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 (4 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mike Kachman said:
No it doesn't.  But she should be in jail and unable to serve because:

Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 798 — disclosure of classified information could apply to someone who “knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person” classified information. Someone guilty of this crime “shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both,” under the law.

Anther law, 18 USC 793 — gathering, transmitting or losing defense information also carries a penalty of an unspecified fine or imprisonment of up to 10 years, or both.

Both 793 and 798 fall under the broader 1917 Espionage Act.
Click to expand...
There are literally hundreds of pages of discussion of this stuff in this thread.  

Also, being incarcerated would not preclude someone from being sworn into the office of the Presidency.  And then you'd get to pardon yourself.  

 
timschochet said:
This is such crap, Jon. There have been tons of wild unproven accusations made against Hillary Clinton and none of them have turned out to be true. If "rainbows and unicorns" is your way of describing a false, unrealistic narrative, then it would be far more accurate to apply that label to many of Hillary's critics in this thread and elsewhere who assume she is corrupt without evidence, you among them. 
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you're wrong.  Bill Clinton did pardon Marc Rich.  It's a documented fact.  Marc Rich did give a ton of money to Hillary's senate campaign.  It's a documented fact.  Bill Clinton did pardon others who gave a ####-ton of money to Hillary's family.

Hillary did set up a private e-mail server.  She has lied about the details repeatedly.  These things are all documented fact.  You yourself have noted some of the lies.

 
timschochet said:
This is such crap, Jon. There have been tons of wild unproven accusations made against Hillary Clinton and none of them have turned out to be true. If "rainbows and unicorns" is your way of describing a false, unrealistic narrative, then it would be far more accurate to apply that label to many of Hillary's critics in this thread and elsewhere who assume she is corrupt without evidence, you among them. 
Click to expand...
Only in Tim's World.

 
Rich Conway said:
Sorry, but you're wrong.  Bill Clinton did pardon Marc Rich.  It's a documented fact.  Marc Rich did give a ton of money to Hillary's senate campaign.  It's a documented fact.  Bill Clinton did pardon others who gave a ####-ton of money to Hillary's family.

Hillary did set up a private e-mail server.  She has lied about the details repeatedly.  These things are all documented fact.  You yourself have noted some of the lies.
Click to expand...
Yes I was expecting this post. You've brought up the Marc Rich thing several times. Of all the "scandals" against the Clintons made over the years, this one has the most credibility. And even it has very little because there is no evidence that Bill Clinton's decision to pardon was made as a result of money donated to him (which is the accusation.) It also has nothing to do with Hillary, and therefore has no bearing on my response to jon mx. 

As to the email thing, yes she set up an email server. Yes she lied about it at least once that I know of. As you know, I don't regard these as major issues that prove Hillary's corruption, so they don't contradict my response to jon. 

 
jon_mx said:
Someone quotes law and links to the law and you call it nonsense?  :confused:  
Click to expand...
He didn't quote the law- in fact he left out the most important part w/r/t Sec 798, that it requires "knowing and willful" disclosure of certain types of classified info, which seems like a real stretch here.

Anyway I certainly wouldn't call the potential allegations of a violation of 793(f) "nonsense," but it's certainly not close to the slam-dunk that the poster suggests. There are multiple discussions in this thread of the reasons that the provision may not (or IMO probably does not) apply to Clinton's conduct.

 
timschochet said:
In this case, my world is the serious real world. The "Hillary is a corrupt and deserves to be in a jail" world is a fantasy world, a make believe land for conservatives (along with a few hardcore progressives) which has no bearing on reality. 
Click to expand...
How would you know? When you are pressed about these things you claim you don't look into them because they bore you.

 
BeaverCleaver said:
You seriously are going to fall back to this? :lmao:
Click to expand...
I certainly am. It's the gold standard. When somebody is accused of wrongdoing, a good way to know if it's true or not is if that person is actually charged with a crime. If there aren't any charges, it's pretty easy to assume that the accusations have no substance. 

 
timschochet said:
I certainly am. It's the gold standard. When somebody is accused of wrongdoing, a good way to know if it's true or not is if that person is actually charged with a crime. If there aren't any charges, it's pretty easy to assume that the accusations have no substance. 
Click to expand...
You should just call her St. Hillary from now on.

 
timschochet said:
I certainly am. It's the gold standard. When somebody is accused of wrongdoing, a good way to know if it's true or not is if that person is actually charged with a crime. If there aren't any charges, it's pretty easy to assume that the accusations have no substance. 
Click to expand...
The gold standard, like the TPP?

 
timschochet said:
Yes I was expecting this post. You've brought up the Marc Rich thing several times. Of all the "scandals" against the Clintons made over the years, this one has the most credibility. And even it has very little because there is no evidence that Bill Clinton's decision to pardon was made as a result of money donated to him (which is the accusation.) It also has nothing to do with Hillary, and therefore has no bearing on my response to jon mx. 

As to the email thing, yes she set up an email server. Yes she lied about it at least once that I know of. As you know, I don't regard these as major issues that prove Hillary's corruption, so they don't contradict my response to jon. 
Click to expand...


What you said:  "There have been tons of wild unproven accusations made against Hillary Clinton and none of them have turned out to be true."

There is truth to at least a dozen of the scandals.  But it is ridiculous to argue.  By your 'gold standard' definition, none of the accusations against Nixon were true since there were no charges.  You create whatever definition it is to make Hillary smell like roses.  It really has become pathetic. 

 
timschochet said:
Yes I was expecting this post. You've brought up the Marc Rich thing several times. Of all the "scandals" against the Clintons made over the years, this one has the most credibility. And even it has very little because there is no evidence that Bill Clinton's decision to pardon was made as a result of money donated to him (which is the accusation.) It also has nothing to do with Hillary, and therefore has no bearing on my response to jon mx. 

As to the email thing, yes she set up an email server. Yes she lied about it at least once that I know of. As you know, I don't regard these as major issues that prove Hillary's corruption, so they don't contradict my response to jon. 
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, what would you accept as "evidence that Bill Clinton's decision to pardon was made as a result of money donated"?  And let's not pretend that this was a single questionable pardon (Marc Rich).  While that is the most well known, it is hardly the most questionable.

 
TobiasFunke said:
The book is nonsense.  A bunch of Secret Service agents have said as much:


 
The author also contradicted the book himself in his testimony during the Ken Starr investigations.
 
I understand that this sort of sleaze has always held a particular appeal to Clinton opponents.  And there's even a good argument to be made that it helps Hillary in a "boy who cries wolf" kind of way- the nonsense "scandals" outnumber the legitimate concerns tenfold, so the legitimate concerns get lost in the noise.  I think Trump's about to find this out for himself.
 
Still, maybe this one time all the reasonable, intelligent Clinton haters can be better than your Breitbart-reading, tin foil hat wearing cohorts and disregard this crap?  How about it, friends?
Click to expand...
I don't know which people you're referring to, but unless it involves illegal activity like sex trafficking or underage girls, I don't give a #### who or what Bill Clinton has sex with.

 
No politician has ever needed to be indicted to be commonly accepted as being a liar and a cheat. In our system, you don't rise in politics without being such... and the Clintons do it better than anyone else. 

 
Rich Conway said:
Out of curiosity, what would you accept as "evidence that Bill Clinton's decision to pardon was made as a result of money donated"?  And let's not pretend that this was a single questionable pardon (Marc Rich).  While that is the most well known, it is hardly the most questionable.
Click to expand...
You do realize that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are two different people, right?

 
So far about 1/10 of the speech has focused on legitimate criticisms like trade, the TPP, and our involvement in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. 

The other 9/10s is the same old conspiracy nonsense- Foundation, Benghazi, emails, etc. 

 
dparker713 said:
Rich Conway said:
Out of curiosity, what would you accept as "evidence that Bill Clinton's decision to pardon was made as a result of money donated"?  And let's not pretend that this was a single questionable pardon (Marc Rich).  While that is the most well known, it is hardly the most questionable.
Click to expand...
You do realize that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are two different people, right?
Click to expand...
The money went to Hillary's campaign and Hillary's brothers.

 
timschochet said:
So far about 1/10 of the speech has focused on legitimate criticisms like trade, the TPP, and our involvement in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. 

The other 9/10s is the same old conspiracy nonsense- Foundation, Benghazi, emails, etc. 
Click to expand...
Here's a hint: what you consider "legitimate" is not the same as what other people consider legitimate.

Note: I'm not watching or listening, as I really don't much care what Donald has to say.

 
Clinton Foundation Said to Be Breached by Russian Hackers


The Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation was among the organizations breached by suspected Russian hackers in a dragnet of the U.S. political apparatus ahead of the November election, according to three people familiar with the matter.

The attacks on the foundation’s network, as well as those of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, compound concerns about her digital security even as the FBI continues to investigate her use of a personal e-mail server while she was secretary of state.

... The compromise of the foundation’s computers was first identified by government investigators as recently as last week, the people familiar with the matter said. Agents monitor servers used by hackers to communicate with their targets, giving them a back channel view of attacks, often even before the victims detect them.

...

The thefts set the stage for what could be a Washington remake of the public shaming that shook Sony in 2014, when thousands of inflammatory internal e-mails filled with gossip about world leaders and Hollywood stars were made public. Donor information and opposition research on Trump purportedly stolen from the Democratic Party has surfaced online, and the culprit has threatened to publish thousands more documents.

A hacker or group of hackers calling themselves Guccifer 2.0 posted another trove of documents purportedly from the DNC on Tuesday, including what they said was a list of donors who had made large contributions to the Clinton Foundation.

...

The Clinton campaign was aware as early as April that it had been targeted by hackers with links to the Russian government on at least four recent occasions, according to a person familiar with the campaign’s computer security. ...
Click to expand...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-21/clinton-foundation-said-to-be-breached-by-russian-hackers

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
In this case, my world is the serious real world. The "Hillary is a corrupt and deserves to be in a jail" world is a fantasy world, a make believe land for conservatives (along with a few hardcore progressives) which has no bearing on reality. 
Click to expand...
Your world has the possibility of Donald Trump becoming dictator of the United States Tim :oldunsure:

 
dparker713 said:
You do realize the Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are two different people, right?
Click to expand...
You know, several aspects of the law treat me and my wife as the same person. If she buys stocks based on insider information I have, for example, it is as if I did it.

 
timschochet said:
So far about 1/10 of the speech has focused on legitimate criticisms like trade, the TPP, and our involvement in Iraq, Libya, and Syria. 

The other 9/10s is the same old conspiracy nonsense- Foundation, Benghazi, emails, etc. 
Click to expand...
It will also be the focus if she is president.  She has so much baggage, most of which is self-inflicted, she can not lead.  I am not sure what the point of winning is.  No matter which candidate is elected, it will be a 4-year term of divisiveness not seen since the civil war.   

 
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
254K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top