By now I am certain everyone is totally sick of the various caucuses.  I have lost track of what’s next.

How interesting that the mighty Trump didn’t prevail in Iowa…or is it?  Iowa is heavy in the evangelical department and apparently Ted Cruz is popular amongst that subset of voters.  (I haven’t figured out why because he appears to be mean as a snake.)

Trump actually took coming in second pretty well for a narcissist.  I still want to make Rubio sit at the “little table” at all holidays.

So, who is worse?  Worse in what way?  Worse for the Republican party might be a place to start.  Who would be worse for the country?  Trump or Cruz?

If you held a gun to my head and told me I had to vote for one or the other, I would vote for Trump.  Why?  I think Trump is living on borrowed ideology.  The power of his belief system could easily be over-ruled by pragmatism.  Cruz—not so much.  He believes in his cause and his own sense of righteousness, or so it appears.  That is why he is more dangerous than Trump.

Don’t get me wrong..a gun would have to be involved and aimed right at my skull.

104 thoughts on “Who is worse? Trump or Cruz?

  1. Pat.Herve

    @Jackson Bills
    Citizens United in action.

  2. Cargosquid

    Starry,
    The prosecutor allowed him to plead to one misdemeanor.
    He was charged with felonies.

  3. Mom

    @Moon-howler
    I have no positive attributes.

    1. A count wasn’t involved. Ask Elena.

  4. Pat.Herve

    This just in – Colin Powell and Condi Rice had classified emails sent to personal email addresses –
    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rice-aides-powell-also-got-classified-info-personal-emails-n511181

    Should we hang them now or later……
    “They were unclassified at the time, and they are, in my judgment, still unclassified,” he (Powell) said.

    Congress – stop voting on repealing Obamacare and write a law that says that Government employees MUST use government email systems to conduct government work. Seems so simple. I could write the law but the Republican Congress will not take it up – because – they do not want to conduct government business on government email systems.

  5. Wolve

    @Moon-howler

    Trump claims that he is paying for his own campaign and, unlike the rest of the candidates, won’t owe any political “favors” to anybody. Some of his supporters have been sending him donations, but I heard him say in a video that they shouldn’t do so because he doesn’t need it.

    1. Operative word- Claims.

      What difference does it make who pays? Trump pays for himself or someone else does. It’s still money being spent on an election.

  6. Wolve

    @Starry flights

    The FBI investigative team is sending you regular updates on this criminal case?

  7. Wolve

    Moon-howler :
    Operative word- Claims.
    What difference does it make who pays? Trump pays for himself or someone else does. It’s still money being spent on an election.

    Operative words: political “favors.” Nobody can buy him.

    1. There are favors out there. Count on it.

  8. Steve Thomas

    @Censored bybvbl
    Sarah Palin is on my naughty list right now. I’m Irish. I have a long-memory for folks who tick me off.

  9. Steve Thomas

    @Starry flights
    Starry said: “Your accusations against Hillary are not supported by any evidence.”

    Starry…there’s enough that has been released (by a judges order) to the public, the IG reports, etc. that constitutes evidence. Even without the 22 TS/SAP emails, there is evidence of multiple crimes. The only think standing between Hillary and an indictment right now is the fact that the FBI is trying to build an air-tight case, which will force the DOJ to choose between indictment, and an all-out-revolt within the FBI and intelligence community.

  10. Steve Thomas

    Moon-howler :
    Starry, Republicans have been trying to make this case for years. Its just what they do.

    Moon…this isn’t the “Republicans”. This is the Inspector General, and the FBI doing their sworn duty. I am disappointed that you would place partisan desires over national security. She was the Secretary of State for goodness sake, and she completely disregarded her duty to safeguard state secrets. She may have even compromised human intelligence assets (which usually means death).

    I cannot believe that you, Starry, and the rest who are claiming “Move along, nothing to see here” or “this is just the GOP being ugly” are so blind to the seriousness of what she did.

    I held a TS with full-scope poly. I was responsible for cyrptographic equipment and materials (codes). I was also tasked with operation of SIPRNET and NIPRNET networks in the field. If I had done just a portion what Hillary and her staff did, I’d be in a Federal Military prison, with a “P” stenciled on the back of my uniform.

    1. I keep thinking what Colon Powell said. I think there is a lot of partisanship going around on this one.

  11. Steve Thomas

    Moon-howler :
    I keep thinking what Colon Powell said. I think there is a lot of partisanship going around on this one.

    Moon, please dig a bit deeper. In Powell’s case, the information was determined to be “Confidential”…the lowest classification, which if disclosed would “cause damage or be prejudicial to national security if publicly available”. This was limited to TWO emails.

    In Rice’s case, it was her staffers, not her email, which were found to contain classified information. There were 10 cases. These included some “Secret”, and the remainder “Confidential. Secret information would cause “serious damage” to national security if it were publicly available.

    In Clinton’s case, we have approaching 1500 classified emails, ranging from “Confidential” all the way up to “Top Secret/SAP” which would cause “exceptionally grave damage” to national security if made publicly available. There is an email thread showing Clinton directing her staff to copy classified information from a secure environment, to a non-secure one…Her server. The operation of this server for the purposes of conducting official State Dept business, is a crime in and of itself.

    If Hillary is not indicted and made to defend herself in court, the Federal Department of Justice no longer holds the moral authority to prosecute any American for espionage. Saying “Powell and Rice did it too” ignores the facts, the proportionality of the violation, and most importantly, the damage to National Security. Anyone advocating she get a pass, is IMHO, UN-AMERICAN. Charge her, and give her a day in court. This needs to move from Justice to Judicial.

  12. Steve Thomas

    Oh…and Powell’s emails were government…Not personal. They never left the Government’s email system. That is a key differentiation.

  13. Pat.Herve

    Steve Thomas :
    Oh…and Powell’s emails were government…Not personal. They never left the Government’s email system. That is a key differentiation.

    Classified email was sent to Powel’s Personal email –
    Washington (CNN)Colin Powell and top staffers for Condoleezza Rice received classified information through personal email accounts, according to a new report from State Department investigators.

    Congress can fix this, but they will not.

  14. Pat.Herve

    @Steve Thomas
    Steve,

    If I sent you an article from the NY Times would you have done anything wrong? No. Well, it has been reported that the CIA classified an article from the NY Times that was sent to Hillary. What did she do that was wrong?

    We still do not have the facts – just leaks.

  15. Steve Thomas

    Pat.Herve :
    @Steve Thomas
    Steve,
    If I sent you an article from the NY Times would you have done anything wrong? No. Well, it has been reported that the CIA classified an article from the NY Times that was sent to Hillary. What did she do that was wrong?
    We still do not have the facts – just leaks.

    Pat,

    Here’s a few inconvenient indisputable facts:

    -She operated a non-secure homebrew server (shows intent to circumvent records laws)

    -She “wiped the server” (shows intent to tamper with potential evidence)

    -The server was housed in non-secure facilities (her home, and Platte River Networks Data Center) and was physically accessible to uncleared individuals (violation of US code section 18).

    -She claimed she turned over all work-related email, and yet more than what she turned over was recovered via alternate means (shows intent to hide potential criminal activity). We haven’t even hit the actual content and classification here. This is another violation of US code, specifically Section 5, sub-section 522.

    Now let’s deal with the actual emails: Some were classified retroactively. Ok, let’s set aside those which were determined to be “confidential”. One of the email chains released shows Clinton to have directed her staff to copy something marked with a security classification requiring transmission by secure means, to a non-secure system, remove the classification markings, and transmit. This in and of itself is a violation of US Code 18.

    – Then there’s the 22 emails determined to be classified as TS/SAP. Right there.

    We don’t have ALL the facts, but there’s enough there that she should consider and Alford plea, were she to be indicted today. With each new revelation, the story gets worse, not better, Clinton supporters attempts at minimizing, deflecting, and outright lying, notwithstanding.

  16. Steve Thomas

    One last thought: If the FBI presents an air-tight case (and it is looking like they intend to do so), and the Administration declines to indict her, it will no longer just be about Clinton and her emails…it will be about Obama too.

    Richard Nixon neither ordered nor participated in the Watergate break-in…he just tried to cover it up by obstructing justice. Didn’t turn out so well for him.

  17. Pat.Herve

    but Steve – we do not have any facts. What we have are well timed leaks.

    I am not defending her – but lets get the facts. There is no law that says she must use a Government email address (Congress should fix that, but will not). Clinton did ask for information to be sent to her by a subordinate – was that information classified? I still cannot find anything that says it was. IF she did ask for Classified markings to be removed, it is a big problem. Did she ask for Classified markings to be removed – I do not know without the facts.

  18. Steve Thomas

    @Pat.Herve
    She did instruct her aid to remove the markings. Several media outlets have published a copy of the email. Here’s just one:
    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/08/whoa-hillary-e-mail-instructs-aide-to-transmit-classified-e-mail-without-markings/

  19. Pat.Herve

    @Steve Thomas
    Steve – I have seen that – my question is – were those talking points Classified, Confidential or neither?

    If she asked for the Classified ‘identifying heading’ to be taken off of a document – that is a big issue.
    If she asked for the ‘identifying heading’ ‘David Cameron talking points’ to be removed – that is not an issue.
    The email is taken out of context because we need someone to comment on the document that we are talking about for it to have context.

    In my line of work – saying ‘identifying heading’ is meaningless as far as Classification, but I have not worked with Dept of State in a bit.

  20. Steve Thomas

    @Pat.Herve
    “In my line of work – saying ‘identifying heading’ is meaningless as far as Classification, but I have not worked with Dept of State in a bit.”

    Why would something require transmission by secure fax, if it were not classified? That’s my point.

  21. Steve Thomas

    @Pat.Herve

    And Pat, what you are calling “leaks” are documents released by court-order, in response to a FOIA request by judicial watch. Classification marking (or lack there of) are present (of not), and if absent, can be inferred by the justification for redaction. You do know that when something is released via FOIA, and parts are redacted, the releasing agency must provide an explanation as to why the redaction occurred.

Comments are closed.