokesman for the governor has said that “any insinuation that his support was tied to anything other than his desire to elect candidates who would help pass his agenda is ridiculous.”

Dr. McCabe told the Journal, “Once I decided to run, my husband had no formal role in my campaign other than to be” supportive.

In February of this year, Mr. McCabe ascended from the No. 3 position at the FBI to the deputy director post. When he assumed that role, officials say, he started overseeing the probe into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server for government work when she was secretary of state.

FBI officials have said Mr. McCabe had no role in the Clinton email probe until he became deputy director, and by then his wife’s campaign was over.
Guess the 2016 Electoral College Map

But other Clinton-related investigations were under way within the FBI, and they have been the subject of internal debate for months, according to people familiar with the matter.

Early this year, four FBI field offices—New York, Los Angeles, Washington and Little Rock, Ark.—were collecting information about the Clinton Foundation to see if there was evidence of financial crimes or influence-peddling, according to people familiar with the matter.

Los Angeles agents had picked up information about the Clinton Foundation from an unrelated public-corruption case and had issued some subpoenas for bank records related to the foundation, these people said.

The Washington field office was probing financial relationships involving Mr. McAuliffe before he became a Clinton Foundation board member, these people said. Mr. McAuliffe has denied any wrongdoing, and his lawyer has said the probe is focused on whether he failed to register as an agent of a foreign entity.

Clinton Foundation officials have long denied any wrongdoing, saying it is a well-run charity that has done immense good. {Good! For whom? }

The FBI field office in New York had done the most work on the Clinton Foundation case and received help from the FBI field office in Little Rock, the people familiar with the matter said.

In February, FBI officials made a presentation to the Justice Department, according to these people. By all accounts, the meeting didn’t go well.

Some said that is because the FBI didn’t present compelling evidence to justify more aggressive pursuit of the Clinton Foundation, and that the career anticorruption prosecutors in the room simply believed it wasn’t a very strong case. Others said that from the start, the Justice Department officials were stern, icy and dismissive of the case.

“That was one of the weirdest meetings I’ve ever been to,” one participant told others afterward, according to people familiar with the matter.

Anticorruption prosecutors at the Justice Department told the FBI at the meeting they wouldn’t authorize more aggressive investigative techniques, such as subpoenas, formal witness interviews, or grand-jury activity. But the FBI officials believed they were well within their authority to pursue the leads and methods already under way, these people said.

About a week after Mr. Comey’s July announcement that he was recommending against any prosecution in the Clinton email case, the FBI sought to refocus the Clinton Foundation probe, with Mr. McCabe deciding the FBI’s New York office would take the lead, with assistance from Little Rock.

The Washington field office, FBI officials decided, would focus on a separate matter involving Mr. McAuliffe. Mr. McCabe had decided earlier in the spring that he would continue to recuse himself from that probe, given the governor’s contributions to his wife’s former political campaign.

Within the FBI, the decision was viewed with skepticism by some, who felt the probe would be stronger if the foundation and McAuliffe matters were combined. Others, particularly Justice Department anticorruption prosecutors, felt that both probes were weak, based largely on publicly available information, and had found little that would merit expanded investigative authority.

According to a person familiar with the probes, on Aug. 12, a senior Justice Department official called Mr. McCabe to voice his displeasure at finding that New York FBI agents were still openly pursuing the Clinton Foundation probe during the election season. Mr. McCabe said agents still had the authority to pursue the issue as long as they didn’t use overt methods requiring Justice Department approvals.

The Justice Department official was “very pissed off,” according to one person close to Mr. McCabe, and pressed him to explain why the FBI was still chasing a matter the department considered dormant. Others said the Justice Department was simply trying to make sure FBI agents were following longstanding policy not to make overt investigative moves that could be seen as trying to influence an election. Those rules discourage investigators from making any such moves before a primary or general election, and, at a minimum, checking with anticorruption prosecutors before doing so.

“Are you telling me that I need to shut down a validly predicated investigation?” Mr. McCabe asked, according to people familiar with the conversation. After a pause, the official replied, “Of course not,” these people said.

For Mr. McCabe’s defenders, the exchange showed how he was stuck between an FBI office eager to pour more resources into a case and Justice Department prosecutors who didn’t think much of the case, one person said. Those people said that following the call, Mr. McCabe reiterated past instructions to FBI agents that they were to keep pursuing the work within the authority they had.

Others further down the FBI chain of command, however, said agents were given a much starker instruction on the case: “Stand down.” When agents questioned why they weren’t allowed to take more aggressive steps, they said they were told the order had come from the deputy director—Mr. McCabe.

Others familiar with the matter deny Mr. McCabe or any other senior FBI official gave such a stand-down instruction.

For agents who already felt uneasy about FBI leadership’s handling of the Clinton Foundation case, the moment only deepened their concerns, these people said. For those who felt the probe hadn’t yet found significant evidence of criminal conduct, the leadership’s approach was the right response.

In September, agents on the foundation case asked to see the emails contained on nongovernment laptops that had been searched as part of the Clinton email case, but that request was rejected by prosecutors at the Eastern District of New York, in Brooklyn. Those emails were given to the FBI based on grants of partial immunity and limited-use agreements, meaning agents could only use them for the purpose of investigating possible mishandling of classified information.

Some FBI agents were dissatisfied with that answer, and asked for permission to make a similar request to federal prosecutors in Manhattan, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. McCabe, these people said, told them no and added that they couldn’t “go prosecutor-shopping.”

Not long after that discussion, FBI agents informed the bureau’s leaders about the Weiner laptop, prompting Mr. Comey’s disclosure to Congress and setting off the furor that promises to consume the final days of a tumultuous campaign.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Nov 2016 08:35

The New York Times reports:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/po ... p-tax.html

Donald J. Trump avoided reporting hundreds of millions in taxable income with a tactic so legally dubious that his lawyers said an I.R.S. audit would most likely find it improper.

Tax experts who reviewed documents for The Times said Mr. Trump trampled a core tax policy tenet by receiving tax benefits for losing vast amounts of other people’s money.

habal · Post by **habal** » 01 Nov 2016 12:18

USA is ready for elections:

all voting machines AOK.
all machines have pre-determined input and output. USA leads the world in electronic voting.
no humans also needed to complete this exercise.
master computer divides votes in fractions and gives fractional victories.
fully automatic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fob-AGgZn44

habal · Post by **habal** » 01 Nov 2016 12:25

Hillary discusses rigging elections in leaked audio

all elections in US including DA, Gov, el presidente, Senator are rigged as per the vid on fractional rigging.

USA has taken electronic voting to whole another level.

habal · Post by **habal** » 01 Nov 2016 13:31

watch after 13:50 to see how ALL US elections are rigged real time

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 01 Nov 2016 13:56

Why don't you indians have the same moral conviction and save the white women from being raped by these barbarous rape pasand white men there? Find your humanity folks.

why? because they wanna rape them also.

and the memsabs know it too, buddy.

so when you sit near the memsabs on an airplane speak only english and and don't be doing strange stuff like reading an iee journal. or look at her nasty little pet dog like you're hungry or something. especially don't do math in reverse polish notation in front of her. very scary........

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 01 Nov 2016 15:18

http://nypost.com/2016/10/28/weiner-rev ... ary-probe/

On page 3 of their 11-page report, the agents detail how they showed Abedin a classified paper on Pakistan sent from a State Department source which she, in turn, inexplicably forwarded to her personal Yahoo email account — an obviously unclassified, unencrypted, unsecured and unauthorized system. The breach of security was not an isolated event but a common practice with Abedin.

“She routinely forwarded emails from her state.gov account to either her clintonemail.com or her yahoo.com account,” the agents wrote. Why? “So she could print them” at home and not at her State Department office.

Abedin contended that she “would typically print the documents without reading them” and “was unaware of the classification.” Uh-huh.

The FBI also pointed out that “the only person at DoS (Department of State) to receive an email account on the (clintonemail.com) domain was Abedin.”

“Multiple State employees” told the FBI that they considered emailing Abedin “the equivalent of e-mailing Clinton.” Another close Clinton aide told the FBI that “Abedin may have kept emails that Clinton did not.”

However, another witness told agents that he and another Clinton aide with computer skills built the new server system “at the recommendation of Huma Abedin,” who first broached the idea of an off-the-grid email server as early as the “fall (of) 2008.”

But Abedin’s role in this caper begs for fresh scrutiny. Making false statements to a federal agent is a felony. So is mishandling classified information.

By forwarding classified emails to her personal email account and printing them out at home, Abedin appears to have violated a Classified Information NonDisclosure Agreement she signed at the State Department on Jan. 30, 2009, in which she agreed to keep all classified material under the control of the US government.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Nov 2016 16:49

Atrios at Eschaton blog:
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2016/10/which-********.html

Presumably after the election we'll have to update our lists about who our "approved ********" are and who our "unapproved ********" are. We support the former in their efforts to kill the latter, because of our deep commitment to humanitarian concerns. I still don't know if Assad is our ally or if mentioning his name without spitting is a treasonous offense. Maybe this election will finally bring us closure on this issue! It must get confusing when the people we're arming are being killed by weapons given to the last people we armed, but the world is deeply complicated in ways that only the Mustache of Understanding can explain, after consulting with his cab driver.

For those of you who like to see subtle or not so subtle anti-Clinton messages in everything I write, this is an evergreen comment about the state of the Foreign Policy Community (otherwise known as the Very Serious People).

Falijee · Post by **Falijee** » 01 Nov 2016 20:27

Huma Abedin holed up at her NYC home after FBI reopens Clinton probe

Even worse for her situation, Abedin swore under oath while testifying in a lawsuit brought against the State Department by Judicial Watch that she had handed over all of her devices that could hold emails relevant to the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server. she’s found to have lied she could face up to five years in jail.

She could be seen inside her Gramercy Park apartment in loungewear as she spent time with her mother and sister.

( So, this staunch Pakistani -born Islami mother ( most probably a US citizen !) is in Massaland from Saudi -Barbaria to console her westernized but Islami daughter in her "job crisis" .)

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 01 Nov 2016 20:46

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 01 Nov 2016 21:04

A_Gupta wrote:The New York Times reports:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/po ... p-tax.html

Guptaji,

Bania admi will try to avoid taxes. No big deal. The orange orangutan is paying lots of property taxes, city and state taxes to keep schools and municipalities in operation.

The Ghaadhacratic party chamchas are now trying to throw all sorts of lies and propaganda after Clinton didi is in trouble for obstruction of justice.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 01 Nov 2016 21:09

I despair at some of the logic being thrown around on this dhaaga... mein gott in himmell!