John Podesta's good friend Peter Kadzik is in charge of Clinton email probe at DOJ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Peter just needs to go.

It can't happen before the election. Would be viewed as proof of DOJ taint. And Hillary never admits an error. So he's in place for the near term durstion.

Kadzik is the taint.

Oh there's more in there. Maybe look for the names of other DOJ political appointees in the stash of emails....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow! I honestly don't know how anybody can defend this anymore.

We're not defending it. We're just saying we don't care.

Unitl it affects you and it will be too late?

You can still vote for Hillary, but to say that you don't care about this exposure of Washington corruption? That's crazy.

I don't think Hillary's supporters are crazy, they just ignorant. They don't read the orignial sources or different sources of information. They get their information from 1-2 sites that brainwashed them. And then they take an ostrich position "I don't care" becasue they don't have enough information to make an intelligent decision.

You may be right.

It wasn't a Hillary supporter pointing and screaming "Media Matters David Brock!" when someone pointed out that Kadzik is in no way "in charge of the email probe."

Exactly. This is a stupid bit of nonsense. These guys are friendly -- stop the presses! High powered people in Washington know each other! OP has the vapors!

i wonder if he'll give Podesta another "heads up" about things in this investigation..or if he has been all along.

I always found it so weird how confident it was that she would not face charges (and not because she's actually innocent).

Hence, that disgusting arrogance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't believe people in the "Washington liberal bubble" don't care, but corruption in politics is hardly a novel concept and I for one don't think that will end with Trump based on how he has run his personal and business affairs.

So I'm just reluctantly prepared to put up with four more years of business as usual until Republicans put forth a reasonable alternative. If I have to choose between two corrupt individuals, I will always choose the one who isn't a moron.

Well-said. It's a sickening state of affairs all around.

[Anonymous]

Kadzik is NOT in charge. He is the Congressional liaison. I am not a Clnton supporter--I thought this, too, at first, but have been set straight by a pal from DOJ-retired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really great Guardian article that sums up what these leaked emails illustrate about the 'elites' in power. If you're not in their club, you're screwed. If you're in the club, you get rich and stay protected. Admission to and advancement in the club isn't based on merit:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/31/the-podesta-emails-show-who-runs-america-and-how-they-do-it

As if Trump hasn't spent the entirety of adult life starfucking his way into the same room as the "elites." The unwashed masses don't have their own planes and helps, aren't living in Trump Plaza or buying memberships at Mar-a-Lago or Doral.

Most articles on Trump say he's sort of a homebody, not many friends, has trouble trusting non-family. At the Al Smith dinner he called out how phony everyone in the room was. Basically, "I thought you were my friends... then I stopped giving you money and ran for president... and you all stabbed me in the back. It's interesting."

I think he's going to squeeze many of the bloodsucking 'elites' if he wins. And I can't wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kadzik is NOT in charge. He is the Congressional liaison. I am not a Clnton supporter--I thought this, too, at first, but have been set straight by a pal from DOJ-retired.

Perhaps his job title -- Assistant AG for Legislative Affairs -- might have provided a clue for Trumpsters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kadzik is NOT in charge. He is the Congressional liaison. I am not a Clnton supporter--I thought this, too, at first, but have been set straight by a pal from DOJ-retired.

Perhaps his job title -- Assistant AG for Legislative Affairs -- might have provided a clue for Trumpsters.

That would mean that Trumpsters would have a clue, when that is clearly not the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the person who doesn't care:

It has now been revealed that Kadzik's wife (Amy Weiss) was Deputy Press Secretary to Bill Clinton in the White HOuse--the Clinton administration.

And, now her husband--Podesta's good buddy, who fed him backchannel information--is in charge of the DOJ investigation. No, move along, nothing to see here.

Haven’t been fond of this slogan, but here it rings true.... #DrainTheSwamp

You must be kidding. Kadzik is the Assistant AG for Legislative Affairs, so he is in charge of DOJ liaison to Congress, not in charge of the investigation. He even says that the Civil Division representatives will be testifying on Capitol Hill. He is NOT in charge of the investigation, but every agency has a liaison to Congress because they have oversight and budget responsibilities. That position, in any agency is almost always a political appointee.

But the investigation divisions? There are many fine federal employees who serve our country in public service year after year, dealing with the ins and outs of whatever political party at the top of the pyramid. They are both good at their jobs and rarely pull punches.

Kadzik let Podesta know that emails of a former Administration official would likely be questioned by Congress. This is no secret. Congress publishes a list of their hearings. But sometimes they come up fast. Congress actually tells agencies what they want to know in advance because want answers, not we don't know. Testimony is not some kind of "gotcha" moment. That's not back channel to to tell a staffer (Podesta) that their principal (Clinton) will be discussed at a Congressional hearing.

There was a time when I once had to prepare a number of Republican nominees for their jobs. I also asked the agency congressional liaison office to find out what particular issues/questions were of interest to members of Congress. We passed that info onto the nominees so they could give their views clearly and concisely. This was to save time and to ensure important points were covered.

A debate is different. In that situation, people want to see how you do "on the fly" Telling someone that there is a public Congressional hearing scheduled in which they will be mentioned is not backchannel at all.

Don't all you Trump posters get tired of trying to live in a state of "perpetual outrage"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the person who doesn't care:

It has now been revealed that Kadzik's wife (Amy Weiss) was Deputy Press Secretary to Bill Clinton in the White HOuse--the Clinton administration.

And, now her husband--Podesta's good buddy, who fed him backchannel information--is in charge of the DOJ investigation. No, move along, nothing to see here.

Haven’t been fond of this slogan, but here it rings true.... #DrainTheSwamp

You must be kidding. Kadzik is the Assistant AG for Legislative Affairs, so he is in charge of DOJ liaison to Congress, not in charge of the investigation. He even says that the Civil Division representatives will be testifying on Capitol Hill. He is NOT in charge of the investigation, but every agency has a liaison to Congress because they have oversight and budget responsibilities. That position, in any agency is almost always a political appointee.

But the investigation divisions? There are many fine federal employees who serve our country in public service year after year, dealing with the ins and outs of whatever political party at the top of the pyramid. They are both good at their jobs and rarely pull punches.

Kadzik let Podesta know that emails of a former Administration official would likely be questioned by Congress. This is no secret. Congress publishes a list of their hearings. But sometimes they come up fast. Congress actually tells agencies what they want to know in advance because want answers, not we don't know. Testimony is not some kind of "gotcha" moment. That's not back channel to to tell a staffer (Podesta) that their principal (Clinton) will be discussed at a Congressional hearing.

There was a time when I once had to prepare a number of Republican nominees for their jobs. I also asked the agency congressional liaison office to find out what particular issues/questions were of interest to members of Congress. We passed that info onto the nominees so they could give their views clearly and concisely. This was to save time and to ensure important points were covered.

A debate is different. In that situation, people want to see how you do "on the fly" Telling someone that there is a public Congressional hearing scheduled in which they will be mentioned is not backchannel at all.

Don't all you Trump posters get tired of trying to live in a state of "perpetual outrage"?

Well I admit it is less fun than living in the Clinton world of "Friends with benefits."

[Anonymous]

I have lived through Democrats and Republicans. I can assure you they all have "friends with benefits".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I have lived through Democrats and Republicans. I can assure you they all have "friends with benefits".

Well then it follows it doesn't matter who wins. Is that the point you meant to make?