Forum menu
^^^ agreed that's why she is able to run.
I never had sexual relations with that woman (Monica Lewinsky)
Two peas in a pod the Clintons
GIven the fact that the FBI have reopened the investigation, it seems Jamba is agreeing with them.
The real issue with the VERY public announcement of re-opening the investigation is that, this doesn't mean that anything has already been found, it simply means that the computers, seized for a completely unrelated offence, can now be investigated under the terms of the original investigation. Any evidence otherwise obtained would be inadmissible in court due to being illegally obtained under the articles 4th and 9th amendments.
Again, the election result is being affected based on hearsay, NOT fact. It should NEVER have been publicly disclosed this close to an election.
I never had sexual relations with that woman (Monica Lewinsky)Two peas in a pod the Clintons
And yet still thought of as one of the best US Presidents of recent times. His philandering and trying to wriggle out of it had little effect on his job performance or the public's opinion of him.
Will Monica get to have a go at being president as well?
Will Monica get to have a go at being president as well?
and yet still a misogynist ****.
I would have thought you admired folk who were willing to brazenly lie in the face of overwhelming evidence and still maintain an untenable position.Two peas in a pod the Clintons
Will Monica get to have a go at being president as well?
She'll get close, but no cigar...
Do you HONESTLY believe Donald Trump would do better? The nuclear codes would be on Twitter closely followed by the words "Big League!" by the end of January 20th.
I don't have a horse in this race. If I lived over there I'd be voting Jill Stein, so I could stand back in 4 years - regardless of who actually won - and say, "None of this is on my hands".
At the very least, Hilary treated (retroactively applied) state secrets with (alleged) reckless disregard, (allegedly) broke clear and established rules on the handling of top secret information, (allegedly) withheld and subsequently deleted evidence in an FBI investigation and claimed to have lost her memory of what happened.FTFY.
Ummm... She broke the [i]rules[/i]. That much is clear. None of the above is alleged, it happened, and the FBI Director clarified this himself when speaking to the House Judiciary Committee in July. The issue for the GOP nutters is that the [i]law[/i] is different to the [i]rules[/i]. The [i]law[/i] requires the [i]rules[/i] to have been broken [i]with intent[/i]. The flip-side of this is that lack of intent instead shows lack of competence. So it's lose-lose for Hillary, really.
The point is - whilst Trump may well be the worst-equipped person ever to feature in a Presidential election - does anything about Hillary, from the dodgy email server to the [url= http://uk.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-emails-classified-information-2016-9 ]constantly changing story about what emails were exchanged[/url] to the [url=
when speaking to the press about server wiping[/url] to the [url= http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/james-comey-testimony-clinton-email-225224 ]damning conclusion of the FBI Director re: Hillary's actions[/url] to her [url= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI ]constant documented flip-flopping on issues[/url]... does any of that make you think she'd be any better?
That's why people believe she's untrustworthy.
yes because Trump is an egomaniacal female groping wee raging orange shit bag who is unrpedictable, bares grudges and likes to settle scores by using overwhelming force that many consider bullying. he also seems bereft of principles beyond making money for the D man.does any of that make you think she'd be any better?
Its really hard to think of anyone less suited to hold such a high office...Gary Glitter?
Hilary is a pretty poor candidate for all the reasons you mention as well but Trump is truly odious where as she is just crap and a bit slimy/slippery.
Jamba - you really need to read up a bit on Trumps past - racial profiling tenets, illegal evictions, groping women, him and his wife lying about her immigrations status etc etc
and yet still a misogynist ****.
😆 I bet you shout racist a lot as well. Bless.
Phillip May and Dennis Thatcher would be just as ridiculous as candidates for PM as Cherie Blair would. Dennis has missed his opportunity.
The use of a private e-mail sever didn't break the rules, nor the law. It was against advice and council to do so, but not forbidden by anything nor anyone.
Intent (or lack thereof) is a clear founding in any common case law, but particularly criminal law. There is still no clear evidence that anything marked directly as secret was passed through the private server. It's more about soft data than hard data in this regard and that's where the problem lies.
I don't really see flip-flopping, I see a change in stance between a state issue and a national campaign over a 15 year period.
The use of a private e-mail sever didn't break the rules, nor the law. It was against advice and council to do so, but not forbidden by anything nor anyone.
It was a private server and classified information (not retrospectively classified, either) was found on it.
Title 18, Section 793 of the US Federal Penal Code
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) [b]through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust[/b], or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
There is still no clear evidence that anything marked directly as secret was passed through the private server.
relevant @ 42s onwards
And now, we may have intent:
[url= https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12605 ]https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12605[/url]
So another poster who knows better than the FBI
The same FBI that has re-opened its investigation as a result of new emails found?
I'm just looking at what the law says and what evidence is available and suggesting certain conditions may be met. Given Comey specifically said he couldn't recommend a case because he couldn't prove intent, I'd say the above email is - at the very least - interesting.
I watched that as it was broadcast and also the commentaries that followed it. The majority of correspondents believed that the reason for not even a hint at any further prosecution was that the content of the emails contained references to classified material, but no actual material, or that that as both the sender and recipient of classified material, that not only Clinton was at fault and to bring prosecution would've opened a MUCH bigger can of worms.
And now we may have intent
To expedite the transfer of the taking points around an unclassified State Dept case?
Why, in 2011, would press talking points need sending over secure fax? Why would press talking points need their identifying info scrubbing? Why does the pdf version of the email have the "Re:" box censored?
TPS also stands for [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protected_status ]Temporary Protected Status[/url].
[img] 
[/img]
that not only Clinton was at fault and to bring prosecution would've opened a MUCH bigger can of worms
Oh, that's alright then.
#I'mWithHer
The Director of the FBI said
I'm not disputing what he said, it was what [i]wasn't[/i] said that I and others were commenting on; The same is true of this recent release.
You say you don't have a horse in this race (I despise this phrase, it's parochial at best...) , but do you want Trump running the only democratic superpower? Do you honestly believe that this would be helpful, for anyone?
Appreciate I'm late to this debate, but...
Hilary is as bent as a nine bob note. And Trump is a dangerous lunatic.
South Park nailed it years ago:
[url=
do we have to choose, every four years, between a giant douche and a turd sandwich? "It's because we're American, son."[/url]
but do you want Trump running the only democratic superpower? Do you honestly believe that this would be helpful, for anyone?
That's rather disingenuous. A loaded question like that suggests that I have argued the case for Trump to be Pres, when I have done nothing of the sort.
That's rather disingenuous. A loaded question like that suggests that I have argued the case for Trump to be Pres, when I have done nothing of the sort.
Yep. Twitter is full of anti-Trumpers who are seeking to minimise Hilary's misdemeanours, with the view that "If you criticise Hilary, you must want Trump for President." It's dishonest.
I wish neither of them were going to be President.
tjagain - Member
No ninfan - innocent until proven guilty remember?POSTED 3 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST
tjagain - Member
Jamba - you really need to read up a bit on Trumps past - racial profiling tenets, illegal evictions, groping women, him and his wife lying about her immigrations status etc etcPOSTED 1 HOUR AGO # REPORT-POST
😆
That's rather disingenuous. A loaded question like that suggests that I have argued the case for Trump to be Pres, when I have done nothing of the sort.
Not to be insulting (that's really not what I'm going for here) but, by leveling barrage after barrage of accusations at HRC (whom I also don't particularly care for, but hey....the devil you know and all that..) you give weight and credence to Trump's arguments (whatever they might be) thus lending support to his cause. By muddying the waters over what may turn out to be nothing more than a misdemeanor, one which she can't repeat in the Oval in any case, it gives succor to Trumps campaign, helping the rest of the world to slide further toward the tipping point.
If their economy fails, ours will fail faster and fall further as we have already taken a hit with Brexit and there's not much left that either the government of the BoE can do. We ALL
.have a horse in this race
hebdencyclist - Member
anti-Trumpers who are seeking to minimise Hilary's misdemeanours, with the view that "If you criticise Hilary, you must want Trump for President." It's dishonest.I wish neither of them were going to be President.
Agreed, but since one of them [u][b]IS GOING TO BE PRESIDENT[/b][/u] people need to decide which it's going to be.
Personally, I'll take [i]Hilary's misdemeanors[/i] over Trump's megalomaniacal, petty, racist, misogynistic, ranting any day. One may be dishonest, but the other is equally dishonest but also deranged and VERY dangerous.
VERY dangerous.
I don't see Trump sabre rattling and threatening to attack Russia like Clinton has been
That email is old, old news, TFO:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/hillary-clinton-emails-nonsecure-gop-217510
and:
".....State Department spokesman John Kirby said officials see no indication the document was ever sent to the email account Clinton used, which was hosted on a private server.
“We did do some forensics on that and found no evidence it was actually emailed to her,” Kirby said at a daily news briefing on Friday. “We have found no indication that the document was emailed to former Secretary Clinton. There are other ways it could have found its way to her for her use."
Kirby also said the fact that the talking points were initially set to be sent via a secure system [b]did not necessarily mean they were classified.[/b]
I don't see Trump sabre rattling and threatening to attack Russia like Clinton has been
Isn't this a fundamental difference between the politician and businessman? We had an arms race because the politics demanded it, safe in the knowledge that neither side was going to press the button.
I don't feel safe in the knowledge that Trump can work this subtlety out.
Trump is a classic personality disorder. thats what makes him dangerous
Trump is a classic personality disorder. thats what makes him dangerous
Trump can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. But there's plenty on Hilary that leads me to believe she's both ruthless and dishonest.
Lesser of two evils. She is a misogynist and both her and her husband are greedy opportunists. What a choice.
I'm not up to speed on USA politics, but I get the impression that many of Barack Obama's plans have been thwarted by Congress. Is it likely that if Trump were elected President, many of his more extreme policies would be blocked? Would Trump or Clinton have more support than Obama, thus allowing them to proceed with impunity?
by leveling barrage after barrage of accusations at HRC you give weight and credence to Trump's arguments (whatever they might be) thus lending support to his cause.
So... by countering some oft-repeated and demonstrably false statements (whose purpose serves only to "muddy the waters", as you put it) with evidence, I am subjecting HRC to a barrage of accusations and therefore supporting Trump's arguments [i]whatever they might be[/i]? Lending support to his cause?
a) that's possibly the most ill-conceived argument I've ever read on here.
b) I don't know what STW's exposure is to undecided US voters, but I reckon it's safe to say this thread will not prove statistically significant when it comes to counting the vote.
Trump is a classic personality disorder. thats what makes him dangerous
You're right. I'd feel much safer knowing the leader of the free world was someone who can laugh and come up with a nice catchphrase about the death by bayonet-rape of someone...
So... by countering some oft-repeated and demonstrably false statements (whose purpose serves only to "muddy the waters", as you put it) with evidence, I am subjecting HRC to a barrage of accusations and therefore supporting Trump's arguments whatever they might be? Lending support to his cause?
a) that's possibly the most ill-conceived argument I've ever read on here.
Yep. It's the "If you're not with us, you're against us" fallacy. And it sickens me almost as much as Donald Trump sickens me.
I hate this whole coarse, polarized car-crash of a debate (not on STW - I mean the whole election debate) in which each side feels compelled to pretend their preferred candidate is a decent person who gives a flying **** about ordinary Americans.
death by bayonet-rape
You know what? I didn't know that was how he'd died. I thought the mob had beaten him to death.
Every day's a school day, as they say!
I hate this whole coarse, polarized car-crash of a debate (not on STW - I mean the whole election debate) in which each side feels compelled to pretend their preferred candidate is a decent person who gives a flying **** about ordinary Americans.
Indeed. Its fandom, rather than anything meaningful.
[EDIT] - Never mind, It's not worth it.
What, pray tell, have you countered with fact?
Well, all that pish you "allegedly" fixed by adding "allegedly" to for starters. It happened. It does not require conjecture. You claimed there were no classified emails found on her server. I linked a video of the Director of the FBI saying there were.
the devil incarnate is running for the Oval
Get a grip of yourself.
What do you aim to accomplish by posting negative issue stuff against HRC if not to get Trump elected
You seem to be stuck in the dichotomy of dislike x = like y, and it's not doing you any favours.
Is it not possible, that in highlighting the Clinton shennanigans (did we mention that the Clinton Foundation is also under investigation by the FBI yet?) she may stand aside and let someone more palatable run for the Democrats? Bernie Sanders would have had this wrapped up already, for instance. Someone who actually [i]has[/i] been fighting for equal rights since college, unlike Hillary...
Bernie Sanders would have had this wrapped up already
Oh, absolutely.
Jamba - you really need to read up a bit on Trumps past - racial profiling tenets, illegal evictions, groping women, him and his wife lying about her immigrations status etc etc
@tj I appreciate you may not read a lot if what I have posted but I have repeatedly said Hillary is appalling but Trump is worse. Hebden summed it up on the prior page with his nine-bob note vs lunatic.
The FBI found enough emails to make it worth formally re-opening their investigation.
Just over a week to go. I have no doubt there will be more sh.t to meet the fan on all sides
The FBI director in his limited press release confirmed that they contained classified and secret material, but not how it came to be there. Was it sent to her? Was it sent to her or by her? Was it comments on classified material or the material itself. The consensus seemed to be that if it had been HRC that'd put the information there or sent it to others, she'd have been prosecuted. She wasn't or at least hasn't been so far.
You seem to be stuck in the dichotomy of dislike x = like y, and it's not doing you any favours.
no, I'm not. What I'm saying is that a negative issue ad about X only helps Y, there's not really any middle ground as there's only 2 candidates.
Don't be insulting, it's been civil so far.
Is it not possible, that in highlighting the Clinton shennanigans she may stand aside and let someone more palatable run for the Democrats? Bernie Sanders would have had this wrapped up already, for instance.
In the two weeks remaining? You want to change the candidate and have them have any chance of succeeding?
Someone who actually has been fighting for equal rights since college, unlike Hillary...
Did you see her speech to her graduating class? Equal rights go beyond gay rights.
Trouble is Jamba you have repeatedly been shown to be talking total bobbins about Clinton - confusing opinion with fact. Whereas its fact about Trump not opinion