What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is it really surprising that a SOS would have someone at the FBI give them a heads up about an investigation coming their way? 

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Fwiw - pages 243-244 have the fingerprint info. It says no prints on the outside of the gun, only one on the inside and it's not Foster's. However it also footnotes that there are reasons why prints might not have been present on the gun, largely related to outside exposure. Further up it states that the gun dated to 1913 and was identified as a long time family gun of the Foster family (as identified by Foster's daughter), it says that the gun had a particular rebound effect from the hammer which had left a mark on Foster's thumb and hand, and it also says that that kind of gun leaves a very particular sort of chemical residue from the gunpowder and that very residue was found on Foster in at least a couple places. This file just verifies and documents that it was a suicide.
Click to expand...
How could outside exposure explain the lack of Foster's prints when someone else's were found intact? 

 
[icon] said:
Maybe they don't like the idea of 4 more years of a Clinton presidency?  :whoosh:

It's entertaining to me that for as much vitrol and hatred some on the left have for Trump, it somehow escapes them that a LOT of people are not so much voting FOR trump, as for "Anyone but Hillary" 

 
Click to expand...
About as anti-Hillary as they get. Doesn't excuse Trump for his rhetoric or the deliberately obtuse who pretend it isn't happening.

 
On Tuesday night, in a classified room in the Capitol, a group of Republicans and Democrats on the Oversight Committee met with Justice Department congressional liaison Peter Kadzik to discuss document requests. Republicans had called the hearing because they felt the FBI was not being forthcoming in their request for a full, un-redacted copy of the agency's Clinton investigative report.

Immunity also came up. Republicans wanted to know who else beside Pagliano and Combetta had received legal protection and who approved the agreements. Lawmakers also asked whether the deals required the recipients to still cooperate with other investigative entities.

Kadzik wouldn’t say. A Democratic source said he could not answer the questions because Republicans had only asked for the information a few hours earlier in a letter to the Justice Department, and the answers weren't fully researched.

Kadzik's refusal to answer fully did not go over well with Republicans, and the meeting deteriorated from there, said one GOP source in the room. One Republican threatened to make Kadzik testify in a public setting, should he fail to get them the information, in effect daring him to say that Congress wasn’t entitled to it.
Click to expand...
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/cheryl-mills-immunity-deal-reaction-228596

- The DOJ Congressional liaison would not tell Congress who had received immunity agreements. Sure, this is fine.

- I have a feeling the next meeting with Kadzik is not going to go very well.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Yuk.

- eta - BTW folks this is a public official emailing on public matters. This is a PUBLIC record.
Click to expand...
It's public now. Seems like gmail efforts to keep out of public. 

I'm sure CNN and MSNBC must be all over this now  

Assuming Comey is clean and/or not completely hamstrung, how does he not do something about this?

 
David Dodds said:
I think the Church destruction is way more likely to have been caused by people like Bob Creamer working covertly (until exposed) by the DNC. 

Instantly picked up as the lead story in all the same places that were selling Hillary as the perfect candidate.  Has all the markings of a false flag story to try and convince more black voters to actually vote.
Click to expand...
Just slid into Alex Jones territory so this is where I get off the train. Arson is not plants in a crowd. Which by the way has still not been proven if we are being intellectually honest. 

 
Thunderlips said:
Why are his supporters convinced...
Click to expand...
You could say this about all things Donald.

He is a professional con man. A flat out shyster.  These realities are not even debating in any circles that include Trump from a business perspective (and social at that).  Now, he's parlayed that into being an exceptional brand creator, entertainer and personality... and the three are somehow mashed into one consumable piece of plastic veneer nowadays to feed the reality TV hungry crowd. 

He has them convinced, because selling #### to a bunch of suckers is, quite literally, Trumps greatest calling and claim to fame.  

I'm not even saying this sarcastically, sardonically or even in a negative way... it's what he is. A personality that sells itself and somehow, he built a world brand by doing so.  And did that by convincing people of some underlying value, often in the name itself - when in reality, there was no value there whatsover (Trump U, countless failed endeavors, but Trump the brand came through untarnished, and that's because of Trump, himself). 

Now, you want that for reality TV and the dumb ### suckers who bought his books, classes, steaks, chinese made ties, fine.  But not for ###### president, people. 

Problem is, Trump's greatest asset is convincing people how great he is and that's why he can win... but this time, not just those suckers listed above are going to feel the pain of his history of failure, lies and fraud. And from a NYer who has witnessed Trump and knows people in circles with him, y'all are being played for suckers. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NCCommish said:
Right but why did they endorse him? What made them think he was their guy? You act like that happened in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
Honestly, who do you think they endorsed in the last election?

Here I will help, Right Wing Extremist groups tend to vote for the GOP. Just like the Left Wing Extremist groups tend to vote for Dems.

Seriously some of you need to stop acting like this is just something that started with Trump.

 
NCCommish said:
Just slid into Alex Jones territory so this is where I get off the train. Arson is not plants in a crowd. Which by the way has still not been proven if we are being intellectually honest. 
Click to expand...
If we're being intellectually honest, a lot of the hand wringing about whom to vote for just doesn't happen in this election cycle.  Then who would boost news ratings?

 
NCCommish said:
Just slid into Alex Jones territory so this is where I get off the train. Arson is not plants in a crowd. Which by the way has still not been proven if we are being intellectually honest. 




 
Click to expand...
That's fair.  But why are people assuming it's from a Trump Supporter.  Someone burned up a church and spray-painted a Trump slogan.  Two pretty even scenarios:

- Clinton's team trying to turn the tide on bad news

- A Trump supporter did this

As I type this, I think it's likely 80/20 being the Clinton support as the same media groups that have shown to be in HRCs pocket all trolled the story out as their lead.  

 
Hang 10 said:
How could outside exposure explain the lack of Foster's prints when someone else's were found intact? 
Click to expand...
It says in the footnote that "latent prints can be destroyed by exposure to certain elements, such as heat." The guy died in a very woody public park in the midst of July.

 
David Dodds said:
That's fair.  But why are people assuming it's from a Trump Supporter.  Someone burned up a church and spray-painted a Trump slogan.  Two pretty even scenarios:

- Clinton's team trying to turn the tide on bad news

- A Trump supporter did this

As I type this, I think it's likely 80/20 being the Clinton support as the same media groups that have shown to be in HRCs pocket all trolled the story out as their lead.  
Click to expand...
Huh.  Only took one sentence to shift those odds.

 
David Dodds said:
That's fair.  But why are people assuming it's from a Trump Supporter.  Someone burned up a church and spray-painted a Trump slogan.  Two pretty even scenarios:

- Clinton's team trying to turn the tide on bad news

- A Trump supporter did this

As I type this, I think it's likely 80/20 being the Clinton support as the same media groups that have shown to be in HRCs pocket all trolled the story out as their lead.  
Click to expand...
Dude.

 
David Dodds said:
That's fair.  But why are people assuming it's from a Trump Supporter.  Someone burned up a church and spray-painted a Trump slogan.  Two pretty even scenarios:

- Clinton's team trying to turn the tide on bad news

- A Trump supporter did this

As I type this, I think it's likely 80/20 being the Clinton support as the same media groups that have shown to be in HRCs pocket all trolled the story out as their lead.  
Click to expand...
Wow.  There are actually people in this country who think like this.  Amazing.

 
Courtjester said:
Honestly, who do you think they endorsed in the last election?

Here I will help, Right Wing Extremist groups tend to vote for the GOP. Just like the Left Wing Extremist groups tend to vote for Dems.

Seriously some of you need to stop acting like this is just something that started with Trump.
Click to expand...
Really? David Duke endorsed Romney? The KkK endorsed Romney? Neo-Nazis poll watched for Romney? Really? How did I miss all that?

 
Has Hillary given the Saudi's money back yet? They didn't burn a black church or anything but funding 9/11 was kinda sleazy. 

 
NCCommish said:
Really? David Duke endorsed Romney? The KkK endorsed Romney? Neo-Nazis poll watched for Romney? Really? How did I miss all that?
Click to expand...
Well, there was no reason for them to endorse anyone in that campaign.  I mean, it's not like his opponent was a black guy or anything.

 
Workhorse said:
Wow.  There are actually people in this country who think like this.  Amazing.
Click to expand...
If it's realistic to assume that someone would burn a church and paint a pro-candidate slogan as a means to drum up support for that candidate, why is it crazy to think that someone would burn a church and paint a pro-candidate slogan as a means to drum up support for the other candidate? 

I mean.. if someone is insane enough to burn a church... how is that small of a shift in rationale hard to imagine? 
 

 
timschochet said:
Earlier Dodds used the term "false flag". That's usually reserved for Alex Jones fans and the deep alt right. 
Click to expand...
No it's not, it's a well known military/intelligence term. It's just ludicrous to use it here.

News alert: there are some really ugly, sick people in the world and they do horrible things.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For those arguing the church was attacked by a Dem plant, did we reach a similar conclusion about the firebombed GOP office? Or was that Hillary too?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
It says in the footnote that "latent prints can be destroyed by exposure to certain elements, such as heat." The guy died in a very woody public park in the midst of July.
Click to expand...
 Latent finger prints? Seems odd that you could hold a gun with enough force to shoot yourself without making decent prints. How long was he in the woods before his body was found?

 
David Dodds said:
That's fair.  But why are people assuming it's from a Trump Supporter.  Someone burned up a church and spray-painted a Trump slogan.  Two pretty even scenarios:

- Clinton's team trying to turn the tide on bad news

- A Trump supporter did this

As I type this, I think it's likely 80/20 being the Clinton support as the same media groups that have shown to be in HRCs pocket all trolled the story out as their lead.  
Click to expand...
The more likely outcome is the the least complicated one. Could it have been arson for Clinton? There is certainly a less than zero chance but it's pretty close to zero. 

It is much more.likely that someone burned that church because it was a black church. And they didn't like that. It is far more likely although not at all guaranteed that person would support the guy the KkK endorsed. It's not the only possible explanation it's just the most likely. And usually the most likely answer is the right one.

 
Thunderlips said:
Here's my thing about Trump though(and I guess it's a question to the Trump supporters going back to the primaries.....so it's not just a HRC v. DT question)......Why are his supporters convinced that he's NOT going to fall in love with "business as usual" in Washington and just start sucking from that teat for his own gain?  
Click to expand...
Well obviously that won't MAGA, so he won't do it, of course.

 
[icon] said:
If it's realistic to assume that someone would burn a church and paint a pro-candidate slogan as a means to drum up support for that candidate, why is it crazy to think that someone would burn a church and paint a pro-candidate slogan as a means to drum up support for the other candidate? 

I mean.. if someone is insane enough to burn a church... how is that small of a shift in rationale hard to imagine? 
 
Click to expand...
It's not impossible, but I also wouldn't call it a 50/50 proposition that someone who supports Clinton would set fire to a 100-year-old sanctuary in Mississippi to drum up support in a community that is overwhelmingly voting for Clinton already.

 
Henry Ford said:
It's not impossible, but I also wouldn't call it a 50/50 proposition that someone who supports Clinton would set fire to a 100-year-old sanctuary in Mississippi to drum up support in a community that is overwhelmingly voting for Clinton already.
Click to expand...
Or maybe they wanted to make it a national story to bolster the craptastic arguments being floated in here. 

 
knowledge dropper said:
Trump will put together a great cabinet because he doesn't want to do the dirty work. 

HRC will put together a clown car full of unqualified political hacks, outcasts from academia, and sycophants in her cabinet.

I'm not worried at all about Trump.  
Click to expand...
The people he has had in his campaign save for Kelly-Anne Conway late in the game have been a JOKE.

 
Henry Ford said:
It's not impossible, but I also wouldn't call it a 50/50 proposition that someone who supports Clinton would set fire to a 100-year-old sanctuary in Mississippi to drum up support in a community that is overwhelmingly voting for Clinton already.
Click to expand...
Black on black arson?

 
[icon] said:
If it's realistic to assume that someone would burn a church and paint a pro-candidate slogan as a means to drum up support for that candidate, why is it crazy to think that someone would burn a church and paint a pro-candidate slogan as a means to drum up support for the other candidate? 

I mean.. if someone is insane enough to burn a church... how is that small of a shift in rationale hard to imagine? 
 
Click to expand...
Which is more likely:  An unhinged Trump supporter in the deep south, a part of the country where ignorant racists have historically burned churches to intimidate African-Americans for decades, feels empowered to burn a church by a candidate who has used racist buzzwords during his Presidential campaign. 

Or:

Hillary Clinton, who has engaged in some shady dealings in DC with her emails and coziness with all sorts of insiders, plants a false flag and has a supporter burn a church in the middle of nowhere Mississippi to try to compel African-Americans to go the polls.

The former fits into patterns of behavior for many generations in that part of the country. The latter exists at the fringes of political "thought" and wouldn't be credible as part of a movie.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
2K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
krista4
In this thread I rank my favorite Beatles songs: 204-1.
138 139 140
Replies
7K
Views
254K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top