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 (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
- Status
timschochet
Footballguy
G
Guest
Guest
Whether he made or lost money doesn't matter, Tim, if she shared with him classified government intelligence about the likelihood of Greek default. That the intelligence turned out to be wrong in utterly immaterial. You're really a piece of work.
I thought she got her intel on Greece from Sid? How classified could it be if it is coming from outside the government?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
That's nice. He was a great man. The tweets from Max Blumenthal, son of Sidney Blumenthal, are repulsive."One person of integrity can make the difference."
How in the hell would Hillary know?"One person of integrity can make the difference."
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
What Napolitano has been saying is that he thinks she will be indicted, but if she is not then people in intelligence and the FBI will leak details indicating she should have been. Even after the forthcoming expected decision to not indict comes out that will still be the danger. It always has been because people have largely expected she would not be indicted. However if the FBI did not recommend indictment and found no such details then that was never a danger either. It's just a question of which turns out to be true.
In other news, yesterday the Democratic nominee for president was questioned by the FBI, 4 days after her husband had a chat with the person in charge of it.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
On a more serious note besides the obvious trolling, the issues that remain are 1. the possibility of leaks, and 2. the possibility that the FBI recovered Hillary's emails, especially in terms of the Foia requests for them.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
dparker713
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
dparker713
Footballguy
This is in her emails. The FBI would have reviewed this. They will have a more comprehensive idea about what actually happened than whichever news organization reports on this.
badmojo1006
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
This is actually the CNN report which was well discussed here:
- 5/6/16
The discussion was about whether the DOJ had couched the investigation by ignoring the negligence and retention statutes and only looked at the one which concerned willful intent. That is one of the crimes and standards but not the only one.
This was compounded when Mills had her walkout on the FBI when they raised the process for the destruction of the emails. The issue then was whether perhaps Mills had some sort of qualified immunity agreement or if the DOJ hierarchy had prearranged an agreement to not probe certain areas.
I think those questions remain. But all this was well discussed.
eta - I think the DOJ should release a detailed summary explaining the rationale for not indicting with the announcement and the best thing would be to see James Comey's name signing off on it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
badmojo1006
Footballguy
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The 'no indictment' decision will not be the end of the story (most likely) but it will end the threat to Hillary's nomination.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
Except, what I posted from CNN said that sources told Evan Perez that "there will be announcement of no charges" and nothing that you have posted said there would be an announcement of no charges, so it couldn't have been discussed and it was not old news as you keep insisting.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
That's why I posted the follow up, to clarify. You're right this is the first confirmation there will not be charges.
Sand
Footballguy
I've been saying this is the best choice for Clinton for a while.
Just like Sessions would be the best choice for Trump.
timschochet
Footballguy
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
badmojo1006
Footballguy
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
I don't agree that this shows corruption, but I do agree that it will be seen that way by the masses whose grip on facts is loose at best.
Zegras11
Footballguy
No. Like we've just started to see, it will have many faces. Some rebellion, a lot of call for political change right and wrong, like Sanders and Trump have brought up this cycle. And a whole lot more weird behavior from all types of groups.
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
Zegras11
Footballguy
Of course you don't. You can't see someone as corrupt until it's black and white. And that fine.
Many people can see people for what they are and be accurate about it to a very high degree after meeting them just once. I'm one of those people and have had many successful businesses because of it. Hillary is as corrupt as they come. Very little about her is genuine at all.
G
Guest
Guest
I'll draw an oblique parallel. Saw a bunch of headlines that Spielberg's BFG was the best family movie since ET... Went to buy tickets and it's at 71% on Rotten Tomatos. But you'd never know in reality it's an average movie at best, because the majority of our media is owned by 6 conglomerates in the pocket of the mega-corporations that also happen to own the studios and promote their tent poles.
What's occurred is a closed loop where reality is deeply skewed and where the ability to gauge reality is distorted. One may argue that having Rotten Tomatos, like having "alternative" media for politics, is a bastion of hope. But the facts are, the masses are directed to think and distracted from examining as big corporations dictate.
Hillary is a master at using propaganda, the media and obsfucation to hide that fact that in actuality, she is a terribly ####ty movie.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I recall us having maybe two discussions and IIRC they both went well. Last one we left off where i asked if you agreed with a public records suit by a good government group in San Diego. Seemed straightforward but I couldn't even get you to reach common ground on that basic issue, I suppose because it would reflect badly on Hillary. Glad to discuss again whenever you like.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/02/the-fbi-interviewed-hillary-clinton-today-the-next-two-weeks-are-huge/
- GOP convention is July 18, Dem convention is July 25. Tuesday is July 5th. 2 weeks from now, if that's when the DOJ announcement comes will be roughly just before the GOP convention. Obviously Hillary would get a big wind in her sails but if it comes it should come week of 7/11-15.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
MSNBC Exclusive: Hillary Clinton's First Interview After FBI Meeting | NBC News
(Video)
Summary:
"Let me just repeat what I have repeated for many months now, I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified."
After Clinton said that there weren't going to be any further comments on the matter, Todd shifts the conversation to Bill's allegedly coincidental meeting with US Attorney General Loretta Lynch at an airport in Phoenix. Todd asked what Hillary's initial reaction was upon learning the news.
"Well I learned about it in the news, and it was a short, chance meeting at a airport tarmac. Both of their planes as I understand it were landing on the same tarmac at about the same time. The Attorney General's husband was there, they said hello, they talked about grand kids, which is very much on our minds these days. Golf, their mutual friend former Attorney General Janet Reno, it was purely social."
Todd then asks Hillary if she views what Bill did as inappropriate. Clinton reiterated that it was a chance meeting, and she actually laughed at the assumption that anything related to the investigation would be discussed.
"Well it was a short, chance meeting that occurred and they did not discuss the Department of Justice's review. And I know that some nonetheless have viewed the meeting in a different light, and both the Attorney General and my husband said they would not do it again. The bottom line for me is I respect the professionalism and integrity of the officials at the Department of Justice handling this process."
"I think hindsight is 20/20, both the Attorney General and my husband have said that they wouldn't do it again even though it was from all accounts that I have heard and seen an exchange of pleasantries."
...
But the punchline, and by far the most important moment of the interview, one which would confirm there is indeed collusion between the DOJ and Hillary and that "the fix is in", is whether the FBI had advised Hillary that no charges would be filed against her.
Recall that overnight CNN reported that "within the next two weeks or so, the expectation is there will be an announcement of no charges being brought against Clinton so long as no evidence of wrongdoing emerges from her interview with the FBI, sources familiar with the investigation told CNN."
Rounding up all up, Todd said he's hearing reports that no charges will be brought, and asks Clinton if any indication was given that no charges would be filed. Hillary, clearly aware a positive response would confirm all suspicion about a captured department of justice, didn't answer.
Chuck Todd: "There is some news reports out there that indicate that no charges may be brought against you in a final decision in a couple of weeks. Were you given that indication today that no charges would be filed and are you confident that no charges would be filed?"
Clinton: "Chuck, I am not going to comment on the process. I have no knowledge, any timeline is entirely up to the department."
...
- About 25 Ah's in there.
- 2 cackles - @ 4:04 when asked if Bill and Lynch discussed the criminal investigation.
+ @ 6:50 when Todd tells Hillary there are no charges and that the interview is over.
- Hillary refuses to say who authorized her server (that's in the video, not the text).
- @ 6:50 Todd tells Hillary that just as they are talking the news that she would not be indicted just happened to come across the wire. Quite a coincidence. Hillary does not react at all and says robotically she has "no knowledge" of "any timeline." At this point I think that is a lie.
- Won't comment on if she was told at the interview if she was told there would be no charges. That should be a simple 'no'. - It's clear this is how the Clinton source was able to tell the press that there were no charges.
- Maybe the most absurd thing out of this is Hillary claims she only learned of Bill's ambush on Lynch "in the news." That's a sheer boldfaced lie.
- Yes, I realize this is ZeroHedge. I am partly using it because it has an actual partial transcript. But it raises an interesting point - what if Bill went on Lynch's plane to force the interview and also to force a definitive answer on the indictment question?
- How does a decision on no charges get made the same day as the interview? It would make sense that such a decision would take some period of time after the interview was digested, not immediately. Alternatively, if the decision was already made, why have the interview?
- Maybe Bill went on the plane to pressure Lynch to force an end to the investigation and to conclude the investigation in time for the convention?
(Video)
Summary:
On why Clinton believes no laws were broken by using a private server, as expected Clinton gave the same answer we have heard frequently over the course of the investigation.
"Let me just repeat what I have repeated for many months now, I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified."
After Clinton said that there weren't going to be any further comments on the matter, Todd shifts the conversation to Bill's allegedly coincidental meeting with US Attorney General Loretta Lynch at an airport in Phoenix. Todd asked what Hillary's initial reaction was upon learning the news.
"Well I learned about it in the news, and it was a short, chance meeting at a airport tarmac. Both of their planes as I understand it were landing on the same tarmac at about the same time. The Attorney General's husband was there, they said hello, they talked about grand kids, which is very much on our minds these days. Golf, their mutual friend former Attorney General Janet Reno, it was purely social."
Todd then asks Hillary if she views what Bill did as inappropriate. Clinton reiterated that it was a chance meeting, and she actually laughed at the assumption that anything related to the investigation would be discussed.
"Well it was a short, chance meeting that occurred and they did not discuss the Department of Justice's review. And I know that some nonetheless have viewed the meeting in a different light, and both the Attorney General and my husband said they would not do it again. The bottom line for me is I respect the professionalism and integrity of the officials at the Department of Justice handling this process."
"I think hindsight is 20/20, both the Attorney General and my husband have said that they wouldn't do it again even though it was from all accounts that I have heard and seen an exchange of pleasantries."
...
But the punchline, and by far the most important moment of the interview, one which would confirm there is indeed collusion between the DOJ and Hillary and that "the fix is in", is whether the FBI had advised Hillary that no charges would be filed against her.
Recall that overnight CNN reported that "within the next two weeks or so, the expectation is there will be an announcement of no charges being brought against Clinton so long as no evidence of wrongdoing emerges from her interview with the FBI, sources familiar with the investigation told CNN."
Rounding up all up, Todd said he's hearing reports that no charges will be brought, and asks Clinton if any indication was given that no charges would be filed. Hillary, clearly aware a positive response would confirm all suspicion about a captured department of justice, didn't answer.
Chuck Todd: "There is some news reports out there that indicate that no charges may be brought against you in a final decision in a couple of weeks. Were you given that indication today that no charges would be filed and are you confident that no charges would be filed?"
Clinton: "Chuck, I am not going to comment on the process. I have no knowledge, any timeline is entirely up to the department."
...
- About 25 Ah's in there.
- 2 cackles - @ 4:04 when asked if Bill and Lynch discussed the criminal investigation.
+ @ 6:50 when Todd tells Hillary there are no charges and that the interview is over.
- Hillary refuses to say who authorized her server (that's in the video, not the text).
- @ 6:50 Todd tells Hillary that just as they are talking the news that she would not be indicted just happened to come across the wire. Quite a coincidence. Hillary does not react at all and says robotically she has "no knowledge" of "any timeline." At this point I think that is a lie.
- Won't comment on if she was told at the interview if she was told there would be no charges. That should be a simple 'no'. - It's clear this is how the Clinton source was able to tell the press that there were no charges.
- Maybe the most absurd thing out of this is Hillary claims she only learned of Bill's ambush on Lynch "in the news." That's a sheer boldfaced lie.
- Yes, I realize this is ZeroHedge. I am partly using it because it has an actual partial transcript. But it raises an interesting point - what if Bill went on Lynch's plane to force the interview and also to force a definitive answer on the indictment question?
- How does a decision on no charges get made the same day as the interview? It would make sense that such a decision would take some period of time after the interview was digested, not immediately. Alternatively, if the decision was already made, why have the interview?
- Maybe Bill went on the plane to pressure Lynch to force an end to the investigation and to conclude the investigation in time for the convention?
Last edited by a moderator:
dparker713
Footballguy
I'm pretty sure most everyone here would agree that Hillary is corrupt. However, what you're talking about isn't that Hillary is corrupt, it's that Lynch and Comey are corrupt. Now Lynch had an ill advised meeting Bill, but Comey was being lauded for his impartiality this entire process. So his only offense will have been to make a decision that you don't agree with. Mind you, he's got a much more thorough understanding of the facts and the issues, but somehow if he disagrees with your conclusions he's corrupt. The more logical response is that you're just flat wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
dparker713
Footballguy
The film’s technical achievements may be complex, but its emotions are facile.
Richard Brody·The New Yorker
Regrettably, The BFG plays it too nice and falls short.
Peter Travers·Rolling Stone
But with The BFG—which opens in July in the United States, and which is playing out of competition here in Cannes—Spielberg gets the tone just right.
Stephanie Zacharek·Time
The BFG is a children’s fable that’s more likely than not to bore kids to sleep with its truly languorous two-hour run time.
David Sims·The Atlantic
Seriously, do you even try?
cobalt_27
Footballguy
I really doubt that. I strongly suspect Bill felt it would be a nice extension of goodwill to meet up with his old buddy he nominated to the NY court, exchange pleasantries, and remind her that they're pals. The FBI can't conduct its investigation and interviews on a whim. Honestly, the attorneys on both sides need ample time to prepare, likely requiring weeks notice. I suspect the Hillary meetup has been scheduled for quite some time now.
Bottom lineI don't know what Bill was up to. I don't trust him or Hillary, but I don't think they're that sloppy to plan a meeting to give Lynch an ultimatum--assuming they even have that kind of pull--and do it in such a way that jeopardizes getting caught out in the open like that. I don't know Lynch at all, but Friday left a positive impression on me. Unlike Hillary who is so encumbered by defensive body language, guarded verbal language, and vagaries galore, I found Lynch to be crisp, on point, thoughtful, reflective in recognizing her poor form, and addressed the matter in a way I'd want her to if I were her advisor. Add that to the legions of folks across the political spectrum who vouch for her integrity, I'm not inclined to believe she is a part of anything nefarious. Same with Comey. If there are no charges, I am willing to accept that the evidence they were able to review does not support criminal charges. That doesn't mean I don't think she did anything illegal, but it's a recognition and acceptance of the fact that she probably got away with one.
Which is all for the worst because she's not going to get a big bump from this. Her whole shtick--the whole Clinton stink--is so toxic, her unfavorable a worse than Trump's, that she stands a big chance of losing what would otherwise be a really easy election to win. We'd all be better off with someone else, and an indictment would help set in motion a stronger candidate. But, be that as it may, the Clintons know how to play damage control with the best of them, and this might be one more feather in the cap of their long legacy of crapping on the system.
Last edited by a moderator:
dparker713
Footballguy
His logic is pretty flawed. Pledged delegates are no more bound than superdelegates. The supers aren't going to jump ship anymore than the pledged delegates will unless there is a recommendation for an indictment - then the games begin.
Zegras11
Footballguy
LOL. I was talking about Hillary, and started out with a generalization that this event is another, deeper level of corruption being exposed to the masses.
That is all. Spin away
dparker713
Footballguy
She said no, you underlined and bolded it.
Yeah, Hillary's obviously always been able to keep Bill's impulses inline...
dparker713
Footballguy
The only way she's in control of this process is if Lynch and Comey are corrupt. Hillary and Bill aren't magic. They can't control Justice and the FBI without help.LOL. I was talking about Hillary, and started out with a generalization that this event is another, deeper level of corruption being exposed to the masses.
That is all. Spin away
And what else would "another, deeper level" than more people in different positions?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
She said she had no comment, she did not directly respond to the question if the decision was discussed. You also have to view that in context that a Clinton source told the media that a decision had been made.
As for Bill, yeah I agree, what I find ludicrous is that she says she learned of it through the news.
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
dparker713
Footballguy
"Chuck, I am not going to comment on the process. I have no knowledge, any timeline is entirely up to the department."
I have no knowledge - thats a no.
As for the other one, why? It sounded like Bill had a security detail, but not a staff with him. The security detail wasn't going to disclose anything. And Lynch's staff wasn't going to compound the problem by alerting Hillary's staff. So it's either Bill told her directly or her staff found out through the media. Considering how quickly this came out, it's entirely plausible that she found out from the news report.
timschochet
Footballguy
I do not. And perhaps I am the only one here left who doesn't think so (but I believe there are a few others.)
Hillary is a typical politician and she skirts the lines of what is ethical and legal at times. But I do not believe she crosses those lines, and I do not regard her as corrupt.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
If Bill had that kind of power, wouldn't it have made more sense to pressure Lynch to conclude the investigation in November?
edit: assuming that the conclusion was going to criticize Hillary in any way.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
- Status
Similar threads
