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.
Saints, you posted twice that Clinton's people were blaming the IG report on the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Once again do you have a link for this? I can't find it anywhere. 

 
timschochet said:
Saints, you posted twice that Clinton's people were blaming the IG report on the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Once again do you have a link for this? I can't find it anywhere. 
Click to expand...
That surprises me, I guess I thought I might let you do some heavy lifting for a change... I will see if I can find it. Brock, Fallon & Hillary have all teed it up.

eta -

Fallon also said the inspector general's office may have exhibited an "anti-Clinton bias."
"There were questions raised about this office during the course of its investigation; there were reports about individuals in this office coming forward and suggesting there were hints of an anti-Clinton bias inside that office," he said.
The department's inspector general was appointed by the Obama administration.
Click to expand...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/index.html

They dish gruel like this out for the :tinfoilhat: 'ers.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27 said:
I have not predicted that she will lose.  I have, however, repeatedly said that she is a compromised to the extent that she is vulnerable to losing to a monster, and that's not a good thing.  I can simultaneously (1) prefer Hillary over Trump and (2) be highly concerned that she is a bad candidate.  I don't take any glee in posting negative stories about Hillary, but I do believe she is the worst opponent for Trump and hope she does get indicted sooner rather than later so that a stronger candidate can step in.  The stories I have posted are not meaningless, except to those too ignorant and those so willfully and deliberately blind to Hillary's faults to understand their significance.  

And, yes, Tim I have called your character into question, as well as your brand of "analysis," which relies greatly on passing off others' opinions you support as your own.  I will continue to do so when appropriate.  I disagree with the analysis of BFS and dparker at times, but I also hold them in high regard because they do not present themselves as attention whores or phonies.  They don't come to the defense of criminals, like Richard Nixon or a rapist like Roman Polanski in an effort to give everyone your hot take and elicit a reaction or present themselves as edgy intellectuals who can look beyond the crimes and see the big picture of their greatness the way you have presented it.  
Click to expand...

 
timschochet said:
Saints, you posted twice that Clinton's people were blaming the IG report on the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Once again do you have a link for this? I can't find it anywhere. 
Click to expand...
Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon told CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota on Wednesday that McCullough was part of a “coordinated leak” with Republicans regarding SAP intelligence documents.

Camerota noted that McCullough is not a Republican and then asked, “Why do you think he’s a stooge of the Republicans in Congress? I’ve heard you say that. What’s your evidence?”

“Because two months ago, there was a Politico report that directly challenged the finding of this inspector general, and I don’t think he liked that very much,” replied Fallon. “So I think that he put two Republican senators up to sending him a letter so that he would have an excuse to resurface the same allegations he made back in the summer that have been discredited.”

And, then:

Fallon: No…look, Wolf, if she had anything to hide she wouldn’t be volunteering since last August to go face questions from the Justice Department where the stakes will be much higher than this State Department IG investigation. And as I said the appropriateness of the State Department IG’s office conducting this review at the same time when the Justice Department was already looking to this same issue is an open question. There were questions raised about this office during the course of its investigation. There were reports about individuals in this office coming forward and suggesting that there were hints of an anti-Clinton bias inside that office.

 
Thank you Saints and Sinn Fein. 

I think that's disappointing. I believe in the VRWC, as I have stated several times in this thread, though "conspiracy" is not the right word. However I don't believe that it extends to the IG. 

This is yet another example of Hillary and her folks playing dirty politics when something doesn't go their way. This is an aspect of her persona that I really dislike. Over the years she has associated herself with some slimy attack dogs like Blumenthal and Brock. I'm sure she thinks it's necessary because she believes, correctly, that the other side has always played dirty with her. But I wish she didn't engage in this stuff. 

 
timschochet said:
Thank you Saints and Sinn Fein. 

I think that's disappointing. I believe in the VRWC, as I have stated several times in this thread, though "conspiracy" is not the right word. However I don't believe that it extends to the IG. 

This is yet another example of Hillary and her folks playing dirty politics when something doesn't go their way. This is an aspect of her persona that I really dislike. Over the years she has associated herself with some slimy attack dogs like Blumenthal and Brock. I'm sure she thinks it's necessary because she believes, correctly, that the other side has always played dirty with her. But I wish she didn't engage in this stuff. 
Click to expand...
My psychological interpretation of Hillary is that she actually is a lot like Richard Nixon - she has low self-esteem and thinks the only way she'll ever win is through manipulation and hiding her real self from people.  While I think she will be a decent President, there are the seeds of a Nixon-like self-destruction in her.  The good thing for Hillary compared to Nixon is she has a stronger group of people around her, especially the ex-POTUS, to prevent her from going completely off the rails like Nixon with Watergate. 

 
This Rajiv Fernando fiasco makes no sense to me yet from either side.  Someone help me out with this.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624

Clearly, the fact that this investor donated $1m to the Clintons/Foundation and then received a seat on a nuclear intelligence advisory board (where all other members receive only top level security clearance) goes well beyond a WTF?  But, leaving aside the whole pay-to-play and quid pro quo schema that's dogged the Clintons from the beginning, what is this all about?  There has to be more than his tech background?  And, what was in it for him?  And, if this was all on the up and up, why was everyone in the Clinton camp scrambling and stalling...and then why did he resign two days after the 2011 report surface?  And, why has no one followed up on this since?

None of this makes sense.

 
cstu said:
My psychological interpretation of Hillary is that she actually is a lot like Richard Nixon - she has low self-esteem and thinks the only way she'll ever win is through manipulation and hiding her real self from people.  While I think she will be a decent President, there are the seeds of a Nixon-like self-destruction in her.  The good thing for Hillary compared to Nixon is she has a stronger group of people around her, especially the ex-POTUS, to prevent her from going completely off the rails like Nixon with Watergate. 
Click to expand...
There are amazing parallels, both good and bad. Like Nixon, Hillary has been in the forefront of the public eye for 20 years BEFORE she becomes President, which is something very hard to do. Like Nixon she is a polarizing figure. Like Nixon she has come back from a devastating defeat 8 years earlier to be the favorite to win the Presidency. Like Nixon she is suspicious and distrustful of the press. Like Nixon she is super smart, and IMO both were patriots in the end who sought to do well for their countries. 

Of course it's disturbing because of how Nixon ended up. Still for most of his term he was IMO an excellent President. So I hope for the best from Hillary. 

 
cobalt_27 said:
This Rajiv Fernando fiasco makes no sense to me yet from either side.  Someone help me out with this.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624

Clearly, the fact that this investor donated $1m to the Clintons/Foundation and then received a seat on a nuclear intelligence advisory board (where all other members receive only top level security clearance) goes well beyond a WTF?  But, leaving aside the whole pay-to-play and quid pro quo schema that's dogged the Clintons from the beginning, what is this all about?  There has to be more than his tech background?  And, what was in it for him?  And, if this was all on the up and up, why was everyone in the Clinton camp scrambling and stalling...and then why did he resign two days after the 2011 report surface?  And, why has no one followed up on this since?

None of this makes sense.
Click to expand...
The guy is a bundler and securities dealer, Foundation donor and campaign donor.

Appointed to the International Security Advisory Board.

This is what State says about this board:

The Secretary of State's International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) provides the Department with independent insight and advice on all aspects of arms control, disarmament, nonproliferation, international security, and related aspects of public diplomacy. The ISAB is sponsored and overseen by the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security. The Board provides its recommendations to the Secretary of State. Board members are national security experts with scientific, military, diplomatic, and political backgrounds. The Board meets in a plenary session on a quarterly basis.
Click to expand...
http://www.state.gov/t/avc/isab/index.htm

This is the list of current board members. Fernando doesn't seem to fit in with this group.

I'm guessing Hillary did not consider emails with Fernando "official".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I'm guessing Hillary did not consider emails with Fernando "official".
Click to expand...


This, to me, remains the biggest concern I have about the emails - yoga routines, and wedding plans - sure those are private.  But, virtually all other correspondence with Clinton was as a result of her position as SOS - thus I think that makes them "work" related.  So emails to Sid, or similar - should have been turned over to the State Department.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
The guy is a bundler and securities dealer, Foundation donor and campaign donor.

Appointed to the International Security Advisory Board.

This is what State says about this board:

http://www.state.gov/t/avc/isab/index.htm

This is the list of current board members. Fernando doesn't seem to fit in with this group.

I'm guessing Hillary did not consider emails with Fernando "official".
Click to expand...
Yeah, there's no obvious fit for either the board or him.  Why would he want this position which is so far outside his lane?  And why would the Clintons want him there?  This is massively ####ed up.

 
Sinn Fein said:
This, to me, remains the biggest concern I have about the emails - yoga routines, and wedding plans - sure those are private.  But, virtually all other correspondence with Clinton was as a result of her position as SOS - thus I think that makes them "work" related.  So emails to Sid, or similar - should have been turned over to the State Department.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt she deleted personal messages.  I also don't doubt she deleted work emails.  It would be immensely charitable and foolish to think she didn't.

 
cobalt_27 said:
I don't doubt she deleted personal messages.  I also don't doubt she deleted work emails.  It would be immensely charitable and foolish to think she didn't.
Click to expand...
I have nothing in my private emails that I would be ashamed to show anyone.  Clearly, that is not true for Killary.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I agree, I don't know, I can't see a $ angle for instance.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't rule that out so fast.  First, it's always about the $.  And, if he's involved in trading in international markets, would it not be an immense advantage for him to know intimate workings of nuclear programs going on around the world and inside info on what companies/industries might stand to benefit or be compromised by strategic decisions?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And, it really raises concerns that Janine Mannina, the press aid, wrote in her email that "We must protect the Secretary's and Under Secretary's name" in response to ABC News "fishing all ISAB members about what led Raj Fernando being appointed [to the nuclear advisory board]."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This FBI security check/fishing expedition certainly seems to be hauling in a lot  of fish.  I can see Comey running around Saying "I think we need a bigger boat"

 
Tribune report: Emanuel's rare political reach fuels fundraising machine


When three Chicago financial trading firms traveled to Washington, D.C., for a crucial meeting with federal regulators, they didn't go alone. They brought a man schooled in the ways of the capital who had recently received $182,000 in political contributions from them: Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

At stake was a proposal that would have cut into the firms' bottom lines by making them hold large cash reserves to protect against volatility in the fledgling, high-frequency trading market they had helped pioneer.

Public officials of Emanuel's stature rarely show up at the arcane rule-making meetings of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. But the newly elected mayor delivered a message in the windowless conference room that day, about the important role the trading firms and others like them play in Chicago's economy.

When regulators drafted the final rules months after the September 2011 meeting, Chicago's trading firms got the break they wanted.

Since the Washington meeting, the three firms — DRW Trading Group, Chicago Trading Co. and Infinium Capital — have donated an additional $187,800 to Emanuel's campaign funds, bringing their total support of the mayor to nearly $370,000.

Two other Chicago firms that stood to benefit from the rule, PEAK6 and Chopper Trading, have given an additional $334,000 to Emanuel.

...

The commodity commission's decision to leave smaller firms out of the capital reserve requirement also helped other Chicago firms involved in what is known as proprietary trading.

Two months after the meeting with regulators, Emanuel attended a fundraiser at the Bucktown home of Rajiv Fernando, the CEO of Chopper Trading, a firm that ultimately benefited. Valets welcomed dozens of guests who paid $2,500 to $20,000 for the opportunity to see the mayor. Fernando covered $3,900 in fundraising costs for the car service, dinner, desserts and a photographer. Weeks later, Emanuel's campaign deposited more than two dozen checks, including $20,000 each from Chopper Trading and Chicago Trading Co. and $10,000 from Infinium.

The mayor made a second appearance at Fernando's home in July 2013. Overall Emanuel has collected more than $173,000 connected to Chopper.
He's received even more — $255,000 — from Wilson and his DRW firm. That includes an Emanuel visit to Wilson's Lincoln Park mansion on June 26, 2013. Two days later, Emanuel's campaign cashed nearly $50,000 in contributions from 10 DRW employees and a spouse.

And this year, DRW moved to acquire Chopper Trading.

Wilson and a representative for Infinium, which has since closed, declined to comment. Fernando and Chern did not return calls.
...
Click to expand...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-rahm-emanuel-washington-connections-met-20150202-story.html

- Feb. 2015

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The following is a list of Hillary Clinton's Wall Street fundraising galas since starting her campaign last spring:

DATE- VENUE- HOST (FIRM)

Apr. 28 - New York - Richard Perry (Perry Capital)

Apr. 28 - New York - Doug Teitelbaum (Homewood Capital)

May 13 - New York - Steve Rattner (Willett Advisors/Quadrangle Group)

May 13 - New York - Marc Lasry (Avenue Capital Group)

May 28 - Atlanta - A.J. Johnson (Georgetown Capital)

Jun. 1 - New York - Silda Wall (New World Capital Group)

Jun. 5 - Greenwich, CT - Malcolm Weiner (Millburn Corp.)

Jun. 25 - New York - Karen Persichilli Keogh + Eric Giola (JP Morgan Chase)

Jun. 25 - New York - Blair Effron (Centerview Partners)

Jun. 29 - New York - Martin Sosnoff (Atalanta Sosnoff)

Jul. 1 - Washington - Patrick Steel (FBR Capital Markets)

Jul. 21 - Chicago - Rajiv Fernando (Chopper Trading)

Jul. 22 - Raleigh, NC - George Reddin (FMI Capital Advisors)

Aug. 4 - Aspen, CO - Robert Hurst (Crestview Partners/Goldman Sachs)

Sep. 17 - Chicago - J.B. Pritzker (Pritzker Group)

Sep. 19 - Washington - Frank White (DuSable Capital Management)

Sep. 24 - Cresskill, NJ - Michael Kempner (Pegasus Capital Advisors)

Sep. 25 - Greenwich, CT - Cliff + Debbie Robbins (Blue Harbor Group)

Sep. 28 - Saratoga, CA - Harry Plant (UBS)

Nov. 11 - New York - Howard Lutnick (Cantor Fitzgerald)

Nov. 17 - New York - Jay Snyder (HBJ Investments)

Nov. 30 - Chevy Chase, MD - Jerry Johnson (RLJ Equity Partners)

Dec. 1 - Miami Beach - Bob Wagner (Silver Point Capital/Goldman Sachs)

Dec. 3 - Los Angeles - Michael Kong (MAPTI Ventures)

Dec. 6 - Washington - Julius Genachowski (Carlyle/Rock Creek Ventures/former head of FCC)

Dec. 11 - Chicago - Howard Gottlieb (Glen Eagle Partners/Glenwood Partners)

Dec. 14 - Potomac, MD - Frank Islam (FI Investment Group)

Jan. 27 - Philadelpha - Michael Forman (Franklin Square Capital Partners)

Jan. 27 - New York - Charles Myers (Evercore Partners)

Feb. 5 - Boston - Jonathan Lavine (Bain Capital/Sankaty Advisors)

Feb. 16 - New York - Matt Mallow (BlackRock)

Do you think the middle class will get significant oversight, justice, and change when it comes to Wall Street/Taxation with Hillary? These people aren’t hosting these galas for the ‘good of the people’ — they are hosting them to ensure A SEAT AT THE TABLE.
Click to expand...


- That literally happened with Fernando.

- This post from February 2016 was removed from Daily Kos.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Obama joining Hillary in Wisconsin this week! What kind of impact will Obama's campaigning for Hillary have? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Obama joining Hillary in Wisconsin this week! What kind of impact will Obama's campaigning for Hillary have? 
Click to expand...
It must be a net plus for Trump because Trump is already campaigning as an outsider.  It helps Trump make the case that only he can come in and shake things up.

 
cobalt_27 said:
This Rajiv Fernando fiasco makes no sense to me yet from either side.  Someone help me out with this.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-donor-sensitive-intelligence-board/story?id=39710624

Clearly, the fact that this investor donated $1m to the Clintons/Foundation and then received a seat on a nuclear intelligence advisory board (where all other members receive only top level security clearance) goes well beyond a WTF?  But, leaving aside the whole pay-to-play and quid pro quo schema that's dogged the Clintons from the beginning, what is this all about?  There has to be more than his tech background?  And, what was in it for him?  And, if this was all on the up and up, why was everyone in the Clinton camp scrambling and stalling...and then why did he resign two days after the 2011 report surface?  And, why has no one followed up on this since?

None of this makes sense.
Click to expand...
Could just be that he's a smart guy and impressed her.  But once the story came out the optics were horrible so she removed him.  I mean, the job is hardly worth the investment.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
That surprises me, I guess I thought I might let you do some heavy lifting for a change... I will see if I can find it. Brock, Fallon & Hillary have all teed it up.

eta -

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/index.html

They dish gruel like this out for the :tinfoilhat: 'ers.
Click to expand...
I mean, if there weren't so many partisan people involved, do you really think they're be this many leaks?  The IG and the FBI have been sieves on this.

 
dparker713 said:
I mean, if there weren't so many partisan people involved, do you really think they're be this many leaks?  The IG and the FBI have been sieves on this.
Click to expand...
IMO the leaks have come from the Senate (left & right) to whom the IGs report and the upper level DOJ. I don't think there have been any leaks from the IGs or FBI. I do think the FBI could leak if the DOJ declines indictment though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
IMO the leaks have come from the Senate (left & right) to whom the IGs report and the upper level DOJ. I don't think there have been any leaks from the IGs or FBI. I do think the FBI could leak if the DOJ declines indictment though.
Click to expand...
The Senate wouldn't have the emails.  The investigators would have the emails.

 
timschochet said:
Obama joining Hillary in Wisconsin this week! What kind of impact will Obama's campaigning for Hillary have? 
Click to expand...
Here's Tim:  I'd like to discuss the food she will be eating this week. What kind of impact will this have for Hillary?!  America...REACT!

(Just please talk about anything else)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dparker713 said:
Could just be that he's a smart guy and impressed her.  But once the story came out the optics were horrible so she removed him.  I mean, the job is hardly worth the investment.
Click to expand...
Could be. Seems like an awfully weird they didn't think about the optics. Plus quite a sensitive position to be looking so outside the box. Probably didn't hurt he gave them over $1 million, too 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top