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 (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maurile Tremblay said:
Off topic, but this is not true at all.

When a poker player bluffs, what he says is something like "I raise to $400." That is in no way a lie. His statement is true. He really is raising.

If other people erroneously interpret the raise to mean that he has a strong had, that's their own fault. That's not what he's implying. He's implying only that he has a hand that is within the range that he'll raise with in that situation. Such a range will almost always contain some strong hands and some weak hands. The fact that his hand happens to be weak on this particular occasion does not make his raise a lie.
Click to expand...
I stand corrected.

 
Gr00vus said:
Any proof would be a start. They've really been helping her out by reporting all this new bogus email scandal stuff for sure.
Click to expand...
Except for the fact we have proof otherwise

Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4274  This particular exchange is literally titled "Tax hit on Chris Hayes"...implying doing a tax hit on Sanders on the Chris Hayes Show on MSNBC. You can literally see them truncating paragraphs into sentences, shortening them, so that they appear to be stream of consciousness thoughts rather than prepared statements. Here is the video evidence of that interview.!

List of reporters that Hillary wined and dined, including biggest journalists and pundits of CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, NY Times, and a lot more. Off the record.  https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/12063https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/10353 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/23958 (another dinner with 25) https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26404 "20 reporters who will closely cover the campaign (aka the bus)" "Off the record" dinner with 25 press attendees.” “Hi John - I just wanted to thank you again for your hospitality last night. You were so kind to open your home to us, and the food was as fantastic as promised (everyone at the White House raves about your dinners). I really appreciated the opportunity to connect with a number of folks from Team Clinton. The evening was a great way to kick off this crazy adventure. Thank you, and I hope we'll cross paths again soon. Best, Colleen Colleen McCain Nelson The Wall Street Journal” No wonder the mainstream media has been shilling so hard for Hillary. The first link is the list of media personalities who went to the "off the record" private party in the personal home of John Podesta. Includes many corrupt, in-the-tank-for-Hillary journalists like John Heillman, Mark Halperin, Maggie Haberman (colluding in other emails with the Hillary campaign) and many others (Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopoulos, Mika Brzezinski, and so many more). The largest amount of invitees who said yes to the private party are from the New York Times, Bloomberg, MSNBC, and CNN. Seems to nicely reflect the level of corruption and pro-Hillary bias. This is April 2015 so they were influencing journalists for a long time and their investment has clearly paid off.

The New York Times colluding with Hillary, allowed quote edits  https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4213https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1181 “Margaret, far be it from me what the public editor of the NY Times should focus on, but…” "These exchanges were pretty interesting ... would love the option to use… I wanted the option to use all — and you could veto what you didn't want."

Big media collusion email, working with reporters  https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/24438 “Peter Nicholas (WSJ) is doing a story for Friday on caucus organizing efforts and the Sanders campaign's theory that caucuses will be good for them in the same way that they were for Obama. We've pushed back with our theory of the case, including our strong organizing effort in Iowa and beyond. Per CTR, Amy Chozick is working on story for this weekend about how the GOP will attack Hillary, will likely include focus group data suggesting that trustworthiness and being out-of-touch will be top targets…”

Journalist talks strategy with Clinton staff and asks for permission to write article  https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6453 "am not going to raise this publicly, but one of HRC's opponents will soon charge that she is running an "imperial campaign." If it is the right opponent, Democrat or Republican, the charge will resonate." "BTW, I may doing an Elizabeth Warren column soon. If I write that my optimum scenario would be for Elizabeth to ultimately give a big endorsement to HRC and give the keynote speech at the Convention, totally off the record, would that give you a problem? It would be my personal opinion only, but if you have a problem with my suggesting this as my idea, I won't tell anyone and I won't include it, deferring to you" Yes. This supposed journalist is discussing strategy with the chairman of the Hillary Clinton campaign. Giving him information and warnings about things he learned from other sources most likely off the record. Extreme collusion between the media and Hillary's staff. But wait, there is more! He is asking permission from Podesta to write parts of an article. John Podesta responds to the email, and grants permission for the journalist to write the story as originally planned.


I want people to recognize Fox and AM radio for what it is: propaganda that is preventing people from using reason to make rational decisions.



That is exactly what it is. Although thinking your liberal source of propaganda is not is incredibly naive.

 
rugcleaner said:
Except for the fact we have proof otherwise

That is exactly what it is. Although thinking your liberal source of propaganda is not is incredibly naive.
Click to expand...
Not seeing it there. Not sure what my liberal source of propaganda is either, as I don't watch network/cable T.V. news. Would NPR be a liberal source of propaganda?

 
rugcleaner said:
Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4274 

This particular exchange is literally titled "Tax hit on Chris Hayes"...implying doing a tax hit on Sanders on the Chris Hayes Show on MSNBC. You can literally see them truncating paragraphs into sentences, shortening them, so that they appear to be stream of consciousness thoughts rather than prepared statements.
Click to expand...
- I thought this would be juicy, but I don't see any coordination with MSNBC here?

 
Gr00vus said:
Not seeing it there. Not sure what my liberal source of propaganda is either, as I don't watch network/cable T.V. news. Would NPR be a liberal source of propaganda?
Click to expand...
It's ok just skip the entire meat of the post.

I should have deleted that last line.  It was a reply I made to someone else in a completly different venue.

 
Gr00vus said:
Not seeing it there. Not sure what my liberal source of propaganda is either, as I don't watch network/cable T.V. news. Would NPR be a liberal source of propaganda?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't matter if you were getting your news from the back of a cereal box.  He just posted the proof you requested and you did a piss poor job of blowing holes in it.  Which, generally means you can't.

 
rugcleaner said:
It's ok just skip the entire meat of the post.

I should have deleted that last line.  It was a reply I made to someone else in a completly different venue.
Click to expand...
I read the post. I didn't find anything very conclusive or damning in it, we've been through it all before, many, many times. And it's a real drag for people on phones when you repost big chunks of text like that only to provide a one or two sentence reply.

 
Hang 10 said:
So after all this time we finally find out Bill was the yellow king. Didn't see that coming. 
Click to expand...
“Over all the dismal electoral landscape a canopy of low, lead-colored clouds hung like a visible curse, in all this there were a menace and a portent — a hint of evil, an intimation of Putin. Bird, beast, or insect there was none. The wind sighed in the bare branches of the dead Russian memes and the gray grass bent to whisper its dread WikiLeaks to the earth; but no other sound nor motion broke the awful repose of that dismal place. A few blasted rumors here and there appeared from Comey in this malevolent FBI conspiracy of silent expectation.”


          


    


Along the shore the cloud waves break,


The twin suns sink behind the lake,


The shadows lengthen

Huma In Carcosa.



Strange is the night where black stars rise,


And strange moons circle through the skies,


But stranger still is

Huma lost in Carcosa.



Songs that the Hyades shall sing,


Where flap the tatters of the King,


Huma must die unheard in

Dim Carcosa.



Song of my soul, my voice is dead,


Die thou, unsexted, as perversions unseen


Wiener shall dry and die in


 


          Lost Carcosa.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quez said:
It wouldn't matter if you were getting your news from the back of a cereal box.  He just posted the proof you requested and you did a piss poor job of blowing holes in it.  Which, generally means you can't.
Click to expand...
No, he really didn't. Checking sources and attending dinners is in no way evidence of giving special treatment to a subject.

 
Quez said:
What about Donna Brazile providing debate questions while working at CNN?
Click to expand...
That's a better one. This whole practice of employing current or recent campaign/party employees as commentators is a bad thing. They've been guilty of doing it for both parties though. It definitely invites abuse like that, but I think that's more on Brazile than CNN, even if it's a stupid/naive move on CNN's part to think stuff like that wouldn't happen.

 
Gr00vus said:
No, he really didn't. Checking sources and attending dinners is in no way evidence of giving special treatment to a subject.
Click to expand...
Fine, what about having an "interview" completely scripted beforehand ?

Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4274  This particular exchange is literally titled "Tax hit on Chris Hayes"...implying doing a tax hit on Sanders on the Chris Hayes Show on MSNBC. You can literally see them truncating paragraphs into sentences, shortening them, so that they appear to be stream of consciousness thoughts rather than prepared statements. Here is the video evidence of that interview.!

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Off topic, but this is not true at all.

When a poker player bluffs, what he says is something like "I raise to $400." That is in no way a lie. His statement is true. He really is raising.

If other people erroneously interpret the raise to mean that he has a strong hand, that's their own fault. That's not what he's implying. He's implying only that he has a hand that is within the range that he'll raise with in that situation. Such a range will almost always contain some strong hands and some weak hands. The fact that his hand happens to be weak on this particular occasion does not make his raise a lie.
Click to expand...
MT such a buzz kill sometimes.  

 
rugcleaner said:
Fine, what about having an "interview" completely scripted beforehand ?

Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4274  This particular exchange is literally titled "Tax hit on Chris Hayes"...implying doing a tax hit on Sanders on the Chris Hayes Show on MSNBC. You can literally see them truncating paragraphs into sentences, shortening them, so that they appear to be stream of consciousness thoughts rather than prepared statements. Here is the video evidence of that interview.!
Click to expand...
I think that's been a standard practice thing for a while now, regardless of party/candidate. Hasn't Trump done the same thing?

 
It's a toss up now that O'Keefe threw a wrench in their plan to bus in illegal voters.  "The governor won't do anything because of Flint..."

 
A thing I've been wondering for a few days - isn't the Clinton campaign still sitting on a ton of cash? What are they going to do with it? is it all going to get out the vote efforts, like busing people to/from polling places?

 
Latest Detroit Free Press, today, has Hillary by 4. But if you follow Joy Reid's reporting about the growing number of blacks in the Detroit suburbs, Hillary should win by more than that. She won't lose Michigan. 

 
jonessed said:
He was a crazy liberal before he turned on Hillary.  It's not like this is new.  I don't see the big deal, but I don't think anybody would mind if you left.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

I've been voting against Obama since he was getting Jack Ryan's divorce records released, and it never occurred to me once when Dodds was Pro-Obama here to want to cancel my FBG membership becuse of it.  

 
TobiasFunke said:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Well as you may suspect I'm more of a transparency guy. I have zero fear of information in our democracy. I'd like to say that at the end of the day we rely on the FBI's recommendations like we did in July. If there's no 'there' there then no problem, but if the FBI does eventually recommend indictment let's trust their judgement as well.
Click to expand...
Just to put a bow on this Clinton Foundation "investigation" nonsense, Baier has now apologized for the report:

https://mediamatters.org/video/2016/11/04/baier-apologizes-misleading-report-it-wasnt-just-inartful-it-was-mistake-say-clinton-would-likely-be/214305

The issue of rogue law enforcement officers leaking information about a nonexistent investigation to influence an election is of course an even bigger deal, but one problem at a time.
Click to expand...


- It cracks me up how we're not talking about it... until we are.

Thanks for the update.

This is so complicated I doubt we have time to hash it out but I'll just leave some thoughts:

- What I thought interesting about the Fox report was not the indictments are imminent' part - which sounded like the Judge Napolitano stuff we got through the winter and spring - but the other points, ie the issue of Hillary being hacked ('5' times sounded too specific but it is likely true), the idea that data sharing between investigations was happening, and the idea that the immunity agreements might be breachable if there was evidence of lying.

- BS first raised the issue that the reporting was by Baier, not Herridge, I think he deserves points for that, he was right there.

Here's Baier:

Jon, all of us working on this story at Fox have now circled back with our sources, more than six of them now with specific knowledge of the Clinton investigations. They confirm that there is an active investigation into the Clinton Foundation that has been going on for more than a year. It is continuing. For those investigators working it is a priority but we have also reported there is a split not only between the FBI and the Department of Justice on this, but within the FBI. On the hacking of Clinton's private, unsecured server, while multiple sources believe and are operating under the working assumption that the server has been hacked, and some had specific quotes to that belief, there are, to this day no digital fingerprints of such breaches.

...

I was quoting from one source about his certainty that the server had been hacked by five foreign intelligence agencies. And while others believe that is probable because of the confirmed hacking of email accounts Secretary Clinton communicated with, as of today there are still no digital fingerprints of a breach no matter what the working assumption is within the bureau. All the time, but especially in heated election on topic this explosive every word matters, no matter how well-sourced. 

Which brings me to this. I explained a couple of times yesterday the phrasing of one of my answers to Brit Hume on Wednesday night, saying it was inartful, the way I answered the last question about whether the investigations would continue after the election. And I answered that, yes, our sources said it would. They would continue to likely to an indictment. Well, that just wasn't inartful, it was a mistake, and for that I'm sorry. I should have said, they will continue to build their case. Indictment obviously is a very loaded word, Jon, especially in this atmosphere and no one knows if there would or would not be an indictment no matter how strong investigators feel their evidence is. It is obviously a prosecutor who has to agree to take the case and make that case to a grand jury. We stand by the sourcing, on the ongoing active Clinton Foundation investigation and are working to get sources with knowledge of the details on the record, and on camera. Hopefully today. Jon? 

SCOTT: But clearly there are some within the FBI who believe that the email system was hacked by foreign operators. It's just not something that the FBI is putting out there as being a certainty? 

BAIER: Exactly. They're sticking with what Comey said back in July. But to be clear, you know, when you're quoting someone, you have to be clear that there is this cut and dry determination that you have to have the digital cyber fingerprints to make a complete determination. We should have made that distinction. 
Click to expand...


- I think this makes perfect sense to me. Seems fine.- Here's CNN:

FBI lawyers at headquarters concurred with the Justice Department's view that agents be allowed to continue their work with the option to return if they found more evidence.
Click to expand...
That seems extremely consistent with what Baier says.

Officials at FBI headquarters decided the Clinton Foundation probe should be consolidated in New York. They ordered that agents in Los Angeles, Little Rock and Washington, D.C., turn over their files to the FBI New York office, which appeared to have the strongest case to make.
Agents were told to continue their work.
Click to expand...
Here's the investigation again, and it's 'continuing'.

For reference I would also point to the WSJ and NYT reports, which are again consistent in reporting there is an 'investigation'. However another way to view the investigation issue is that WSJ and IIRC NYT both confirmed there was a 'stand down' order'. In that light it's easy to see how someone from DOJ could say there is 'no investigation' if administration officials told them to officially put it on hold. Officially that may indeed be the position. But the FBI is after all an independent bureau.

- One final point about journalistic independence and integrity. This is yet another internal Hillary campaign email:
 

From:* Nick Merrill <nmerrill@hillaryclinton.com>

*Date:* January 4, 2016 at 12:12:26 PM EST

*To:* Christina Reynolds <creynolds@hillaryclinton.com>, Brian Fallon < bfallon@hillaryclinton.com>, Jennifer Palmieri < jpalmieri@hillaryclinton.com>, Kristina Schake <kschake@hillaryclinton.com>, Tony Carrk <tcarrk@hillaryclinton.com>, Adrienne Elrod < aelrod@hillaryclinton.com>

*Subject:* *Vanity Fair*

They are now going to put the Huma piece on the website on Wednesday morning, and it will hit newsstands on the 12th. I think we should do a call about this and figure out how we're going to rally the troops to defend whatever nonsense is in there. We will need to engage CtR and Media Matters as well. ..
Click to expand...
.

- Now I really don't have a problem with partisan blogs. I don't look at BB for instance because of its ugly alt-right turn but hypothetically like MM if it has a live interview with Paula Jones describing her encounter with Bill Clinton what are you or I to say about it? Same here with the MM video of Baier.

However it does seem a bit odd to attack a news organization of inside wheeling by posting a link to a news site which is essentially a de-facto media arm of a campaign. I'm sure Correct the Record would have been just as effective. But there's no need to pretend there is some watchdogging going on when Baier to his credit said what he said on Fox.

- As for the FBI. One thing I do like about Hillary Clinton and I had been considering this a 100% lock solid total advantage of hers over Donald Trump is the respect for governmental institutions as opposed to claiming "#Rigged!" like the Trump supporters just because they receive a result they don't like. I'm not going to let this little foray into Trumpism dissuade me in still believing that is one of the great virtues of Hillary and her supporters. I think it was just some overreaction given the timing and nature of what's been going on.

- eta - Ok :banned: Friday is here. I will catch up on any replies when I can, however for me the conversation is always open.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quez said:
It's a toss up now that O'Keefe threw a wrench in their plan to bus in illegal voters.  "The governor won't do anything because of Flint..."
Click to expand...
:lol:

http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/18/project-veritas-election-videos/

The videos are, as is typical of O'Keefe's, work somewhat of a gish gallop, comprising a constellation of allegations and assertions that is virtually impossible to fact check without complete clips of the involved conversations. Nearly all the videos used stitched-together, out-of-context remarks with no indication of what occurred or what was discussed just before and after the included portions.

The framing and style of videos created by James O'Keefe is well known due to his 2009 "sting" in which he and accomplice Hannah Giles visited ACORN offices and pretended to be seeking advice on how to run an illegal business that included the use of underage girls in the sex trade. The resulting videos — which were edited to create the impression that O'Keefe and Giles had spoken to ACORN representatives while dressed as a pimp and prostitute — dealt that organization a mortal blow before reports publicizing the deception in O'Keefe's videos came to light:

 
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
258K
rockaction
rockaction
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
2K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top