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 (5 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
jon_mx said:
The Commish said:
That's a faulty presumption, at best.  Given the reality that there are varying degrees of "secured" from "completely open" to "completely closed".  I'm interested to know if you believe a server sitting on a federal network is any more/less or equal secure as a server sitting behind a Timewarner Cable cable modem/router (or whichever carrier she was using at the time).

Of course it's absolutely possible that a server sitting behind a TWC cable modem CAN be more secure than a federal network, but is it likely?  And if it was, wouldn't it  have been to HRC's benefit to establish that at the very beginning and let it be known to the world?  Given she hasn't this is why I'm going with the assumption that it was about as secure as your home internet connection which would be significantly less secure than the federal networks....even the "unsecured" ones.  
Click to expand...
In a way he is correct, spillage is spillage.  But really the federal network and computers which are attached are far more secure and heavily monitored so the spillage can be managed and cleaned up.
Click to expand...
Guess I'm not saying it correctly.  It's every employee's job to minimize spillage.  That falls on everyone.  The rule isn't "well, she spilled it so I'm going to dump out the rest" or "That's on her, she can clean it up".  That's not how any of our contracts work within the government.  There's a problematic method of personal accountability on a good bit of this stuff.

In this case Hillary's put herself in a position where she's on a server where she's the only one left to monitor.  She's outside the government's reach to help.  That doesn't decrease her responsibility, it increases it ten fold.  She didn't recognize that, or she didn't care.  That leaves an open door, hiding in plain site as it pertains to our national security and no one is watching the door.

It doesn't even matter if no one knew about the door (which we can bet isn't true).

 
The Commish said:
Guess I'm not saying it correctly.  It's every employee's job to minimize spillage.  That falls on everyone.  The rule isn't "well, she spilled it so I'm going to dump out the rest" or "That's on her, she can clean it up".  That's not how any of our contracts work within the government.  There's a problematic method of personal accountability on a good bit of this stuff.

In this case Hillary's put herself in a position where she's on a server where she's the only one left to monitor.  She's outside the government's reach to help.  That doesn't decrease her responsibility, it increases it ten fold.  She didn't recognize that, or she didn't care.  That leaves an open door, hiding in plain site as it pertains to our national security and no one is watching the door.

It doesn't even matter if no one knew about the door (which we can bet isn't true).
Click to expand...
Does the average American care I bet not

 
cobalt_27 said:
Still have to interview HRC.  It has taken a massively long time, which I am sure means to some here that they have been twiddling their thumbs with absolutely nothing to look at in this benign security review.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think it means the FBI is doing everything it can to make sure they're not accused of doing a substandard job.

 
dparker713 said:
Actually, I think it means the FBI is doing everything it can to make sure they're not accused of doing a substandard job.
Click to expand...
Of course.  And, I'm sure this is a typical timeframe for "security review" where the FBI keeps coming up with nothing.  Seized servers, immunity agreements, shifting stories by team Clinton.  We're in agreement that the FBI is doing everything they can to do a bang-up job, but we substantially differ on the direction this is likely headed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
 Paul Ryan, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, John Edwards, **** Cheney, Joe Liebermann. 

These are the last 6 VP candidate selections. Some good, some bad, most had no real effect on the election. 

Still it's considered the campaign's single most important decision. 

 
Is the RNC really going to hang their collective hat on Benghazi and the emails to try and overthrow Clinton and put Trump into the White House?   Does this play outside of the RNC bubble?

 
timschochet said:
 Paul Ryan, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, John Edwards, **** Cheney, Joe Liebermann. 

These are the last 6 VP candidate selections. Some good, some bad, most had no real effect on the election. 

Still it's considered the campaign's single most important decision. 
Click to expand...
Most people don't vote for President based on the VP pick. Palin certainly didn't help John McCain any, but I doubt he would have beaten Obama if he had made another (better) choice.

That is not to say that it couldn't make a difference. Elizabeth Warren would solidify the progressive left for Hillary IMO and in this election year that could be decisive as far as turnout in some swing states.  That said, I still don't think Warren is interested (although her recent comments and attitude has made me begin to rethink that).  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And of course Heather Samuelson - who personally culled Hillary's emails - was involved in the Fernando board appointment cover up.

Newly released State Department emails help reveal how a major Clinton Foundation donor was placed on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board even though he had no obvious experience in the field, a decision that appeared to baffle the department’s professional staff.

The emails further reveal how, after inquiries from ABC News, the Clinton staff sought to “protect the name” of the Secretary, “stall” the ABC News reporter and ultimately accept the resignation of the donor just two days later.
Click to expand...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
And of course Heather Samuelson - who personally culled Hillary's emails - was involved in the Fernando board appointment cover up.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624
Click to expand...
This is starting to spiral now.

What a juxtaposition.  Fabulous political week for Hills by all accounts and yet everything mounting in the background that jeopardizes to blow up this entire thing.

Watch Tim is probably on his 5th attempt at cobbling together a VP list of candidates right now to redirect the discussion.  :lmao:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
 Paul Ryan, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, John Edwards, **** Cheney, Joe Liebermann. 

These are the last 6 VP candidate selections. Some good, some bad, most had no real effect on the election. 

Still it's considered the campaign's single most important decision. 
Click to expand...
Cause Palin absolutely sunk McCain's campaign.

 
cobalt_27 said:
Of course.  And, I'm sure this is a typical timeframe for "security review" where the FBI keeps coming up with nothing.  Seized servers, immunity agreements, shifting stories by team Clinton.  We're in agreement that the FBI is doing everything they can to do a bang-up job, but we substantially differ on the direction this is likely headed.
Click to expand...
Plenty of smoke, I just question the amount of fire.

 
dparker713 said:
Cause Palin absolutely sunk McCain's campaign.
Click to expand...
Because they didn't vet her. 

At first it looked brilliant. People forget that now. She came out at the convention and blew everybody away. I still remember Keith Olbermann on MSNBC was basically panicking- "We just lost the election!" Conservatives were totally energized. They loved her. So did parents with children with disabilities. It was only later that it all fell apart. 

 
Oh and hey, this is cute...that donor who got a really big gig with no qualifications in exchange for gazillions with the sham foundation....surprise, surprise, get this....he's a Super Delegate.  This makes so much sense.  WTF?!

 
timschochet said:
Because they didn't vet her. 

At first it looked brilliant. People forget that now. She came out at the convention and blew everybody away. I still remember Keith Olbermann on MSNBC was basically panicking- "We just lost the election!" Conservatives were totally energized. They loved her. So did parents with children with disabilities. It was only later that it all fell apart. 
Click to expand...
I was on the fence.  I generally prefer Republican policies.  However, Palin was such a horrid choice I couldn't excuse it.  It wasn't a lapse in judgment - it was a lack of judgment.  It was entirely an anti-intellectual choice.  And also entirely inexcusable.  

 
I think John Edwards was almost as bad a pick as Palin. Edwards was young and good looking, and those were his only attributes. In the debate against Cheney, a competent guy (say like a Richard Gephart or Russ Feingold) would have been able to put Cheney on the ropes. But Edwards looked so young and naive it may Cheney look wise and knowledgeable by comparison. 

Joe Biden and **** Cheney were basically taken for the same reason: the young candidate takes an older trusted hand whom the public feels can guide the ship. Both times that worked. Hillary doesn't need to do that. 

Leibermann was chosen because he criticized Bill Clinton over the Lewinsky thing and Gore wanted to separate himself from Clinton. That was pretty stupid. Bill Clinton had a 65% approval rating, and Gore did everything he could to run away from him. I think it's the main reason he lost the election, frankly. 

As for Paul Ryan, it was a dull, uninteresting choice. Ryan is a very competent guy but he is way too wonky. No color. He didn't lose the election for Romney, but he did nothing to help Romney win it either. This is the sort of thing Hillary needs to avoid, which is why I don't think she should pick someone like Tim Kaine. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hilarious that Tim is trying so hard to redirect and change the subject in his own thread with missives about potential VP candidates (probably 50% lifted word-for word from other sources).  It's just so darn cute of him.

 
cobalt_27 said:
Hilarious that Tim is trying so hard to redirect and change the subject in his own thread with missives about potential VP candidates (probably 50% lifted word-for word from other sources).  It's just so darn cute of him.
Click to expand...
I think it's an interesting subject, much more interesting to me than repeating the same old stuff about the emails. I note that the news media generally agrees with me on this.  But if you want to discuss the emails, I can't stop you. Have at it. 

And no, everything I just wrote is my own analysis. 

 
cobalt_27 said:
Oh and hey, this is cute...that donor who got a really big gig with no qualifications in exchange for gazillions with the sham foundation....surprise, surprise, get this....he's a Super Delegate.  This makes so much sense.  WTF?!
Click to expand...
I mean, pay for play is so intrinsic to our government, I have a hard time getting worked up over it.

 
timschochet said:
I think it's an interesting subject, much more interesting to me than repeating the same old stuff about the emails. I note that the news media generally agrees with me on this.  But if you want to discuss the emails, I can't stop you. Have at it. 

And no, everything I just wrote is my own analysis. 
Click to expand...
If you don't have any background on the emails, then there isn't any "old stuff."  By definition it's new.  To you. Because your head is buried up your ###, remarkably by your own choosing.  Nonetheless, a lot of new stuff has emerged, but you wouldn't know because you are rigid in adhering to your unique brand of ignorance.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27 said:
If you don't have any background on the emails, then there isn't any "old stuff."  By definition it's new.  To you. Because your head is buried up your ###, remarkably by your own choosing.  Nonetheless, a lot of new stuff has emerged, but you wouldn't know because you are rigid in adhering to your unique brand of ignorance.
Click to expand...
I have been accused several times in this thread of having my head buried up Hillary's ###; now you accuse me of having my head buried up my own ###. I only have one head, so you'll have to choose, because it can't be both places at once. 

If Hillary committed the crimes that you believe she did, she will be indicted and her campaign will be ruined. I don't believe that's going to happen, because I don't believe she committed the crimes you believe she did. But we'll see. I do believe that the FBI is honest. I believe Loretta Lynch is honest. I believe James Comey is honest. I don't think they will cover anything up. If there is a crime here, they'll get to it. Beyond that, you're right: the whole subject bores me. But don't let that stop YOU from discussing it if you want. 

 
timschochet said:
I have been accused several times in this thread of having my head buried up Hillary's ###; now you accuse me of having my head buried up my own ###. I only have one head, so you'll have to choose, because it can't be both places at once. 

If Hillary committed the crimes that you believe she did, she will be indicted and her campaign will be ruined. I don't believe that's going to happen, because I don't believe she committed the crimes you believe she did. But we'll see. I do believe that the FBI is honest. I believe Loretta Lynch is honest. I believe James Comey is honest. I don't think they will cover anything up. If there is a crime here, they'll get to it. Beyond that, you're right: the whole subject bores me. But don't let that stop YOU from discussing it if you want. 
Click to expand...
Thanks for your permission, Tim.  Means so much coming from you.

 
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
253K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Back
Top