What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (6 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
More to the point, though, you fear that the most likely Democrat nominee, having just been seriously wounded by this week’s IG report, is manifestly vulnerable to a much greater wound in the form of a criminal indictment for misconduct that far transcends what the IG report dealt with.  Specifically, as a sophisticated observer, you are aware that Former Secretary Clinton’s intent (known in criminal law as mens rea), or lack of same, is not what matters in this case.  Rather, the applicable legal standard is a mere “gross negligence” one, as specified in the standard national security non-disclosure agreement that she signed and its underlying criminal statutes.  

And when you marry that to the fact that (among other things) her admitted failure to use the State Department’s special classified email system for classified (or potentially classified) information constituted a clear violation of a criminal prohibition, you start worrying big-time.  And this is especially so given that Ms. Clinton did not just violate such laws inadvertently or even only occasionally — she did so systemically.  In other words, her very email scheme itself appears to have been a walking violation of criminal law, one with the mens rea prosecution standard readily met.  
This is all speculation and opinion.  

 
Translation:. I have no idea what I'm talking about, and I have no inclination to try and dig my way out.

This is pretty gross negligence on your part, so we're done here.
No, when every single story is another hit piece on Hillary Clinton then it's extremely fair to question the legitimacy and bias of the site.  I did read your articles and there is nothing there, other than speculation based on an extremely biased interoperation of the IG's report. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
More to the point, though, you fear that the most likely Democrat nominee, having just been seriously wounded by this week’s IG report, is manifestly vulnerable to a much greater wound in the form of a criminal indictment for misconduct that far transcends what the IG report dealt with.  Specifically, as a sophisticated observer, you are aware that Former Secretary Clinton’s intent (known in criminal law as mens rea), or lack of same, is not what matters in this case.  Rather, the applicable legal standard is a mere “gross negligence” one, as specified in the standard national security non-disclosure agreement that she signed and its underlying criminal statutes.  

And when you marry that to the fact that (among other things) her admitted failure to use the State Department’s special classified email system for classified (or potentially classified) information constituted a clear violation of a criminal prohibition, you start worrying big-time.  And this is especially so given that Ms. Clinton did not just violate such laws inadvertently or even only occasionally — she did so systemically.  In other words, her very email scheme itself appears to have been a walking violation of criminal law, one with the mens rea prosecution standard readily met.  
That reads like it was written by someone that never went to law school.

 
No, when every single story is another hit piece on Hillary Clinton then it's extremely fair to question the legitimacy and bias of the site.  I did read your articles and there is nothing there, other than speculation based on an extremely biased interoperation of the IG's report. 
So the FBI is just bored?

 
I've got a list of issues a mile long with Hillary.  How is it that her opposition in this election cycle only really ever talks about this email stuff, where we're missing the most critical information?  It's pretty odd.

 
So the FBI is just bored?
We don't know for sure that the FBI is even investigating.  But no, they are not bored.  There could be any number of reasons why they are investigating, the Clinton's have never had a shortage of people trying to take them down. 

My guess is that any investigation is searching for nefarious activity or possible intelligent leaks associated with the "widespread" and "systemic" violations of the FRA that spanned several administrations, per the IG's report.

 
I've got a list of issues a mile long with Hillary.  How is it that her opposition in this election cycle only really ever talks about this email stuff, where we're missing the most critical information?  It's pretty odd.
Especially when the candidate himself has said American are tired of the damn emails, and that there are other major issues facing Americans.  

 
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/08-sanders-endorsed-obama-clinton-formally-exited-race-n586556

As Bernie Sanders and his supporters argue that Hillary Clinton can't clinch the Democratic nomination on Tuesday - because superdelegates don't count until the convention - it is worth noting that Sanders endorsed Barack Obama two days after Obama crossed the magic number (pledged + superdelegate), saying he had become Democratic nominee.

And Sanders' endorsement of Obama came before Clinton had officially exited the 2008 presidential race.
We're going to have to move the goal posts again people.

 
Oh, Tim.  

Everyone once in a while you post things that make me think that this account really is the biggest fishing trip ever.  This one is in the top 10 here. 
Sand are you ready to apologize for this post now that I have provided you evidence that Hillary really is probably the most respected woman in modern American history? 

 
I love irony, thanks  :thumbup:
Seriously go look through the last few pages of what you actually typed.  It is all short zingers, put downs and emoticons.  You can disagree with me and that's fine, but at least I'm bringing some brain vibrations to the table here. 

 
So folks that are backing Hilary feel strongly that the country doesn't want to hear about emails anymore? I think that is pretty obnoxious to assume and on the heels of a pretty scathing report where she shows no regard for law and order as the FBI said they would never have granted her what she went and did anyways...seems like this is something that will not be brushed under the rug or disappear no matter how much you wish it and lock yourself in a phone booth with three more of her supporters you still cannot stop the other 350 million who are more than a little curious about how she seems to operate...and a tell all book coming from a secret service agent assigned to the Clintons...inquiring minds want to know.

Now back to the regularly scheduled feature tonight, Hitler's amazing speeches 

 
So folks that are backing Hilary feel strongly that the country doesn't want to hear about emails anymore?
Anymore? 

I haven't been able to find any recent polling about this, but all the polling from last year was that most of the public doesn't give a crap about this. 

NOW- if Cobalt is right, and she is indicted, then people will care. Not before that happens. And since I don't believe it will happen, I don't believe the public will EVER care about this. 

 
Anymore? 

I haven't been able to find any recent polling about this, but all the polling from last year was that most of the public doesn't give a crap about this. 

NOW- if Cobalt is right, and she is indicted, then people will care. Not before that happens. And since I don't believe it will happen, I don't believe the public will EVER care about this. 
Last year we didn't have the FBI report in hand and the Washington Post condemning her simultaneously either. Things can change over 12 months, right?

 
Seriously go look through the last few pages of what you actually typed.  It is all short zingers, put downs and emoticons.  You can disagree with me and that's fine, but at least I'm bringing some brain vibrations to the table here. 
Yeah you're a real Einstein. The last few pages I've been having a little fun with the "Hillary Clinch" and you've been saying brilliant things like we don't know if the FBI is investigating Hillary.

 
The Clinton Body Count: 

May 3, 1996...Ron Brown(DNC Chair, Commerce Sec) dies along with 39 other people on an Air Force T-43 which is a converted 737. He was on the verge of being indicted and wanting to strike a deal he will suddenly no longer be able to testify against the Clintons. 

The very next day, his lawyer is murdered in a drive-by shooting. Few days later the air traffic controller who was in charge during Brown's aircraft accident suddenly commits suicide. And this is but one of a bunch of these. Bill Clinton was seen smiling leaving the funeral. 

That's 41 people right there likely murdered at the hands of Hilary and Bill. 

 
Anymore? 

I haven't been able to find any recent polling about this, but all the polling from last year was that most of the public doesn't give a crap about this. 

NOW- if Cobalt is right, and she is indicted, then people will care. Not before that happens. And since I don't believe it will happen, I don't believe the public will EVER care about this. 
I agree If she's indicted people will care. I also think people might care about what we discover in the 30,000 deleted emails. I don't believe for a second they're all yoga routines. They were deleted on purpose - and for a reason.

 
“The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails, Enough of the emails. Let’s talk about the real issues facing America”
-Bernie Sanders

I agree If she's indicted people will care. I also think people might care about what we discover in the 30,000 deleted emails. I don't believe for a second they're all yoga routines. They were deleted on purpose - and for a reason.
Maybe just maybe she didn't want her personal information as fodder for political enemies who have been out to get her for 25 years?  

Also, when talking about the FBI investigation I was speaking to the scope and the coyness of the FBI, we don't know and they haven't said.  If this actually wasn't a witch hunt the FBI would be interviewing and investigating many people, as it is, they most assuredly are investigating Clinton.  And I'd bet what they'll find is violations of rules and protocols, that are not nefarious or isolated to her specifically, and there was no harm done to our Intelligence or to the American people.  And even if they do conjure up a case aimed at her specifically, it would then be on Obama's appointed AG Lynch to pursue, and at what time a no harm no foul case that would accomplish nothing, other than empowering her political enemies. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Clinton Body Count: 

May 3, 1996...Ron Brown(DNC Chair, Commerce Sec) dies along with 39 other people on an Air Force T-43 which is a converted 737. He was on the verge of being indicted and wanting to strike a deal he will suddenly no longer be able to testify against the Clintons. 

The very next day, his lawyer is murdered in a drive-by shooting. Few days later the air traffic controller who was in charge during Brown's aircraft accident suddenly commits suicide. And this is but one of a bunch of these. Bill Clinton was seen smiling leaving the funeral. 

That's 41 people right there likely murdered at the hands of Hilary and Bill. 
I knew if this thread was around long enough somebody would eventually accuse the Clintons of murder. Mr. Ham came awfully close with his Vince Foster nonsense, but even he wouldn't go quite that far. Congratulations MOP! You win the 1990s irrelevant conspiracy prize! 

 
Please change your factually inaccurate thread title. Nobody will clinch anything until the convention 50 days out as superdelegates don't officially vote until that time. Plenty of time for an indictment. 

 
Maybe just maybe she didn't want her personal emails as fodder for political enemies who have been out to get her for 25 years?
I'm sure that's true - but I don't think that's the reason she deleted them. In fact, if she really wanted her actual personal emails hidden from her political enemies then I'd suggest that blending them with her official emails was probably the worst way to go about that. Amazingly poor judgment imo, surpassed only by her idea of actually deleting them. And that poor judgment  - by itself - is not reason enough to keep her out of the White House. If they come out and say something along the lines of "Yep, they were all yoga routines and private emails, nothing to see here" I'll be the first to say I was wrong. But I've said a couple of times on record here I have no doubt whatsoever this secretive, conniving, corrupt, self serving, evil, greedy, ambitious, political cancer, has something rotten in those deleted emails. I'll probably regret NOT taking Squis up on his indictment bet because looking back in hindsight it will probably look like the safest bet in the history of Vegas. In fact I'll do more than admit I'm wrong: If it's merely "rotten" and not "criminal" I'll vote for her.

 
Please change your factually inaccurate thread title. Nobody will clinch anything until the convention 50 days out as superdelegates don't officially vote until that time. Plenty of time for an indictment. 
Per Bernie Sanders in 2008, the thread title is factaully accurate. 
 

As Bernie Sanders and his supporters argue that Hillary Clinton can't clinch the Democratic nomination on Tuesday - because superdelegates don't count until the convention - it is worth noting that Sanders endorsed Barack Obama two days after Obama crossed the magic number (pledged + superdelegate), saying he had become Democratic nominee.

And Sanders' endorsement of Obama came before Clinton had officially exited the 2008 presidential race.

"I plan to play a very active role," Sanders said of endorsing Obama, according to an interview in the June 5, 2008 Burlington Free Press. "I will do everything I can to see that he is elected president."

But the newspaper added, "Sanders said he held off supporting either of the Democrats [Obama or Clinton] because he has made it a custom not to support any Democrat for the presidential nomination until the party had chosen its nominee."
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/08-sanders-endorsed-obama-clinton-formally-exited-race-n586556

 
Please change your factually inaccurate thread title. Nobody will clinch anything until the convention 50 days out as superdelegates don't officially vote until that time. Plenty of time for an indictment. 
Plus it's obnoxious. Being excited for Hillary Clinton clinching the nomination is like being excited for a herpes outbreak.

 
I'm sure that's true - but I don't think that's the reason she deleted them. In fact, if she really wanted her actual personal emails hidden from her political enemies then I'd suggest that blending them with her official emails was probably the worst way to go about that. Amazingly poor judgment imo, surpassed only by her idea of actually deleting them. And that poor judgment  - by itself - is not reason enough to keep her out of the White House. If they come out and say something along the lines of "Yep, they were all yoga routines and private emails, nothing to see here" I'll be the first to say I was wrong. But I've said a couple of times on record here I have no doubt whatsoever this secretive, conniving, corrupt, self serving, evil, greedy, ambitious, political cancer, has something rotten in those deleted emails. I'll probably regret NOT taking Squis up on his indictment bet because looking back in hindsight it will probably look like the safest bet in the history of Vegas. In fact I'll do more than admit I'm wrong: If it's merely "rotten" and not "criminal" I'll vote for her.
Well she has said that it was poor judgement, but in my opinion I think that we would of known about anything that was truly nefarious or criminal, I also think that they would have found that smoking gun this late in the game.   I am not aware of any misgivings reported that are limited to her, her department, or her administration.  

As far as bets go, I don't know what wager you were discussing but I'd be more than happy to take a bet that there will be no criminal charges brought to Hillary Clinton

 
Well, if nothing else, the conservatives and Hillary haters will have one thread that they can all make a fool out of themselves again like they did in the run up to the 2012 election

It was so much fun in the two years prior to that election seeing post after post in this forum about how it was impossible for Obama to be reelected because (take your pick): People only voted for him because they wanted to feel cool and say they voted for the first black president. He got a huge black turnout at the polls which wouldn't be repeated in 2012. Everyone they knew and talked to was voting for Romney. Those who voted for him had buyer's remorse as evidenced by the 2010 election. All the polls were wrong, including Nate Silver, who was a one-hit-wonder and just got lucky but couldn't do it again, etc.

Bottom line, if Hillary runs she probably wins. All they got against her is Benghazi, calling her old (although Romney is actually four months older and age would be a non-issue if he had won and was now seeking reelection). And what they think is the trump card of "She has never accomplished anything in her political career" (which is not the perception among her supporters).

Now a lot of can happen in the next two years, but Democrats are excited about her candidacy (despite what you are hearing on the FFA) and I don't currently see a strong candidate among Paul, Christie, Cruz, Rubio, et al. Jeb Bush could be a serious threat as a moderate alternative, but he has his own issues (Bush name) which he might not be able to overcome.

Anyway, looking forward to the discussion. :popcorn:
Given the news of Hillary clinching (and me puckering) I thought I'd go back to the first page and see what we were saying at the beginning. Not a bad post for Nov 2014 by Squis here.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top