The Hillary Clinton thread

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:19 am

YellowKing wrote:Am I the only one perturbed that the potential next leaders of the free world are sniping back and forth on Twitter like a couple of 15-year olds? Some of us have to act like professionals in our jobs.

I'm not a fan of it. I would respect Hilary more if she actually didn't respond like she did.

There's no chance of me respecting trump at this point at the things he has said.

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:46 am

YellowKing wrote:Am I the only one perturbed that the potential next leaders of the free world are sniping back and forth on Twitter like a couple of 15-year olds? Some of us have to act like professionals in our jobs.

No, you're not. This whole thing is absurd and highly disappointing.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:47 am

YellowKing wrote:Am I the only one perturbed that the potential next leaders of the free world are sniping back and forth on Twitter like a couple of 15-year olds? Some of us have to act like professionals in our jobs.

Maybe they were inspired by Big 10 football coaches?

But no, this is there way to feel relevant to kids these days and they're about 10 years behind the times. If'n they wanted be relevant on twitter with snips and quips they should have been recognized nearly a decade ago and jumped on the bandwagon like the way Ellen did. Now they just embarrassing grand parents, which is not a presidential trait IMO.

PLW · Post by **PLW** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:42 am

I think NOT sniping at each other is the exception, among world leaders. I give you... Prime Minister's Questions.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:54 am

Yeah, politicians have never not been sniping at each other. Twitter is just another, bigger, bully pulpit. (Get it? Bully pulpit?)

Special thanks to Teddy Roosevelt for setting up that punch line.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:42 am

I think it's a further reduction of politics into 30 second sound bites (or rather 140 characters) rather than discussing the issues, but discussing the issues sadly doesn't seem to work. And I blame the audience (for lapping it up) much more than the candidates.

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our (political) stars, but in ourselves"

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 1:20 pm

Newly released State Department emails help reveal how a major Clinton Foundation donor was placed on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board even though he had no obvious experience in the field, a decision that appeared to baffle the department’s professional staff.

The emails further reveal how, after inquiries from ABC News, the Clinton staff sought to “protect the name” of the Secretary, “stall” the ABC News reporter and ultimately accept the resignation of the donor just two days later.

“The true answer is simply that S staff (Cheryl Mills) added him,” wrote Wade Boese, who was Chief of Staff for the Office of the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, in an email to Mannina, the press aide. “Raj was not on the list sent to S; he was added at their insistence.”

Mills, a former deputy White House counsel, was serving as Clinton’s chief of staff at the time, and has been a longtime legal and political advisor.

link

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 1:57 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... fairs.html

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:03 pm

Hey, at least Bill doesn't have to marry them to get them to sleep with him. More proof that Trump is a moron compared to the Clintons.

Archinerd · Post by **Archinerd** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:14 pm

Fat ankles?!?!

Well that does it, I'm voting for Trump.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:05 pm

I'm not sure it's a revelation that Hillary is a Canklesaurus Rex.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:05 pm

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:22 pm

We're screwed no matter what in that arena. If Hillary wins, we get someone accused of defending a rapist. If Trump wins, we get someone accused of being a rapist.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:32 pm

As far as political attacks go, we've hit hobbit toe country. There's no saving us now.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:34 pm

I hate Hillary more than the next guy but when did Bill ever get accused of sexually assaulting someone? I thought he was basically accused of having sex from a position of power. While it's a shitty thing to do it's a far cry from assault. Which affair wasn't an affair but rather was an assault?

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:41 pm

That's how you make it funny. Though, it still wouldn't have been a great thing had is come from Trump's account.

msteelers · Post by **msteelers** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:46 pm

Jimmy Fallon made that joke last night...

While sitting next to the president.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:47 pm

Cankles are a major turn off. Caitlyn Jenner doesn't even have cankles.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:47 pm

LordMortis wrote:I hate Hillary more than the next guy but when did Bill ever get accused of sexually assaulting someone? I thought he was basically accused of having sex from a position of power. While it's a shitty thing to do it's a far cry from assault. Which affair wasn't an affair but rather was an assault?

The accusations are out there.

But they're out there for Trump as well. In addition, Trump is the only one who's been accused of rape by someone under oath.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 7:15 pm

The accusations are also out there that they are murderers, drug dealers and traitors. I haven't heard anything so far that leads me to believe that Bill is anything more than a serial philanderer.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 7:39 pm

LordMortis wrote:I hate Hillary more than the next guy but when did Bill ever get accused of sexually assaulting someone? I thought he was basically accused of having sex from a position of power. While it's a shitty thing to do it's a far cry from assault. Which affair wasn't an affair but rather was an assault?

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:50 pm

Hillary Clinton, from the moment her exclusive use of personal email for government business was exposed, has claimed nothing she sent or received was marked classified at the time.

But a 2012 email released by the State Department appears to challenge that claim because it carries a classified code known as a “portion marking” - and that marking was on the email when it was sent directly to Clinton’s account.

The “C” - which means it was marked classified at the confidential level - is in the left-hand-margin and relates to an April 2012 phone call with Malawi's first female president, Joyce Banda, who took power after the death of President Mutharika in 2012.

"(C) Purpose of Call: to offer condolences on the passing of President Mukharika and congratulate President Banda on her recent swearing in."

Everything after that was fully redacted before it was publicly released by the State Department -- a sign that the information was classified at the time and dealt with sensitive government deliberations.

A US government source said there are other Clinton emails with classified markings, or marked classified, beyond the April 2012 document.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06 ... tcmp=hpbt1

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:00 pm

No one who isn't voting for Trump anyway cares, Rip. E-mail is boring.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:11 pm

Zarathud wrote:No one who isn't voting for Trump anyway cares, Rip. E-mail is boring.

Pretty much true. I'm not a Hillary apologist but I get all

every time the subject comes up.

One thing I've enjoyed about the last eight years is Obama's lack of (real) scandals. We're going to miss that when Clinton takes office, because you know it's going to be one damned thing after another.

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 6:39 am

Zarathud wrote:No one who isn't voting for Trump anyway cares, Rip. E-mail is boring.

I'm not voting for trump and I care.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 8:07 am

Chrisoc13 wrote:
Zarathud wrote:No one who isn't voting for Trump anyway cares, Rip. E-mail is boring.
I'm not voting for trump and I care.

I'm not voting for Trump and I care enough to want the truth but I can wait for Justice to tell me what that truth is.

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 8:28 am

LordMortis wrote:
Chrisoc13 wrote:
Zarathud wrote:No one who isn't voting for Trump anyway cares, Rip. E-mail is boring.
I'm not voting for trump and I care.
I'm not voting for Trump and I care enough to want the truth but I can wait for Justice to tell me what that truth is.

Yeah that's where I am. For me it's not a non-issue, but I'll wait for the investigation to finish. Hopefully it finishes before the election. I bristle a bit when people blow it off because it's "boring". Its ok to blow it off once it's been investigated and determined not to be a punishable crime (if a crime at all). But to blow it off as not being a sexy enough offense to care... I don't love that.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 9:52 am

I care to a degree, but the outrage from people like Rip and MSD has nothing to do with the potential crime itself. The outrage is based solely on who may have done it. I would have the same reaction to anyone who may have potentially spilled classified information. And for me at least, my level of outrage is dictated by the intent behind the spillage. Was it from negligence? An accident? Intentionally spilling info to enemies? Etc. The motivation drives my outrage, not the identity of the spiller.

I believe that SecState's shouldn't have private email servers used for public business. I don't believe that a SecState should go to jail because they had a private email server used for public business - UNLESS the FBI can demonstrate that the private email server's *purpose* was spilling classified information.

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 11:10 am

RunningMn9 wrote:I care to a degree, but the outrage from people like Rip and MSD has nothing to do with the potential crime itself. The outrage is based solely on who may have done it. I would have the same reaction to anyone who may have potentially spilled classified information. And for me at least, my level of outrage is dictated by the intent behind the spillage. Was it from negligence? An accident? Intentionally spilling info to enemies? Etc. The motivation drives my outrage, not the identity of the spiller.

I believe that SecState's shouldn't have private email servers used for public business. I don't believe that a SecState should go to jail because they had a private email server used for public business - UNLESS the FBI can demonstrate that the private email server's *purpose* was spilling classified information.

That's basically how I feel. Which is why I'm guessing this will end up being a non-issue for me. It just doesn't seem malicious at this point. But again we'll see what turns up.

On the flip side there are plenty of people (even within this thread) that seem to be the opposite end of the spectrum from msd and rip, people who don't care because of who it is and her importance to the party right now. That to me is equally annoying.

msduncan · Post by **msduncan** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 11:48 am

Zarathud wrote:No one who isn't voting for Trump anyway cares, Rip. E-mail is boring.

Translation: law breaking is ok if my guy or gal does it.

Again, my wife would be thrown under the jail if she did what Hillary did. It's a matter of whether we are going to let people in government positions abuse the law in this country without consequences just because it bores you or you want them to be elected. Any other small time government employee or citizen that doesn't have power would be tossed in the lockup.

Then again, so many people these days are OK with floods of illegal immigrants from Mexico and South America coming across the borders without vetting them at all. It's really not surprising that some are A-OK with the government corruption and politicians that are above the law that you see in so many of these Latin american countries.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 11:51 am

Why do keep using your wife in these analogies?

And again, you're just blatantly lying about things. We have very stringent vetting for immigration. Obama has actually been under fire for overactive deportation. Could you at least perform even a simple google search before you just make this crap up?

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:18 pm

He uses his wife to give himself an air of authority on this topic.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:22 pm

msduncan · Post by **msduncan** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:22 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:He uses his wife to give himself an air of authority on this topic.

I'm using my wife because she works for the Department of Defense and has been advised that she would be squashed like a bug for just forwarding an 'Official Use Only' email.

And she does have all the authority in my house. Does that count?

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:23 pm

msduncan wrote: Then again, so many people these days are OK with floods of illegal immigrants from Mexico and South America coming across the borders without vetting them at all. It's really not surprising that some are A-OK with the government corruption and politicians that are above the law that you see in so many of these Latin american countries.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 2:07 pm

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 3:51 pm

msduncan wrote:I'm using my wife because she works for the Department of Defense and has been advised that she would be squashed like a bug for just forwarding an 'Official Use Only' email.

So do I, and I've received the same training. And I've seen spillage in action. Prison was not involved.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 4:02 pm

Don't be a liar. I know you and I happen to know you're posting from prison.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 4:45 pm

msduncan wrote:Translation: law breaking is ok if my guy or gal does it.

Not at all. I'm not the one demanding an inquisition at every imaginary offense of the "other side," the Republican party's modus operandi for the last 20 years.

People didn't really care much when Snowden leaked national security documents. Polls show most people don't seem to care about Hillary's goddamn e-mails. At minimum, they don't care to the extent the Republicans want to make it an election issue. Even here, there are only a handful who care.

msduncan wrote:It's a matter of whether we are going to let people in government positions abuse the law in this country without consequences just because it bores you or you want them to be elected. Any other small time government employee or citizen that doesn't have power would be tossed in the lockup.

Jaywalking and speeding are also crimes that few care about. E-mail security policy isn't something that most people bother about -- or they wouldn't have stupid passwords like 1234 and 12345.

Abuse the law? Hillary wanted to circumvent a rule she didn't understand that inconvenienced her. The boss getting around IT security for their own convenience plays out in most corporate offices all the time. Does it show poor judgment and lack of understanding of IT? Absolutely, but most Baby Boomers also have a terrible understanding of IT issues unless they work in IT.

The only scandal is that no one inside the administration reported Hillary or forced her to comply with policy.

TheMix · Post by **TheMix** » Sat Jun 11, 2016 5:54 pm

I'd like to clarify. As my comments may have somewhat sparked this.

It's not the email issue itself that I find boring. I do care. But I'd like to get the facts before making a final judgement. Although, as others have stated, the intent matters a lot to me, and will likely affect my final level of OUTRAGE(TM).

But what I am tired of is the constant harping on it. It's like the person at the party that tells a joke that makes everyone laugh. So he or she tells it again. And again. And brings it up every chance... hoping to get the laugh again. And then seems confused that people aren't laughing. If it is used in a clever new way (nod to LordMortis's repost - which I thought was clever and amusing), then I don't have an issue with it. But it seems that it's mostly used as "Yeah, but what about you? You deleted emails, so there!" I find playground retorts to be really boring and tiresome. These days I'm waiting for the inevitable "I'm going to take my ball and go home!"