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 (12 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can remember Marc Morial and Pennington here in NO taking credit for the decreasing crime, and the comeback was back then that no they didn't really do anything but instead it was that the Clinton crime bill had put more officers on the street and increased sentencing provisions. Bill Clinton is stioll making the argument today that it helped and helps crime nad that it protects the most vulnerable first. It's weird to have this argument 20 years after a law has passed.
The violent crime rate in 93/94 was insanity.  Double what it is now nationally.

 
Well he included the "heel" stuff too but still felt the need to add the "animals" part. But no matter.  Where's the part where they're black?

Is it because they're in gangs?  Because I'm 100% sure that black people are not the only people in violent gangs by a longshot- not today and not in 1996- and frankly it seems kinda racist to assume they are.  Did Clinton say that only black people are in gangs? If so, your criticism seems totally valid.  But if not, and that part was added to the "paraphrase," I'd love to hear why.
It's not my criticism.

 
The violent crime rate in 93/94 was insanity.  Double what it is now nationally.
Whether right or wrong Bill seems to understand it implicitly better while Hillary argues like she's some visitor from another planet who is shocked to have just found this awful law to be in existence.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whether right or wrong I know that Bill seems to understand it implicitly better while Hillary argues like she's some visitor from another planet who is shocked to have just found this awful law to be in existence.
Yeah.  I think the biggest problem with the bill was that it was intended to be experimental - to see what worked - but the only part of the bill with an expiration date was the assault weapons ban.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘superpredators.’ No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.
Not sure what the heel part matters when she just called them superpredators (=animals).

 
Sorry, my bad.
No worries. My main criticisms of her on that are a misunderstanding where "super predators" came from as a term and how stupid it is, and the fact that she rolled over on the bill and just bailed on it.  It wasn't a great bill and it still needs to be fixed, but some stuff was very worthwhile in it.   

 
Here is from DOJ regarding gangs in 1994:

https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-103-gang-statistics


103. Gang Statistics



 



Gang violence has risen sharply, especially in large cities. Id. Youth gangs are becoming more violent and increasingly serve as a way for members to engage in illegal money-making activities, such as drug and firearms trafficking. Id. In 1994, gang members were suspects or victims in about forty percent of all homicides in Los Angeles County. C. Maxson, Street Gangs and Drug Sales in Two Suburban Cities, National Institute of Justice (September, 1995).

A recent survey of America's largest city police departments showed that ninety-five percent reported significant criminal activity by youth gangs or gang-like groups of young people. G. David Curry, et al., Gang Crime and Law Enforcement Recordkeeping, National Institute of Justice (August 1994). A recent survey of law enforcement officials in forty-five cities suggests the presence of almost 1,500 youth gangs with more than 120,000 members. Irving A. Spergel, et al., Youth Gangs: Problem and Response - Stage 1 Assessment (May 1990) (Data collection reports conducted by the University of Chicago's National Youth Gang Suppression and Intervention Program in cooperation with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, United States Department of Justice). Gang youth committed over eleven percent of all crimes. Id. The rate of violent offenses for gang members was three times higher than non-gang delinquents. Id. The average age of the arrested gang offender is seventeen or eighteen years. Id. The age range of gang members appears to have expanded in recent decades with members remaining in gangs longer and becoming increasingly involved in serious gang-oriented pursuits. Id. The gang problem was not viewed as exclusively juvenile since adults were involved in almost one-half of the youth gang-related incidents. Id.

Most participants in gang crimes tend to be young, male, and either black or Hispanic. C. Maxson, Ph.D.,supra. Gang cocaine sales involve more young, black males in transactions that more often include crack rather than powder form. Id. The increased likelihood of black and young gang offenders has also characterized the sales of other drugs by gang members. Id. Hispanics have been more involved in sales of drugs other than cocaine. Id.

"Gangs" consist of different types of members including core and leaders, associates or regulars, peripheral or fringe, and "wannabees" or recruits. The core can be regarded as the inner clique which determines the basic nature and level of gang activity. They are generally more involved in delinquent or criminal activities than fringe members. Id. Gang attributes include violent behavior, group organization, leadership, territory, recurrent interaction and use of symbolism. Gang membership appears to prolong the extent and seriousness of criminal careers. Id. Many experts suggest a close relationship between youth gang members and organized adult crime. Id. The disturbing increase of young people committing federal crimes of violence, especially gang-related crimes, necessarily means juveniles must be considered for prosecution.

Perhaps my language was a bit too crass but I don't think it is much of a stretch that Hillary talking about gangs (most participants in gang crimes tend to be young, male and either black or Hispanic) could be reasonably viewed as code for minorities.  There is no doubt saying we should bring them to heel implies they are animals.



 
Not sure what the heel part matters when she just called them superpredators (=animals).
Superpredators was a sociological term en vogue at the time to describe a massive number of juveniles with no respect for human life and a sociopathic personality who would take over this country with their crime wave by the end of the century.  It was very apocalyptic sounding and the politicians and newspapers ran with it.  It also turned out to be really stupid.

 
.




Perhaps my language was a bit too crass but I don't think it is much of a stretch that Hillary talking about gangs (most participants in gang crimes tend to be young, male and either black or Hispanic) could be reasonably viewed as code for minorities.  There is no doubt saying we should bring them to heel implies they are animals.
I agree with this, and I think it's right that she apologized for it and has taken a much better tone and approach on these issues than she did 20 years ago. Only thing I didn't like was tagging her with having said something akin to  "little black animals," that was over the line.

Yay for peaceful message board resolution.

 
m.townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/04/13/watch-dnc-official-dodges-hillary-emails-scandal-questions-n2147617

Brutally concise summary of why Hillary and now Obama spin on mishandling of classified information is outrageous.  

 
 



Trial set for suspect who allegedly hacked Bush family, Sidney Blumenthal

By Josh Gerstein

04/14/16 12:39 PM EDT


A federal judge has set a September trial date for a Romanian man accused of hacking into the email accounts of politicallyconnected Americans, including a member of the Bush family, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and an informal adviser to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Marcel Lazar, alleged to be the hacker known as “Guccifer," entered a not guilty plea through his attorney during a brief hearing Thursday morning in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

U.S. District Court Judge James Cacheris ordered that Lazar stand trial beginning on Sept. 12. ...
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/04/september-trial-set-for-alleged-email-hacker-guccifer-221947

- If he reaches a plea deal for charges they essentially knew he did and can totally prove, ie for which the Feds have zero reason to cut a plead deal, watch out.

Admittedly this would have to happen some time well in advance of September though and while the FBI investigation of Hillary is still ongoing to make a difference.

 


Wait, isn't she supposed to be overseeing waterworks in Flint right now?

Oh, I see.  06.  Well, whatever then
Whoops, I forgot the chaser:

Hillary Clinton: ‘You see the top 25 hedge fund managers making more than all of America’s kindergarten teachers combined’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/06/13/hillary-clinton-you-see-the-top-25-hedge-fund-managers-making-more-than-all-of-americas-kindergarten-teachers-combined/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
 



http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/04/september-trial-set-for-alleged-email-hacker-guccifer-221947

- If he reaches a plea deal for charges they essentially knew he did and can totally prove, ie for which the Feds have zero reason to cut a plead deal, watch out.

Admittedly this would have to happen some time well in advance of September though and while the FBI investigation of Hillary is still ongoing to make a difference.
Watch out for what?

This is yet another meme that's been repeated with almost every one of these Clinton "scandals" over the last 25 years: there's always some other trial somewhere, and a possible plea deal, and then somebody's going to name the Clintons as directly involved. Can't think of how many times I've heard this exact same scenario. It never happens. 

 
...This is yet another meme that's been repeated with almost every one of these Clinton "scandals" over the last 25 years: there's always some other trial somewhere, and a possible plea deal, and then somebody's going to name the Clintons as directly involved. Can't think of how many times I've heard this exact same scenario. It never happens. 


Example?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watch out for what?

This is yet another meme that's been repeated with almost every one of these Clinton "scandals" over the last 25 years: there's always some other trial somewhere, and a possible plea deal, and then somebody's going to name the Clintons as directly involved. Can't think of how many times I've heard this exact same scenario. It never happens. 
It is amazing how many crooks are associated with the Clintons. 

 
It would be so much easier if people could just speak the truth instead of having to dance around the politically correct minefield...

 
It is amazing how many crooks are associated with the Clintons. 


Hillary has to be the only major presidential candidate and likely nominee to have made an appearance before a grand jury, separately been under FBI investigation (maybe more than once), and had an indictment drawn up against her. I doubt there's ever been anyone who even had one of those things happen. Crazy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watch out for what?
For the reason they would grant him a plea deal. This usually happens when there is too little proof for prosecutors to feel confident - which is not a concern here - or when a defendant has testimony which can help the Feds in another case.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hillary has to be the only major presidential candidate and likely nominee to have made an appearance before a grand jury, separately been under FBI investigation (maybe more than once), and had an indictment drawn up against her. I doubt there's ever been anyone who even had one of those things happen. Crazy.
Obviously a victim  of the vast right wing conspiracy.  And a woman too, so a double victim.  

 
Henry Ford said:
Along with her Iraq war vote.  And her email decisions.  And the Super predator comment. And Benghazi.  And the disclosure of the Department of State cable that directed diplomats to spy on the U.N.  And saying she and Bill were "dead broke." And that racist Gandhi joke about him running a gas station.

We should start a list.
Probably her decision to vote for a law outlawing flag burning.

Oh, and her support of "don't ask don't tell."

And her support for "Marriage = 1 man and 1 woman." (anti-gay marriage).

 
I'm really torn on Hillary.

I've come to accept that Bill was really just a moderate Republican / moderate Democrat mix.  And that's not bad.  I think more good was done than bad while he was president.  I don't like the privatization of prisons.  I really, really, really don't like it.  Or the power that we seem to be giving the police (i.e., the impounding property without trial, police brutality, etc.).  I don't like the ties to wall street.  Both of those things I don't love.  And I'm not sure Hillary wouldn't be more of the same here.

And I don't love her seemingly hawkish behavior about foreign policy.

That being said, I'm sure she'd be better (to me, at least) than any of the non-moderate Republicans running.  So she's not a horrible choice.

I just wish she didn't bring the ick factor with her.  Sure, Bill had (has) it too, but he's got just enough Joe-Biden-awe-shucks-happy-go-lucky that I can at least stomach it.  Particularly if there are good results.  

I wish she wasn't making it so hard to support her.

 
I'm really torn on Hillary.

I've come to accept that Bill was really just a moderate Republican / moderate Democrat mix.  And that's not bad.  I think more good was done than bad while he was president.  I don't like the privatization of prisons.  I really, really, really don't like it.  Or the power that we seem to be giving the police (i.e., the impounding property without trial, police brutality, etc.).  I don't like the ties to wall street.  Both of those things I don't love.  And I'm not sure Hillary wouldn't be more of the same here.

And I don't love her seemingly hawkish behavior about foreign policy.

That being said, I'm sure she'd be better (to me, at least) than any of the non-moderate Republicans running.  So she's not a horrible choice.

I just wish she didn't bring the ick factor with her.  Sure, Bill had (has) it too, but he's got just enough Joe-Biden-awe-shucks-happy-go-lucky that I can at least stomach it.  Particularly if there are good results.  

I wish she wasn't making it so hard to support her.
Yeah, I can't tell you how badly I want a woman in the Oval Office.  I just would like her to be Elizabeth Warren or someone like her.

 
Hillary has to be the only major presidential candidate and likely nominee to have made an appearance before a grand jury, separately been under FBI investigation (maybe more than once), and had an indictment drawn up against her. I doubt there's ever been anyone who even had one of those things happen. Crazy.
She was never indicted for anything. These were drafts, not actual indictments, by the prosecutors, which went nowhere obviously because as much as they wanted hang something on Hillary they lacked the evidence to do so. You make it sound like she was charged with something, which she was not.

"As an uncharged person, Hillary Rodham Clinton retains a significant interest in her personal privacy despite any status as a public figure."

 

 
I carry too much baggage to steward it, but would like someone to start a thread to deconstruct what's real and what's bs in the top 20 Clinton scandals.  I have no doubt 80% of what's been reported is distorted and politically motivated.  But I also believe that there is deep corruption and crimes amongst the raff.  

Spend about 20 mins on Cattle Futures today and it's hard to find any plausible explanation other than Hillary was actively participating in a criminal conspiracy to launder bribes.  (Statute of Limitations had expired by the time reporters looking at Clinton finances discovered it - otherwise I think she'd have been jailed).  

There's also meat in the pardons and Travelgate.  As someone who hasn't spent a ton of time on each and tended to dismiss much of what was hurled at the Clintons as partisan, I'd like to get smart on the substance.

Anyone keen to start that thread?

 
Last edited:
She was never indicted for anything. These were drafts, not actual indictments, by the prosecutors, which went nowhere obviously because as much as they wanted hang something on Hillary they lacked the evidence to do so. You make it sound like she was charged with something, which she was not.

"As an uncharged person, Hillary Rodham Clinton retains a significant interest in her personal privacy despite any status as a public figure."

 
Hence I said "drawn up".

 
I'm really torn on Hillary.

I've come to accept that Bill was really just a moderate Republican / moderate Democrat mix.  And that's not bad.  I think more good was done than bad while he was president.  I don't like the privatization of prisons.  I really, really, really don't like it.  Or the power that we seem to be giving the police (i.e., the impounding property without trial, police brutality, etc.).  I don't like the ties to wall street.  Both of those things I don't love.  And I'm not sure Hillary wouldn't be more of the same here.

And I don't love her seemingly hawkish behavior about foreign policy.

That being said, I'm sure she'd be better (to me, at least) than any of the non-moderate Republicans running.  So she's not a horrible choice.

I just wish she didn't bring the ick factor with her.  Sure, Bill had (has) it too, but he's got just enough Joe-Biden-awe-shucks-happy-go-lucky that I can at least stomach it.  Particularly if there are good results.  

I wish she wasn't making it so hard to support her.
I see her as a failed Secretary of State, failed Senator and failed First Lady who has always put her personal interests above those of the country.  The Syria and Libya policies are immediate disqualifiers for me.  Given the track record, I don't see how in the name of all that's holy she is even being considered.  I'm leaning towards Gary Johnson.  

 
She was never indicted for anything. These were drafts, not actual indictments, by the prosecutors, which went nowhere obviously because as much as they wanted hang something on Hillary they lacked the evidence to do so. You make it sound like she was charged with something, which she was not.

"As an uncharged person, Hillary Rodham Clinton retains a significant interest in her personal privacy despite any status as a public figure."

 
Do you have a take on Cattle Futures?

 
Hence I said "drawn up".
Hence you were being misleading in your terminology. One of the few times you haven't quoted extensively from an article and just paraphrased and it is obvious why.  When you say an indictment was "drawn up" most people would assume that it was filed, not just a draft that went nowhere. It appears you intentionally neglected to mention that it was a draft.  What I don't get is why you always do this, you should have enough legitimate things to point to about Hillary without having to try to resort to these tactics - geez you must be really desperate.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hence you were being misleading in your terminology. One of the few times you haven't quoted extensively from an article and just paraphrased and it is obvious why.  When you say an indictment was "drawn up" most people would assume that it was filed, not a just draft that went nowhere. It appears you intentionally neglected to mention that it was a draft.  What I don't get is why you always do this, you should have enough legitimate things to point to about Hillary without having to try to resort to these tactics - geez you must be really desperate.
That's not what it means to me, no it was not filed.

 
That was my take. As with every criminal wrong doing alleged with Hillary, no charges were ever filed by any prosecutor, anywhere, not even a misdemeanor.
All kinds of smoke, but no fire, right?  Just another example of "The Man" trying to bring sweet, innocent Hillary down.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What was she indicted with again? What charges were brought by any prosecutor?
Wasn't discovered until after Statute of Limitations were up.  I mean what's your explanation for what occurred?  Think it went how she claimed -- despite an economic journal running a model staying it was 1:31 trillion that she'd have gotten the 100x return in that period?  Or was there maybe another explanation for how trades at the daily peak were consistently attributed to her time after time and she was handed over $100k after shelling out $1k? 

It was quite clearly laundering of a bribe, if you look at it objectively.

Wondering if you care - and if so what's the explanation?

If it was criminal - would even that matter?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top