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.
Just because she acted in a way that one might lose their clearance and job if she were a regular State or DoD employee doesn't mean she's unqualified for the job as POTUS...

I'm kinda halfway serious. She was at such a high level of government as well as being not super tech savvy (like many of her generation) that she felt that she didn't have to worry about such things and others would take care of it. She trusted her advisors and underlings to handle that stuff and they bungled the hell out if it.

Yet, she's still the best major party candidate in the race. Horseshoe up their ### indeed...
Tim and I have essentially made the same argument since the story first broke. And it appears that most likely voters do not consider it the automatic disqualifier for POTUS that the anti-Hillary crowd here does.

 
Just because she acted in a way that one might lose their clearance and job if she were a regular State or DoD employee doesn't mean she's unqualified for the job as POTUS...

I'm kinda halfway serious. She was at such a high level of government as well as being not super tech savvy (like many of her generation) that she felt that she didn't have to worry about such things and others would take care of it. She trusted her advisors and underlings to handle that stuff and they bungled the hell out if it.

Yet, she's still the best major party candidate in the race. Horseshoe up their ### indeed...
You're missing the point.  A lot of people who are in jail are qualified to work too.

 
She was at such a high level of government as well as being not super tech savvy (like many of her generation) that she felt that she didn't have to worry about such things and others would take care of it. She trusted her advisors and underlings to handle that stuff and they bungled the hell out if it.
Hillary is definitely 100% responsible.

However I don't feel this has to preclude people from voting for her vs Trump. To me it's always been two different conversations, what happened vs 'OMG the future of our republic, NATO, domestic tranquility, etc.' As far as the politics goes, there have always been better, more qualified, more decent and ethical Democrats who would have done a much better job with Trump. With Hillary anti-Trumpers were always and still are taking unnecessary electoral and eventually once president political risks.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Z, you summed up exactly how I feel about her.  IMO she's filler between Obama and another great  President.
I would not want someone like Hillary to be a substitute teacher in a school.

Why would anyone want her to be the leader of the country for four years?

 
Just because she acted in a way that one might lose their clearance and job if she were a regular State or DoD employee doesn't mean she's unqualified for the job as POTUS...

I'm kinda halfway serious. She was at such a high level of government as well as being not super tech savvy (like many of her generation) that she felt that she didn't have to worry about such things and others would take care of it. She trusted her advisors and underlings to handle that stuff and they bungled the hell out if it.

Yet, she's still the best major party candidate in the race. Horseshoe up their ### indeed...
Except this part isn't true.  Her advisors and the IT staff at State specifically told her not to do most of what she did.

 
Z, you summed up exactly how I feel about her.  IMO she's filler between Obama and another great  President.
Here's the problem. 'Great people' want nothing to do with that low paying, crappy job. Only psychos, Alzheimer's victims (Hillary) and narcissists apply anymore.

 
Tim and I have essentially made the same argument since the story first broke. And it appears that most likely voters do not consider it the automatic disqualifier for POTUS that the anti-Hillary crowd here does.


timschochet said:
Hillary was ignorant of how best to protect classified materials, and her decision to use a private server was careless.


Squiz, that's where Tim is now. You should should join him in walking to the light.

However Tim also says that he doesn't think that these issues are important to him in terms of what make a good president. I'm fine with that, I disagree with it, but at least he has left the stage of denial about what Hillary did behind finally.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Squiz, that's where Tim is now. You should should join him in walking to the light.

However Tim also says that he doesn't think that these issues are important to him in terms of what make a good president. I'm fine with that, I disagree with it, but at least he has left the stage of denial about what Hillary did behind finally.
I'm in agreement with him and have been for quite awhile that she was negligent in that respect (but not rising to the level of criminality).

 
And let me guess...shortly after this he was found dead under suspicious circumstances, possibly another victim of The Hillary Death Squad.
No, much weirder, nothing happened to him. Lose two drives filled with the SOS's classified data and gosh no consequences. Reassuring.

I think this does give a lot of credence to the report that Cooper had a couple hundred thousand dollars in legal bills though.

A source familiar with Mr. Cooper’s arrangement with the Clintons tells me that they have paid his legal fees associated with the FBI investigation, amounting to “hundreds of thousands of dollars.” They aren’t paying those costs out of a sense of decency. They’re paying them because he knows the “why” of the server, which may very well have been to make it easier for the foundation to hustle big donations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, much weirder, nothing happened to him. Lose two drives filled with the SOS's classified data and gosh no consequences. Reassuring.

I think this does give a lot of credence to the report that Cooper had a couple hundred thousand dollars in legal bills though.
Brilliant reverse psychology by the dastardly Hillary - leave him alive instead of silencing him forever with The Hillary Hit Squad. Great argument against the 40 other mysterious deaths, just say, "But nothing happened to Justin Cooper".

 
Brilliant reverse psychology by the dastardly Hillary - leave him alive instead of silencing him forever with The Hillary Hit Squad. Great argument against the 40 other mysterious deaths, just say, "But nothing happened to Justin Cooper".
That was the DOJ's call. They left Hillary to Comey, not the others.

Why would Hillary even worry when the AG has her back and when she's taking care of the legal bills of the main witnesses against her?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tim and I have essentially made the same argument since the story first broke. And it appears that most likely voters do not consider it the automatic disqualifier for POTUS that the anti-Hillary crowd here does.
I've read many arguments by Tim, I've seen you paste & copy Twitter posts as well as throw in the occasional emoji.

FYI, 38% of registered voters have a positive opinion of Hillary.

 
Baloney Sandwich said:
FYI, 38% of registered voters have a positive opinion of Hillary.
Any way you could translate this to Twitter "likes" so some posters will understand this?  If you don't do that then they might think that's a good number.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Serious question: if someone has done something in their past that would normally result in being fired from the State Department or DoD, buy does not get prosecuted for those issues, does that disqualify them from being POTUS?

Obviously, it doesn't really DQ them per the Constitution, but is that person fit to hold the highest office in government? If not, could they be allowed to hold any elected office?

 
Serious question: if someone has done something in their past that would normally result in being fired from the State Department or DoD, buy does not get prosecuted for those issues, does that disqualify them from being POTUS?

Obviously, it doesn't really DQ them per the Constitution, but is that person fit to hold the highest office in government? If not, could they be allowed to hold any elected office?
Would you hire someone to do a job that is more important than a job they got fired from (or should have been fired from)?

I wouldn't. I'd find someone who didn't screw up while doing their last job.

 
Serious question: if someone has done something in their past that would normally result in being fired from the State Department or DoD, buy does not get prosecuted for those issues, does that disqualify them from being POTUS?

Obviously, it doesn't really DQ them per the Constitution, but is that person fit to hold the highest office in government? If not, could they be allowed to hold any elected office?
Hillary Clinton held the position of Secretary of State. She did nothing in her past that would come close to deserve her being fired from that position. So your question is irrelevant. 

 
Would you hire someone to do a job that is more important than a job they got fired from (or should have been fired from)?

I wouldn't. I'd find someone who didn't screw up while doing their last job.
Then it's a good thing that Hillary didn't get fired nor should she have been. To the contrary; she was an excellent S of S. 

So now you can vote for her. And you should. 

 
Then it's a good thing that Hillary didn't get fired nor should she have been. To the contrary; she was an excellent S of S. 

So now you can vote for her. And you should. 
Comey said his employees in the FBI  would face discipline for the same behavior.

“They might get fired, they might lose their clearance, they might get suspended for 30 days. There would be some discipline." - James Comey testimony to Congress.

It's getting really hard to be "excellent" to you Tim. You are asking for it. Really asking for it being so ### #### obtuse towards what that ##### did. 

 
Hillary has 120 million in ads and Trump has 12 million....Typical democrat overspending..While the republican spends conservatively...What a f-ing waste of money..

 
Then it's a good thing that Hillary didn't get fired nor should she have been. To the contrary; she was an excellent S of S. 

So now you can vote for her. And you should. 
This is dumb, she is the only SOS to have been investigated by the FBI, that is by definition a disgrace.

She'll still be president but it's time to acknowledge that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Serious question: if someone has done something in their past that would normally result in being fired from the State Department or DoD, buy does not get prosecuted for those issues, does that disqualify them from being POTUS?

Obviously, it doesn't really DQ them per the Constitution, but is that person fit to hold the highest office in government? If not, could they be allowed to hold any elected office?
One person has resigned from the presidency because he knew he would be impeached, which means disqualified.

What did he do, how was he discovered, and then compare.

However this is academic, we know Hillary will be president.

 
Hillary has 120 million in ads and Trump has 12 million....Typical democrat overspending..While the republican spends conservatively...What a f-ing waste of money..
$120 million is a waste of money, but $12 million is not.

Eh, whatever. You keep on supporting candidates who don't spend money. Fight the good fight.

 
Comey said his employees in the FBI  would face discipline for the same behavior.

“They might get fired, they might lose their clearance, they might get suspended for 30 days. There would be some discipline." - James Comey testimony to Congress.

It's getting really hard to be "excellent" to you Tim. You are asking for it. Really asking for it being so ### #### obtuse towards what that ##### did. 
It's not only Tim.  Squiz, TF, TGunz (and many more) - they are all making excuses for criminal behavior or just burying their heads in the sand and ignoring anything and everything.  

For them, it's not about Hillary - it's about them having to find a reason to feel good about themselves for supporting someone so insanely corrupt and disgusting.  If they had any morals or backbone they would stand up for what they believe in.  Hillary represents EVERYTHING Democrats rail against, yet here they are day after day excusing and defending her 30+ years of shady, questionable and criminal behavior.  And in some cases, actually condoning it because she's not like us regular citizens.

If Hillary were a Republican, you better believe these same guys would be in here raising hell on how corrupt, shady and UNQUALIFIED she would be for President.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hillary Clinton held the position of Secretary of State. She did nothing in her past that would come close to deserve her being fired from that position. So your question is irrelevant. 
I'm pretty sure there are large numbers of people that would fire her the moment they found out she voted for the Iraq War.  They would probably ask why she was even given the job.

 
www.washingtonexaminer.com/york-did-team-clinton-destroy-evidence-under-subpoena/article/2600969

Two things emerging:

1.  Pattern of organized crime

2.  Blatant effort by State and DOJ with support by a neutered FBI to look past it 

 
How many billions for a wall that would be a huge waste of money?
FFS that's rhetoric to rile up the base. right or wrong, that's all it is.

anyone who truly believes Trump will build a wall (on the southern border) AND have Mexico pay for it has bumped their head.

 
I'm pretty sure there are large numbers of people that would fire her the moment they found out she voted for the Iraq War.  They would probably ask why she was even given the job.
Dude, everyone knew that when Obama chose her as SOS and it wasn't considered as an issue by most Democrats (and for obvious reasons there wasn't a peep out of anyone on the right).
 
www.washingtonexaminer.com/york-did-team-clinton-destroy-evidence-under-subpoena/article/2600969

Two things emerging:

1.  Pattern of organized crime

2.  Blatant effort by State and DOJ with support by a neutered FBI to look past it 
I think what gets me about this is Justin Cooper. In a normal investigation he would have been indicted, then get him to flip on Hillary. However we know the DOJ denied at least two requests to expand the investigation to the Foundation. Well Cooper worked for the Foundation and Teneo. Band also worked for both and Cooper worked for him. 

The other things that have surprised me are the acceptance of attorney client privilege for Mills, even to the extent that she was allowed to act as an attorney at Hillary's interview, the acceptance of the claim of privilege on the keyword list, and the fact that the name of one of Hillary's attorneys is redacted. And we know that Mills elsewhere got to claim privilege in her own interview.

The FBI did not have normal freedom in this investigation. So I don't think we can say they were neutered and also supported the DOJ's determining the result by rule making at the same time.

However what the FBI does have is information, and they are letting that out. These document releases should be very interesting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think what gets me about this is Justin Cooper. In a normal investigation he would have been indicted, then get him to flip on Hillary. However we know the DOJ denied at least two requests to expand the investigation to the Foundation. Well Cooper worked for the Foundation and Teneo. Band also worked for both and Cooper worked for him. 

The other things that have surprised me are the acceptance of attorney client privilege for Mills, even to the extent that she was allowed to act as an attorney at Hillary's interview, the acceptance of the claim of privilege on the keyword list, and the fact that the name of one of Hillary's attorneys is redacted. And we know that Mills elsewhere got to claim privilege in her own interview.

The FBI did not have normal freedom in this investigation. So I don't think we can say they were neutered and also supported the DOJ's determining the result by rule making at the same time.

However what the FBI does have is information, and they are letting that out. These document releases should be very interesting.
I think this will all come out in the wash.  If it's after the election and Hillary won -- well, it'll be the first time the rabbit got caught by the foot.  This was criminal.  And once all of Mills and Cooper's (let alone Abedin and the Queen herself) are documented, it'll all come out and the right will push for RICO and it'll be competitive appropriate.  

 
Comey said his employees in the FBI  would face discipline for the same behavior.

“They might get fired, they might lose their clearance, they might get suspended for 30 days. There would be some discipline." - James Comey testimony to Congress.

It's getting really hard to be "excellent" to you Tim. You are asking for it. Really asking for it being so ### #### obtuse towards what that ##### did. 
You don't have a good history of being excellent towards me. You have personally insulted me in the past, while I have never done so to you. So it doesn't surprise me that you will do so again. 

My point, if you wish to discuss it, is that Coney's comments may be applicable to one of his employees, or a State Department employee on a lower level, but it is not applicable to either the Secretary of State or to a former First Lady and Senator like Hillary Clinton. I have been very consistent about this. Hillary is not a normal employee. She is the very definition of VIP. She acted careless here, but she wasn't appointed by Obama to make sure emails don't have classified information. That's beneath her duties. Her role was to be the public face of America to the world, to negotiate agreements and treaties, to help shape the direction of our foreign policy and to aid the President in handling international crisis. To claim that she is disqualified for the email crises is like holding a head football coach responsible for not enough towels in the locker room. It's so far removed from her main duties that nobody would ever bother to make this argument if they weren't already trying to "get" Hillary Clinton. 

 
FBI investigations, private speeches to Goldman Sachs, huge corporate and foreign donors, and zero press conferences?  Don't worry about it, this is normal!  Trump sucks!  :^)

#I'mWithHer  

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top