2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Amerika

New investigation into Hillary’s emails? Stack of resignation letters from furious FBI agents over the decision to not recommend indictment? Classified and Top Secret info on Anthony Weiner’s unsecure computer? DOJ blocks probe of Clinton Foundation? Terry McAuliffe’s PAC, Common Good VA, while working for the Clinton Foundation, donated $467,000 to a top level FBI director's wife and who later became in charge of investigating Clinton’s email scandal?

Just think what will come out tomorrow.

RobertKK

Christy42 wrote: »

The messenger should report everything (I. E. Not pick and choose polls) and not add their own spin. It is still may. You have nothing but conjecture and hope. That is all that has hurt the Clinton campaign. OMG no one will be able to support Hillary campaign after next week's wiki leaks but we aren't going to tell you what is in it now for reasons.

Followed by OMG did you see the wiki leaks you can't vote for her but we won't go into what it was about because you would realise we have nothing while the other candidate campaigns on a platform of war crimes.

You talk about war crimes and you continuously ignore Hillary Clinton signed off on a record breaking arms deal with Saudi Arabia, who have used the weapons she signed off on to bomb hospitals, prisons while having a blockade on Yemen which is stopping food getting into Yemen and which had led to a cholera outbreak.
Why is a war crime if Russia for example bombs an area with civilians, but it is a mistake if the US do the exact same thing like bomb a hospital?
You apply double standards, the biggest war crimes that have been committed in the past 15 years have been policies that have destroyed countries.
Obama takes out families with double tap strikes, but Trump...maybe being honest about the terrible foreign policies of the US is far better than sugar coated war crimes.

BorneTobyWilde

Clinton used a private server to hide her activities . That is the crime, and she is guilty of it. It does not matter what was in emails. The fact that she used a private server is enough evidence.

Brian?

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Clinton used a private server to hide her activities . That is the crime, and she is guilty of it. It does not matter what was in emails. The fact that she used a private server is enough evidence.

I wish the world worked in such simplistic terms. It's not enough evidence though.

BorneTobyWilde

Brian? wrote: »

I wish the world worked in such simplistic terms. It's not enough evidence though.

Did she use a private server
Yes
Case closed
It was never about the emails
She broken the law and put information at risk

Pro Hoc Vice

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Did she use a private server
Yes
Case closed
It was never about the emails
She broken the law and put information at risk

Can you point at a law that makes the use by any citizen in the USA of a private server illegal.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

You talk about war crimes and you continuously ignore Hillary Clinton signed off on a record breaking arms deal with Saudi Arabia, who have used the weapons she signed off on to bomb hospitals, prisons while having a blockade on Yemen which is stopping food getting into Yemen and which had led to a cholera outbreak.
Why is a war crime if Russia for example bombs an area with civilians, but it is a mistake if the US do the exact same thing like bomb a hospital?
You apply double standards, the biggest war crimes that have been committed in the past 15 years have been policies that have destroyed countries.
Obama takes out families with double tap strikes, but Trump...maybe being honest about the terrible foreign policies of the US is far better than sugar coated war crimes.

Change of topic. I asked for proof that these emails would lead to Hillary's downfall. You jumped on the last line of my post and ignored the topic. Come one again.

I noticed Amerika was the one this time to start hoping something actually concrete comes out tomorrow. The same thing we have been hearing all summer and autumn.

TheDoctor

Day 273 of the email "scandal".

Still waiting for something damaging to be released, will come back again tomorrow

gosplan

There's so little that's concrete in all this Hillary hate.

Benghazi was a mess. She used a private server.

Big deal.

Sofa Spud

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Clinton used a private server to hide her activities . That is the crime, and she is guilty of it. It does not matter what was in emails. The fact that she used a private server is enough evidence.

Tell that to Colin Powell, who did the same....

gosplan

gosplan wrote: »

There's so little that's concrete in all this Hillary hate.

Benghazi was a mess. She used a private server.

Big deal.

Wow.

I didn't know the full details so just read the entire Wikipedia entry on Benghazi.

Are. You. Kidding. Me.

If more capable republicians spend as much time being actual politicians as they do organising witch hunts against whoever, they wouldn't be in this situation.

KingBrian2

gosplan wrote: »

Wow.

I didn't know the full details so just read the entire Wikipedia entry on Benghazi.

Are. You. Kidding. Me.

If more capable republicians spend as much time being actual politicians as they do organising witch hunts against whoever, they wouldn't be in this situation.

If more Republicans had voted for Ron Paul in previous elections they would not be in the current mess they are in. He had the traditional values that most Republicans signed up for.

cnocbui

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Clinton used a private server to hide her activities . That is the crime, and she is guilty of it. It does not matter what was in emails. The fact that she used a private server is enough evidence.

Actually, she used it for convenience - hard printouts being one use-case I read.

A crime is something which contravenes a Law. Which law was contravened?

Hiding something is not in itself wrong. Do you habitually parade naked in front of road facing windows with open curtains, blinds and such? The only problem is if she were hiding evidence of wrong-doing, like habitually sexual assault. The FBI didn't find anything that they or the public needed to know.

RobertKK

Christy42 wrote: »

Change of topic. I asked for proof that these emails would lead to Hillary's downfall. You jumped on the last line of my post and ignored the topic. Come one again.

I noticed Amerika was the one this time to start hoping something actually concrete comes out tomorrow. The same thing we have been hearing all summer and autumn.

The last line showed you ignore the reality of US foreign policy, that is all I am pointing out. It has been a disaster for a long time and war crimes are happening all the time, but when you don't sign up to the international criminal court, you do it for a reason...

Obama didn't bring change one can believe in, but many people chose to be gullible and believed an election slogan. He just became the acceptable face to many wrong doings.
If he was a Republican he would have been held to account like Bush Jr was who was not viewed in a favourable light by many citizens in the international community.

As for what Amerika hopes for... there is so much smoke around these emails. Comey is putting his job on the line with this, so maybe the smoke is from a fire.

RobertKK

TheDoctor wrote: »

Day 273 of the email "scandal".

Still waiting for something damaging to be released, will come back again tomorrow

After all those missing and destroyed devices, not to mention deleted emails, maybe they forgot about the laptop...and a penis finally brings down a Clinton.

gosplan

KingBrian2 wrote: »

If more Republicans had voted for Ron Paul in previous elections they would not be in the current mess they are in. He had the traditional values that most Republicans signed up for.

They need a plan.

16 candidates in the primaries shows there was no clear strategy.

They've spent 8 years being the 'anti' party so now they don't know what they're actually for anymore.

I genuinly think that the problem is they reacted to Obama in such a negative way, not necessarily because he was black but because he was clearly going to be such a historic democratic president and he wanted to change so much.

cnocbui

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Did she use a private server
Yes
Case closed
It was never about the emails
She broken the law and put information at risk

Ironically, she may actually have been doing the government a favour and been providing greater security than they themselves provide. Security by obscurity. Foreign nation states have been hacking US government agencies relentlessly. Victims include - ha ha - the State Department, Whitehouse, NOAA and USPS.

Then there is the biggie: the US government's Office of Personnel Management (OPM). That hack delivered into the hands of a foreign government, the names, addresses, social security numbers, fingerprints, job titles, security clearances, places of work, details on neighbours, friends, relatives, overseas contacts - for 21.5 million government employees.

I am sure there have been other successful hacks of US government systems that have not been made public.

And you say she put stuff at risk! I say she managed to protect information better than many US government departments have managed to

RobertKK

cnocbui wrote: »

Ironically, she may actually have been doing the government a favour and been providing greater security than they themselves provide. Security by obscurity. Foreign nation states have been hacking US government agencies relentlessly. Victims include - ha ha - the State Department, Whitehouse, NOAA and USPS.

Then there is the biggie: the US government's Office of Personnel Management (OPM). That hack delivered into the hands of a foreign government, the names, addresses, social security numbers, fingerprints, job titles, security clearances, places of work, details on neighbours, friends, relatives, overseas contacts - for 21.5 million government employees.

I am sure there have been other successful hacks of US government systems that have not been made public.

And you say she put stuff at risk! I say she managed to protect information better than many US government departments have managed to

Good security like her close associate John Podesta?

Hillary is an elderly woman and seems to be ignorant on internet security, and her private server according to the WSJ was found to have sent or received material from Hillary's provate server, and it was going to a Yahoo email account, Yahoo who only recently admitted their email servers were hacked for a long time.
It is a bit of a disaster and about as secure as house with no door.

B_Wayne

RobertKK wrote: »

After all those missing and destroyed devices, not to mention deleted emails, maybe they forgot about the laptop...and a penis finally brings down a Clinton.

So far nothing scandalous for the campaign appears to be the issue. More retreading old ground...

Amerika

Classified and Top Secret info from Hillary to Huma to Anthony Weiner's PC... greater security?

KingBrian2

cnocbui wrote: »

Ironically, she may actually have been doing the government a favour and been providing greater security than they themselves provide. Security by obscurity. Foreign nation states have been hacking US government agencies relentlessly. Victims include - ha ha - the State Department, Whitehouse, NOAA and USPS.

Then there is the biggie: the US government's Office of Personnel Management (OPM). That hack delivered into the hands of a foreign government, the names, addresses, social security numbers, fingerprints, job titles, security clearances, places of work, details on neighbours, friends, relatives, overseas contacts - for 21.5 million government employees.

I am sure there have been other successful hacks of US government systems that have not been made public.

And you say she put stuff at risk! I say she managed to protect information better than many US government departments have managed to

You make this charge that the US is being hacked which keeps coming up from the Democrats. Chancellor Angela Merkel had her phone spied on by US agents and the UN is full of spies. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black. As I pointed out before the US supports pussy riot in Russia and the Free Syrian Army in Syria so the US can't take a bit of hacking. The real problem is many Democrats and Republicans cant believe it that Edward Snowdon went to Russia instead of staying in the US which we know never spies on its own citizens. When it come Hillary. She keeps accusing the Russians of hacking the US. The same old blame it on the Russian response. I don't believe many Americans see the Russians as interfering in US politics. Hillary should stop using them as a scapegoat.

RobertKK

B_Wayne wrote: »

So far nothing scandalous for the campaign appears to be the issue. More retreading old ground...

That is like seeing a book and it contains information you haven't seen, you were told this book didn't exist as all books with relevant information had been turned in to the people who had asked to see them, the person who had access to the book had signed a document under the penalty of perjury that all such books and copies of said book were turned over to the people who had sought them.
Perjury is one issue as it is clear Huma Abedin lied, and she has her lawyers in discussion with the Justice department.

Also how do you know there is nothing of issue here, are you saying Comey put his job on the line for nothing scandalous?
At the very least Huma Abedin is in serious trouble and should be charged with perjury and maybe obstruction of justice - which could very well lead back to Hillary Clinton.

gosplan

RobertKK wrote: »

That is like seeing a book and it contains information you haven't seen, you were told this book didn't exist as all books with relevant information had been turned in to the people who had asked to see them, the person who had access to the book had signed a document under the penalty of perjury that all such books and copies of said book were turned over to the people who had sought them.
Perjury is one issue as it is clear Huma Abedin lied, and she has her lawyers in discussion with the Justice department.

Also how do you know there is nothing of issue here, are you saying Comey put his job on the line for nothing scandalous?
At the very least Huma Abedin is in serious trouble and should be charged with perjury and maybe obstruction of justice - which could very well lead back to Hillary Clinton.

It's the constant attempt to link anything to Hillary.

They want it soooooo bad.

Not you necessarily, just the effort that has been going into this witch hunt.

At some point it would be nice if people said - I don't agree with her much but she hasn't done much wrong

RobertKK

KingBrian2 wrote: »

You make this charge that the US is being hacked which keeps coming up from the Democrats. Chancellor Angela Merkel had her phone spied on by US agents and the UN is full of spies. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black. As I pointed out before the US supports pussy riot in Russia and the Free Syrian Army in Syria so the US can't take a bit of hacking. The real problem is many Democrats and Republicans cant believe it that Edward Snowdon went to Russia instead of staying in the US which we know never spies on its own citizens. When it come Hillary. She keeps accusing the Russians of hacking the US. The same old blame it on the Russian response. I don't believe many Americans see the Russians as interfering in US politics. Hillary should stop using them as a scapegoat.

Pussy riot are disgusting and Hillary had them over to the US for her campaign, despite Pussy Riot having sex in front of children, and going into a supermarket where they used a frozen chicken to explicitly pleasure themselves.
Not to mention the incident on the altar of the church in Moscow.
Hillary Clinton's judgment is so poor.

I am not surprised the Russians put some of the members of Pussy Riot in jail, most civilised countries would have done the same if people were acting like them in public.

Sofa Spud

gosplan wrote: »

They need a plan.

16 candidates in the primaries shows there was no clear strategy.

They've spent 8 years being the 'anti' party so now they don't know what they're actually for anymore.

I genuinly think that the problem is they reacted to Obama in such a negative way, not necessarily because he was black but because he was clearly going to be such a historic democratic president and he wanted to change so much.

I think that's a really good and relevant point - what do they stand for anymore? Ideologues are rarely a good thing, but none of them, with perhaps the exception of Rand Paul, had a coherent ideological message.

Considering the GOP we always the party of 'family values', especially when Clinton the First was in the White House, that's clearly gone out the window with Trump walking the nomination. They can't call themselves fiscal conservatives any more, and couldn't for a long time if you stick to the definition of what that means, when they are cutting income (taxes) and not willing to touch big item spending cuts. Their politics boils down to partisan conflict for the sake of it and little else....

RobertKK

gosplan wrote: »

It's the constant attempt to link anything to Hillary.

They want it soooooo bad.

It was found Hillary had lied about no classified material as classified material was found on her private email server but Comey went beyond his reach and let her off.

She lies and lies, Bill strays and it is the woman's fault, not her sex addict philandering husband.

She has such a poor record of telling the truth that Hillary has only herself to blame.
Destroying devices that were suppose to have been turned over, joking about using a cloth to wipe a hard drive clean when it was software to totally clean off information on the hard drive.
She does too much that one would have to be very gullible to believe a word she says.
She looks guilty in her mannerisms.

CNN are saying the FBI believe there is classified material on the laptop that came from Clinton's email server.

RobertKK

The White House Press secretary has said Obama believes that Comey is a man of integrity.

K-9

Sweetemotion wrote: »

A cnn article?

If I linked a daily mail or fox news article.

Would you read it?

Mod:

Posters can't dismiss media links just because they don't like the source, we've warned posters about this before, including Daily Mail links!

Either refute the link by stating what you think is wrong with it or provide a link that disagrees with it.

gosplan

RobertKK wrote: »

It was found Hillary had lied about no classified material as classified material was found on her private email server but Comey went beyond his reach and let her off.

She lies and lies, Bill strays and it is the woman's fault, not her sex addict philandering husband.

She has such a poor record of telling the truth that Hillary has only herself to blame.
Destroying devices that were suppose to have been turned over, joking about using a cloth to wipe a hard drive clean when it was software to totally clean off information on the hard drive.
She does too much that one would have to be very gullible to believe a word she says.
She looks guilty in her mannerisms.

CNN are saying the FBI believe there is classified material on the laptop that came from Clinton's email server.

Comey did, Bill did, email server, she looks guilty in her mannerisms.

Lots of nothing tbh.

Amerika

Wikileaks said they were launching "phase three" of its election coverage this week. I have a feeling this week’s leaks will damaging for Trump and Republicans.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-30/wikileaks-warns-it-launching-phase-three-its-election-coverage

RobertKK

Huma Abedin is playing the fool by claiming she doesn't know how emails came to be on Weiner's laptop.

Fox News say they were told by officials that the metadata shows there are new emails that were not on other devices from the Clinton sever and from the State department, and it is as Permabear stated yesterday, it was done so emails could be printed and it was a Yahoo email account that was used - the emails stopped going to the account when Hillary stopped being at the State department.

RobertKK

gosplan wrote: »

Comey did, Bill did, email server, she looks guilty in her mannerisms.

Lots of nothing tbh.

You are basing that on nothing to back up your claim it is lots of nothing.

We don't know, but are we to think that Comey put his reputation on the line for 'lots of nothing'?

Comey who the White House said today is a man of integrity and good character.

Comey must believe they found the smoking gun to do what he did.

The White House just came out in support of Comey and said Obama doesn't think he's trying to influence anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRc1-3-OjtQ

Pretty big either way.. They know it's nothing or they know it's bad.

K-9

RobertKK wrote: »

You are basing that on nothing to back up your claim it is lots of nothing.

We don't know, but are we to think that Comey put his reputation on the line for 'lots of nothing'?

Comey who the White House said today is a man of integrity and good character.

Comey must believe they found the smoking gun to do what he did.

This is the same Comey who was accused of political bias for months up to this decision?

It was a brave step for him to take, time will tell if it was a stupid one.

RobertKK

K-9 wrote: »

This is the same Comey who was accused of political bias for months up to this decision?

It was a brave step for him to take, time will tell if it was a stupid one.

Yes, depending on which side one was on, he did a great job or he did an awful job. I thought it was a bit strange as I didn't understand the system, but didn't realise until the past few days he had overstepped his reach when he said there would be no prosecution which was the job of the Justice Department.
It probably added to Trump arguing the system was rigged - probably as rigged as any election in a western democracy is. But it was not good how the FBI dealt with the whole Clinton email scandal, I still think it was strange.

Yeah time will tell. I think they must be fairly certain for what they did.

gosplan

RobertKK wrote: »

You are basing that on nothing to back up your claim it is lots of nothing.

We don't know, but are we to think that Comey put his reputation on the line for 'lots of nothing'?

Comey who the White House said today is a man of integrity and good character.

Comey must believe they found the smoking gun to do what he did.

'We don't know'

Exactly.

This is another scandal to engulf Hillary and the beat people can say is 'we don't know'

Sofa Spud

Amerika wrote: »

Wikileaks said they were launching "phase three" of its election coverage this week. I have a feeling this week’s leaks will damaging for Trump and Republicans.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-30/wikileaks-warns-it-launching-phase-three-its-election-coverage

Based on what? The release from wikileaks makes no reference to him - Zerohedge said that Wikileaks have said in the past that they would publish information relating to Trump if they had any, that's all. What makes you think they have any?

Amerika

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Based on what? The release from wikileaks makes no reference to him - Zerohedge said that Wikileaks have said in the past that they would publish information relating to Trump if they had any, that's all. What makes you think they have any?

Just a gut feeling. Republicans can't be that smart as to not have some emails hacked along the way.

RobertKK

gosplan wrote: »

'We don't know'

Exactly.

This is another scandal to engulf Hillary and the beat people can say is 'we don't know'

Except that is more than "Lots of nothing".

In the media, there has been claims the metadata shows that state.gov emails and emails from the Clinton server, plus emails not on other devices on this particular laptop.

It is more than 'Lots of nothing', but all we don't know is the content of the emails, given there was classified emails found before, and given the sheer number of emails involved with this laptop - it does not look good for the Hillary camp, and I think this is why some are taking a step back from Clinton.

RobertKK

Amerika wrote: »

Just a gut feeling. Republicans can't be that smart as to not have some emails hacked along the way.

Trump didn't use email, so if it was simply Republicans wanting to stop him, well we all know that.
I can't see what Wikileaks would have that would be bad for Trump.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

Except that is more than "Lots of nothing".

In the media, there has been claims the metadata shows that state.gov emails and emails from the Clinton server, plus emails not on other devices on this particular laptop.

It is more than 'Lots of nothing', but all we don't know is the content of the emails, given there was classified emails found before, and given the sheer number of emails involved with this laptop - it does not look good for the Hillary camp, and I think this is why some are taking a step back from Clinton.

This is indeed a near perfect definition of lota of nothing. We have claims, a may earlier on. An ah sure it must be something if his reputation is on the line. Sure with that many emails there must be something like. None of these amount to proof. Indeed as it stands it doesn't even amount to evidence. Just more pure hope. Remember the burden of proof is not on Hillary here so unless you need something more than smoke.

Amerika

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump didn't use email, so if it was simply Republicans wanting to stop him, well we all know that.
I can't see what Wikileaks would have that would be bad for Trump.

Perhaps some high level GOP politicians negative feelings about Trump. Wouldn't look good for the GOP or Trump either.

RobertKK

Christy42 wrote: »

This is indeed a near perfect definition of lota of nothing. We have claims, a may earlier on. An ah sure it must be something if his reputation is on the line. Sure with that many emails there must be something like. None of these amount to proof. Indeed as it stands it doesn't even amount to evidence. Just more pure hope. Remember the burden of proof is not on Hillary here so unless you need something more than smoke.

Sometimes the simplest explanation is the most valid explanation.

There is a reason to get a warrant to look at the emails, what would you have done, do a metadata search of the laptop, see their are state,gov and emails linked to the Clinton private server, see there are 650,000 emails, would you have done nothing? - given all emails and devices with emails were suppose to have been turned over under the penalty of perjury?

Are you saying you would have covered this up?

RobertKK

Amerika wrote: »

Perhaps some high level GOP politicians negative feelings about Trump. Wouldn't look good for the GOP or Trump either.

I think it would just reinforce his anti-establishment tag.

K-9

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes, depending on which side one was on, he did a great job or he did an awful job. I thought it was a bit strange as I didn't understand the system, but didn't realise until the past few days he had overstepped his reach when he said there would be no prosecution which was the job of the Justice Department.
It probably added to Trump arguing the system was rigged - probably as rigged as any election in a western democracy is. But it was not good how the FBI dealt with the whole Clinton email scandal, I still think it was strange.

Yeah time will tell. I think they must be fairly certain for what they did.

Well the system is rigged because of Super PAC's and the Citizens United case but that's a whole other debate. That issue only seems to raise its head when the other side exploit it, not enough people are bothered otherwise.

gosplan

Christy42 wrote: »

This is indeed a near perfect definition of lota of nothing. We have claims, a may earlier on. An ah sure it must be something if his reputation is on the line. Sure with that many emails there must be something like. None of these amount to proof. Indeed as it stands it doesn't even amount to evidence. Just more pure hope. Remember the burden of proof is not on Hillary here so unless you need something more than smoke.

Unfortunately in politics sometimes there isn't a burden of proof. Sh1t sticks.

Hillary has been targeted for over 2 decades.

It's amazing that there's still so little on her.

Amerika

RobertKK wrote: »

I think it would just reinforce his anti-establishment tag.

Depends on what is said about him, I guess.

And no wonder Hillary pushed for early voting in the swing states as it favors democrats. Get them to vote before they know what they’re actually voting for and before they have a chance to change their minds. Brilliant!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/31/us/politics/early-voting-trump-clinton.html

cnocbui

K-9 wrote: »

This is the same Comey who was accused of political bias for months up to this decision?

It was a brave step for him to take, time will tell if it was a stupid one.

Comey's a brave one all right. On the one hand he advises the government not to name Russia as meddling with emails because it is too close to the election and then much, much closer to the election, he goes and makes innuendos about Clinton and emails.

Most people doing a compare and contrast are surely going to be wondering at the motivation behind the clear discrepancy.

With people well knowing the mutual admiration between Trump and Putin and how the latter has clearly been assisting the former, they might come to the conclusion that a partisan political agenda could explain it.

This election really is going to go down in History under the 'Infamy' heading.

FBI Director James Comey argued privately that it was too close to Election Day for the United States government to name Russia as meddling in the U.S. election and ultimately ensured that the FBI's name was not on the document that the U.S. government put out, a former FBI official tells CNBC.

The official said some government insiders are perplexed as to why Comey would have election timing concerns with the Russian disclosure but not with the Huma Abedin email discovery disclosure he made Friday.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/31/fbis-comey-opposed-naming-russians-citing-election-timing-source.html

Chong

This has probably been posted already but jesus if this was all the truth:

https://twitter.com/hectormorenco

gosplan

Chong wrote: »

This has probably been posted already but jesus if this was all the truth:

https://twitter.com/hectormorenco

Especially the bit about how Trump 'risked his life' by running against the corrupt elites.