The Hillary Clinton thread

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Thu Jun 30, 2016 11:17 pm

Jack Handey "Although many people assume otherwise, Handey is a real person, not a pen name or character."

Between 1991 and 1998, Saturday Night Live included Deep Thoughts on the show as an interstitial segment between sketches. Introduced by Phil Hartman and read live by Handey (neither actually appeared on screen), the one-liners proved to be extremely popular. Hartman would intone "And now, Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handey...", and peaceful easy listening music would play while the screen showed soothing pastoral scenes, much like a New Age relaxation video. Handey would then read the Deep Thought as the text to it scrolled across the screen. They became an enduring feature of SNL, which often had multiple Thoughts in each episode, and made Handey a well-known name.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:12 am

hepcat wrote:I think it makes him infinitely more likeable. If you have a talent, use it. His talent is comedy. I don't get the feeling that he's being crass or overly insulting in that pursuit. Hell, from what I'm reading, he's been pretty low profile for the last decade or so.

Hell yes. I really enjoy watching him disembowel some ill prepared person testifying in committee. I think he'd be a fantastic VP, and probably equally good an attack dog as Warren is.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:18 am

I recently read Handey's Stench of Honolulu, which I cannot recommend enough. The guy's hilarious.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Fri Jul 01, 2016 12:32 pm

WaPo

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch said Friday she will “accept” the recommendations from prosecutors and others leading probes into the use of a private email server by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state.

Lynch’s statement during a gathering in Colorado underscored the intense sensitivity surrounding the FBI and Justice investigations into the past use of an exclusive email server by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

By promising to abide by the recommendations, Lynch directly addressed worries by Clinton critics and others that she — as an Obama administration appointee — could ultimately overrule the investigators.

She said she will “briefed and will accept” the recommendations from the investigation teams, which she described as led by “independent” officials whose careers span from “administration to administration.”

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:38 am

Hillary Clinton Raised $68.5 Million In June

The total includes $40.5 million raised for the Clinton campaign and another $28 million split between the Democratic National Committee and dozens of state parties. These sums are by far the highest monthly fundraising totals for the campaign so far this election cycle, which is no doubt due to Clinton having become the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee in June. The total is almost identical to the amount Obama raised in June 2012. The campaign enters July with $44 million in cash on hand.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 10:58 am

Isgrimnur wrote:WaPo

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch said Friday she will “accept” the recommendations from prosecutors and others leading probes into the use of a private email server by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state.

Lynch’s statement during a gathering in Colorado underscored the intense sensitivity surrounding the FBI and Justice investigations into the past use of an exclusive email server by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

By promising to abide by the recommendations, Lynch directly addressed worries by Clinton critics and others that she — as an Obama administration appointee — could ultimately overrule the investigators.

She said she will “briefed and will accept” the recommendations from the investigation teams, which she described as led by “independent” officials whose careers span from “administration to administration.”

This was so stupid on so many levels. Do these people just not think?

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 11:23 am

Grifman wrote:This was so stupid on so many levels. Do these people just not think?

The idea that she would meet on a plane with Bill Clinton is incomprehensibly stupid.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 12:25 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:
Grifman wrote:This was so stupid on so many levels. Do these people just not think?
The idea that she would meet on a plane with Bill Clinton is incomprehensibly stupid.

If the former President and future First Gentleman asks if he can drop by to say howdy, are you really going to tell him you're washing your hair? The poor judgment belongs on Clinton, as far as I'm concerned.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 1:48 pm

Clinton interviewed by the FBI about private email server

Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI about her use of a private email server as secretary of state, her campaign said Saturday, as federal investigators neared the end of the probe that has hung over her White House bid. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, gave a voluntary interview for 3 1/2 hours on Saturday morning at FBI Headquarters in Washington, her campaign said. "She is pleased to have had the opportunity to assist the Department of Justice in bringing this review to a conclusion," Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said. "Out of respect for the investigative process, she will not comment further on her interview." Spokespeople for the FBI and the Justice Department declined to comment Saturday. The interview was expected and it does not suggest that she or anyone else is likely to face prosecution. Some legal experts view criminal prosecution as exceedingly unlikely. The interview may indicate that the Justice Department's yearlong probe is drawing to a close. But the ongoing investigation represents a major risk for Democrats as Clinton is merely four weeks away from being formally nominated as the party's presidential candidate.

What would happen if Clinton were to be indicted and, presumably, forced to drop out of the race? Would Sanders become the default candidate or would the party be able to parachute in an alternate more to their liking?

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 2:00 pm

Kraken wrote:If the former President and future First Gentleman asks if he can drop by to say howdy, are you really going to tell him you're washing your hair? The poor judgment belongs on Clinton, as far as I'm concerned.

I wouldn't argue against that - but the AG has to be aware of the political optics as well and say "It would be insane for us to meet privately while this is going on".

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:39 pm

Kraken wrote:
RunningMn9 wrote:
Grifman wrote:This was so stupid on so many levels. Do these people just not think?
The idea that she would meet on a plane with Bill Clinton is incomprehensibly stupid.
If the former President and future First Gentleman asks if he can drop by to say howdy, are you really going to tell him you're washing your hair? The poor judgment belongs on Clinton, as far as I'm concerned.

No, you tell him that you're sorry, but until the investigation of his wife is complete, it would be best if we don't have any private conversations. It's not really that hard.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:42 pm

Max Peck wrote:Clinton interviewed by the FBI about private email server
Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI about her use of a private email server as secretary of state, her campaign said Saturday, as federal investigators neared the end of the probe that has hung over her White House bid. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, gave a voluntary interview for 3 1/2 hours on Saturday morning at FBI Headquarters in Washington, her campaign said. "She is pleased to have had the opportunity to assist the Department of Justice in bringing this review to a conclusion," Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said. "Out of respect for the investigative process, she will not comment further on her interview." Spokespeople for the FBI and the Justice Department declined to comment Saturday. The interview was expected and it does not suggest that she or anyone else is likely to face prosecution. Some legal experts view criminal prosecution as exceedingly unlikely. The interview may indicate that the Justice Department's yearlong probe is drawing to a close. But the ongoing investigation represents a major risk for Democrats as Clinton is merely four weeks away from being formally nominated as the party's presidential candidate.
What would happen if Clinton were to be indicted and, presumably, forced to drop out of the race? Would Sanders become the default candidate or would the party be able to parachute in an alternate more to their liking?

I believe the party would choose, not sure how. But Betnie's people would have a cow if he wasn't chosen, that's for sure. I've heard Biden and Kerry mentioned as possible replacements, I don't think Bernie is popular with party leadership.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 4:56 pm

Max Peck wrote: What would happen if Clinton were to be indicted and, presumably, forced to drop out of the race? Would Sanders become the default candidate or would the party be able to parachute in an alternate more to their liking?

This is the main reason that Bernie hasn't suspended his campaign yet. If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 5:40 pm

Grifman wrote:
Max Peck wrote:Clinton interviewed by the FBI about private email server
Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI about her use of a private email server as secretary of state, her campaign said Saturday, as federal investigators neared the end of the probe that has hung over her White House bid. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, gave a voluntary interview for 3 1/2 hours on Saturday morning at FBI Headquarters in Washington, her campaign said. "She is pleased to have had the opportunity to assist the Department of Justice in bringing this review to a conclusion," Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said. "Out of respect for the investigative process, she will not comment further on her interview." Spokespeople for the FBI and the Justice Department declined to comment Saturday. The interview was expected and it does not suggest that she or anyone else is likely to face prosecution. Some legal experts view criminal prosecution as exceedingly unlikely. The interview may indicate that the Justice Department's yearlong probe is drawing to a close. But the ongoing investigation represents a major risk for Democrats as Clinton is merely four weeks away from being formally nominated as the party's presidential candidate.
What would happen if Clinton were to be indicted and, presumably, forced to drop out of the race? Would Sanders become the default candidate or would the party be able to parachute in an alternate more to their liking?

I believe the party would choose, not sure how. But Betnie's people would have a cow if he wasn't chosen, that's for sure. I've heard Biden and Kerry mentioned as possible replacements, I don't think Bernie is popular with party leadership.

Yeah, I'd expect the delegates would have to decide. Bernie would be politicking Hillary's delegates, but I also expect that Biden & Kerry as well as others would be doing the same - as well as others (CA Gov. Brown would be a great possibility, IMHO).

Anonymous Bosch · Post by **Anonymous Bosch** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 5:52 pm

Pyperkub wrote:Yeah, I'd expect the delegates would have to decide. Bernie would be politicking Hillary's delegates, but I also expect that Biden & Kerry as well as others would be doing the same - as well as others (CA Gov. Brown would be a great possibility, IMHO).

Biden's probably the odds-on favourite. Newsom would likely be more palatable than the decrepit fossil of Gov. Moonbeam, though.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 6:44 pm

Ok, done some reading, it all depends upon whether this is pre- or post converntion. If it were to occur before the convention and Clinton withdrew, then presumably she would release her delegates. Then we would have an open convention, and it would be up to the convention delegates to decide. This would favor Bernie but it would not be a lock - I think a lot of delegates would favor Biden.

If she were to resign after the convention, then the party rules say that the DNC would choose a candidate.

So there you have it.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Sat Jul 02, 2016 6:47 pm

Anonymous Bosch wrote:
Pyperkub wrote:Yeah, I'd expect the delegates would have to decide. Bernie would be politicking Hillary's delegates, but I also expect that Biden & Kerry as well as others would be doing the same - as well as others (CA Gov. Brown would be a great possibility, IMHO).
Biden's probably the odds-on favourite. Newsom would likely be more palatable than the decrepit fossil of Gov. Moonbeam, though.

Newsom is far too young and inexperienced. However, you may wish to actually look at Brown's record over the past 8 years... he's been extremely solid. 78 is bit old though.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:27 am

Sorry Rip...

FBI says it won't recommend charges in Clinton email matter

The FBI won't recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while secretary of state, agency Director James Comey said Tuesday, lifting a major legal threat to her presidential campaign. Comey said that although the investigation found "extremely careless" behavior by Clinton and her staff in their handling of sensitive information, the FBI had concluded that "no charges are appropriate." He said the agency believed that "no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." The announcement came three days after the FBI interviewed Clinton for hours in a final step of its yearlong investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week that she would accept the recommendations of the FBI director and of career prosecutors, meaning that Comey's decision almost certainly brings the legal part of the issue to a close and removes the threat of criminal charges. However, it's unlikely to wipe away many voters' concerns about Clinton's trustworthiness. And it probably won't stop Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who has called for criminal charges, from continuing to make the server a campaign issue.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:31 am

Max Peck wrote:Sorry Rip...

FBI says it won't recommend charges in Clinton email matter
Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week that she would accept the recommendations of the FBI director and of career prosecutors, meaning that Comey's decision almost certainly brings the legal part of the issue to a close and removes the threat of criminal charges.

Article this morning said that Lynch has said she will recuse herself after much media pressure. No idea who will take her place or whether the replacement will differ on her decision.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:31 am

Now to watch that FBI revolt that we were told about.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:38 am

GreenGoo wrote:
Article this morning said that Lynch has said she will recuse herself after much media pressure. No idea who will take her place or whether the replacement will differ on her decision.

I thought she said she would accept the FBI's recommendation

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:41 am

Defiant wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Article this morning said that Lynch has said she will recuse herself after much media pressure. No idea who will take her place or whether the replacement will differ on her decision.
I thought she said she would accept the FBI's recommendation

That was earlier in the week/end of last week (not sure the exact date). With the Director coming out with his recommendation, not sure if she will follow through on her recusal or not. I got the feeling that she did not know the director was about to make an announcement.

Shrug. Seems like news is coming out in bits and pieces and communication between the various players is slow to non-existent.

edit: Just found the article on my phone. It said that she announced last Friday that she was going to recuse herself. Not sure how that aligns with her announcement that she would accept the FBI's recommendation.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:46 am

FBI recommends no criminal charges against Hillary over email server.

I look forward to Rips frustrated and angry proclamations that this is one huge conspiracy.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:55 am

GreenGoo wrote:
Defiant wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Article this morning said that Lynch has said she will recuse herself after much media pressure. No idea who will take her place or whether the replacement will differ on her decision.
I thought she said she would accept the FBI's recommendation
That was earlier in the week/end of last week (not sure the exact date). With the Director coming out with his recommendation, not sure if she will follow through on her recusal or not. I got the feeling that she did not know the director was about to make an announcement.

Shrug. Seems like news is coming out in bits and pieces and communication between the various players is slow to non-existent.

edit: Just found the article on my phone. It said that she announced last Friday that she was going to recuse herself. Not sure how that aligns with her announcement that she would accept the FBI's recommendation.

The article has it wrong, then. She didn't recuse herself, she just said she expected to accept the FBI/prosecutor recommendations.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 11:59 am

The director isn't recommending charges, but he was pretty harsh on Clinton and her team. The no charges recommendation comes because he said they couldn't find any example of anyone ever being charged in a similar situation.

edit: And that they found no evidence of the Clinton team trying to coverup anything.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:08 pm

Max Peck wrote: The article has it wrong, then. She didn't recuse herself, she just said she expected to accept the FBI/prosecutor recommendations.

Thanks. The article was critical of the Clintons, so perhaps the idea that Lynch had taken herself out of the equation was the same thing as a recusal. Which of course is nonsense.

AWS260 · Post by **AWS260** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:53 pm

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:And that they found no evidence of the Clinton team trying to coverup anything.

That just shows how deep the cover-up really goes. This calls for a Congressional investigation!

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:55 pm

hepcat wrote:FBI recommends no criminal charges against Hillary over email server.

I look forward to Rips frustrated and angry proclamations that this is one huge conspiracy.

Meh, I never expected them to prosecute.

She actually could shoot someone and get a pass.

The important thing is it established as fact that she(they) were in fact careless and likely compromised national secrets. Not to mention mishandled and improperly destroyed records that should have been kept.

Didn't destroy her campaign in a single blow but yet another paper cut.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:56 pm

GOP vows not to rest until they get to the(ir) truth!

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:59 pm

Rip wrote: She actually could shoot someone and get a pass.

As could Trump when it comes to his supporters. Welcome to politics!

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:10 pm

Yes, yes he did.

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:14 pm

In short, the CEO of an organization can get get away with violating company policy while those that are employed by him/her would be disciplined or fired. News at 11.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:15 pm

Nobody has to convince me that Hillary (and her husband) are crooks that have gotten away with a lot of stuff. Every time I watch House of Cards, I envision Bill and Hillary in the Frank and Claire Underwood roles.

The problem is convincing me Hillary's crookedness outweighs Trump's incompetence.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:20 pm

The corruption that the Clintons may be central to is the same corruption that has been in place for decades. If you feel that, despite all that, the country is in decent shape and you can continue to exist under such a system, then let it go. If, however, you would feel better manning a checkpoint at your neighborhood border to keep "undesirables" out, as your job has been destroyed by the economic backwater that he turns us into, vote for Trump.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:24 pm

Rip wrote:
Yes, yes he did.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

"Consequences" or "security or administrative sanctions" does not equal indictment, which is what the FBI was charged on deciding.

xwraith · Post by **xwraith** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:35 pm

Any other person would have been broken over this.

Or can I start handling classified materials and store then out on my gmail account?

Politico: “We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”

We are so screwed.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:38 pm

You must be under the mistaken belief that our government maintains even a slightly competent IT department at every level. I'm guessing that if they brought charges against Hillary, they'd have to then start investigating everyone else. And that would lead to some pretty alarming news.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:52 pm

There are different standards of illegality at play here. The Navy engineer took assets marked as classified and took them off-network. Aka how Snowden stole information. Something they train people not to do since it lead to a huge information breach and that they detect fairly well now (it's how they likely caught him).

That is a far cry from someone talking about some thing that *should* have been classified had the communication been on official channels. It's a loophole and Congress might be able to close it but grandstanding will probably be all that comes from it. And it's a very different story from Patraeus who mishandled the information and *then* gave it to the biographer/reporter he was banging on the side.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:54 pm

I worked for the US Army Corps of Engineers in 2000, and they were still running Windows 3.1 on some systems. The guy who maintained the servers storing tons of important geographical data could be found most days in the back playing Diablo or Age of Empires. Our primary file share had no real backup, and the bulk of our help desk support was done by untrained interns getting paid slightly more than minimum wage. We would regularly find porn on work PCs that we were servicing.

Needless to say, my opinion of government IT is pretty damn low.

xwraith · Post by **xwraith** » Tue Jul 05, 2016 2:01 pm

No excuse.

Any reasonable person would have known they were taking risks and those risks have been realized.

Transcript: For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

We know that people receiving these email were compromised.

... when one of Secretary Clinton’s original personal servers was decommissioned in 2013, the e-mail software was removed. Doing that didn’t remove the e-mail content, but it was like removing the frame from a huge finished jigsaw puzzle and dumping the pieces on the floor. The effect was that millions of e-mail fragments end up unsorted in the server’s unused — or “slack”— space. We searched through all of it to see what was there, and what parts of the puzzle could be put back together.

So no encryption at rest for the data, while the server was fully functional all the data was there in plain text. Even after decomissioning the data was there on the disks.