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 (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Commish said:
If they don't know the rules, how do they know they are forging their own path and not just following the rules?

ETA:  To answer your question the first two that come to mind are Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.  They both understood the environments they were in better than anyone in the world.  They understood what drove their space and how things worked.  They both proceeded to turn it all on it's head altering technology as we know it today.
Click to expand...
Two notoriously unethical corporate leaders are your examples of what leaders should be?

 
timschochet said:
Is it a fact?

Yes and no, IMO. It's a fact, but not necessarily the way you construct it. I have a feeling what happened is something like this:

HUMA The State Department needs copies of all your work emails for the FOIA.

HILLARY Don't they already have copies?

HUMA They didn't keep them. Or they can't find them. I dunno, it's all screwed up.

HILLARY Well, I don't want to give them my personal emails. Can't we separate those?

HUMA Yeah, it's gonna take a lot of time to go through it though. We'll have to pay somebody.

HILLARY You're right. I wish I had thought of that before. What a mess. Oh well, let's do it.

HUMA What do you want me do with the private ones once you've separated them?

HILLARY I dunno. Get rid of them I suppose. I don't need them anymore. 
Click to expand...
While we're completely making things up:

HUMA: Is that a new pants suit?

HILLARY:  Yes.  I bought it from a Vulcan on Neblus 9.

HUMA:  Can I help you take it off?

HILLARY:  Can you?!  Set my phaser to yum.  

One of those two dialogues is more realistic than the other.  It's not he first one.   

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Tim, I'm always respectful of differing conclusions and actually I enjoy them.

My suggestion would be just look at facts yourself. Ignore conservative and liberal blogs. Just look at the facts yourself.

For me one telling fact - and it is a fact - is that Hillary destroyed the entirety of the electronic version of her email archive. That includes the personal and the public, all of it.

Now do you accept that very basic fact?

If so, and considering the extreme extra work and time that goes into printing into paper and then turning that over to State who then had to take months (again, that's a fact) to go through it, why would she do that?

I'm glad to listen to your conclusions but work on your facts, start with that basic one.
Click to expand...
Per the facts what form of electronically handing over of the emails was legally available to Hillary in 2014/2015?

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Why print them?
Click to expand...
For someone that likes to force others to know the facts, here is what  the OIG report states -

"As a result, printing and filing remained the only method by which emails could properly be preserved within the Office of the Secretary in full compliance with existing FAM guidance. "

 
dparker713 said:
Yeah, its the Democrats' fault for not anticipating a pathological liar, reality TV star, bigoted bully would steamroll the entire Republican primary field.  Hmm, well... maybe... 
Click to expand...
Shame on the Democrats for putting up someone that can't beat the worst Republican candidate since Richard Nixon.

 
Mr. Ham said:
While we're completely making things up:

HUMA: Is that a new pants suit?

HILLARY:  Yes.  I bought it from a Vulcan on Neblus 9.

HUMA:  Can I help you take it off?

HILLARY:  Can you?!  Set my phaser to yum.  

One of those two dialogues is more realistic than the other.  It's not he first one.   
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
timschochet said:
Or consider this: only a little over a year ago: Donald Sterling was ostracized and removed from the NBA for being caught making offensive comments in private. Yet Sterling's comments pale compared to a lot of stuff Trump has said in public! 
Click to expand...
Didn't know Trump played basketball though. i.e. very silly comparison, Tim.

 
Good quote from a Bernie supporter on CNN.  I suspect many, many Bernie supporters feel exactly the same way.

"Don't expect me to vote for the demon just because the devil is running."

 
TobiasFunke said:
Here's what I wrote before. I just don't get your anti-press ranting at all. How do you think you get any information about the candidates?  Where do you think all the information about both Clinton and Trump that makes them so distasteful to you comes from? 
Click to expand...
The problem with the press is that they are spinning news rather than reporting it. This happens both on the 24 hour channels, the rest of the MSM - everywhere. That is how it is. The press doesn't just report facts - it tries to influence opinion. It has ever since the Nixon era when they realized they had the power to take down a President. IMO, they abuse that power.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
And why get rid of the electronic versions of work and personal?
Click to expand...
When it finally comes out what was in the deleted "personal" emails, I think the answer will be clear: deleting them was the ONLY way to the Presidency. Yoga routines my ###.

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Yes it most certainly has.  Whether sustainable or not is a question, but the rate of increase in healthcare cost are down both with respect to what they were and with respect to what they were predicted to be.   Some of this no doubt has nothing to do with the ACA, but it is beyond the point to argue that none of it has anything to do with the ACA unless you also want to argue that non of the items most griped about (limited networks, higher out of pocket costs) have nothing to do with the ACA.
Click to expand...
I'm not seeing it. My wife, who volunteers as a SHEBA rep for a food bank isn't seeing it - not happening, no matter how it is being spun.

 
bueno said:
I'm not seeing it. My wife, who volunteers as a SHEBA rep for a food bank isn't seeing it - not happening, no matter how it is being spun.
Click to expand...
Anecdotes are not substitutes for actual data.. NHE (eta: rate of increase) is down.  You are supposed to rebut that most of this was a result of the recession and a few drug patents that expired at the beginning of the decade and the changes to health plans that results in more deferred care and that not much of this is the result of the ACA.  That very little of this is structural, and thus neither permanent nor sustainable.  That already in 2014 the health expenditures bumped back into the 5+% range (which is still below what it was).  Along with not only are there no major drug patents expiring anytime soon, some very expensive drugs have been released such as the $100K hepatitis C cure and the $250K a year CF treatment,   And that deferred care will eventually cost us even more - one way or another.  Oh and the whole thing is about to collapse in one giant death spiral.  And you may all be correct, but so far the cost curve has been bent downward despite your own experiences.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Anecdotes are not substitutes for actual data.. NHE (eta: rate of increase) is down.  You are supposed to rebut that most of this was a result of the recession and a few drug patents that expired at the beginning of the decade and the changes to health plans that results in more deferred care and that not much of this is the result of the ACA.  That very little of this is structural, and thus neither permanent nor sustainable.  That already in 2014 the health expenditures bumped back into the 5+% range (which is still below what it was).  Along with not only are there no major drug patents expiring anytime soon, some very expensive drugs have been released such as the $100K hepatitis C cure and the $250K a year CF treatment,   And that deferred care will eventually cost us even more - one way or another.  Oh and the whole thing is about to collapse in one giant death spiral.  And you may all be correct, but so far the cost curve has been bent downward despite your own experiences.
Click to expand...
What the data might not show is the number of people who have been priced out of the market. Or forced on the equivalent of medicaid (which recoups its costs from your estate.)

 
Obama said that the nominee will be clear next week. Have to imagine his endorsement is coming after the last primary votes. Hell get right to work using the bully pulpit on Trump.

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Even if true, do you think that the scrutiny - even unfair :bs:   would not be coming the second that Sanders was realistically the actual nominee?
Click to expand...


Sure, but I don't think it sticks. Lines have been drawn.  I doubt you will see much change in terms of the negative profiles of any of the candidates. 

Clinton's challenge is finding a way to get neutrals to like her.  I don't think she can do that. 

 
tommyGunZ said:
bueno said:
What the data might not show is the number of people who have been priced out of the market. Or forced on the equivalent of medicaid (which recoups its costs from your estate.)
Click to expand...
Uninsured rates are at all time lows. 

Try again. 
Click to expand...
To be fair as the plans in the individual market have been required to actually cover stuff without massive discriminatory practices prices have gone up (but still only about 2/3rds of ESI cost).  For some this has priced coverage as high as 20% (I thing I read this on Andrew Sprung;s blog recently) of income which is not likely affordable,   Also the plans that are making a killing in the individual market as opposed to those with big lost tend to be the plans that are built upon existing Medicaid MSO plans.   

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
For someone that likes to force others to know the facts, here is what  the OIG report states -

"As a result, printing and filing remained the only method by which emails could properly be preserved within the Office of the Secretary in full compliance with existing FAM guidance. "
Click to expand...
- Within the office.

Q Did -- did the Secretary have a practice of printing and saving her e-mails somewhere, hard copy? …

...

Q General practice during -- during her tenure.

A So I'm not familiar with a practice where she would print and save her e-mails. I obviously have seen a lot of e-mails where she would say, Please print. But I don't know that she had a practice of printing and saving her e-mails.
Click to expand...
- Cheryl Mills depo.

- So within the office, no, Hillary was not doing that. She failed that basic obligation too.

In 2009, NARA amended its  regulations explicitly to address official emails on personal accounts:

Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.
Click to expand...
- OIG report.

- So Hillary failed that reg too.

In August 2012, OMB and NARA issued a memorandum to the heads of executive departments, agencies, and independent agencies in part directing agencies to eliminate paper and use electronic recordkeeping.
Click to expand...
- OIG report.

- So even by the time Hillary was finally in July 2014 - 5 years later forced to turn over her records even then the Department was managing things electronically.

Hillary could have had her emails searched by some tech people - using the search terms and methods she will not share with the people she is supposed to serve as a public servant - she could have had that downloaded into a pst or other electronic format and turned that over to State. Instead of the months it took her - from July 2014 to December 2014 - and then the months it took State - from December 2014 to what like May 2015 - that it took State to prepare the material - Hillary could have handed over a pst or some electronically formatted set of material in a few hours or whatever it takes to do so such things electronically.

However, even if for the sake of argument Hillary was permitted or even had to turn over material in paper, why then delete all electronic copies of all official and personal emails?

eta - Btw my point to Tim was to consider a set of facts and then conclude what he will with it, which you are doing now, which is great, case in point for Tim.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can Bernie reconsider a 3rd party run?  He'd get about half the democrats and a ton of independents, not to mention everyone who is going to stay home because they can't stand both DT and HRC. Hive Mind saying 81% chance of Bernie victory if it was 3 horse race. Put Warren on the ticket.  It's not like he won't be able to raise money for a run. I don't believe a Bernie 3rd party run would guarantee a Trump win.  I do believe Bernie not running 3rd party guarantees a Trump win.

 
Willie Neslon said:
Can Bernie reconsider a 3rd party run?  He'd get about half the democrats and a ton of independents, not to mention everyone who is going to stay home because they can't stand both DT and HRC. Hive Mind saying 81% chance of Bernie victory if it was 3 horse race. Put Warren on the ticket.  It's not like he won't be able to raise money for a run. I don't believe a Bernie 3rd party run would guarantee a Trump win.  I do believe Bernie not running 3rd party guarantees a Trump win.
Click to expand...
Hive Mind. :lol:

 
The Commish said:
Ethics really wasn't part of the assertion however, I provided others as well.  How about Pope Francis?  That a better example for you?
Click to expand...
I have no idea why you think a pope that has broken most of the rules supports your position as opposed to @dparker713 ''s:

 "Yes I think its odd you think great leaders know and understand the rules they're bound by.  As I think of great leaders as generally not following the rules but forging their own path.  This is why I asked you for examples." 

Everyone of your examples fits his definition.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
eta - Btw my point to Tim was to consider a set of facts and then conclude what he will with it, which you are doing now, which is great, case in point for Tim.
Click to expand...
The question wasn't whether or not Hillary failed to comply with the regulations while she was in office, but whether or not Tim should read into the fact that Hillary handed over her emails in paper format,  The only format that would legally comply with the request for these records - no matter how stupid this requirement might be.  So the answer to your question to Tim is that only if one is ignorant or dishonest can they read anything into your fact.

ETA:  Yes Hillary could have turned over (and did with the thumb drives) electronic format versions, but the State Department would then have printed and filed the records,  Similarly the FOIA review required paper.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, why is Pags pleading the fifth?  What would possibly be self-incriminating about his role as Hillary's IT administrator?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
The question wasn't whether or not Hillary failed to comply with the regulations while she was in office, but whether or not Tim should read into the fact that Hillary handed over her emails in paper format,  The only format that would legally comply with the request for these records - no matter how stupid this requirement might be.  So the answer to your question to Tim is that only if one is ignorant or dishonest can they read anything into your fact.
Click to expand...
See I don't agree with your conclusion however we still agree on the fact that Hillary destroyed all electronic versions of all emails of all kinds. Exercise successful.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
The question wasn't whether or not Hillary failed to comply with the regulations while she was in office, but whether or not Tim should read into the fact that Hillary handed over her emails in paper format,  The only format that would legally comply with the request for these records - no matter how stupid this requirement might be.  So the answer to your question to Tim is that only if one is ignorant or dishonest can they read anything into your fact.
Click to expand...
However again why destroy all electronic versions of official and personal then?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Not that general election polls really mean anything, of course... :hophead:

Capital JournalVerified account ‏@WSJPolitics 1h1 hour ago

New WSJ/NBC/Marist poll shows Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders both winning against Donald Trump in November.
Click to expand...
I can't understand the obsession with prediction, it's enough to look at how things stand now. It's a snapshot and shows current status, that's worth looking at.

 
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
264K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top