Re: The Hillary Clinton thread
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 12:07 pm
I'm still up in the air. I really, really don't want to vote for Hillary. I'm watching the polls, though, to determine if I need to do so in self-defense.
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
Exactly my fear, and why I'm less likely to protest-vote for someone I actually like.Isgrimnur wrote:Don't make a Brexit mistake of voting based on what you think might happen.
Don't let people off so easily. They had sixteen choices and they picked the worst.Scoop20906 wrote: This makes sense to me and might explain why Trump was able to hijack the Republican system because he was able to tap into people's frustration with the main parties nominations over the last decades.
The whole planet's political thought processes are absurd. We could be working together far better both within the USA and across borders to fix our impact on Earth, colonize and explore the Solar system and further the chances of human life continuing after we destroy this planet. But instead we continue to focus on craziness like Drumpf and email servers, Brexit, et al.YellowKing wrote:What we really need is an alien invasion to unite humanity against a common enemy.
[Edit] I'm only half-kidding. Think about it - we no longer fear the Soviets, China still seems kind of a distant threat. Terrorism, OK sure, but it's not centralized enough. With no big threat to focus on, we turn on each other.
Which is I think the biggest part of the problem.Holman wrote:Don't let people off so easily. They had sixteen choices and they picked the worst.Scoop20906 wrote: This makes sense to me and might explain why Trump was able to hijack the Republican system because he was able to tap into people's frustration with the main parties nominations over the last decades.
There are 1,785 filers listed at the link.Each individual who is a candidate for federal office must file an FEC Form 2 within 15 days of becoming a candidate. The candidate may file this form on paper or electronically. Paper filers may choose to send a letter that contains the information required on the FEC Form 2, in lieu of the form itself.
Under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the Act), an individual becomes a candidate for federal office when:
- The individual has received contributions aggregating in excess of $5,000 or made expenditures aggregating in excess of $5,000; or
- The individual has given consent to another person to receive contributions or make expenditures on behalf of him or herself and that person has received contributions aggregating in excess of $5,000 or made expenditures aggregating in excess of $5,000 (11 CFR 100.3(a)).
Yeah, you figure with several more candidates Sanders would have had a much better chance. There was an analysis the other day (I think the NY Times?) about how much closer Clinton / Sanders would've been had Biden entered the race.Rip wrote:Which is I think the biggest part of the problem.Holman wrote:Don't let people off so easily. They had sixteen choices and they picked the worst.Scoop20906 wrote: This makes sense to me and might explain why Trump was able to hijack the Republican system because he was able to tap into people's frustration with the main parties nominations over the last decades.
If the establishment Republicans wanted to win they should have just went in with 2 or 3 guys. While the Democrat establishment people deferred to Clinton which kept Sanders from doing what Trump has done.
I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat.
Timing is everything...Rip wrote:They can. But in the Democrat party not towing the party line will turn you into an outcast. Just ask Bernie.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/b ... ats-225161
House Democrats frustrated with Bernie Sanders' slow-moving support for Hillary Clinton shouted "timeline, timeline" at the presidential candidate during a closed-door meeting. A dozen Democrats wanted to know the Vermont senator's timeline for endorsing Clinton, the presumptive nominee, with just three weeks to the start of the Democratic convention in Philadelphia. Sanders never answered, though at one point he said, "our goal is not to win elections," then paused. During that pause, Sanders was booed, until he completed his thought by saying, "but to transform America" in order to win elections. The exchange is according to a Democrat who attended the session and spoke on condition of anonymity to freely discuss the meeting.
He has more leverage to change the platform the longer he waits. This is a non-issue until the convention.tru1cy wrote:Bernie is in a position to make changes to the party platform, but he needs to endorse Hilary and move his supporters towards her since beating Trump is paramount
Fixed.gilraen wrote:He's already said he will vote for Clinton. They'll try to leverage the best position until the convention, and then he will absolutely endorse her. Although some of his supporters are crazy enough to vote for Trump on lack of principle anyway.
Do you remember which a··hole from FL it was? There are so many...Grifman wrote:Watching the "interrogation" of Comey right now. The Republican member from Florida is a total a**hole. He all but accused Comey of conspiring with Lynch, Clinton, and Obama in deciding not to recommend prosecution. No wonder this country is screwed up when people like this hold elected office.
has my vote.I offered extraordinary transparency, which I'm sure confused and bugged a lot of people
Wow. That's brilliant!hepcat wrote:Comey needs to run for office. Any man who can deliver the line
has my vote.I offered extraordinary transparency, which I'm sure confused and bugged a lot of people
I guess if I was looking for a little light in a *very dark and seemingly endless tunnel* I'd say at least this isn't on the level of short-term political advantage that ends in a Brexit-level event.Zarathud wrote:So tired of these jackasses endlessly spending our tax dollars in the hopes of a short-term political advantage.
He doesn't understand that the attorneys didn't look at the emails, they used a search engine to look at headers and email content to determine if they were personal vs. work. It also turns out that they may have security clearance after all according to Elisha Cummings (TBD).malchior wrote:Chaffetz is amazingly out of his mind. He is saying that there should be prosecutions of Clinton's uncleared attorneys because they *may* have happened to come across classified documents accidentally. Comey dealt well with that total jackass.
I suspect the markets would react even worse than they did to the Brexit if Trump were to win.malchior wrote:I guess if I was looking for a little light in a *very dark and seemingly endless tunnel* I'd say at least this isn't on the level of short-term political advantage that ends in a Brexit-level event.Zarathud wrote:So tired of these jackasses endlessly spending our tax dollars in the hopes of a short-term political advantage.
Zarathud wrote:If you don't get the result you want, investigate again until you get something to stick!
While it's a valid question and interesting and excellent question, I don't know if the FBI addressed it (publicly?). I haven't read it anywhere.RunningMn9 wrote:I've asked several times, without answer, so I'll give it one more go. How did the classified information get on her email server? Did she put it there? Did someone email it to her?
The answer is both? 110 less than more 2,000 were either emails she sent or receive not in an email chain with a "a very small number" marked explicitly as classified?Yes. More than 2,000 of the 30,490 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department in December 2014 contained classified information, including 110 emails in 52 email chains that contained classified information at the time they were sent or received, Comey said. The FBI director said “a very small number” of the emails containing classified information “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information,” contrary to Clinton’s claims that none was marked classified.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... ote_margin69,498,516
I caught some of this while waiting at the airport. What I came away with was, out of thousands of emails investigated, there were only 3 that had (C) in the body of the email, and so were not even correctly identified as classified by the department's own guidelines! And for this some ex-CIA turd from Texas was saying Clinton put lives at risk. Bitch, please.Grifman wrote:Watching the "interrogation" of Comey right now. The Republican member from Florida is a total a**hole. He all but accused Comey of conspiring with Lynch, Clinton, and Obama in deciding not to recommend prosecution. No wonder this country is screwed up when people like this hold elected office.
Interesting tidbits from today's hearing. There wasn't a discussion of who sent the email but mostly it sounded like it was multiple people inside the organization. But the 'clearly marked' classified information Comey referred to in his statement. There were 3. And they constituted a single character - (c) for confidential (not secret or top secret!) buried in a paragraph in the 3 longish emails. And they weren't actually legitimate. They were human errors. All the other classified information was upclassified or deemed classified when sent but wasn't marked as such. Comey classified it seeming to consist of general State Department business.RunningMn9 wrote:Snowden wasn't hounded for how he handled classified information. He was hounded for intentionally spilling classified information to a widespread audience.
Clinton did not intentionally spill classified information to anyone. I've asked several times, without answer, so I'll give it one more go. How did the classified information get on her email server? Did she put it there? Did someone email it to her?
Hmm, I would have that it was pretty clear - it was emailed to her. In most cases, maybe even all, it wasn't a document that was attached, it was a classified matter discussed by someone else who wrote the initial email and then it worked its way up the chain to her. She ddin't download a file of classified info, if that's what you are asking.RunningMn9 wrote: I've asked several times, without answer, so I'll give it one more go. How did the classified information get on her email server? Did she put it there? Did someone email it to her?
I didn't see this or have an extensive background but is under the skin the same asmalchior wrote:I was out doing some yard work a few minutes ago and I recalled there was an actual interesting moment in the Comey inquisition. I don't know if anyone else was watching but at the end Chaffetz asked a question about whether they found anything implicating the Clinton Foundation. This seemed (to me at least) to get under Comey's skin. I don't know if it was supposed to be an off-limits topic, something Chaffetz found out about, or just bluster but Comey's composure changed and Chaffetz started swaying back and forth like he wanted to dig in on it. Maybe it is the poker player in me looking for something but there was something going on there. Comey said he wouldn't answer the question and Chaffetz just moved briskly on with his presen-questioning. Thought that was fairly odd.
Another interesting tidbit - gross negligence was never on the table. Justice doesn't think it is likely constitutional.