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 (11 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's what I think is interesting: it's not going to matter in all likelihood. Some partisans will think she should be hauled off to jail, perp walking, etc and won't be satisfied until that happens. Other more zealous partisans will demand a stake through the heart, head chopped off and her ashes scattered to finally put an end to her.  

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
There are a wide range of things that could happen to normals who would do less than what what Hillary did:

  • lose job
  • lose clearance
  • banned from future federal work requiring clearance
  • fine
  • misdemeanor
  • felony
  • jail
For instance if Hillary got hit with a fine and a misdemeanor with probation half or even a quarter of what Petraeus got that's no small thing. That would be a big deal. Hillary btw has the same lawyer as Petraeus. - Not that I'm saying that will happen. But just "less than jail" would not automatically be without consequences either. If it reaches one of her aides without touching Hillary that would even be a big deal IMO. There will also be a report, I could see how such a report would find "wrongdoing" but not criminal wrongdoing on Hillary's part. Or maybe no wrongdoing by anyone is possible, but after a year of investigation I doubt the FBI just comes out and says 'well we've just been doing this for nothing' either.
Click to expand...
I grit my teeth while defending Hillary on this comparison :x, but Petraeus was on another level because there was clear intent to circumvent the law.  He bet everything on that whole affair remaining secret, and he lost that one in more ways than one.  Regardless of how it shakes out with Hillary, it's highly doubtful that there will be a smoking gun that clearly proves cause and effect to that degree.  ie Hillary, "These protocols are a pain in my butt, so stop using them...  I don't care if it's an unsecured server.  Rub Mommy's bunions."  

 
Ditka Butkus said:
She likes Ted Cruz but would she sleep with him.
Click to expand...
No.

http://www.tmz.com/2015/08/09/caitlyn-jenner-attracted-to-women-i-am-cait/

Caitlyn Jenner One Thing Hasn't Changed ... I Still Only Like Girls!

Caitlyn Jenner is still only into women ... despite what the producers of her show want you to think.

A promo for this week's episode of "I Am Cait" casts doubt on her sexual orientation, but we're told Caitlyn has not wavered an inch -- she's not attracted to men.

Our sources say Caitlyn's family has asked the same question and got an unequivocal answer ... she's into women just as much as Bruce.
Click to expand...

 
Keith Boykin ‏@keithboykin 3m3 minutes ago

Hillary Clinton beats Bernie Sanders 74%-12% among black Democrats in Ohio. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_OH_30716.pdf … pic.twitter.com/nngaKtAnDr



Cc-VAi_UAAA-NTO.jpg







 


 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Fla\/\/ed said:
On 1/27/2016 at 4:12 PM, Fla\/\/ed said:

Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
  On 1/27/2016 at 3:27 PM, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

Do people understand that Hillary Clinton has the authority to declassify documents that originate in the State Department so that they can be shared? This is only an issue if the classification comes from another agency. If some diplomat in State classifies an email and Hillary declassifies it to send it to Sidney Blumenthal, that is perfectly legal. All authority to classify of declassify a State Department document stems through her.
Click to expand...
Well then....do you have a link for this and if this is all she did why is this investigation going on by the FBI?
Click to expand...
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/85691.pdf

You'll need to read the entire regs, but the long and short of it is that she has the original classification authority, and she also has the highest declassification authority in the department (as you might expect). Also note that in addition to relating to a classifiable subject matter, in order to meet the requirements for classification, the OCA (here, Hillary) must determine that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm national security in a way that can be identified or described.

I know there is an investigation to determine what originally classified material was on the servers. It's not impossible that she could have improperly declassified another agency's information. Or it's possible that she could have declassified without dotting the Is and crossing the Ts (striking out the original classification as opposed to deleting it etc.). I just find a lot of the coverage of this kind of mystifying. I hear certain people claim that indictments are imminent, but I don't hear that from the NY Times or anything.
Click to expand...
I think we need to bump this!

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
I think we need to bump this!
Click to expand...
1. It applies to documents classified by State, not the documents classified by the intelligence agencies, which have all or nearly all of the highest classifications at issue.

2. This would at least move into the direction of conceding these documents were classified at the time Hillary sent/received them, or should have been classified by her at that time but she did not. However if the claim is that for the State class documents they were classified but Hillary declassified them that at least is a move in the right direction.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Great news for Hillary. Bloomberg will not run as a third party candidate.

Nate Silver ‏@NateSilver538 19m19 minutes ago

Bloomberg explicitly cites throwing the election to Cruz/Trump as a reason he won't run. http://bv.ms/1QCDaK6
Click to expand...
Meh, I think Trump egged him into panic but he has disintegrated quite a lot lately, and also Bloomberg was piping up when Sanders was looking like he might pull it off but that threat has waned considerably.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Does she now.

Governmental or NGO experience handling public health crises and government misfeasance and maybe malfeasance = ???
Click to expand...
The malfeasance issue doesn't really matter from her perspective.  Her job is to provide water and nutrition support services to the people of Flint.  Whether or not anyone goes to jail over it doesn't really matter for her position.  But she does have a PhD in international relations from Oxford.  I'd imagine that would be helpful.  She's also Vice Chair of the Clinton Foundation, working with the Clinton Global Initiative, which has done a lot of work bringing water to the people of Rwanda, among others.  That seems relevant. 

I don't know what her thesis at Columbia was, but she teaches at the School of Public Health.  I think she's extremely qualified for this position.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
The malfeasance issue doesn't really matter from her perspective.  Her job is to provide water and nutrition support services to the people of Flint.  Whether or not anyone goes to jail over it doesn't really matter for her position.  But she does have a PhD in international relations from Oxford.  I'd imagine that would be helpful.  She's also Vice Chair of the Clinton Foundation, working with the Clinton Global Initiative, which has done a lot of work bringing water to the people of Rwanda, among others.  That seems relevant. 

I don't know what her thesis at Columbia was, but she teaches at the School of Public Health.  I think she's extremely qualified for this position.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that is a straight up, informational response. But this sounds somewhere between sending Michael Brown and asking Bindi Irwin to tackle a rattle snake infestation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Thanks, that is a straight up, informational response. But this sounds somewhere between sending Michael Brown and asking Bindi Irwin to tackle a rattle snake infestation.
Click to expand...
It's not.  As far as tackling a public health crisis related to water and nutrition distribution, I'd take Chelsea Clinton over Hillary or Bill any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

 
Hillary is currently detailing a plan called "debt free tuition", where "all but the wealthy won't have to pay for college". It's a 100 billion dollar a year plan

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Smack Tripper said:
Hillary is currently detailing a plan called "debt free tuition", where "all but the wealthy won't have to pay for college". It's a 100 billion dollar a year plan
Click to expand...
Just so I'm clear, the wealthy (by some yet to be determined definition) pay the tax for the plan, yet they are the only ones barred from the program?

 
Shula-holic said:
Just so I'm clear, the wealthy (by some yet to be determined definition) pay the tax for the plan, yet they are the only ones barred from the program?
Click to expand...


But it is not really the wealthy.  The mega-wealthy already have theirs.  Taxing income (not wealth) is really a tax on people trying to get rich.  

 
Shula-holic said:
Just so I'm clear, the wealthy (by some yet to be determined definition) pay the tax for the plan, yet they are the only ones barred from the program?
Click to expand...
That seems about the size of it. She hasn't indicated who is "wealthy".  She has also said she'll urge colleges to lower their fees. She says it's very different from Bernie's plan. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jon_mx said:
But it is not really the wealthy.  The mega-wealthy already have theirs.  Taxing income (not wealth) is really a tax on people trying to get rich.  
Click to expand...
Absolutely.  It's completely window dressing to pitch raising the marginal rates to the voting public.  That wouldn't hit the people the politicians like to claim they are taxing.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
1. It applies to documents classified by State, not the documents classified by the intelligence agencies, which have all or nearly all of the highest classifications at issue.

2. This would at least move into the direction of conceding these documents were classified at the time Hillary sent/received them, or should have been classified by her at that time but she did not. However if the claim is that for the State class documents they were classified but Hillary declassified them that at least is a move in the right direction.
Click to expand...
I replied to this and went to never - never land.  That post took too much energy to do again.  So you are stuck with this-

Lets just say that #1 seems to mean to me that the scope of the investigation, at least for criminal "mishandling of classified" information would very likely be limited to those items where some other government agency claims to be the source of the information and it was classified at the time.

And #2 is wrong.  None of the emails were classified.  That fact will never change.  The judgment of those handling a State Department FOIA request as to what to should be classified would never trump the judgment of the Secretary of States.  And despite the way it is portrayed in the commercial media that is not what is happening here.  

 
Gr00vus said:
A couple of weeks ago at the Nevada town hall she was saying free junior college. So she's continuing to inch towards Bernie's initial starting position. She's evolving!
Click to expand...
Going to need to know what she considers wealthy. 

I wish she would stick with Jr college being free 

 
Smack Tripper said:
She may propose a wall and waterboarding in the general election at this point
Click to expand...
Not sure she has an orginal idea floating around in her corrupt head. Im pretty sure she just tracks polling and popularity on every issue and jumps in on whichever way the wind is blowing on each. Democrats seem to like this free education thing.......you know what im for that.

 
Wooderson said:
Going to need to know what she considers wealthy. 

I wish she would stick with Jr college being free 
Click to expand...
Yes, at least Bernie is advocating this for public universities.  

Hillary is apparently going to do this for all, only emboldening the education industrial complex.. she will tell them to lower rates... now when they are getting a blank check from the government they're going to CUT costs?  

why do I feel like that will go as well as telling Wall Street to cut it out

 
So let's see what has changed in people trying to get elected?   Free this & free that.  You are entitled & have it coming.  We will pay for it from the rich people.

Ad throw up all over the place.  Same stuff to get ELECTED, not stuff that advances the country & the individual.  IMO

 
Smack Tripper said:
Yes, at least Bernie is advocating this for public universities.  

Hillary is apparently going to do this for all, only emboldening the education industrial complex.. she will tell them to lower rates... now when they are getting a blank check from the government they're going to CUT costs?  

why do I feel like that will go as well as telling Wall Street to cut it out
Click to expand...
education industrial complex?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
I replied to this and went to never - never land.  That post took too much energy to do again.  So you are stuck with this-

Lets just say that #1 seems to mean to me that the scope of the investigation, at least for criminal "mishandling of classified" information would very likely be limited to those items where some other government agency claims to be the source of the information and it was classified at the time.

And #2 is wrong.  None of the emails were classified.  That fact will never change.  The judgment of those handling a State Department FOIA request as to what to should be classified would never trump the judgment of the Secretary of States.  And despite the way it is portrayed in the commercial media that is not what is happening here.  
Click to expand...
You really don't know that, just pure speculation on your part.  

 
squistion said:
education industrial complex?  
Click to expand...
Yes.  The max revenue/profit model which has taken over higher education in the past 30-35 years.  I don't have the numbers with me right now, but I believe the cost of education has risen at a rate 42 percent higher than inflation in the past 30 years.  

 
jon_mx said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
IAnd #2 is wrong.  None of the emails were classified.  That fact will never change.  The judgment of those handling a State Department FOIA request as to what to should be classified would never trump the judgment of the Secretary of States.  And despite the way it is portrayed in the commercial media that is not what is happening here.  
Click to expand...
You really don't know that, just pure speculation on your part.  
Click to expand...
No it is a fact.  The emails that were deemed classified were so marked during the FOIA review.  That is only within the past year.

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
I replied to this and went to never - never land.  That post took too much energy to do again.  So you are stuck with this-

Lets just say that #1 seems to mean to me that the scope of the investigation, at least for criminal "mishandling of classified" information would very likely be limited to those items where some other government agency claims to be the source of the information and it was classified at the time.

And #2 is wrong.  None of the emails were classified.  That fact will never change.  The judgment of those handling a State Department FOIA request as to what to should be classified would never trump the judgment of the Secretary of States.  And despite the way it is portrayed in the commercial media that is not what is happening here.  
Click to expand...
Hm, I though we covered this too. - Yep I agree it takes too much energy to find the original exchange.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
No it is a fact.  The emails that were deemed classified were so marked during the FOIA review.  That is only within the past year.
Click to expand...
It is still possible that the markings were stripped or the information was reproduced from classified documents.  Markings are not what makes them classified.  

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
I replied to this and went to never - never land.  That post took too much energy to do again.  So you are stuck with this-

Lets just say that #1 seems to mean to me that the scope of the investigation, at least for criminal "mishandling of classified" information would very likely be limited to those items where some other government agency claims to be the source of the information and it was classified at the time.

And #2 is wrong.  None of the emails were classified.  That fact will never change.  The judgment of those handling a State Department FOIA request as to what to should be classified would never trump the judgment of the Secretary of States.  And despite the way it is portrayed in the commercial media that is not what is happening here.  
Click to expand...
1. Ok, but even so even for State classified docs (1) depends on (2) anyway. I think for purposes of this argument (here) means we are only looking at State classified docs and not all the docs, which includes almost everything Secret and above and any other non-State class docs. The investigation as we know covers everything, State and non-State.

2. Here you're in a conundrum. In order to use the defense - for the State class docs - that Hillary had authority to declassify then she would have had to have been making determinations that they were potentially classified in the first place, ie then. If State (in 2014-16) had determined that Hillary had declassified the State docs then they would not be classifying them now. I would be willing to move to the conversation that Hillary would have been making the class/declass determinations of State sourced docs contemporaneously but she herself rejects this notion that she was personally obligated to evaluate all documents she received. I think you too here implicitly acknowledge that the fact that the SOS governs control over declassification of State docs means that she too - like every single USG personnel handling potentially classified documentation - is required to be trained to do so and also to do so when she reads any document when it flows through her transom. There is no indication she ever did this once. There are at best maybe 1-2 instances when Hillary asks Sullivan if a document is classified. In at least one instance she asks an aide to strip the headings/markings so she could send non-paper.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
I am not part of the defense team.  I am the jury!

And no, knowing that the authority to ultimately determine what was and what was not classified within the State Department does not require Hillary to declassify her emails and/or their content.
Click to expand...
Hey I accept that BFS, didn't mean to suggest o/w, I should have said "for Hillary to use that defense...".

Well then that authority was non-exercised and the emails remained in their pristine state as they existed when sent and received, unevaluated by Hillary. Which is where the Hillary has herself now, basically acknowledging that she was not evaluating the substance of the information in front of her. That's really one of two possible claims against her, either that she did not do her duty or she was fully aware of her duty and breached it. I guess the former is the better one for her. It falls into the 'grandma' defense.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Hey I accept that BFS, didn't mean to suggest o/w, I should have said "for Hillary to use that defense...".

Well then that is authority was non-exercised and the emails remained in their pristine state as they existed when sent and received, unevaluated by Hillary. Which is where the Hillary has herself now, basically acknowledging that she was not evaluating the substance of the information in front of her. That's really one of two possible claims against her, either that she did not do her duty or she was fully aware of her duty and breached it. I guess the former is the better one for her. It falls into the 'grandma' defense.
Click to expand...
Wrong! 

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Wrong! 
Click to expand...
Ha, ok, let me know why when you get a chance. First of all Hillary's not claiming she declassed the State emails. Secondly (aside from her conversation with George Stephanopoulas) she's not even acknowledging she was to analyze their substance at all. It's more or less a "I don't do windows" defense, she seems to think that's for the little people.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
- There's video of Hilary on Fox if you can get that to work.

- That's Hillary on the townhall on Fox. How that happened I have no idea, it would be nice to see the GOP go on Msnbc now.

- The question where Hillary is asked what happens if she types an email, doesn't she have to determine if the information she is sending is classified. It's absurd for her to answer 'no', which she does.

- The comparison to Powell is absurd too. Powell had TWO, both below secret. Hillary's predecessor Rice had ZERO. Hillary had 2100, something like 100 secret or above. There is no comparison whatsoever.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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
259K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 11 (members: 0, guests: 11)
Back
Top