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.
TobiasFunke said:
It's disgraceful how Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch got together on a tarmac to go back in time and convince Judicial Watch and other groups to submit massive FOIA requests to the State Department and then also convinced Congress to set aside a limited budget for State's Office of the Inspector General to deal with those massive requests.  We're through the looking glass, people.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile, in bizarro world:

Bill Clinton Snubs Lynch at Phoenix Airport 

Source says this tells us indictment is coming

 
Mr. Ham said:
Days After Private Meeting, Lynch Dropping All Semblance of Impartiaility and Protecting Clintons by Delaying Document Release 27 Months!!!!

Optics on this are insane!  You'd think Lynch was outright blackmailed on that plane!  

The documents between Clinton aides and the Foundation were supposed to be public by July 21 -- and the scope went from 6k to over 30k based on an "error!"  Now Lynch wants to delay until 2018.

Our Republic has been hijacked.  Stonewalling, obstructing, lying, shielding voters from damning facts.  If you're not outraged, imagine if his had been done under Bush.

"So tell me, Bill, how are your grandkids!"  
Click to expand...


- One little bit out of this is that the Teneo employees include Justin Cooper, who managed Hillary's server, and the Foundation employees include Chelsea Clinton, who it turns out wrote State quite a bit - under a pseudonymous email address and name of "Diane Reynolds."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
pantagrapher said:
Meanwhile, in bizarro world:

Bill Clinton Snubs Lynch at Phoenix Airport 

Source says this tells us indictment is coming
Click to expand...
You should get your facts right to snark properly, Bill Clinton requested the meeting so it would have said:

Lynch Snubs Bill Clinton at Phoenix Airport

Source says this tells us indictment is coming


Of course if this had happened we never would have heard of it since apparently the local ABC affiliate only learned of the meeting through a leak once it was happening.

 
timschochet said:
Bill's having ice cream with James Comey as we speak. 
Click to expand...
You pretend not to understand that Comey is by the book and has a bead on the Clintons.  The major inconvenience to the Admin and Clintons is that he isn't turning a blind eye.  It's the corruptible players, including Obama, that have to be watched and held to bear.  

 
Seriously though, it's crazy that people think that when you massively increase the workload of a small group of civil servants without increasing their manpower or compensation one iota, and then the group makes a couple sloppy mistakes and needs a ton more time to finish the work, the response is CONSPIRACY! rather than the simple common sense conclusion that something like this is basically inevitable.

 
timschochet said:
This placement of this post is ironic- it was made only a few minutes after MOP once again accused the Clintons of murder in this thread- yet Jon finds my attititude irrational. 

Oh and here are a few other people on this planetwho do not realize that the FBI is undergoing a criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton: 

James Comey

Loretta Lynch

the FBI agents conducting the investigation. 

Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton.  
Click to expand...
If you want to be grouped with MoP, that is fine by me.  You have earned that level of notoriety in this thread.  

Outside of Hillary, not one of the people you named have denied it is a criminal investigation.   Comey has directly denied it is a 'security inquiry'.  They all call it a pending investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private e-mail server which they can't comment on.  And as with every FBI investigation, the end result is a recommendation as to whether to file criminal charges.  Even you have acknowledged this by the predictions you have made.  So I have no idea your logic in refusing to acknowledge such an obvious point.  

 
TobiasFunke said:
Seriously though, it's crazy that people think that when you massively increase the workload of a small group of civil servants without increasing their manpower or compensation one iota, and then the group makes a couple sloppy mistakes and needs a ton more time to finish the work, the response is CONSPIRACY! rather than the simple common sense conclusion that something like this is basically inevitable.
Click to expand...
Absolute bull####.  This is material information affecting the election for President, and this information can only hurt and inform in a way that disqualified Clinton further.  If this pertained to Trump, it would have been released.

 
jon_mx said:
If you want to be grouped with MoP, that is fine by me.  You have earned that level of notoriety in this thread.  

Outside of Hillary, not one of the people you named have denied it is a criminal investigation.   Comey has directly denied it is a 'security inquiry'.  They all call it a pending investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private e-mail server which they can't comment on.  And as with every FBI investigation, the end result is a recommendation as to whether to file criminal charges.  Even you have acknowledged this by the predictions you have made.  So I have no idea your logic in refusing to acknowledge such an obvious point.  
Click to expand...
You're right, none of them have denied it. You forgot to add that none of them have confirmed it either. 

If it's clearly a criminal investigation as you and others claim, why will no one in authority confirm that this is so? Why do you rely on offhand comments and rulings by judges unrelated to the investigation as evidence? 

If just one person in either the FBI or the Justice Department says "Hell yeah this is a criminal investigation!" Then I'll accept it. But until then I've got no real reason to believe it. 

 
timschochet said:
You're right, none of them have denied it. You forgot to add that none of them have confirmed it either. 

If it's clearly a criminal investigation as you and others claim, why will no one in authority confirm that this is so? Why do you rely on offhand comments and rulings by judges unrelated to the investigation as evidence? 

If just one person in either the FBI or the Justice Department says "Hell yeah this is a criminal investigation!" Then I'll accept it. But until then I've got no real reason to believe it. 
Click to expand...


^^^^^^Update.^^^^^^^

 
timschochet said:
You're right, none of them have denied it. You forgot to add that none of them have confirmed it either. 

If it's clearly a criminal investigation as you and others claim, why will no one in authority confirm that this is so? Why do you rely on offhand comments and rulings by judges unrelated to the investigation as evidence? 

If just one person in either the FBI or the Justice Department says "Hell yeah this is a criminal investigation!" Then I'll accept it. But until then I've got no real reason to believe it. 
Click to expand...
This is just priceless stuff here.  If they don't include the "Hell yeah" part, fair to assume you'll still be a denier?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27 said:
This is just priceless stuff here.  If they don't include the "Hell yeah" part, fair to assume you'll still be a denier?
Click to expand...
:lmao:

what am I denying exactly? You guys are so hung up on this. If we call it a criminal investigation will that make Hillary a criminal? Is it like Obama refusing to say radical Islam? 

Fine. It's a criminal investigation! It's VERY SERIOUS! There's about a 1% chance that Hillary will be indicted for creating a private email system, but hey those are higher odds than timschochet being indicted for creating a private email system. But whatever. You win. She's in some real trouble! 

What now? 

 
timschochet said:
You're right, none of them have denied it. You forgot to add that none of them have confirmed it either. 

If it's clearly a criminal investigation as you and others claim, why will no one in authority confirm that this is so? Why do you rely on offhand comments and rulings by judges unrelated to the investigation as evidence? 

If just one person in either the FBI or the Justice Department says "Hell yeah this is a criminal investigation!" Then I'll accept it. But until then I've got no real reason to believe it. 
Click to expand...
It walks like a duck.  It quacks like a duck.  It floats like a duck.  It even looks like a ####### duck. But until Obama calls it a duck there is no reason to believe it is a duck.   No arguing with that 'logic'. :rolleyes:  

 
timschochet said:
:lmao:

what am I denying exactly? You guys are so hung up on this. If we call it a criminal investigation will that make Hillary a criminal? Is it like Obama refusing to say radical Islam? 

Fine. It's a criminal investigation! It's VERY SERIOUS! There's about a 1% chance that Hillary will be indicted for creating a private email system, but hey those are higher odds than timschochet being indicted for creating a private email system. But whatever. You win. She's in some real trouble! 

What now? 
Click to expand...
Some may not agree with him, but Obama actually has a reason for that.  Do you? 

 
I don't really follow politics but is it true that Republicans voted to slash funding on Embassy security prior to the Benghazi tragedy?  

 
TobiasFunke said:
Seriously though, it's crazy that people think that when you massively increase the workload of a small group of civil servants without increasing their manpower or compensation one iota, and then the group makes a couple sloppy mistakes and needs a ton more time to finish the work, the response is CONSPIRACY! rather than the simple common sense conclusion that something like this is basically inevitable.
Click to expand...
This administration seems to be able to shunt money all over the place when it comes to escorting and relocating illegals, shoring up the disaster-that-is-Obamacare, and many others.  Somehow, though, they don't have any ability to internally allocate more resources to FOIA requests.  Huh - it's like they don't want them to be able to respond to these requests...

 
timschochet said:
:lmao:

what am I denying exactly? You guys are so hung up on this. If we call it a criminal investigation will that make Hillary a criminal? Is it like Obama refusing to say radical Islam? 

Fine. It's a criminal investigation! It's VERY SERIOUS! There's about a 1% chance that Hillary will be indicted for creating a private email system, but hey those are higher odds than timschochet being indicted for creating a private email system. But whatever. You win. She's in some real trouble! 

What now? 
Click to expand...
No, a criminal investigation by the FBI does not necessarily make her a criminal.  Obviously.  And, yes, there are reasons Obama is refusing to use the "radical Islam" phrase.  Every bit as much as you have been reluctant to concede that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation.

I'm glad you have at least moved beyond this denial part and conceded the investigation for what it is.  Now, is she in trouble?  Potentially.  Clearly, that's what the FBI is sorting out.  I'd say the odds are greater than 1% but they're less than 99% that she'll be indicted.  I'd put it closer to 40/60.

 
Bucky86 said:
Honest question for @timschochet and @Mr. Ham: How many times a day does Hilary Clinton come up in your mental dialogue? 
Click to expand...
Not that much truthfully. Trump does, quite a bit more. 

But- and I know a lot of people reading this aren't going to believe me- the vast majority of my thoughts each day center on my family, my work, my daughters' activities, my attempts to get healthy and stay healthy (lose weight). This stuff, while very serious for the nation, is leisure for me. It's extracurricular. 

 
I don't really follow politics but is it true that Republicans voted to slash funding on Embassy security prior to the Benghazi tragedy?
Click to expand...
Yes but that doesn't count. Lying about an attack is a much more serious offense than causing it.

 
Sand said:
This administration seems to be able to shunt money all over the place when it comes to escorting and relocating illegals, shoring up the disaster-that-is-Obamacare, and many others.  Somehow, though, they don't have any ability to internally allocate more resources to FOIA requests.  Huh - it's like they don't want them to be able to respond to these requests...
Click to expand...
I'm curious, how high of a priority do you believe FOIA requests should be for an administration?  Like, important enough to default on the national debt?  Not fund education?  I mean, we are saving money by not paying a Justice of the Supreme Court, so that's maybe some funds to shift.

 
Sabertooth said:
I don't really follow politics but is it true that Republicans voted to slash funding on Embassy security prior to the Benghazi tragedy?  
Click to expand...
I read this, Ambassador Stevens sister came out saying  she didn't blame Hillary, and she didn't want to make it political, by then proceeded to blame Congress for lack of funding.  As if our military budget isn't already 4x more than any other country, maybe the bean counters should have thought about this before they blew their wad buying guns for anyone who could hold one and scream, "Allah akbar". 

The reason Congress didn't approve it though is likely because of some unrelated crap attached to the bill they didn't like.  Just like this zika deal the Democrats keep refusing to sign, and the gun one the Democrats refused to sign recently that would have notified FBI if someone on list went to buy a gun.  This goes both ways, but you generally just get the headline for it not passing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quez said:
I read this, Ambassador Stevens sister came out saying  she didn't blame Hillary, and she didn't want to make it political, by then proceeded to blame Congress for lack of funding.  As if our military budget isn't already 4x more than any other country, maybe the bean counters should have thought about this before they blew their wad buying guns for anyone who could hold one and scream, "Allah akbar". 

The reason Congress didn't approve it though is likely because of some unrelated crap attached to the bill they didn't like.  Just like this zika deal the Democrats keep refusing to sign, and the gun one the Democrats refused to sign recently that would have notified FBI if someone on list went to buy a gun.  This goes both ways, but you generally just get the headline for it not passing.
Click to expand...
Like I said, I don't really get into the political stuff.  Is this a yes or a no?  

 
Oh good, more hearings for when Hillary is sworn in.  Over under on when the committee report comes out is four years.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow.  Watching CNN, and even they are skewering Lynch's judgment for meeting with Bill.  

- Carl Bernstein - she needs to recuse herself.  Unthinkable she can go on. (He wrote the favorable book "Hillary Clinton: A Woman in Charge")

Panel:

- She's not trustworthy.

- Broad recognition the Clintons consider themselves above the law.

 
dparker713 said:
I'm curious, how high of a priority do you believe FOIA requests should be for an administration?  Like, important enough to default on the national debt?  Not fund education?  I mean, we are saving money by not paying a Justice of the Supreme Court, so that's maybe some funds to shift.
Click to expand...
Funniest thing I've read all week.  Thanks for that little interlude of hilarity.

 
It's amazing to me to think that there are people who actually want the Clintons to be anywhere near the White House again.  I'm not talking about folks who are voting for Hillary as a means to beat Trump.  Just people who are actually pro-Hillary.

 
MaxThreshold said:
C'mon, Tim.  You're not this dense, are you?

Squiz, yes.  You...no.
Click to expand...
I don't think it should be amazing that there's a lot of people out there who actually like Hillary Clinton. I'm not ashamed to write that I'm one of them. This goes beyond my agreement with her on policy and my respect for her competence, both of which are at a high level. 

But I actually like her too. There's some things I don't like about her for sure. But I think she's a good person. I think she actually wants what's best for the United States. I don't buy into the depiction of her as a power mad corrupt and crooked woman, which I know you and others here believe in. I think that's a caricature. 

And that's my honest opinion. 

 
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
260K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 9 (members: 0, guests: 9)
Back
Top