Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (4 Viewers)

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Hey remember when the drone issue was just newspaper articles?

These emails are no more damning that those.  If this is the new worst of the worst then there is still nothing here. 

 

[cobalt_27]

If you have a problem with me over this issue, I will address it with you in the timschochet thread. I prefer not to do it here, as it's irrelevant to Hillary Clinton. 

I do have a problem with you, and I will address this issue when and where I feel it is appropriate. Lifting phrases from others and passing them off as your own makes you come off like an awful human being (and no small thing, but completely antithetical to women's/girl's issues you purport to champion), as was the case in your comments about that girl Polanski raped.  

You're lucky that in this case of "whip smart" you come off as just a phony.  

 

[skol asylum]

This is a couple days old so sorry if already posted. Probably nothing new here, but if you follow the logic how do you not indict?

https://beckandlee.wordpress.com/2016/06/06/why-hillary-clintons-emails-matter-a-legal-analysis/

 

[Willie Neslon]

Tim, you know the real difference between Bernie and Hillary?  It's that Bernie actually gives a ####. He didn't get in the race just because he wanted to be president. He got in because he believes in what he's saying.  The guy knew months ago he couldn't win but he stayed in anyway. Why?  Because he had a chance to get his message out, in person, to all 50.  He wanted to make his case state by state and person by person as to actually move the needle.  The guy is a bona fide american hero.  He's created something bigger than himself that will live on long after he's gone.  That's what means something to him.  He's not in simply to have a portrait in the White House, he's in it to help the people he's seen get screwed over and over and over by the same people who bought HRC long ago. What does Hillary want her legacy to be other than being the first female potus? We have no idea because she doesn't either.

 

[Loan Sharks]

I love how the presumed Democratic nominee is under criminal investigation by the FBI and everybody is like 'no problem'.

 IC agent named on her server? Not a problem.

Specific drone strikes? No problem.

Top Secret & above? No problem.

Not authorized? No problem.

Not cooperating? No problem.

People were told to shut up? No problem.

SBU markings? Not a problem.

Destroyed all the metadata? No problem.

Said there was nothing on the server then server seized? No problem.

What exactly is the problem? 

There is no problem the fix is in. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

This is a couple days old so sorry if already posted. Probably nothing new here, but if you follow the logic how do you not indict?

https://beckandlee.wordpress.com/2016/06/06/why-hillary-clintons-emails-matter-a-legal-analysis/

As I have noted several times it is possible that a prosecutor would try to prosecute Hillary for "mishandling classified information" by noting that "classified" is not in the actual language of the espionage act, but would we really expect it?  

 

[timschochet]

Tim, you know the real difference between Bernie and Hillary?  It's that Bernie actually gives a ####. He didn't get in the race just because he wanted to be president. He got in because he believes in what he's saying.  The guy knew months ago he couldn't win but he stayed in anyway. Why?  Because he had a chance to get his message out, in person, to all 50.  He wanted to make his case state by state and person by person as to actually move the needle.  The guy is a bona fide american hero.  He's created something bigger than himself that will live on long after he's gone.  That's what means something to him.  He's not in simply to have a portrait in the White House, he's in it to help the people he's seen get screwed over and over and over by the same people who bought HRC long ago. What does Hillary want her legacy to be other than being the first female potus? We have no idea because she doesn't either.

I believe, with all my heart, that Hillary Clinton wants to be President because she believes she can do good things for this country. 

 

[Guest]

I believe, with all my heart, that Hillary Clinton wants to be President because she believes she can do good things for this country. 

Your heart, [quick, say the pledge of allegiance as a cover so your heart can't hear]...  Is stupid as ####.

 

[timschochet]

I do have a problem with you, and I will address this issue when and where I feel it is appropriate. Lifting phrases from others and passing them off as your own makes you come off like an awful human being (and no small thing, but completely antithetical to women's/girl's issues you purport to champion), as was the case in your comments about that girl Polanski raped.  

You're lucky that in this case of "whip smart" you come off as just a phony.  

You really think I "passed it off as my own"? lol whatever. I guess think whatever you want then. 

 

[dparker713]

I love how the presumed Democratic nominee is under criminal investigation by the FBI and everybody is like 'no problem'.

 IC agent named on her server? Not a problem.

Specific drone strikes? No problem.

Top Secret & above? No problem.

Not authorized? No problem.

Not cooperating? No problem.

People were told to shut up? No problem.

SBU markings? Not a problem.

Destroyed all the metadata? No problem.

Said there was nothing on the server then server seized? No problem.

What exactly is the problem? 

If your issue is with her server, that is a separate issue from what that report is showing.  That report is calling to question the handling of information by State under Clinton in general.  

 

[dparker713]

It's not a good look at all.  And the fact that Hillary has had to keep moving the goal posts, as opposed to being straight forward from the beginning--and then not cooperating with OIG investigation for reasons that make no sense- -makes all of this even more concerning.

She's under investigation by the FBI.  Not cooperating with an internal review makes perfect sense.

 

[Willie Neslon]

I believe, with all my heart, that Hillary Clinton wants to be President because she believes she can do good things for this country. 

Name one thing she stands for that could be seen as being not politically expedient.  Scratch the last part.  Name one thing she stands for.

 

[dschuler]

Hillary should pick her husband as VP, and then go to jail.  Country would be great with Bill back in charge.  

 

[timschochet]

Name one thing she stands for that could be seen as being not politically expedient.  Scratch the last part.  Name one thing she stands for.

Women's rights.

Children's rights. 

Minority rights. 

Fighting climate change. 

A commitment to NATO, and to our allies. 

Obamacare. 

Shall I go on? 

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Not cooperating with an internal review makes perfect sense.

Only for the guilty.

 

[dparker713]

How come she didn't know giving speeches to wall street between the recession and running this time around may be a bad idea?  How come she didn't realize using an unsecured personal server while Secretary of State may not be the best plan?  If she's the best we got we're all doomed.

Being a paid speaker is a common activity for former high level government employees.  We've only got a limited ability to restrict the future employment of government employees - can't exactly tell someone that may one day run for President that they can't accept any private sector work.

 

[cobalt_27]

She's under investigation by the FBI.  Not cooperating with an internal review makes perfect sense.

If it were a criminal investigation, I would wholeheartedly agree with you.  But, if the FBI was merely conducting a "security review," then it makes no sense for her not to cooperate with a review under the roof of her own agency.  Would you agree with that?

 

[Willie Neslon]

Women's rights.

Children's rights. 

Minority rights. 

Fighting climate change. 

A commitment to NATO, and to our allies. 

Obamacare. 

Shall I go on? 

Other than saying she's for these things, how is she for them?  Who would come out in 2016 and say they're against the rights of women and children?

 

[cobalt_27]

You really think I "passed it off as my own"? lol whatever. I guess think whatever you want then. 

You do this a lot.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

If your issue is with her server, that is a separate issue from what that report is showing.  That report is calling to question the handling of information by State under Clinton in general.  

That would be like saying the gun the police seized in an unsolved shooting is unconnected to the shooting.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Being a paid speaker is a common activity for former high level government employees.  We've only got a limited ability to restrict the future employment of government employees - can't exactly tell someone that may one day run for President that they can't accept any private sector work.

Nobody said she couldn't give those speeches.

 

[dparker713]

Tim, you know the real difference between Bernie and Hillary?  It's that Bernie actually gives a ####. He didn't get in the race just because he wanted to be president. He got in because he believes in what he's saying.  The guy knew months ago he couldn't win but he stayed in anyway. Why?  Because he had a chance to get his message out, in person, to all 50.  He wanted to make his case state by state and person by person as to actually move the needle.  The guy is a bona fide american hero.  He's created something bigger than himself that will live on long after he's gone.  That's what means something to him.  He's not in simply to have a portrait in the White House, he's in it to help the people he's seen get screwed over and over and over by the same people who bought HRC long ago. What does Hillary want her legacy to be other than being the first female potus? We have no idea because she doesn't either.

Wow, that's quite the powerful Kool Aid you've drank

 

[Willie Neslon]

Wow, that's quite the powerful Kool Aid you've drank

I'm a judge them by their actions and not their words kind of guy.

 

[Dignan_]

Whoever is advising Hillary on her wardrobe should be indicted...that is unless focus groups have indicated that dressing like Dr. Evil is a winning formula...

Kim Jong-il

 

[dparker713]

Only for the guilty.

You've watched too much TV.  Its the smart thing to do for anyone under investigation for anything at all.

 

[dparker713]

If it were a criminal investigation, I would wholeheartedly agree with you.  But, if the FBI was merely conducting a "security review," then it makes no sense for her not to cooperate with a review under the roof of her own agency.  Would you agree with that?

Not at all.  Whatever you're calling it, its still an interview with a law enforcement agency.  Prudence is called for.

 

[dparker713]

That would be like saying the gun the police seized in an unsolved shooting is unconnected to the shooting.

This makes zero sense.

 

[Dignan_]

I just saw this again.  It seems to get more repulsive, and comical, every time I see it.  https://youtu.be/Y-H9BOIYhgc

There's my African-American!

http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201604_2131_edgfg_sm.jpg

 

[timschochet]

Other than saying she's for these things, how is she for them?  Who would come out in 2016 and say they're against the rights of women and children?

Here is her website:

https://www.hillaryclinton.com

It contains specific proposals on all of the issues I mentioned. Take a look; we need your vote! 

 

[cobalt_27]

Not at all.  Whatever you're calling it, its still an interview with a law enforcement agency.  Prudence is called for.

Well, no matter what we call it, it defies explanation how the gravity of this has been summarily dismissed and minimized.  I can understand how Trump supporters are wild and crazy with hope for an outcome, and I can understand how Hillary supporters (myself included now) are wild and crazy with hope for the alternative outcome.  But, to diminish the gravity of it and how there is a very realistic possibility of the investigation blowing up this entire election makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

[Guest]

The bottom of the barrel of stupid, and naive are people thinking that a Tweet written by 20 something social media managers paid for by dirty money, based on a Meme Hillary herself has never heard of is somehow relevant to political discourse; while meanwhile the White House fiddles as it acknowledges criminality,. So weird.

 

[Willie Neslon]

Here is her website:

https://www.hillaryclinton.com

It contains specific proposals on all of the issues I mentioned. Take a look; we need your vote! 

Really?

 

[Dignan_]

How come she didn't know giving speeches to wall street between the recession and running this time around may be a bad idea?  How come she didn't realize using an unsecured personal server while Secretary of State may not be the best plan?  If she's the best we got we're all doomed.

Greed

Narcissism

Incompetence

 

[timschochet]

Really?

Of course we do! 

 

[Willie Neslon]

Of course we do! 

I meant linking the website. (and she's not getting my vote.)

 

[dparker713]

Well, no matter what we call it, it defies explanation how the gravity of this has been summarily dismissed and minimized.  I can understand how Trump supporters are wild and crazy with hope for an outcome, and I can understand how Hillary supporters (myself included now) are wild and crazy with hope for the alternative outcome.  But, to diminish the gravity of it and how there is a very realistic possibility of the investigation blowing up this entire election makes absolutely no sense to me.

I'm just going by the information I've seen and the inferences I draw from Obama's actions.  So I don;t think an indictment is particularly likely.  Nor do I think anything short of an indictment derails her campaign.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This makes zero sense.

Why does law enforcement seize any given thing in a criminal investigation?

 

[dparker713]

Why does law enforcement seize any given thing in a criminal investigation?

This has nothing to do with the WSJ article.

 

[cobalt_27]

I'm just going by the information I've seen and the inferences I draw from Obama's actions.  So I don;t think an indictment is particularly likely.  Nor do I think anything short of an indictment derails her campaign.

There's a lot of real estate between "particularly likely" and "realistic possibility."  While I am not saying it is likely, enough objective legal analysts have weighed in with concerns about its realistic possibility that it concerns me.  And, I also would add that I think it's a bit too optimistic for my comfort level to think anything short of indictment will not derail her campaign.  It probably depends, and it concerns me further that Hillary does not enjoy a wide reservoir of favorable support to weather this storm in this political climate in this bizarre election cycle.  I cannot allow myself to under-estimate the potential gravity of this quite possibly paving the way for President Trump.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This has nothing to do with the WSJ article.

It originally had to do with your comment that the server and the alleged crime were unconnected. It's the implement by which the alleged crime would have been committed.

 

[dparker713]

It originally had to do with your comment that the server and the alleged crime were unconnected. It's the implement by which the alleged crime would have been committed.

The problem is sending classified information over a non-secure network - including a network entirely maintained by State.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The problem is sending classified information over a non-secure network - including a network entirely maintained by State.

And landing on Hillary's server where it stayed for up to 5 years. 

 

[tommyGunZ]

Lmao Warren hated Hillary 2 months ago

link?

 

[BassNBrew]

Has this bigot been indicted yet or has Big Pharma made a huge donation to the Obama library?

 

[dparker713]

And landing on Hillary's server where it stayed for up to 5 years. 

Once the data went to a non-secure server, it doesn't much matter where it winds up.  It was already compromised.

 

[Sabertooth]

Has this bigot been indicted yet or has Big Pharma made a huge donation to the Obama library?

Which bigot? Also I don't think Big Pharma is a company.  I think it BP means British Petroleum.  Right church, wrong pew.  

 

[Boston]

I'm just going by the information I've seen and the inferences I draw from Obama's actions.  So I don;t think an indictment is particularly likely.  Nor do I think anything short of an indictment derails her campaign.

Wouldn't this be a compromised investigation if Obama knows exactly what is going on?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Once the data went to a non-secure server, it doesn't much matter where it winds up.  It was already compromised.

So why is it part of the focus of the investigation as the report says? 

Thiscwas originally reported by Catherine Herridge months ago btw, it might be worth looking at that story again as it has now been confirmed.

This is the second story to drop of serious content on the server in the last few days. 

 

[MaxThreshold]

Let's make a count...

Hillary Clinton has been endorsed today by: Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Martin O'Malley.

Did I miss anybody?

Who else are they going to endorse?  I'm not sure what YOU think the importance of this is.  You might as well say "Joe Schmoe on Twitter endorsed Hillary today" for what those endorsements are all worth.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Wouldn't this be a compromised investigation if Obama knows exactly what is going on?

Yes.  But then again, should we be surprised about that?  I don't think I ever seriously believed HRC would be indicted over this because the WH would make sure she wouldn't.  This Obama administration and the Clintons have shown that laws apply to everyone else except them.  Why should this situation be any different?