home

Weiner and Clinton Aide Huma Abedin Split

Anthony Weiner has gotten caught sexting again. His wife, Clinton aide Huma Abedin issued a statement saying she is leaving him.

"After long and painful consideration and work on my marriage, I have made the decision to separate from my husband. "Anthony and I remain devoted to doing what is best for our son, who is the light of our life. During this difficult time, I ask for respect for our privacy."

Trump issued a statement blaming Hillary. That's absurd. David Plouffe, Obama's 2008 campaign manager, yesterday called Trump a psychopath. I could do without the name-calling, but Trump does seem to just make stuff up, and uninformed and lazy people who can't be bothered to fact-check buy into it.

< House Comm. Seeks Epi Pen Documents, Generic Version Announced | Kim Dotcom Extradition Appeal To Be Live-Streamed >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The issue is Trump's reaction (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:34:36 PM EST
    There is no personal pain he will not try to exploit for personal gain.

    Ana Navarro has it right:

    Link

    Trump is a drowning man (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:46:48 PM EST
    clawing in every direction at the surface of the water.

    Parent
    A sorry situation, sad (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 04:18:24 PM EST
    for all involved. Anthony Weiner is troubled and needs sustained professional help to manage his self-destructive personality.  Sad, too, for Huma who apparently tried to support Anthony and save their marriage.  And, unfair to their baby boy. Difficult to speak to the marriage of others, but a separation may be the best shock therapy, but it seems to have progressed beyond such optimism.

    Sad, too, for Trump, who should be able to appreciate the difficulties of marriage and its dissolution, for reasons that are not just neglecting to put the toilet seat down. But, not surprising, since that would require empathy and an ability to genuinely move beyond self-absorption and put himself in the shoes of others.

    This goes far beyond (1.00 / 2) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 06:46:48 PM EST
    a martial problem.  Redbrown nailed it.

    Huma has demnstrated carelessness and nishandling of classifed material before. It is reasonable to question if she left classifed material lying unprotected around the house the same way she did in her car.

    Weiner's reckless cheating and Huma's enabling made them both prime targets for blackmail

    Will it make any difference to many on the Left?

    No. As Heinlein wrote.

    What are the marks of a sick culture? It is a bad sign when the people of a country stop identifying themselves with the country and start identifying with a group. A racial group. Or a religion. Or a language. Anything, as long as it isn't the whole population.


    Parent
    Trump (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 07:23:09 PM EST
    must be sharing the information he's getting in national security briefings with everybody if he's saying that. He must be giving the information to Melania, Putin the Russian mafia and everybody.

    Parent
    Really?? (1.00 / 2) (#35)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 10:55:25 PM EST
    Getting desperate, eh?

    Parent
    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 06:23:59 AM EST
    you're the one that's getting desperate. You're playing six degrees of Kevin Bacon here. Trump always accuses people of doing exactly what he's doing. Desperate is accusing someone else for Weiner's own behavior. You guys are really just sad.

    Parent
    Indeed (none / 0) (#49)
    by Yman on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 02:41:53 PM EST
    You are.

    Gonna be a rough November for you.   :)

    Parent

    You go far beyond (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Towanda on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 10:16:22 AM EST
    the bounds of decency.  You are akin to Trump.

    I denounce both of you, on behalf of every woman -- and there are many of us -- who has been advised, and even ordered by courts, that she must allow her child or children to be with a father who has an addiction or other issues.  

    Especially on a law blog, you ought to know better.  But you long have proven your inability to learn.

    We will cast our ballots with your ilk in mind.    

    Parent

    I think it goes beyond the bounds of decency... (none / 0) (#42)
    by kdog on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 10:53:25 AM EST
    to imply Weiner is a bad father and should have his kid taken away...assuming facts not in evidence (on a law blog).  

    Parent
    There does not (none / 0) (#43)
    by KeysDan on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 11:01:21 AM EST
    seem to be any bounds to the indecency of Trump, his rabid surrogates and feverish supporters. The commenter glomed onto your basic odious right wing talking point.  There are the putrid alt right falsified sapphic depictions that go beyond the beyond.  

    This is all Trump and the Republicans have got. Tragic, but, true.

    Parent

    The NYT also did so (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Towanda on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 11:31:23 AM EST
    and is getting roundly trashed for its continuing to trash any remaining standards of journalism -- any remaining after others' exposes of the NYT history in covering the Clintons.

    This, after the AP's Katherine Carroll's idiocy in attempting to defend the AP's excuse for an expose.

    I am so glad that I left journalism.

    Parent

    I (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by FlJoe on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 12:47:29 PM EST
    am not glad that journalism has apparently left us.

    Parent
    Some years back, NYT's Patrick Healey (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by christinep on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 02:24:34 PM EST
    wrote a story/article that purported to be about the number of nights the Clintons spent together under the same roof at their Chappaqua home. Yep, that was a fun one, that was one piece-of-hard-to-swallow trash. Displayed front & center around the time of the 2008 primary, the tale led me to joke about the potential for another story recounting the amount of toilet paper used in the master bath.    

    I have noticed that Mr. Healey is trotted out, periodically to perform a similar service for the NYT.

    Parent

    aka the night I stopped regularly watching MSNBC (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by ruffian on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 03:29:37 PM EST
    Still remember Tweety salivating over that one.

    Parent
    As Charles Pierce (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by Nemi on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 04:08:41 PM EST
    writes about NYT in general and specifically about a piece Healy co-wrote with Amy Chozick, The New York Times Tried to Make the Weiner Story a Clinton Story, and the Result Is Embarrassing:

    This is horrible. This is ghastly. This is cheap shot by deliberate imprecision. This is the kind of thing that would get thrown back in the face of rookie reporters in Seagoville, Texas.

    What "shadow," precisely, is it that her husband's misbehavior is casting over Ms. Abedin? Other than the fact that summoning up this "shadow" is a way to get the words "classified information" into a story about the sad public dissolution of a marriage, as well as a way to wedge in a reference to the Clinton Foundation. This is one large storage space of a "shadow." I mean it. Who in the unholy fck thinks like this?

    That's what I wonder. What kind of people are they? And, to quote Pierce:

    Loyal readers deserve better.


    Parent
    Actually (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 03:50:42 PM EST
    She did not exactly defend it.  What she did was even more incredible


    Nevertheless, the AP refused to delete the tweet.
    Kathleen Carroll, the AP's executive editor, was confronted by CNN's Brian Stelter about the inaccurate tweet.
    Asked directly by Stelter if she would agree that the tweet is "inaccurate," Carroll said the AP was better at "breaking stories and covering news... than we are on tweets." She said the tweet needed "more precision."
    Pressed by Stelter, Carroll said she did not "regret" the tweet because, if she did, the AP would have deleted it. She then acknowledged that the tweet was "sloppy."

    THINK PROGRESS

    Parent

    Ah ha! (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 01:55:27 PM EST
    Another "Trumpunderstanding."

    Outside the fervid swamps of define Hillary and attack Trump..... Everyone understands that saying something goes far beyond a martial misunderstanding, etc., doesn't mean that the martial bit is excused.

    But you knew that.  

    Now, what's your real problem?

    Parent

    not to mention (none / 0) (#53)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 05:16:14 PM EST
    Modo whose disdain has no limits

    Parent
    Actually (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by jbindc on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 10:27:50 AM EST
    We should all be more concerned as to what national security Manafort, Bannon, and Ailes have seen or will see.  You know, people directly involved with the campaign.

    Parent
    Prime targets for blackmail.. (none / 0) (#29)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 07:52:10 PM EST
    in other words, the hard-right dirty tricksters might threaten to talk about for months on end, rather than just weeks on end.

    Roger Stone would, under ordinary circumstances, prefer to spearhead the efforts, but right now he's too busy being turned on.

    Parent

    Meanwhile (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 08:41:08 PM EST
    This disappears down the rabbit hole
    FBI and Justice Department prosecutors are conducting an investigation into possible US ties to alleged corruption of the former pro-Russian president of Ukraine, including the work of Paul Manafort's firm, according to FBI amultiple US law enforcement officials.
    .  If we were living in the real world that would be the story.

    Parent
    Trying to change the subject? (1.00 / 3) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 10:54:00 PM EST
    lol

    Parent
    Clinton (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by FlJoe on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 05:21:51 AM EST
    never hired Weiner, Trump made Manafort his main man, you tell me which story should get the most scrutiny. Trump attacks Hillary over a twice removed, rather minor, sex scandal but he gets a pass for hiring a possible illegal foreign agent with deep ties to the Russians.

    Parent
    You are trying to change the subject. (1.00 / 1) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 08:00:33 AM EST
    Won't work.

    Parent
    Actually those who handle (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 08:13:30 AM EST
    the higher levels of classified material are considered to be blackmail targets and in the military, and other government agencies, an affair will get your clearance pulled.

    Parent
    What does that have to do with Weiner? (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by jbindc on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 08:38:08 AM EST
    He doesn't have clearance, nor handles classified information, you know, because he isn't directly involved with the campaign.   (How much classified material does a campaign have anyway?)

    Parent
    I guess you have (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 09:04:29 AM EST
    never heard of "pillow talk."

    A man named Petareus got into a heap of trouble over it.

    And why do you bring up the campaign? Weiner has been her husband for years...including when Hillary was SecState.

    Parent

    I guess no one who is in a relationship (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by CST on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 09:58:23 AM EST
    Should ever have security clearance by this metric.

    Seriously - what are you trying to imply?  That since she was married she can't be trusted?

    Petraeus got into a heap of trouble because it was proven he was intentionally leaking information.  Do you have any evidence that Huma was doing that?  

    You can't prove that someone isn't doing something, it's impossible.  I can't prove you aren't a murderer.  But the whole justice system is predicated on the fact that until you prove someone is doing something that person is not guilty.  So I will continue to assume that you haven't actually murdered anyone, despite the fact that I have no evidence that you haven't.

    Parent

    A couple of thoughts (1.00 / 1) (#63)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 01:43:34 PM EST
    1. Intent is used to determine degree.  Obviously Hillary was as grossly negligent as a drunk driver killing someone in a wreck.

    2. You try and defend by taking a point to the extreme. IF the person involved would suffer serious damage to their reputation if their relationship/acts were exposed then they should not have a security clearance. That's been the benchmark since day 1.

    3. Thousands of people have been convicted on circumstantial evidence not as strong as her's.


    Parent
    Well as for her reputation (none / 0) (#64)
    by CST on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 01:50:53 PM EST
    She wasn't doing anything.  Her acts didn't damage anything.  Last I checked, we don't punish people for getting cheated on, not even in the military - it's the person who is having the affair that gets in trouble.  Furthermore, who is going to blackmail someone about something that the whole world already knows (her husband's indiscretions)?

    What possible circumstantial evidence do you have that she exposed state secrets?

    Parent

    The issue is this (1.00 / 1) (#66)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 02:05:09 PM EST
    what did she disclose to Weiner? And he definitely was subject to blackmail.

    And the whole world did not know about the third time around.

    And based on what Comey said, who knows what she said/left laying around.

    In the world outside of Hillary....Hillary and her staff would be in jail.

    And as Curly said, "The day ain't over yet."


    Parent

    Weiner (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CST on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 02:17:39 PM EST
    didn't have a reputation left to trash.  Wow - something that happened twice happened a third time.  Woo-hoo.

    She's not been accused or shown to share anything with Weiner which she's not allowed to do anyway.  Petreaus got in trouble for that - because it was proven.  If there is evidence that she is sharing classified information - than by all means that's something to discuss.  Otherwise, this is a whole lot of absolutely nothing.

    Parent

    fortunately for Hillary (none / 0) (#67)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 02:12:48 PM EST
    she's running against Curly -- and Moe and Larry.

    Parent
    They should be In jail for -- what, exactly? (none / 0) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 02:37:51 PM EST
    jimakaPPJ: "In the world outside of Hillary....Hillary and her staff would be in jail."

    Because you say so? They're guilty, even in the face of any and all evidence to the contrary, because Trump and the crackpots you listen to on Fox News and AM squawk radio know better, and the professionals at the Dept. of Justice don't.

    And so once again, you're conflating your own grievously misinformed and utterly misguided personal opinion with truth, and then asserting and misstating that BS as actual fact.

    Heaven help us if people like you are ever returned to power.

    Parent

    Uh Donald (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 11:22:44 AM EST
    When we get rid of opinion the Internet will be unused.

    lol

    Parent

    When we get rid of warmed-over (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 12:24:29 PM EST
    secondhand opinions and trolls, the internet might actually become a useful, productive forum.

    Parent
    a drunk driver killing someone.. (none / 0) (#70)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 02:52:39 PM EST
    no need for anyone to read any further after that.

    Talk about wingnut radio hyperbole..

    The only type of person to whom that's "obvious" is the type of person thinks of 1962 as Good Old Days.

    Parent

    Cliche? (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:03:31 PM EST
    Yes but a glaring accurate analogy.

    1962? On shore duty. Home with wife and daughter a lot. Yes, a very good year until a President's comments gave the Soviet's the opinion he was weak.

    Next thing I knew I was packed and standing by.

    Parent

    when I was 21.. (none / 0) (#75)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:31:46 PM EST
    it was a very good year..

    Ah yes, 1962: the year we came closer than we've ever come to nuclear war. With all those children getting practice cowering under their desks at school and getting a rude awakening about how the world really works..

    I suppose Dr Strangelove might've said it was a very good year.

    Parent

    You mean the President (none / 0) (#76)
    by Yman on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 03:32:54 PM EST
    ... who actually fought in a war???

    Heh.

    BTW - Isn't it funny how conservatives always judge "the void old days" by hire good they were for them,  personally.

    Very telling.  

    Parent

    how do you (and redbrow) (none / 0) (#55)
    by ding7777 on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 08:33:32 PM EST
    know it was classified material?

      "Material disposed of in `burn bags' is not limited to classified information.
    As the regulations state, Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) and Personally identifiable information (PII) documents are often burned


    Parent
    How do you know it wasn't?? (1.00 / 1) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 09:06:22 AM EST
    how do you know (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 09:42:56 AM EST
    Trump isn't selling what he's getting in his briefs to the Russians he owes money to?

    Parent
    It's not up to ding (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Yman on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 10:18:39 AM EST
    ... to offer evidence.  You and redbrow are claiming she mishandled classified evidence in the burn bags, without any evidence ... as usual.

    Parent
    She has a history (1.00 / 1) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 01:28:06 PM EST
    as does Hillary.

    Just ask the FBI:

    Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

    FBI Director Comey's statement.

    And you think Hillary Inc should the nuke codes?

    Really?

    Parent

    Comey (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by ding7777 on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 01:56:56 PM EST
    believes his evidence is weaker than the proverbial ham sandwich

    Parent
    All of which (none / 0) (#71)
    by Yman on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 07:17:18 PM EST
    ...is nothing more than the meaningless opinion of a Republican FBI director - not to mention irrelevant to your baseless claim.

    You have no evidence to back your smear/accusation - so you just try to distract and divert attention from thst fact.

    Typical Jim.

    Parent

    Rebecca Traister, always worth a read (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by ruffian on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 01:24:52 PM EST
    spells it out in NY Mag. This is not a politcal issue.

    Would have loved to see the Jennifer Granholm chat with Andrea Mitchell she describes. Will have to look that one up. Granholm is the perfect one to have out there for stuff like this.

    Fact-checking not always easy (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Lora on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 09:57:14 AM EST
    When you are surrounded by people and AM radio and "news" sources that all tell you stuff that is contrary to what the FM radio and "news" sources and people are telling the other group, it does become difficult to fact-check.  Even the so-called fact-checking sites are biased.

    I like to think I can determine what is true from what is fiction; don't you think that in general those that believe Trump and his ilk think so also? They are not all lazy.  Uninformed, likely; more likely disinformed.

    Brainwashing is a real and serious thing.  Not just for Trump followers.  Many times I have found left-leaning individuals and groups parroting what has been told them without really checking out the truth of the matter.  May I remind you of Trayvon Martin?

    And sometimes the truth is nowhere to be found.

    It's not hard to understand (1.00 / 1) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:11:48 PM EST
    He has a problem.

    What is hard to understand is she put up with it.

    Easy for you to say (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:25:54 PM EST
    Judging others' decisions in these situations is not appropriate.  

    Life cam be complicated.  

    But bash away.

    Parent

    Judgement? Not at all. (1.00 / 2) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 05:15:22 PM EST
    He was publicly embarrassed himself and his wife three times.

    He has, as I noted, a problem. That's not complicated.

    And noting that is bashing?

    Really?

    Parent

    You are basically blaming (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 05:21:12 PM EST
    her for not leaving him sooner.

    Parent
    Maybe she loves the father of her child, (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:39:39 PM EST
    is a compassionate human being, and was hoping he could overcome this addiction without breaking up their family?

    I've never been married, but that is my guess.


    Parent

    Why did Ivana put up with Trump? (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 06:35:17 PM EST
    I'd imagine that Ivana's likely answer to me would (rightly) be, "Butt out." One shouldn't pass judgment about the respective state of other people's personal relationships, including marriage, unless one wishes to invite outside speculation on one's own intimate affairs. What's going on between Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner is entirely their business, and is neither your concern nor mine.

    As far as Weiner's "problem" is concerned, we might just as well ask why some people feel compelled to alter their physical appearance excessively via plastic surgery, tattooing or piercing, or rearrange their closets and cupboards over and again in a precise manner, or wash their hands incessantly, or spend hours on end watching adult-oriented entertainment, or seek out anonymous sexual encounters.

    What's sad is that there are many people suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) who also realize themselves that their recurring thoughts or repetitive behaviors make no sense to third party observers, or are counter-productive or even self-destructive. Yet they do it anyway, because they lack impulse control and can't help themselves.

    As to what exactly triggers the loss of impulse control, I'm not sure. However, researchers have established a possible causal link between the occurrence of OCD and clinical depression and our respective levels of serotonin, a monoamine neurotransmitter which our bodies produce naturally to regulate our moods, cravings and appetites. Perhaps the answer will be found through further research of that biochemical relationship.

    But we're really only scratching the surface of our understanding of mental illnesses. People who suffer from them deserve our compassion and empathy rather than our scorn and ridicule, even if we don't like their behavior.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Trump will exploit (none / 0) (#1)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 02:54:47 PM EST
    anyone's personal reverses to his own advantage with continued disregard for the truth. Where are the Clinton reps hitting back?


    Besides which - Trump panic! (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:08:43 PM EST
    Does anyone think Abedin would have chosen this timing if she were not 100% convinced Clinton was going to be elected?

    The panic tweets will be getting more and more bizarre in the next 2 months. Buckle up!

    Parent

    i think timing (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 04:03:55 PM EST
    was actually related to the NY Post story w/pic of husband w/child; she had no choice but to make a statement.

    Parent
    Just posted about this in the Open Thread. (none / 0) (#2)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:00:56 PM EST
    After all that had come of his previous sexting, how could he continue to do it?

    I thought it was pretty clear (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CST on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:06:40 PM EST
    After the second time that this is pathological.  It's kind of sad honestly.

    Parent
    Ya. The conclusion (3.00 / 1) (#8)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:28:20 PM EST
    here, is that he hates women.

    Parent
    Veru sad, I think (none / 0) (#5)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:09:47 PM EST
    He had a promising future, perfect family. Hard to understand such pathology.

    Parent
    Addictions are not logical (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:35:35 PM EST
    People continue to do things they know will harm themselves.  The definition of addiction.

    Parent
    Citation please (none / 0) (#12)
    by Redbrow on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 03:45:02 PM EST
    For the Trump tweet blaming Hillary.

    I don't see it in his twitter timeline or mentioned in any news stories.

    Whether in a tweet or otherwise (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Nemi on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 06:16:14 PM EST
    it seems pretty obvious that he blames Hillary Clinton ...

    Parent
    for all the good it'll do him (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 06:27:50 PM EST
    "Huma is making a very wise decision. I know Anthony Weiner well, and she will be far better off without him. I only worry for the country in that Hillary Clinton was careless and negligent in allowing Weiner to have such close proximity to highly classified information. Who knows what he learned and who he told? It's just another example of Hillary Clinton's bad judgment. It is possible that our country and its security have been greatly compromised by this."

    Let's forget for the moment the inherent hypocrisy of the man who's commenting above on the state of the Abedin-Weiner marriage, given that he's also someone who left his previous two spouses in order to take up with women who were much younger than himself.

    Since Anthony Weiner doesn't work for Hillary Clinton and is not part of her personal entourage or campaign inner circle, Trump's gratuitous expression of concern about Weiner's "close proximity to highly classified information" is both misplaced and nonsensical -- unless, of course, Trump himself has been sharing details of the national security briefings he's been receiving with his wife Melania.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    he calls the whole thing (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 07:44:38 PM EST
    "Hillary's Bad Judgment." It was a statement with the title "Hillary's Bad Judgment" not a tweet -- even worse.

    Parent
    I think it is referring to the one where (none / 0) (#15)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 04:08:26 PM EST
    he somehow insinuates that having Hillary having Weiner so close to someone in her inner circle was some kind of a national security threat, as if Abedin was sharing the classified briefings with him.

    Which prompted BTD to observe - if Trump thinks that happens, is it because he is sharing material with Melania?  

    Parent

    That is not a tweet (1.00 / 2) (#16)
    by Redbrow on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 04:14:23 PM EST
    And nowhere in that statement does Trump blame Hillary for Weiner's actions.

    Trump blames Weiner.

    Huma has demnstrated carelessness and nishandling of classifed material before. It is reasonable to question if she left classifed material lying unprotected around the house the same way she did in her car.

    Weiner's reckless cheating and Huma's enabling made them both prime targets for blackmail.

    Parent

    Yes, Trump blames Weiner. (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 30, 2016 at 05:44:01 PM EST
    But he also used the occasion to take a gratuitous cheap shot at Mrs. Clinton, assuming that Mr. Weiner may have been privy to classified information without any evidence to support such a supposition.

    Again, given that Weiner was not employed by Mrs. Clinton and was not part of her inner circle, only in the parallel universe of Wingbatland would such fact-free speculation appear as "reasonable." To the rest of us back on Planet Earth, Trump's charge is totally without foundation.

    But then, what else is new?

    Parent

    Exactly (none / 0) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 06:41:38 PM EST
    Another source (none / 0) (#32)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 09:56:23 PM EST
    reports it the same way -- blaming Hillary

    Parent
    Jeralyn's post has (none / 0) (#31)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 09:18:45 PM EST
    a link and does not refer to a tweet.

    Parent
    I changed it from (none / 0) (#33)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 09:57:10 PM EST
    tweet to statement (but thanks for the support!)

    Parent
    Trump was raised (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 29, 2016 at 04:33:00 PM EST
    by wolves. So there's a reason why he's blaming Hillary and it's that.