Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (4 Viewers)

[cstu]

This election may have the lowest turnout in history

Obama and 69.5 and 66 million votes in 2008 and 2012.

McCain had 60 million and Romney had 61 million.

IMO Hillary has a floor of 65 million because of women voters and Trump has a ceiling of 60 million.  Hillary should run away with it in popular votes.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

This is interesting...since 18 year olds started voting in 1972, turnout has been in a really narrow range:

2008    57.10%
2004    55.70%
1992    55.20%
1972    55.10%
2012    54.90%
1976    53.60%
1984    53.30%
1980    52.80%
1988    50.30%
2000    50.30%
1996    49.00%


And the last three elections are all in the top half.  Would definitely take the over on 54% for this one.

2004 was extremely close when people woke up on election day.  2008 and 2012 featured Obama.  

2016 will feature two of the most disliked candidates in modern political history squaring off against one another, and the outcome is likely to be a foregone conclusion by August, let alone November.  I wouldn't be surprised to see this drop below 50%.  

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Maybe she got a boost from this Sanders gaffe:

Old Man Yells At Cloud Wall Street.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

#### Hillary....No really somebody #### Hillary...I think she needs it.

 

[cstu]

2004 was extremely close when people woke up on election day.  2008 and 2012 featured Obama.  

2016 will feature two of the most disliked candidates in modern political history squaring off against one another, and the outcome is likely to be a foregone conclusion by August, let alone November.  I wouldn't be surprised to see this drop below 50%.  

I believe the result of the 2000 election was a wake up call for young people, which is why you saw the huge jump from 2000 to 2004. Hillary won't generate enthusiasm for herself (like Kerry) but she's far better than the destruction Trump can cause (like W).

 

[Gr00vus]

So, she'll win the women vote, the african american vote, the latino vote...how does she lose this thing?

 

[pantagrapher]

So, she'll win the women vote, the african american vote, the latino vote...how does she lose this thing?

Outside of a widespread voter suppression effort by the GOP, the path looks pretty clear right now.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Outside of a widespread voter suppression effort by the GOP, the path looks pretty clear right now.

They'll have to suppress their own voters.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

 

[Gr00vus]

Outside of a widespread voter suppression effort by the GOP, the path looks pretty clear right now.

I'm a Charger fan, so my experience is there are all kinds of ways you to lose that you never expected. Marlon McCree making an interception on 4th down  (when the Chargers are up by 8 with about 6 minutes left in the game) trying to return said interception and then fumbling it back to the Patriots kind of never expected.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

So, she'll win the women vote, the african american vote, the latino vote...how does she lose this thing?

Well, this is a woman who had a 50-60% lead six months ago and found herself in a dog fight against an aging socialist who relied on $27 donations to fund his campaign.  Don't underestimate her ability to turn a blowout into a one score game as we get close to November.

 

[Gr00vus]

But seriously - how big will she win the women vote? I guess it somewhat depends on the opponent. But I'm thinking if it's Trump or Cruz she could pull 70% plus.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I'm a Charger fan, so my experience is there are all kinds of ways you to lose that you never expected. Marlon McCree making an interception (when the Chargers are up by 8 with about 6 minutes left in the game) trying to return said interception and then fumbling it back to the Patriots kind of never expected.

In football terms Hillary vs Donald will be a Browns/Raiders slopfest. Tons of turnovers, ugly, fights, but basically all Hillary has to do is run the ball, own the middle of the field, and take field goals when available. 

 

[pantagrapher]

I'm a Charger fan, so my experience is there are all kinds of ways you to lose that you never expected. Marlon McCree making an interception (when the Chargers are up by 8 with about 6 minutes left in the game) trying to return said interception and then fumbling it back to the Patriots kind of never expected.

I tend to believe nothing very surprising happens after the conventions. The media will make a big deal out of small blips and changes in momentum, but nothing major will happen. Pundits will do their usual concern trolling and promise their October Surprises, but most people know who they're going to vote for by that point and aren't easily dissuaded. That's why I think a weird turnout issue would be the only real way to tip the scales.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I tend to believe nothing very surprising happens after the conventions. The media will make a big deal out of small blips and changes in momentum, but nothing major will happen. Pundits will do their usual concern trolling and promise their October Surprises, but most people know who they're going to vote for by that point and aren't easily dissuaded. That's why I think a weird turnout issue would be the only real way to tip the scales.

Low turnout could happen if people are incredibly disgusted by the choices.

 

[Gr00vus]

I tend to believe nothing very surprising happens after the conventions. The media will make a big deal out of small blips and changes in momentum, but nothing major will happen. Pundits will do their usual concern trolling and promise their October Surprises, but most people know who they're going to vote for by that point and aren't easily dissuaded. That's why I think a weird turnout issue would be the only real way to tip the scales.

Or a federal prison term. What's that, Marty wasted another time out? I'm sure that won't come back to haunt us (because Kaeding's a gagger anyway).

 

[Gr00vus]

Low turnout could happen if people are incredibly disgusted by the choices.

I don't see how that is detrimental to HRC, unless there's not a uniform distribution of stay at homes.

 

[pantagrapher]

Low turnout could happen if people are incredibly disgusted by the choices.

Maybe. But primary turnout seems to be tracking pretty good so far. And it's not like POTUS is the only thing on the ballot.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I don't see how that is detrimental to HRC, unless there's not a uniform distribution of stay at homes.

TBH I don't see it really happening where people don't show up *against Donald. He resolves or negates all of Hillary's flaws one for one Includibg record, hers is flawed but his is worse (in business) to nonexistent (in government). Plus the media will gut him like roadkill.

Hillary doesn't have to do much but remind people Donald is completely unqualified to very dangerous and use his own quotes as ads. 

 

[Henry Ford]

Outside of a widespread voter suppression effort by the GOP, the path looks pretty clear right now.

Or Clinton being charged with a federal crime after the nomination is set. 

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

Maybe. But primary turnout seems to be tracking pretty good so far. And it's not like POTUS is the only thing on the ballot.

I haven't seen anything on yesterday's vote totals but isn't it only up on the GOP side?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Or Clinton being charged with a federal crime after the nomination is set. 

I'm thinking the prospect of Donald being the potential beneficiary of this will make any potentially political decision even less likely to go against Hillary. 

 

[AnonymousBob]

So, she'll win the women vote, the african american vote, the latino vote...how does she lose this thing?

She doesn't. There's a very slight chance she loses against Romney or some other moderate conservative if they bypass Trump and Cruz, and an even smaller chance she gets indicted. Barring both those unlikely scenarios I don't see how she isn't our next President. 

 

[Poppa]

I'm thinking the prospect of Donald being the potential beneficiary of this will make any potentially political decision even less likely to go against Hillary. 

Disagree. The Republic has survived any number of idiots and buffoons as leaders; it will survive Trump, as well - probably. Any politics involved is being exerted now - before a possible referral - to minimize potential fallout. With Comey's well-earned reputation for independence, if his FBI recommends prosecution, and has built an iron-clad case of criminal wrongdoing - imo, Lynch will have no reasonable option not to proceed with the Government's case against HRC and others. I see, too, a President who would not wish his historical 'legacy' tarnished by the perception (or reality) of sweeping a high-profile criminal referral under the rug. 

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

New emails have come to light showing that the NSA rejected Hillary's request to use Blackberry at State:

2/13/09 - State Dept. Senior Coordinator for Security Infrastructure, Bureau of Diplomatic Security Donald R. Reid requested to obtain secure Blackberry technology for Hillaryand that request was denied.  Subsequently Hillary's aides tried to pry into the security arrangements for President Obama’s Blackberry and that was similarly rebuffed - strongly"
 

[Redacted] at Eric's request we began examining options for S with respect to secure “Blackberry-like” communications … the current state of the art is not too user friendly, has no infrastructure at State and is very expensive…each time we asked the question “What was the solution for POTUS?” we were politely told to shut up and color … NSA opened the door for us to establish requirements and they would try to help…

While our noses are out of joint for how this was handled, the issue will be what kind of support will NSA be offering to meet S demands (basically, wireless comm in Mahogany Row) …

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-4.pdf

- "S" is Hillary. - Not sure who "Eric" is and who Reid is emailing is redacted as well.

2/18/09 - Again Reid to we don't know who (redacted)

Here’s the results of our meeting yesterday… as I had been speculating, the issue here is one of personal comfort … S does not use a personal computer so our view of someone wedded to their email (why doesn’t she use her desktop when in SCIF?) doesn’t fit this scenario … during the campaign she was urged to keep in contact with thousands via a BB … once she got the hang of it she was hooked … now everyday, she feels hamstrung because she has to lock her BB up … she does go out several times a day to an office they have crafted for her outside the SCIF and plays email catch up … Cheryl Mills and others who are dedicated BB addicts are frustrated because they too are not near their desktop very often during the working day…

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-8.pdf

.It's not clear how this email go to Reid as he is not shown on the first string, but this was the start of it:

Meeting:  Ms. Mills described the requirement as chiefly driven by Secretary Clinton, who does not use standard computer equipment but relies exclusively on her Blackberry for e-mailing and remaining in contact on her schedule, etc.  Ideally, all members of her suite would be allowed to use Blackberries for communication in the SCIF; [Redacted] was not the primary driver, but if possible would be a plus.

...Ms. Mills has witnessed the use of Blackberries in other sensitive (but perhaps not SCI fed spaces); she asked some excellent questions about what might be possible and prudent. She also asked about precedent; former Secretary Rice had received waivers for her staff; however, use expanded to an unmanageable number of users from a security perspective, so those waivers were phased out and Blackberry use was not allowed in her suite …

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-8.pdf

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-10-11.pdf

- The policy is described as "no BB in the SCIF" which apparently caused Hillary "displeasure."

- So basically here Hillary and her staff were told that Blackberry use for documentation requiring SCIF was prohibited - and were told to "shut up and color" - but apparently they went ahead and did it anyway on their own.

 

[The Commish]

How many people here know what SCIF is without looking it up?

ETA:  And FWIW...the NSA was correct to tell her to pound sand on this topic.  It's absurd to even request such things.  That she did shows she either doesn't care or doesn't understand.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

So there's been a lot of discussion about who at DOJ will be making the decision on Hillary's handling of classified data.

Well, it turns out it is this guy - John Carlin (from 12/8/13 Foreign Policy magazine):

The fight over the government’s top national security lawyer.

In September, President Obama nominated John Carlin, a career federal prosecutor, to run the Justice Department’s National Security Division, a senior post whose occupant plays a key role in authorizing secret surveillance operations and managing national security investigations. It was a controversial pick.

Not only did some of Carlin’s peers think he wasn’t the most qualified candidate. Attorney General Eric Holder — the man who was supposed to be Carlin’s boss — hadn’t supported him. Several former officials told Foreign Policy that the attorney general "strenuously" objected to nominating Carlin.

But Carlin had the backing of two senior officials in the White House, who had made it known that he was their preferred choice. In the end, their candidate won out, prompting several former law enforcement and national security officials to decry the nomination as an act of undue political influence over law enforcement decisions.

"I think it is extraordinary and unusual to have someone forced upon an attorney general over his objections," said one former law enforcement official. "The independence of the Justice Department from the White House is institutionally important." Decisions on which cases to prosecute and how to manage criminal investigations are supposed to be made free of political considerations.

...Carlin’s biggest advocates in the White House were Kathryn Ruemmler, the White House counsel, and Lisa Monaco, the president’s homeland security and counterterrorism adviser, according to current and former officials. Ruemmler and Monaco had worked with Carlin at the Justice Department and in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, where all three served at the same time as prosecutors.

Former officials said they are concerned that Carlin, who has been acting in the position since March, doesn’t speak as an independent voice for the department, but rather is aligning his positions first with the White House, and particularly with Monaco, thus undermining Holder’s authority. Two individuals drew comparisons to John Yoo, the controversial Justice Department attorney in the George W. Bush administration, who was known to have his own relationships with White House officials and was seen as operating outside channels meant to guard against political influence.

"It shouldn’t be that way," said a former government official who doesn’t support Carlin’s nomination. "There should be some walls between the Justice Department and the White House. The White House should not have a direct feed."

Former officials could not point to a specific instance in which Carlin had bowed to White House influence or shared information with Monaco before talking to the attorney general. But they said his close relationship with Monaco has created an impression among many national security lawyers in Washington that Carlin is the White House’s inside man at the Justice Department. Carlin became the acting director of the National Security Division after Monaco left the post and went to the White House. He was the chief of staff when she ran the division.

The concerns about Carlin’s independence run deeper than that, however. Two former officials, citing conversations with current Justice Department employees, said that Carlin is avoiding taking documented positions before his Senate confirmation hearing. Instead, Carlin has requested that colleagues not copy him on emails about sensitive policy issues. Many of Carlin’s communications are taking place by phone, former officials said. A date for a confirmation hearing hasn’t been set.

...

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/12/08/white-house-v-holder/?wp_login_redirect=0

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

- Because it's not all about "hacking."

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

How many people here know what SCIF is without looking it up?

ETA:  And FWIW...the NSA was correct to tell her to pound sand on this topic.  It's absurd to even request such things.  That she did shows she either doesn't care or doesn't understand.

I realize this is viewed as witchcraft by some of the more superstitious around here, but in the way of learning something here is a presentation about teh requirements of SCIF's.

The SCI data which Hillary held was not supposed to leave or be viewed outside one of these.

http://www.docslide.com/sensitive-compartmented-information-facilities-scif/

The key takeaway is:

All SCI must be stored within accredited SCIFs.

http://www.docslide.com/sensitive-compartmented-information-facilities-scif/

Hillary obviously violated this multiple times.

 

[pantagrapher]

- Because it's not all about "hacking."

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Because when the NSA refuses to give you a secure blackberry, the next best thing is to ask your personal IT guy to set up a personal email server for you

 

[culdeus]

I love it that the GOP is blocking a moderate republican for the supreme court to see who Hillary or Trump nominates instead.  

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I love it that the GOP is blocking a moderate republican for the supreme court to see who Hillary or Trump nominates instead.  

Donald's pick.

 

[The Commish]

They will take you into an inactive SCIF on tours of the Pentagon.  They're pretty cool to look around in and you get the sense based on the room set up, all the signage (like above).  It's pretty obvious (even to the Beatrice types of people) that when you walk into a room like that, what you're doing in there is a pretty big deal.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

- So basically here Hillary and her staff were told that Blackberry use for documentation requiring SCIF was prohibited - and were told to "shut up and color" - but apparently they went ahead and did it anyway on their own.

Nothing you posted supports your conclusion.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Because when the NSA refuses to give you a secure blackberry, the next best thing is to ask your personal IT guy to set up a personal email server for you

You have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Saint's I'm not trying to be rude but if you want to make a claim that the NSA's refusal led to inappropriate actions then it is not the setup of the personal server (which once again is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand) but that Hillary had her staff "copy" classified information into email for her convenience - assuming there was actual evidence of this.

Oh wait!  Hillary doing any of this out of convenience was a lie.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Nothing you posted supports your conclusion.

I thought the email where the NSA told Hillary to "shut up and color" was at a minimum pretty damn funny.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Saint's I'm not trying to be rude but if you want to make a claim that the NSA's refusal led to inappropriate actions then it is not the setup of the personal server (which once again is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand) but that Hillary had her staff "copy" classified information into email for her convenience - assuming there was actual evidence of this.

Oh wait!  Hillary doing any of this out of convenience was a lie.

BFS you're not rude, you know I enjoy the topic and insights from any so inclined to offer them. I appreciate the discussion, in Internet talk that's mild stuff.

In terms of that specific claim we know at least Hillary & Co. were explicitly told they could not bring blackberries into the SCIF, and secure blackberries were ruled out, and that that displeased Hillary. It appears to me looking at those emails that Hillary had her preference for blackberry and she wasn't going to adjust her way of doing things for any security restrictions that the NSA laid out for her.

 

[17seconds]

Low turnout could happen if people are incredibly disgusted by the choices.

Whether turnout is high or low depends on people less likely to vote in a typical election.  If Trump is the nominee I expect a big turnout.  There will be a massive campaign to keep him from being president.  Women's groups, celebrities, minorities trying to get out the vote.  It will be like Obama '08 but on the negative side.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Whether turnout is high or low depends on people less likely to vote in a typical election.  If Trump is the nominee I expect a big turnout.  There will be a massive campaign to keep him from being president.  Women's groups, celebrities, minorities trying to get out the vote.  It will be like Obama '08 but on the negative side.

I agree, including on that last point. If there is high turnout it won't be pro Hillary it will be anti Donald. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

BFS you're not rude, you know I enjoy the topic and insights from any so inclined to offer them. I appreciate the discussion, in Internet talk that's mild stuff.

In terms of that specific claim we know at least Hillary & Co. were explicitly told they could not bring blackberries into the SCIF, and secure blackberries were ruled out, ...

Not really sure that is true either.  They rejected per your post what was used by Rice and her staff because they couldn't manage it.  Did the State Department use any of that additional funding starting with the 12% bump in funding in the March 2009 appropriations bill and similar early bills to rebuild State on technology that fit, among with correcting other IT deficiencies with the " NSA opened the door for us to establish requirements and they would try to help… "?   I don't pretend to know.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Not really sure that is true either.  They rejected per your post what was used by Rice and her staff because they couldn't manage it.  Did the State Department use any of that additional funding starting with the 12% bump in funding in the March 2009 appropriations bill and similar early bills to rebuild State on technology that fit, among with correcting other IT deficiencies with the " NSA opened the door for us to establish requirements and they would try to help… "?   I don't pretend to know.

Obviously not, we know by 2011 State IT again offered to hook up a secure blackberry with separate gov email when (one of the times) Hillary's server crashed, which the Hillary team declined at that point. Actually in Feb 09 if they had actually arranged for this it would have required a gov email just like in 2011, it's doubtful they would have acceded to that anyway. My guess is NSA wasn't even told Hillary was on her own server at that point or else I'm sure they would have flipped out. Being told to go 'shut up & color' was the response for just pushing back on the demand for a secure bb.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Obviously not, we know by 2011 State IT again offered to hook up a secure blackberry with separate give email when (one of the times) Hillary's server crashed, which the Hillary team declined at that point. Actually in Feb 09 if they had actually arranged for this it would have required a gov email just like in 2011, it's doubtful they would have acceded to that anyway. My guess is NSA wasn't even told Hillary was on her own server at that point or else I'm sure they would have flipped out. Being told to go 'shut up & color' was the response for just pushing back on the demand for a secure bb.

Hillary's usage of a personal account that as additionally on a private server has nothing to do with accessing secured information.  While one can debate the relative "security" of the private arrangement versus government IT  a dot gov email account is by definition not secure.  So what the NSA could offer at a later date to access secured information is not obvious by Hillary declining a dot gov account in 2011.  I agree she probably didn't ask again.  She probably didn't see much need - because her email kept her in the loop .

 

[James Daulton]

Has it been suggested that maybe she was one of the few real females on Ashley Madison.  Gotta keep those communications secret.

 

[Guest]

New emails have come to light showing that the NSA rejected Hillary's request to use Blackberry at State:

2/13/09 - State Dept. Senior Coordinator for Security Infrastructure, Bureau of Diplomatic Security Donald R. Reid requested to obtain secure Blackberry technology for Hillaryand that request was denied.  Subsequently Hillary's aides tried to pry into the security arrangements for President Obama’s Blackberry and that was similarly rebuffed - strongly"
 

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-4.pdf

- "S" is Hillary. - Not sure who "Eric" is and who Reid is emailing is redacted as well.

2/18/09 - Again Reid to we don't know who (redacted)

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-8.pdf

.It's not clear how this email go to Reid as he is not shown on the first string, but this was the start of it:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-8.pdf

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JW-v-State-Hillary-BB-NSA-IAD-00646-pg-10-11.pdf

- The policy is described as "no BB in the SCIF" which apparently caused Hillary "displeasure."

- So basically here Hillary and her staff were told that Blackberry use for documentation requiring SCIF was prohibited - and were told to "shut up and color" - but apparently they went ahead and did it anyway on their own.

The arrogance!

 

[Trey]

@SaintsInDome2006 You have to be pretty pleased that you'll be able to keep that Hillary+Clinton+email news alert active for another 4 years at least!

 

[Guest]

dailycaller.com/2016/03/16/hillary-faces-national-security-establishment-uprising-over-emails/

There are a lot of tea leaves in this article that do not bode well for Hillary.

The reason the NSA told her to go color is because it's absolutely reckless, like asking to drive a school bus with an unpinned grenade in your hand.  Anyone who deals with SCIF will tell you that anyone even requesting to do this has no regard...  And that it appears they were still trying to find work arounds and she is documented as lying about the devices she used, and top secret information was on her private server...  It all suggests massive impropriety and an above-the-law arrogance.

Now read that it's essentially this same team of buttoned up intelligence professionals investigating patiently and thoroughly and that they will make the recommendation as to whether to prosecute--and are fully prepared to rebel if she skates.

Add depositions, immune witnesses, possibly a Romanian hacker extradited to the US possibly to testify that emails that could be tied to public corruption are authentic--and Hillary has a gauntlet of fire to walk before she's not in danger of having to drop out.  (Although even if she's indicted, I see her trying to politicize it and stay in).

Get ready for a very interesting ride.  This is all so very good for the country.  Then again, I would take a Hillary in an orange jump suit over Trump...

Or a legit Democratic replacement for Hillary, who would have run and been viable if party leadership hadn't been so absolutely adamant that this is Hillary's turn.  

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

@SaintsInDome2006 You have to be pretty pleased that you'll be able to keep that Hillary+Clinton+email news alert active for another 4 years at least!

Ha, I don't think it will last that long. We will likely have resolution of the investigation in May, then more detail will continue to come out, we should see a report or three with findings, but with Donald the Senate will likely flip Dem and of course Hillary will suffocate whatever else might come out of the DOJ so my guess is end date is January at best. I guess the only other possibility is that Foia cases ultimately gain the additional emails and their release.

 

[squistion]

dailycaller.com/2016/03/16/hillary-faces-national-security-establishment-uprising-over-emails/

There are a lot of tea leaves in this article that do not bode well for Hillary.

Daily Caller  

If that is your best authority for tea leaves not boding well for Hillary, her supporters have nothing to worry about.