From a NY Post article about the forthcoming book by former Secret Service officer Gary J. Byrne, "Crisis of Character: A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience With Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate."
The title of the Post article is "Lewinsky allegedly freaked out after Clinton’s affair with VP’s daughter," and from that, you can see that there's more in the article than just that bit about Hillary's supposed fascination with guns. The VP's daughter wasn't the daughter of Clinton's own VP, but Eleanor Mondale, the daughter of Jimmy Carter's VP, Walter. There's a description of Monica arriving at the White House to see the President and getting told (with incredible disrespect): "You have to wait. He’s with his other piece of a–. Wait till he’s finished." Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?
Irate, Lewinsky responded with an unseemly gesture, toward her body, “What’s he want with her when he has this?”"Unseemly gesture"?! What unseemly gesture? "Toward her body"? Toward what part of her body? I can't believe I'm left trying to picture this, but it seems that Lewinsky was humiliated by men who were judging her, making it about her body, and she had the presence of mind not to crumple but to use humor. I wouldn't call that freaking out, not unless you give me better info about the unseemly gesture and the body part.
पोस्ट्स
१२२ टिप्पण्या:
Let us hear from the SS of all presidents and their wives and other candidates and compare notes. We need to know everyone's shxt to evaluate how bad this stuff in this book is.
Call me when Laslo weighs in.
Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?
They don't. But corruption befouls everything it touches.
Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?
Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have to cover for a Presidents sexual addictions?
You dedicate yourself to protecting the President, to the point of having to take a bullet for him, but then you end up just protecting his penis.
It's probably a bit frustrating.
"Let us hear from the SS of all presidents and their wives and other candidates and compare notes. We need to know everyone's shxt to evaluate how bad this stuff in this book is."
That's assuming that the people who find this "interesting" are interested in something other than Clinton bashing.
The book by Reagan's former SS agent, "Riding With Reagan" shows what it supposed to look like. The SS was corrupted by the people they spent 24/7 with. It will take decades to get back to normal, if ever.
This is Daily Mail stuff, and the quotes may well have been jazzed up a bit.
But the story about Monica Lewinsky throwing a hizzy fit at the gate upon being told the President was with another woman, is an old one, and so is the story about Hillary! crowning Billy Jeff with a table lamp.
Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?
Because Clinton let them, and perhaps because he rewarded them when the agents picked-up on the president's wandering eye.
I watch a member of Clinton's detail try to lure Don Henley's female backup singers to go to his hotel, after Clinton (sitting next to Ted Kennedy) made no bones about making clear to everyone his interest in them on stage rather than Henley.
And maybe because the agents believed there were "left-overs" and "sloppy seconds" to be had?
None of the Secret Service scandals since then surprised me. I just wonder to what degree Clinton was the one who put all that in motion.
The Clintons have extremely poor judgment in public and private matters. For Hillary, just look at the Midfle East; her biggest failure at State. I make this assertion as one of fact rather than opinion. We have seen objectively bad results due to decisions made by the both of them which we would not see with people of good judgment.
Hillary should not be president.
His account is probably exaggerated and maybe even mendacious in places, but the Clintons were such personages as to lend credibility to the tales.........Don't secret service agents have to sign some kind of non disclosure agreement? Maybe the book sales will be worth more than his pension.
I find it interesting that anyone believes this stuff.
"I find it interesting that anyone believes this stuff."
I suspect you know it is true and won't admit it.
All right, I admit it, I know nothing about guns, never held or fired a real gun in my life.
So what is a "one-way range," anyway? Is there actually such a thing as a two-way range???
"Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that? "
They're the President's protective detail. How they speak to the President's mistress is up to the President.
I don't think it's hard to imagine the thread of the conversation.
SS: “The president is still with another appointment,”
Ms: I have an appointment to see the President! I am a personal friend of President Clinton, how dare you keep me waiting here" blah blah blah
He lashed back He lashed back, meaning the lashing started with Lewinsky
SS: You have to wait. He's with his other piece of ass.
Translation: Your implied claim of special status isn't as special as you think. Your status is derived from your servicing the President sexually, which doesn't outrank the woman servicing the President right at this very moment.
I suspect that career SEcret SErvice on the top-of-the-career-ladder White House Presidential detail, accustomed to courtesy and respect from Senators and Cabinet members and senior military and donors and foreign dignitaries didn't take kindly to getting do-you-know-who-I-am attitude from a twenty-something cum-dumpster.
I feel bad calling LEwinsky that, but it's the literal truth of her position in the Clinton White House, a position that she was using to get access to POTUS.
Lots of interesting contradictions here.
If Lewinsky pointed to her breasts, she should have said "these" and not "this". If instead she point to her crotch, that would flatly contradict Bill Clinton's assertion that it wasn't more than blowjobs and 'gars.
Lefties hate guns but love love love shooting them.
Anyways, I'm amused by someone's attempt to portray Clinton II as a gun-savvy, gun-totin' patriot.
How does Bill Clinton's behavior differ from the Kennedys?
"Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have to cover for a Presidents sexual addictions?"
Because they are supposed to be dedicated to protecting him and nothing else. It is absolutely none of their business to have opinions about the President's choice of activities other than what relates to security. Presidents meet with whomever they choose and have the sex they decide to have. It's unprofessional to display judgment about the sex the President is having.
"I suspect you know it is true and won't admit it."
Anything negative written or said about them just automatically becomes "true" in the minds of some people. That's what's most interesting.
Friendship with "benefits". So, this is why they resumed abortion rites. The dysfunctional revolution created mass collateral damage inside and outside of Planned Parenthood offices and clinics.
Anyway, it's hardcore pornography with a focus on function over form. It is second only to reactive and planned parenthood in its pursuit of debasing human life for profits, pleasure, and leverage.
This sounds like it came right out of a series that appeared in National Review during the Clinton years: "Letters from Al". In each letter, to his friend Rusty who lived in the Brazilian rain forest, Al would recount the latest goings-on in the White House. In one letter, a fight is happening between Hillary and Bill, the first lady is throwing dishes, lamps, etc at the President and a secret service agent tells the VP, it would actually be legal for us to shoot her right now...
Ann Althouse...
Presidents meet with whomever they choose and have the sex they decide to have. It's unprofessional to display judgment about the sex the President is having.
Unless the president puts them in the position of active solicitors/screeners as well as traffic cop.
Basic agency theory.
The "letters" were later collected into a book, which one could order via the Althouse portal into Amazon:
Letters from Al: From National Review
Don't worry, pm317. Nobody who is going to vote for Hillary now will have their minds changed by stories like this.
"Presidents meet with whomever they choose and have the sex they decide to have. It's unprofessional to display judgment about the sex the President is having."
Much of this must have begun in the Kennedy Administration. However, Grover Cleveland secretly had cancer surgery while president and that involved some secrecy by his staff but I don't know how much the Secret Service was involved in those days.
I think Roosevelt had some assistance with his affair with Lucy Mercer who was with him when he died.
The Kennedy's probably lowered the bar considerably and the Clinton's did away with it.
"It's unprofessional to display judgment about the sex the President is having." Tongue-in-cheek-trolling, right? I know off-campus sex by Progs is all good, and we are supposed to be nonjudgmental and everything, but even professionals might feel a professional duty to report or prevent sexual harassment of an intern, and even professionals devoted to Slick Willy's security might want to prevent an assault on, say, Kathleen Willey, if they could, and some professionals might even wonder whether certain bimbos are not as innocent as they appear and therefore pose a risk to national security.
Because they are supposed to be dedicated to protecting him and nothing else.
Oblige me by citing your source for that interesting take on professional ethics.
Well, professional standards are often not adhered to in any profession. Given the actual account here, it appears that Lewinsky is the one who actually started the spat in the first place. It is human to want to slap that down verbally, especially since it is 100% certain the officer involved knew precisely why she was there in the first place.
"One-way" vs. "two-way" gun range. Wow, what a concept.
I've only been to a few ranges, all of which were definitely one-way in the sense that the shooters were "here" and the targets were "there" and there was no funny business about switching them around. The bullet trajectories were always supposed to go from "here" to "there". (The range staffs were all annoying strict about that for some reason. Bunch'a fascists...)
Is "one-way" a gun range term of art? Bueller?
Remember that this is the sensible stable candidate who can be trusted with her finger on the Button.
Why on earth would Americans want this trashy corrupt vile family back in the White House?
Because they are supposed to be dedicated to protecting him and nothing else.
Suppose the a Secret Service agent knows the President is selling national security secrets to a foreign power, does his ethics trump the national interest? Suppose President Donald Trump is about to launch a nuclear war, that he's about to press The Button. Marine guards have been dispatched to stop him, are the Secret Service agent obliged to shoot them in defense of the President?
"One-way" vs. "two-way" gun range. Wow, what a concept.
Combat ranges have multiple shooting directions.
So what is a "one-way range," anyway? Is there actually such a thing as a two-way range???
Not much in the way of return clientele in that business model.
In 1996, blacks did not "believe" O.J. Simpson killed two people. They denied what was obvious for political reasons.
By 2016 a considerable majority admit what they knew 20 years before.
In 1999, Democrats did not "believe" Clinton was a horny nerd who got elected governor and then president who then set about satisfying his sexual desires. They denied what was obvious for political reasons.
In 2016, Democrats are still "forced" to "believe" things about the Clinton's that everybody knows are lies.
Perhaps in another 20 years we can be done with this bull shit.
Two way gun range.
Actually, Clinton made it ok for all politicians er most ...
Sanford didn't resign.
Vitter didn't resign.
Ensign was forced to resign.
Indeed, since 1990 the Reps may have overtook the Dems re: infidelity. Congrats!
And Anthony Weiner didn't actually cheat, but hey, perverts have to resign asap.
And of course Republican evangelicals believe in personal redemption ie to forgive is a virue for the party of family values.
Politics, gotta love it!
The SS guy made that statement up. Only the very gullible, gulls, would believe that.
"It's unprofessional to display judgment about the sex the President is having."
How about a critique?
"Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?"
They don't have to. But eventually they are disgusted by having to cover up for the rascals. They can't talk that way to the President, so they take it out on the least likely to cause them trouble.
The covering up comes with the job. Don't want to assist in presidential exploitation of women? Then don't be a Secret Service officer.
That's the rule. It probably also influences what kind of people they get, and what gender they get as well.
The judgment the SS agent passed was not on the sex President Clinton was having, or even on with whom he was having it. It was on the ridiculously entitled behavior of a woman who had, in fact, reduced herself to a piece of ass. The agent was merely relaying a fact: "You are not the only piece of ass President Clinton is nailing, and you have the misfortune of arriving as he is nailing one of the others. So get in line, sister."
And yes, just about the time I start to feel some sympathy for Monica Lewinsky, I read something that reveals that, no, she was not a shrinking violet victim; she was an aggressive stalker with delusions of grandeur.
A non-one-way gun range
I wonder if Al Gore saw the headline this morning and said "Huh?"
shiloh:
Do you expect anybody to believe Anthony Weiner did not cheat?
Pull the other one...
And yes, just about the time I start to feel some sympathy for Monica Lewinsky, I read something that reveals that, no, she was not a shrinking violet victim; she was an aggressive stalker with delusions of grandeur.
When it comes to sex (rape isn't really sex, right?) it takes two to besmirch the dignity of the office.
...it seems that Lewinsky was humiliated by men who were judging her, making it about her body, and she had the presence of mind not to crumple but to use humor.
It could seem that way, if one is disposed to think in those terms. It's just as plausible to conclude the Secret Service agents were disgusted by what their ethics had obliged them to tolerate and keep secret.
Smiling, she fired her next shots 'right into the target’s crotch"
I doubt that al the next shots were in the crotch.
The Thompson is notoriously difficult to control under any circumstance. ant tends to walk up toward the moon very quickly.
And yes, that is personal experience with both the Thompson (Vietnam) and the M3A1 (70's).
Paco Wové said...
-------------
Just looking for fairness and ridiculing the absurdity of it all. Do I wish Clintons were better people in their personal lives, you bet I do but all this stuff is not going to amount to a hill of beans.
My more immediate worry is who the hell is styling Hillary. She looks awful and unserious.
Hard to tell Birkel, since he was a pervert foremost. Carter lusted in his heart. Weiner lusted on the internet. Clinton lusted everywhere.
Different strokes for different folks! Pun intended.
Studies in America are all over the place, but percentages have to go up if you're a male politician. Especially if you're a sexually repressed family value Republican.
Again, human nature as regards to political power.
>
FWIW, presidential historians came out w/a "report" in the '70s saying only two presidents didn't cheat ~ Truman and Ford.
Hard to tell, my ass, shiloh.
Meanwhile, you say "everybody does it, but those guys are worse" and "those guys" are your perceived political opponents. How convenient.
Now, quit with the stupid bull shit.
pm317:
How nice of you to worry about the fashions and stylings of a woman who lost top secret information to hackers because she made it surpassingly easy to steal.
I could be a Democrat if I could learn how to ignore reality. Perhaps you and shiloh could teach a seminar to expand your numbers.
Didn't say everybody does it. Why so angry Birkel?
One would think in today's look at me, 24/7 media society if Weiner actually had an affair, that person(s) would have come out of the shadows.
To be sure a few came out to tell of their on-line affairs. Again, it's probably worse to be a pervert, than an actual cheater.
I disagree with AA about the language; if you behave like a slut, you'll have to expect being treated as one. And the SS probably had a fair idea of Clinton's opinion of Ms. Lewinsky.
As for the violence, the SS back then were seriously worried Hillary! might do the President actual damage that could possibly render him incapacitated.
Indeed, this is why many cons flock to this safe haven as Althouse helps them ignore reality!
Despite the Secret Service agents being cynics, they remain faithful to performing their duties and responsibilities. It's just unfortunate that the men who occupy the office will once and repeatedly betray and corrupt its official stature. Still, it could be worse. It could be occupied by a female chauvinist. They are renowned for the selective principles and outlook.
So I know about ranges (I used to love to watch my Dad qualify in the tactical range, and being a snot-nosed teenager used to laugh watching him GI Joe-it and then have to flip around to fire at the "bad guy" target the range master would drop. I miss him so much!) but what I did not know was that He-Clinton had an affair with Mondale's daughter. Is this new news?
...it seems that Lewinsky was humiliated by men who were judging her, making it about her body, and she had the presence of mind not to crumple but to use humor.
Does anyone believe Lewinsky thought IT wasn't about anything other than her body?
Sometimes feminism requires women to assume other women are idiots.
Dirty, nasty, filthy and too worn out to think. That sums up the Clintons' way life. The surprising part is their having any time left over for lusting after piles of stolen money.
“What’s he want with her when he has this?”
Is she unaware the disdain for Bill Clinton is in part because he was the most powerful man in the world and ended up with her? It's as bad as Tiger tapping the Perkins waitress.
You're the President of the goddamn United States. Tap something Derek Jeter hit later.
"It's unprofessional to display judgment about the sex the President is having."
Unprofessional???
It still boogles my mind he didn't do the honorable thing and resign.
Meea- No. I remember it being reported when the Lewinsky scandal was going on. The spin was that Lewinsky was angry and jealous that Clinton stood her up for Mondale, and that she assumed they were having an affair, but they really only had a meeting.
pm317 wants to hear from the Secret Service what they know about all the other wives of presidents before he can form a judgment about Hillary's behavior.
The inference is that if their behavior is comparable to what they know about Hillary's, then Hillary's behavior is perfectly normal and there is nothing to worry about. An excellent example of progressive-liberal ethical thinking: if the majority do x, then, by definition, x is a good thing to do.
If only one-half of the incidents related in this book are accurate, it is objectively true that Hillary is psychologically unfit to be president.
MisterBuddwing said...
So what is a "one-way range," anyway? Is there actually such a thing as a two-way range???
That caught my eye, too. I've never shot at an official range, usually just ambling over to the next holler and shooting up a competitor's still, but here's pic from a two-way range.
"It still boogles my mind he didn't do the honorable thing and resign."
I can even remember when Sam Donaldson said he would have to resign.
The left have very elastic scruples.
shiloh, demonstrates this well.
As many have found there is a lot of money to be made in lies about the Clintons.
Gary wrote: As many have found there is a lot of money to be made in lies about the Clintons.
Lickspittle.
If Hillary catches Bill in the sack with some young babe will she launch nukes on China?
We need a 2016 "Goldwater daisy" ad displaying this concept.
Hillary. Unstable. Dangerous.
"Toward what part of her body?"
Well, he used a cigar. So, her mouth, right?
As many have found there is a lot of money to be made in lies about the Clintons
Lot of money to be made in lies by the Clintons too. It is pretty funny that one of the strategies that came out of the DNC hack was that Democrats planned to "muddy the waters" around ethics issues. So they didn't want Americans to see clearly what she did. Move on people, nothing to see here!
Shiloh is going into the files from the past, OK. Here is Hillary in her own words. Does she make you proud to be an American?
"As many have found there is a lot of money to be made in lies about the Clintons"
Yeah, they're worth what? 100 million?
Quaestor said... [hush][hide comment]
...it seems that Lewinsky was humiliated by men who were judging her, making it about her body, and she had the presence of mind not to crumple but to use humor.
Does anyone believe Lewinsky thought IT wasn't about anything other than her body?
Sometimes feminism requires women to assume other women are idiots.
Reading the Starr Report, Lewinski actually believed Clinton was in love with her, and that they had a future. She lied to protect him.
tim in vermont said...
[As many have found there is a lot of money to be made in lies about the Clintons]
The Clintons learned and capitalized on this better then anyone, why are we supposed to look down on others who follow their example?
Scene: Hillary opens the bedroom door. Bill in bed with young women having sex. Young woman screams and clutches sheet up around her chest. Bill has shocked look on face.
Hillary: "At it again? I need sex more than once a year. I am the Commander-in-Chief and Leader of the Free World."
Bill: "But we had our deal."
Hillary: "Deal's off. I can't take the humiliation any more. I'm on top of the world now. Use must service me and me only."
Hillary starts throwing vases and other objects at Bill. Young woman screeches. Breaking sounds.
Hillary departs for the Oval. Picks up the Red Phone.
Hillary: "This is President Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton. Commence sequence for nuclear launch on Red China." China pronounced like Trump prounces China.
Voice on Phone: "Yes, Madam President."
Screen: Countdown clock with target painted on China. Sound effect: tick, tick.
Bill rushes into Oval in his boxers, "Hillary, what are you doing?"
Hillary, "I've commenced the nuclear launch sequence on China."
Bill: "You can't do that. The world will be destroyed."
Hillary: "The hell I can't. I am the historic first woman president. And a woman scorned and humiliated. Who's going to stop me?"
Bill grabs the red phone from Hillary and they begin to wrestle. Bill screams into the phone: "This is President Clinton. Cancel the launch. It was only about sex."
Secret Service rushes into Oval and sees Bill and Hillary wrestling over the Red Phone on the floor. Shots ring out.
Screen goes to black.
Lettering on screen: Hillary Clinton. Unstable. Dangerous.
Everyone wonders if stories about the Clintons are true, particularly when they had the White House. I tend to be skeptical, although I despise them as sociopaths who get cover from the MSM.
A very depressed, suicidal patient of mine is a die-hard Democrat. (Yes. It is a trend). She will never vote for Hillary!
Her son was a bomb disposal expert when he was in service. At one point, he and his partner were working to safeguard the FLOTUS. Hillary past up them and said, "Don't speak to me. Don't look at me. Stay the fuck out of my way".
Does anyone want his person to be POTUS?
Can you doubt that these are people of bad character, regardless of their politics, who disgrace the nation?
Secret Service agents remain silent about the pecadillos of Presidents because they are tasked with protecting the President. If the Secret Service were to disclose such activities, then the President would have an incentive to sneak off somewhere without Secret Service protection. Since people show a surprising tendency to do what they have an incentive to do, this would led to the President running off in an insecure mannner without the protection of the Secret Service detail.
It's certainly not unprofessional to have opinions about the sexual activities of the President, as long as it doesn't affect the protection they provide. Should they make them public 20 years later? Probably not.
"Does anyone believe Lewinsky thought IT wasn't about anything other than her body?"
I do. I think the 2 of them had fun talking to each other and that he enjoyed the lighthearted banter with an energetic, funny young woman who adored him. It was a break from the usual pressures of being President and stuck inside the bubble. Read the Starr Report, which covers their conversations.
© me at 3:49.
Like Ann Althouse, I believe Monica Lewinsky was a fool and Bill Clinton was a skillful liar who preyed on her delusions.
Blogger Birkel said...
In 1996, blacks did not "believe" O.J. Simpson killed two people. They denied what was obvious for political reasons.
During the original trial, I was spending a lot of time at home and watched a lot of the actual trial. Not reportage but the trial in real time via courtroom camera.
I had a lot of doubts about OJ's guilt. Nothing I have seen since has changed my opinion.
How bout you, Birkel? How much of the trial, as opposed to people talking about the trial, did you actually see?
I am not black, though I have occasionally considered identifying as black for affirmative advantage.
John Henry
"'Mrs. Clinton let loose a spray of man-stopping .45 -caliber rounds into the paper, dirt, and berms of our outdoor one-way range.' Smiling, she fired her next shots 'right into the target’s crotch.'"
Not interested enough to read the actual article. From Ann's headline, I think I have figured out why Hilary supports gun control. She sounds like she really needs it.
Unfortunately not the kind she and other dems are screeching about.
John Henry
Birkel said...
"Like Ann Althouse, I believe Monica Lewinsky was a fool and Bill Clinton was a skillful liar who preyed on her delusions."
That Monica Lewinski was and remains a fool is fairly obvious, but "delusions"? She wanted to have sex with President Clinton, and he accommodated that desire. What are you saying, she was expecting him to marry her? In a lovely white dress with a long, white train, in a big church, with all their friends and family there? Little girls sprinkling flower petals and International Diplomats bowing as they kissed her hand, her Father giving her away to Bashful Bill. The ring! He kisses the Bride! The limos! The flowers alone would cost a fortune, and the White House Travel Office would plan their honeymoon. And then, the wedded bliss, the interviews as First Lady ...
Must have been a real shock when that didn't pan out, but at least she got to keep the dress.
John said...
"During the original trial, I was spending a lot of time at home and watched a lot of the actual trial. Not reportage but the trial in real time via courtroom camera.
I had a lot of doubts about OJ's guilt. Nothing I have seen since has changed my opinion."
That must be quite an opinion. Do you take it out of the little box from time to time, to admire its incorruptible perfection?
John Henry:
You should try to ask again - but this time in good faith - and perhaps I will give you an answer. Try harder.
Jupiter:
That is exactly what I think Lewinsky foolishly believed.
I watched the whole damned thing. He slaughtered his wife and Ron Goldman. There was no doubt.
Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?
Because they are sworn officers and she was an intern -- one of hundreds running around Washington, DC -- trying to get ahead by giving head.
I find it interesting that anyone believes this stuff.
Heh heh. I find it interesting there's anyone who doesn't. By this time you ought to have a better feeling for the type of people you're dealing with in the Clintons.
Why do Secret Service officers, on the job, have the leeway to speak to someone like that?
Secret Service agents are not servants. They're not supposed to carry the bags, they're not personal assistants, and they're not doormen. For a president to force his protection detail to be involved in his assignations is really a breach of trust.
I can't believe I'm left trying to picture this, but it seems that Lewinsky was humiliated by men who were judging her,
Because of course no one giving out blow jobs at the office must ever be judged.
I do. I think the 2 of them had fun talking to each other and that he enjoyed the lighthearted banter with an energetic, funny young woman who adored him. It was a break from the usual pressures of being President and stuck inside the bubble
The blow jobs were just an added bonus.
By the way, if he did have a personal relationship with her, and wasn't just using her for sex, that makes his effort to discredit her even more despicable.
Blogger Jupiter said...
That must be quite an opinion. Do you take it out of the little box from time to time, to admire its incorruptible perfection?
Nope. Whole years go by when I do not think about OJ Simpson and the trial. To be clear, I was not absolutely 100% convinced that he did not do it. However, watching the trial raised a lot of doubt in my mind. Had I been a juror I surely could not have convicted.
One of the things that really annoys me about the whole megillah is the racism. You are not the first person I have heard say that blacks thought he was innocent out of racial solidarity. No doubt some did but a statement like that implies a belief that blacks, as a group, are too stupid to think for themselves. It is rather disgusting.
Birkel, I asked the question in good faith about how much of the trial you watched. I have no idea why you think I did not. I'll not ask again. I think you just told me.
John Henry
For a president to force his protection detail to be involved in his assignations is really a breach of trust.
That involvement was rife during JFK's term in office.
I think few african americans thought oj wasn't guilty, it's more in the nature, that they didn't care that he did it,
"I had a lot of doubts about OJ's guilt. Nothing I have seen since has changed my opinion."
That must be quite an opinion. Do you take it out of the little box from time to time, to admire its incorruptible perfection?"
I was in New Hampshire taking courses at Dartmouth. I had one of the very early satellite dishes and watched the afternoon sessions of the trial when I got home from class, which was just at 2 PM PST.
I also had doubts about his guilt.The only testimony the jury asked to have read back was that of the limo driver. Marcia Clark, probably in an effort to close a tiny window when OJ could have been at home, lied in her closing argument and I think that gave the jury to hook to acquit him. They caught her lie.
The guy who proved he did it was the civil lawyer who everyone has forgotten, Daniel Petrocelli, who I see has done well since.
I was an unlikely choice to lead Fred Goldman's civil lawsuit against O.J. Simpson. I had never tried a murder case, a wrongful-death case or even a personal injury case, let alone anything as publicly visible as the Simpson case. Unbeknownst to me, Fred Goldman had received a call from a man he did not know who was passionate about Fred's cause and who insisted Fred meet me.
If the Secret Service was worried Hillary Clinton shoot off Bill Clinton's pecker with a Thompson sub machine gun, I like her more already. That should go in a campaign ad.
I say again - Why on earth would Americans want this trashy corrupt vile family back in the White House?
April,
They aren't trashy, that's just rumors spread by a vast right-wing conspiracy...
I actually do wonder how much of the support for Hillary is people who want to get back at country for electing George W. Bush twice.
"So what is a "one-way range," anyway? Is there actually such a thing as a two-way range???"
My first range in battalion was a "hot house." The fire teams started with team live fire drills doing enter and clears, then they moved to squad drills with two team squads. Then we did 9mm sim round drills where I spent most of the time on OP4(opposing force) getting shot because I just got there.
It was a large 2 story cinder block house with rolling steel frame rubber targets and reinforced interior walls. It was definitely a 360 range.
AprilApple said...
"I say again - Why on earth would Americans want this trashy corrupt vile family back in the White House?"
To be honest I could care less if the president banged some whores in the white house as long as it didn't affect his job. Yes it is a rare situation when it would not affect his duties but like I said the trashiness is unimportant.
The problem with the Clinton's is the amazing levels of corruption, incompetence, and the complete amorality they and their supporters operate with. This is the core problem with the inconvenient manifestation of the president sexually abusing underlings and using the office to protect himself which is also a problem.
But the diddling of various women is a "meh."
John Henry:
You avoided my question. Well attempted, you asinine fool.
I had a lot of doubts about OJ's guilt. Nothing I have seen since has changed my opinion. - John "Normally not insane" Henry
"It appears to be me, yes," a stunned Simpson answers.
"Looking at the close up of the shoes, can you believe that those were shoes that you owned at the time?" Petrocelli asks.
"No," Simpson says.
In an interview with 20/20, Petrocelli recalled the awkward exchange. "His story was, 'Well yeah, that's me in the picture, but those are not my shoes,' " he said. "He says, 'I don't remember what shoes I had on that day… but I didn't have those shoes on,' because he knew that those were the killer's shoes." LOL
If you saw OJ in those Airplane movies, you knew he was a great actor though, he should have played Othello. Oh, wait....
If Hillary can have a machine gun why can't I?
Sanford didn't resign.
Nor did William Jefferson.
And Anthony Weiner didn't actually cheat, but hey, perverts have to resign asap.
He lied and blamed hackers. Breitbart showed he was full of shit.
That press conference was Andrew's shining moment.
To be honest I could care less if the president banged some whores in the white house as long as it didn't affect his job. Yes it is a rare situation when it would not affect his duties but like I said the trashiness is unimportant.
I care. He's the President of the US and he was banging women I'd have said no to. He has the world's greatest pickup line and settled for Monica. I know getting head as a married man is a challenge in and of itself, but damn...show SOME choosiness. You couldn't find a hot Hollywood starlet to get your dick wet with?
Blogger Birkel said...
John Henry:
You avoided my question. Well attempted, you asinine fool.
Where was the question? I just went back and looked and see nothing that even looks like it might be a question.
I might answer if I knew what the question was.
Can you point me to the note with the question?
You should be more careful. I am wondering if the assinine fool isn't you.
John Henry
I feel like, in relation to the Simpson case, the prosecution made a lot of mistakes. I can see how someone might have had doubt; I don't know if I can ever really know for sure how I'd have found if I were on the jury, since I think it is impossible to ignore the rest of the stuff I saw/heard as a kid, or later on when hearing about the case.
I had about a 2-year business relationship with a former Secret Service agent back in the mid-1990's. He had served on the First Lady detail since the last couple of years of the Johnson adminstration and into the first two years or so of Clinton. During the time I knew him he shared several stories of his time providing security for the First Lady and her family. He had admired all of the First Ladies - especially Barbara Bush, who he said was the nicest of all of them - until he got to Hillary. He could only put up with about two years of her and then he decided to retire because he couldn't take any more of her. She verbally abused everyone, was rude and demeaning to all the staff, not just the Secret Service, and apparently she crossed some line with him that hedecided the best thing was to get out. He said he felt sorry for his co-workers he left behind who we not yet retirement eligible and had to continue to put up with her. He had loved every minute of his job up until the time he had to work with her.
Let me get this straight: a woman who flashed a thong at a guy, got tucked with a cigar, and blew him while he was discussing military matters....was offended by being called a piece of ass?
She's quite the delicate flower.
That is fucked, not tucked. Tablets are such prudes.
John Henry:
I asked you to try harder. You doubled down on assertion and assumption.
You think that my non-answer to your question provided you with information by which to judge whether I watched the O.J. trial? In what world does what I wrote tell you such information?
I judged that you were asking in bad faith. Your follow-up removed all doubt that I was correct.
Try harder.
So what is the question, Birkel?
John Henry
"Does anyone believe Lewinsky thought IT wasn't about anything other than her body?"
Vernon Jordan testified that Lewinsky asked him if he thought Bill would leave Hillary at the end of his term. As I recall, Lewinsky's testimony revealed someone with an extreme emotional attachment and a belief that attachment was mutual. If Lewinsky is to be believed, Bill lead her on and gave her a false sense of hope about a possible future together. Both of them were manipulative and indiscreet; she also was naive and stupid and had a big mouth (no pun intended).
But, none of this is any of our business. It's not our place to judge what people do within the confines of their marriage even when those confines are contained within the Oval Office. A man's willingness to serially cheat on his wife has no bearing on his general character or his ability to lead this nation. Neither does a propensity to lie under oath and suborn perjury IF it's only about sex because that's what gentlemen do.
Conversely, a woman's willingness to act as the doormat on which her lying, cheating husband year after sorry year wipes his dirty feet has no bearing on her general character or her ability to lead this nation. Neither does a propensity to denigrate and malign the women involved while attempting to deflect attention from her husband's sexual peccadilloes to the supposed machinations of a vast right wing conspiracy. In fact, it's perfectly understandable and acceptable even when you understand that her considerable ambitions were inextricably tethered to his. I mean, what's a girl to do?
It will be a pleasure to welcome this classy, dynamic, gracious, upstanding couple back to the White House.
Conversely, a woman's willingness to act as the doormat on which her lying, cheating husband year after sorry year wipes his dirty feet has no bearing on her general character or her ability to lead this nation.
I disagree. Also disagree on the serial cheating thing (if a man's word is worth nothing, then he's worth nothing), but a "powerful woman" allowing a man to walk over her isn't a powerful woman.
Especially given that this woman is a political figure ONLY because of that man.
Locally, if Jenny Sanford ran for any office, I'd vote for her happily. Didn't tolerate bullshit when Mark had his idiotic meltdown (she referred to it as his Midlife Crisis when she moved out of the Governor's mansion) and has managed to avoid making their issues too public. She's discrete but tough.
She also wants nothing to do with politics, alas.
John Henry:
I asked you to try harder.
Birkel, if it isn't too much trouble, could you please restate your question fully, so that John Henry can be seen to answer or not answer? And so others can understand what you are talking about?
JH, likewise, if you were the one asking the question, please repeat...
I daresay this is blue-on-blue.
My question:
Would you care to try harder?
My question:
Could you ask your questions in good faith?
John Henry needs question marks, which has been an Althouse topic, oddly enough.
Basically, Unknown, John Henry listened to the lawyers in the O.J. Simpson case and decided there was reasonable doubt in spite of the fact O.J. Simpson sawed his ex-wife's head almost completely off. And anybody who thinks O.J. Simpson did what he - you know - actually did (murdered two people) must not have watched the trial.
John Henry asserts that I must not have watched the trial because I refuse to believe that O.J. Simpson might not have done what he - you know - actually did. John Henry does not know me and was not hiding in my shirt pocket 20 years ago. But the magic of the internet allows him to know things, man.
Vernon Jordan testified that Lewinsky asked him if he thought Bill would leave Hillary at the end of his term.
I'm not surprised she had feelings for Clinton. She was young, after all, and in awe. I would be very surprised to find her feelings were reciprocated in the slightest.
Blogger Birkel said...
My question:
Would you care to try harder?
My question:
Would you care to try harder?
My question:
Could you ask your questions in good faith?
Now you are just lying, Birkel. You did not ask would I care to try harder as you now say.
You first suggested that I ask again. Then you commanded me to try harder. I don't see how anyone can recognize this as a "question" as you called it". While you have now rephrased it with a question mark, I still do not recognize it as a question. Looks like a command with a question mark.
+++++
Here is your original post:
"Blogger Birkel said...
John Henry:
You should try to ask again - but this time in good faith - and perhaps I will give you an answer. Try harder."
At 5:59PM 6/19
++++++++++++
You, Birkel, are a lying shit.
Unknown, my question to Birkel, which she can answer or not as she sees fit, was about how much, if any, of the actual trial she watched. As opposed to reports about the trial. I think she answered me, implicitly if not explicitly. I think her answer is that she saw little or none of it.
John Henry
No, Birkel, I did not originally assert that you did not watch much of the trial. As you say, I have no way of knowing. I I merely asked if you had.
I think you have now confirmed how little you did see and are annoyed at being caught out.
You could tell me I am wrong, of course. But after you lied about something so simple as what you said in a comment, I am unlikely to believe you. Not that either of us will or should care.
John Henry
How could I command you? That defies reason.
That you are wrong and, for reasons that are my own, I will not answer your disingenuous query does not change anything.
And I see in your second comment that you once again assumed things you - now admittedly in what can be seen as a sign of progress - cannot know.
And that goes to the proof that your initial question was not asked in good faith. You had an answer you preferred and upon no evidence whatever have doubled down on your bad faith.
Tell us more of implicit answers from a demur.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा