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 (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
saintfool said:
I think it's reasonable for her to remove/delete them if, as she said, they were strictly personal. The FBI recovered them anyway and will hand them over to State now, right? I think if the FBI found anything in them then we'd probably know by now.
Click to expand...
Well, yeah - if strictly personal. - The FBI has already said they found something public/official in the deleted material, that's the point of this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dparker713 said:
What benefits her election chances benefits the country right now.  Get your pound of flesh in December.
Click to expand...
Hey if someone wants to say concern over Trump played a role in the decision making I'm fin with that. I always felt that might impact things. But no that's not how it's supposed to roll.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dparker713 said:
How is anything related to FOIA important?  There's no consequences to violating the law for any public official.  
Click to expand...
Hey it's important because it is - it's important to Hillary because look at the steps she took and it's important to the FBI because they treated the destruction of records as an important matter. Heather Samuelson was there at the last interview right alongside Hillary.

Obviously I agree on the lack of criminal penalty for violating the PRA.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cobalt_27 said:
And it will remain so.  Funny how Hillary supporters take her cue and bury their heads in the sand when #### hits the fan.  It's as though they think it will all just magically go away.  What's clear is Tim thinks it's a better political move to let everyone talk about this and guide the narrative, as opposed to having her come out forcefully and passionately make the case for herself.
Click to expand...
If I was Hillary, I would not waste a minute talking about this. She has nothing whatsoever to gain. Even if she told the truth 100% about everything, the people that don't like her would just call her a liar or say something else negative. She won't gain many votes. Better to stick to policy and attacking Trump. I am not a supporter (I voted for Bernie) but I am voting for her.

 
Anthony Borbely said:
If I was Hillary, I would not waste a minute talking about this. She has nothing whatsoever to gain. Even if she told the truth 100% about everything, the people that don't like her would just call her a liar or say something else negative. She won't gain many votes. Better to stick to policy and attacking Trump. I am not a supporter (I voted for Bernie) but I am voting for her.
Click to expand...
Absolutely accurate. And those who argue otherwise are either politically clueless (which I doubt) or being dosingenuous if they claim it would help Hillary to talk about this. 

 
Anthony Borbely said:
If I was Hillary, I would not waste a minute talking about this. She has nothing whatsoever to gain. Even if she told the truth 100% about everything, the people that don't like her would just call her a liar or say something else negative. She won't gain many votes. Better to stick to policy and attacking Trump. I am not a supporter (I voted for Bernie) but I am voting for her.
Click to expand...
Yeah lol at the thought that would somehow provide closure for those citing section 903.1.6.f on page 297 of the IT handbook.

 
timschochet said:
Absolutely accurate. And those who argue otherwise are either politically clueless (which I doubt) or being dosingenuous if they claim it would help Hillary to talk about this. 
Click to expand...
Eh, couple thoughts: one is that I think she has a duty to talk about it forthrightly and honestly or at least answer questions.

Another is let me remind you that Hillary had a press conference at the beginning of this thing. She did that because she thought it was important, and because it was demanded, yet nearly everything she said there without exception was a lie or just false. What was true then is true now. She has as much of a duty to respond to questions and more now than she did then. And yeah I think it would help her if she was completely honest and acknowledged Comey's report at the very least, accept his findings and make herself an open book. The course she is taking now continues her prior mistakes. She has a chance now at a fresh start but hiding and more dissembling or obfuscation will only hurt things.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dparker713 said:
She could resurrect Jesus and the narrative in this thread wouldn't change.  Of course, this thread is hardly indicative of the greater conversation in and around the country.  
Click to expand...
What makes you say this?  I'd argue that her honesty/authenticity/transparency has been at the center of the discussion with Hillary, whether it's pundits on Sunday morning talk shows trying to explain her unfavorables or late night comedians poking fun or just everyday folks spouting off at the water cooler or on Facebook.  I'd say this thread captures the very essence of how/why Hillary is limping through this election season.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Eh, couple thoughts: one is that I think she has a duty to talk about it forthrightly and honestly or at least answer questions.

Another is let me remind you that Hillary had a press conference at the beginning of this thing. She did that because she thought it was important, and because it was demanded, yet nearly everything she said there without exception was a lie or just false. What was true then is true now. She has as much of a duty to respond to questions and more now than she did then. And yeah I think it would help her if she was completely honest and acknowledged Comey's report at the very least, accept his findings and make herself an open book. The course she is taking now continues her prior mistakes. She has a chance now at a fresh start but hiding and more dissembling or obfuscation will only hurt things.
Click to expand...
Her inability to maneuver through this is not inspiring. 

 
timschochet said:
Anthony Borbely said:
If I was Hillary, I would not waste a minute talking about this. She has nothing whatsoever to gain. Even if she told the truth 100% about everything, the people that don't like her would just call her a liar or say something else negative. She won't gain many votes. Better to stick to policy and attacking Trump. I am not a supporter (I voted for Bernie) but I am voting for her.
Click to expand...
Absolutely accurate. And those who argue otherwise are either politically clueless (which I doubt) or being dosingenuous if they claim it would help Hillary to talk about this. 
Click to expand...
No, it absolutely wouldn't help her to discuss the issue.  Even were she to have a full disclosure session with complete honesty, one press conference where she displays a bit of contrition and honesty isn't going to nullify a lifetime of ethical lapses, shady dealings, and outright lies.  The sycophants would lap it up, but those who have followed her career would understand it was yet another attempt to ride the current political winds.

 
32 Counter Pass said:
I only mentioned the Trump U thing because, as you mentioned, I think the ethics angle is push. Not "trying to hide" from anything. 

You mentioned a laundered bribe can you share a link to this? If it is a fact and not innuendo why weren't charges brought? Again, I am not trying to hide her record or defend her. Only trying to educate myself. 
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy

As to avoid any biased sources, check out the Wikipedia and decide for yourself.  The reason it wasn't prosecuted is threefold:

1. It was not discovered until after the statue of limitations had passed, when reporters were investigating tax returns after other wrongdoing

2. It's likely that it was very common for lawmakers to accept kickbacks and bribes in various forms, and might have been conveniently tamped down -- glass houses and all

3. It was a Clinton at the height of power, and normal rules and extraordinary influence applied

But make no mistake -- she took a laundered bribe

There have been excellent articles posted with more detail and investigations that link the events to Tyson and suggest that the bribe was in exchange for looking the other way on environmental damage from chicken plants -- which eventually led to an aquifer collapse and poisoning of a town's drinking water.

There was a very good expose from the 90s linked a few hundred pages back. Don't have time to look for it -- anyone remember what publication?

 
dparker713 said:
Prove, without getting the chance to ask her, that she deliberately lied.  That she knew the truth and said something else.  Also, you don't get to look at her correspondence with her attorney's - that's privileged.
Click to expand...
This is why I so strongly object to everything Hillary represents.  She is applying to work for us, damn it, and we should have access to the truth.  The fact we don't, the fact we never will, the fact it is denied to us when she flaunts the truth is not something we should be standing by and allowing.

 
Mr. Ham said:
This is why I so strongly object to everything Hillary represents.  She is applying to work for us, damn it, and we should have access to the truth.  The fact we don't, the fact we never will, the fact it is denied to us when she flaunts the truth is not something we should be standing by and allowing.
Click to expand...
Do you have access to everything you need from Donald Trump? Or is it just Hillary who's not forthcoming enough?

 
Mr. Ham said:
I've stated before that I will vote for Hillary over Trump -- but I am PISSED that I have these two "choices."  PISSED!
Click to expand...
What about when Sanders hemmed and hawed for many months before finally releasing a single year of his tax returns? If you think Clinton should hand over privileged communications with her attorneys because "she's applying to work for us," Sanders' intransigence on that basic presidential candidate disclosure must have driven you up a wall, right?

 
TobiasFunke said:
What about when Sanders hemmed and hawed for many months before finally releasing a single year of his tax returns? If you think Clinton should hand over privileged communications with her attorneys because "she's applying to work for us," Sanders' intransigence on that basic presidential candidate disclosure must have driven you up a wall, right?
Click to expand...
We're talking about a candidate burying evidence of a federal crime, not compliance with a voluntary tax return convention.

 
May need a better comedy writer...

Hillary Clinton: "I don't know who created Pokemon Go, but I'm trying to figure out how we get them to do Pokemon Go To The Polls!"

 
Mr. Ham said:
We're talking about a candidate burying evidence of a federal crime, not compliance with a voluntary tax return convention.
Click to expand...
That's one way to look at it. Another way to look at is is that you're demanding access to information that everyone in the country understands is privileged, and that there are very good reasons for that privilege as most everyone in the country understands. But you didn't demand something that most of the country has demanded of its candidates for many decades.

Also you're operating from the assumption that there's been a federal crime and working backwards from that assumption, which is a ridiculous assumption to make. I could say the same thing about Sanders being guilty of tax fraud if I felt like making unfounded assumptions.

You see why both of these suggest that you're not being remotely fair or evenhanded when it comes to Clinton, yes?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Ham said:
But make no mistake -- she took a laundered bribe
Click to expand...
Quit saying that. There is no proof of that. And the Clinton's reported the profits from the cattle future's deal on their income taxes, so it was public knowledge.

And also from Wiki, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy

Clinton responses[edit]

Hillary Clinton's defenders, including White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler, maintained throughout that she had made her own decisions, that her own money was constantly at risk, and that she made both winning and losing trades throughout the ten months.[20] Regarding suggestions that Blair had favored Clinton so that Tyson Foods could gain influence with Governor Clinton, they pointed out that Tyson had, in fact, later opposed Clinton during his 1980 re-election bid, an observation the First Lady had also made at her news conference.[11][20]

Clinton's defenders also stressed that Blair and others stayed in the market longer than Rodham and lost a good amount of what they had earlier made later that summer and fall, showing that the risk was real.[4] Indeed, some reports had Blair losing $15 million[18] and Bone was reported as bankrupt.[7]

 
squistion said:
Quit saying that. There is no proof of that. And the Clinton's reported the profits from the cattle future's deal on their income taxes, so it was public knowledge.

And also from Wiki, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy

Clinton responses[edit]

Hillary Clinton's defenders, including White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler, maintained throughout that she had made her own decisions, that her own money was constantly at risk, and that she made both winning and losing trades throughout the ten months.[20] Regarding suggestions that Blair had favored Clinton so that Tyson Foods could gain influence with Governor Clinton, they pointed out that Tyson had, in fact, later opposed Clinton during his 1980 re-election bid, an observation the First Lady had also made at her news conference.[11][20]

Clinton's defenders also stressed that Blair and others stayed in the market longer than Rodham and lost a good amount of what they had earlier made later that summer and fall, showing that the risk was real.[4] Indeed, some reports had Blair losing $15 million[18] and Bone was reported as bankrupt.[7]
Click to expand...
Can we try this one again?

 
TobiasFunke said:
What about when Sanders hemmed and hawed for many months before finally releasing a single year of his tax returns? If you think Clinton should hand over privileged communications with her attorneys because "she's applying to work for us," Sanders' intransigence on that basic presidential candidate disclosure must have driven you up a wall, right?
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
If someone got paid to write that line they should be fired immediately...it is just so painful watching her trying to connect with ordinary people...she likes hot sauce by the way...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
67% of the US distrusts her right now, per CBS/NYT. It really is indicative.
Click to expand...
I distrust my mother to set my DVR.  Doesn't mean I want to turn over the keys to my house to Jeffery Dahmer.

 
squistion said:
Quit saying that. There is no proof of that. And the Clinton's reported the profits from the cattle future's deal on their income taxes, so it was public knowledge.

And also from Wiki, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy

Clinton responses[edit]

Hillary Clinton's defenders, including White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler, maintained throughout that she had made her own decisions, that her own money was constantly at risk, and that she made both winning and losing trades throughout the ten months.[20] Regarding suggestions that Blair had favored Clinton so that Tyson Foods could gain influence with Governor Clinton, they pointed out that Tyson had, in fact, later opposed Clinton during his 1980 re-election bid, an observation the First Lady had also made at her news conference.[11][20]

Clinton's defenders also stressed that Blair and others stayed in the market longer than Rodham and lost a good amount of what they had earlier made later that summer and fall, showing that the risk was real.[4] Indeed, some reports had Blair losing $15 million[18] and Bone was reported as bankrupt.[7]
Click to expand...
Yeah, no.  She took a laundered bribe.  Read rhe Wikipedia link. 31 trillion to 1 that she gained those returns, based on an independent economic model.  Shenanigans. And yes, they declared the income.  Plausible deniability and an alternative to a suitcase of cash.  Bribe none-the-less.  

To put that in perspective, 31 trillion to 1 is roughly 100 million times more emails than she deleted.

 
cobalt_27 said:
What makes you say this?  I'd argue that her honesty/authenticity/transparency has been at the center of the discussion with Hillary, whether it's pundits on Sunday morning talk shows trying to explain her unfavorables or late night comedians poking fun or just everyday folks spouting off at the water cooler or on Facebook.  I'd say this thread captures the very essence of how/why Hillary is limping through this election season.
Click to expand...
This thread has harped on her emails more than Fox News.  It didn't even matter if there hadn't been anything at all new - it was still the only thing being discussed.  It'll probably maintain this way through the election.

 
Mr. Ham said:
This is why I so strongly object to everything Hillary represents.  She is applying to work for us, damn it, and we should have access to the truth.  The fact we don't, the fact we never will, the fact it is denied to us when she flaunts the truth is not something we should be standing by and allowing.
Click to expand...
If we required everyone running for office to abrogate their rights to do so, we'd never get any desirable candidates.  

 
For Trump to really capitalize on this he needs to come up with a clever quip for this e-mail scandal.  Something that would be compatible to "It's the economy, stupid" or mocking her with a "read my lips...."    Maybe hire Johnny Cochran to come up with something clever.  

 
jon_mx said:
For Trump to really capitalize on this he needs to come up with a clever quip for this e-mail scandal.  Something that would be compatible to "It's the economy, stupid" or mocking her with a "read my lips...."    Maybe hire Johnny Cochran to come up with something clever.  
Click to expand...
If he can hire Johnny Cochran, he will get my vote no matter what.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Ham said:
Yeah, no.  She took a laundered bribe. 
Click to expand...
You keep repeating this lie several times a day, but his each repetition does not make it any more it true or win you any converts -  it only makes you look sillier and more delusional.

 
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
252K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top