2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

How can you even compare lying to victims families, and lying in a federal investigation to Trump saying Obama was shouting at a protester at a rally. If anything that clip shows the lack of respect Obama's own followers have for him.

Oh victims families got it have a Trump answer for that too


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/07/31/politics/donald-trump-khizr-khan-family-controversy/index.html?client=safari

Hank Scorpio

When you have to include GIF's in your retort it's not worth responding to.

BorneTobyWilde

We hear a lot about early voting and fact the turnout is huge, but we also hear the media say it was all for Hillary and that a blue wall is forming. My question is do we actually know who the early voters voted for?

Hank Scorpio

Nody wrote: »

You want to talk disrespect for victims? How about we talk about Trump and the Khan family then? Or his draft dodging? Or "only weak people get mental health issues from war"? Seriously; you're giving me an open goal here if that's the best complaint you can do.

Oh I agree with you, but I believe what Clinton did regarding Benghazi and lying in a federal investigation was far worse.

cnocbui

Just on BBC news - FBI says nothing in the latest email saga changes their earlier conclusion exonerating Clinton.

Itssoeasy

Sky news are reporting that FBI director James comey has said that an examination of Hilary clintons emails has found "no evidence of criminal wrongdoing."

Trump is going to lose it. He went hard and heavy on the email story since they got the new emails.

Sofa Spud

Overheal wrote: »

Oh victims families got it have a Trump answer for that too


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/07/31/politics/donald-trump-khizr-khan-family-controversy/index.html?client=safari

Why, Overheal, why?!!? It took years to get this out of my head and you dump it in here the day we win 6-1???

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

When you have to include GIF's in your retort it's not worth responding to.

I don't have to. The attack on the Khan family supports itself. But she whatever fickle reason needed to evade the subject

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Oh I agree with you, but I believe what Clinton did regarding Benghazi and lying in a federal investigation was far worse.

If she has she isn't being brought up on charges.

Overheal

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Sky news are reporting that FBI director James comey has said that an examination of Hilary clintons emails has found "no evidence of criminal wrongdoing."

Trump is going to lose it. He went hard and heavy on the email story since they got the new emails.

hes going to keep going at it. Ya mad? "Crooked FBI" "rigged election" rabble rabble etc. - facts haven't stopped him before why would they now?

Omy

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

We hear a lot about early voting and fact the turnout is huge, but we also hear the media say it was all for Hillary and that a blue wall is forming. My question is do we actually know who the early voters voted for?

The tallies have info on party age etc.

bajer101

Full letter from Comey.

Itssoeasy

Overheal wrote: »

hes going to keep going at it. Ya mad? "Crooked FBI" "rigged election" rabble rabble etc. - facts haven't stopped him before why would they now?

When I say lose it, that seemed to indicate i was suggesting he had it before.

Yeah and James comey is back off the Christmas card list from trump tower.

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

hes going to keep going at it. Ya mad? "Crooked FBI" "rigged election" rabble rabble etc. - facts haven't stopped him before why would they now?

That's good news for Clinton obviously. Has the separate investigation into the Clinton Foundation been dropped too, or the congress's investigation?

I'm not trying to be smart, there's so many different investigations and Comey's letter only refers to Clinton's email server.

Overheal

Itssoeasy wrote: »

When I say lose it, that seemed to indicate i was suggesting he had it before.

Yeah and James comey is back off the Christmas card list from trump tower.

The Comey love in the media is such a soap opera too. When the investigation started he GOP praised him as the fairest, most thorough, honest, stalwart etc etc man ever. Then he came out with a decision they didn't like. Overnight traitor. Then the liberal media praised him. Then the letter came out. Snake! Then the GOP sang Baby Come Back...

BorneTobyWilde

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Sky news are reporting that FBI director James comey has said that an examination of Hilary clintons emails has found "no evidence of criminal wrongdoing."

Trump is going to lose it. He went hard and heavy on the email story since they got the new emails.

Is this a remark or more.
How on earth could they look at 650,000 emails in a few days. So this new batch of emails is given all clear.
I think pressure has been put on Comey from the top. The timing is crazy.
It's not realistic to say that new investigation took few days .

Sofa Spud

Overheal wrote: »

hes going to keep going at it. Ya mad? "Crooked FBI" "rigged election" rabble rabble etc. - facts haven't stopped him before why would they now?

Drudge front page has Trump quote - "She's protected by rigged system"

You could write it

KingBrian2

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Drudge front page has Trump quote - "She's protected by rigged system"

You could write it

Was Bush not elected in a fixed election in Florida. Nixon was also crooked and was elected. So their are precedents not that I agree with Trump claiming their is rigging. The Democrats also claim their is electoral fraud in previous elections so this is hardly a new development.

Sofa Spud

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Was Bush not elected in a fixed election in Florida. Nixon was also crooked and was elected. So their are precedents not that I agree with Trump claiming their is rigging. The Democrats also claim their is electoral fraud in previous elections so this is hardly a new development.

My point was that Trump talked about voter fraud, polls are wrong, the whole system is rigged and against him - then the polls go positive, Comey steps in with the investigation and suddenly he says ' maybe it's not as rigged as we thought' everything is rosey and then as soon as Comey says they've found nothing, he's right back to the system is rigged again. Predictable...

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Was Bush not elected in a fixed election in Florida. Nixon was also crooked and was elected. So their are precedents not that I agree with Trump claiming their is rigging. The Democrats also claim their is electoral fraud in previous elections so this is hardly a new development.

Nixon didn't get in on a crooked election and Bush it came down to very questionable "hanging chads" in one county that swung the whole election. But could you have predicted that one county and a few hundred votes would have decided the election?

The judgement could have gone either way, and that's all that can really be said; I don't think outside of conspiracy theories could you reasonably say GWB got in on a rigged election.

Overheal

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Is this a remark or more.
How on earth could they look at 650,000 emails in a few days. So this new batch of emails is given all clear.
I think pressure has been put on Comey from the top. The timing is crazy.
It's not realistic to say that new investigation took few days .

Idk. Math? Depends on how many emails you look through and what you're looking for. You could systematically eliminate duplication of emails obtained previously from other sources. You can also have agents filter appropriately for material you're looking for (e.g. Communications between specific parties)

The bad assumption here is that of all 650k emails on her device, that all 650k had any bearing on the HRC investigation. Thousands could have been Amazon spam for instance.

Hank Scorpio

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Drudge front page has Trump quote - "She's protected by rigged system"

You could write it

In fairness there's sample evidence for suspicion.

"In May of 2015, Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik emailed Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta to tell him about potential developments at an impending congressional hearing, as well as about a new development in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for the emails Clinton turned over to the State Department from her private account."

"In an email from Kadzik's personal account titled "Heads up," he wrote: “There is a [House Judiciary Committee] oversight hearing today where the head of our Civil Division will testify. Likely to get questions on State Department emails. Another filing in the FOIA case went in last night or will go in this am that indicates it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the emails.”

Source: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/wikileaks-clinton-justice-department-heads-up-investigation-230643

---

"Attorney General Loretta Lynch is SUED to come clean on secret airport meeting with Bill Clinton days before she was to decide on charging his wife over server scandal"

Source : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3898754/Attorney-General-SUED-come-clean-secret-meeting-Bill-Clinton-days-decide-charging-wife-server-scandal.html

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

In fairness there's sample evidence for suspicion.

And suspicion isn't the same as guilt. I mean Godspeed to investigations against her but until they have the right goods to bring charges against her, she's innocent until proven guilty. Common sense exposed to months, years of media reporting and biased punditry on the issue leads most of us to think that yeah there's something there but that doesn't indict her. It just doesn't.

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

And suspicion isn't the same as guilt. I mean Godspeed to investigations against her but until they have the right goods to bring charges against her, she's innocent until proven guilty. Common sense exposed to months, years of media reporting and biased punditry on the issue leads most of us to think that yeah there's something there but that doesn't indict her. It just doesn't.

I agree. I don't think this is the end of it but it is certainly good news for her.

BorneTobyWilde

'' i am very grateful to the professionals at the FBI for doing an extraordinary amount of high quality work in such a short period of time ''

Sounds like he is trying too hard to convince. The truth may come out years from now.

KingBrian2

Overheal wrote: »

Nixon didn't get in on a crooked election and Bush it came down to very questionable "hanging chads" in one county that swung the whole election. But could you have predicted that one county and a few hundred votes would have decided the election?

The judgement could have gone either way, and that's all that can really be said; I don't think outside of conspiracy theories could you reasonably say GWB got in on a rigged election.

Fair enough but the validity of the election is put at stake when the coverage of one party is shown to overwhelmingly side with one party over the other. Media Bias is almost as bad as voter fraud/suppression or gerrymandering electoral districts. The people are getting a misinformed picture of the candidates.

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Fair enough but the validity of the election is put at stake when the coverage of one party is shown to overwhelmingly side with one party over the other. Media Bias is almost as bad as voter fraud/suppression or gerrymandering electoral districts. The people are getting a misinformed picture of the candidates.

That's hardly a fair assessment. Trump took advantage of literally billions of dollars of free media coverage by going on interviews and picking up the phone. Conservatives know what stations to watch and so do liberals if they want aligned coverage.

The simple truth is the reason most coverage of Trump is negative is because so much of what he is is negative. Just look at politicians he's called liars or that have disavowed him that are now stumping for him for political gain. Quite a farce. His coverage has been more than fair tbh and most days of the week you can usually catch a livestream or two of one of the rallies he puts on. If Bernie had that kind of exposure this would have been a very different race.

rossie1977

This whole thing along with Benghazi have been a complete farce and would never have been investigated had Clinton not been running for president.

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

That's good news for Clinton obviously. Has the separate investigation into the Clinton Foundation been dropped too, or the congress's investigation?
.

What investigation into the Clinton foundation? There is currently an investigation into trump charity though

Sofa Spud

Overheal wrote: »

That's hardly a fair assessment. Trump took advantage of literally billions of dollars of free media coverage by going on interviews and picking up the phone. Conservatives know what stations to watch and so do liberals if they want aligned coverage.

The simple truth is the reason most coverage of Trump is negative is because so much of what he is is negative. Just look at politicians he's called liars or that have disavowed him that are now stumping for him for political gain. Quite a farce. His coverage has been more than fair tbh and most days of the week you can usually catch a livestream or two of one of the rallies he puts on. If Bernie had that kind of exposure this would have been a very different race.

Yeah, no doubt there will be many books and thesis' written about the role the media played in this election that will focus on how they built him up - he was box office and the media milked it. He said outrageous stuff and the media lapped it up. Anytime a mic was put in front of him, he was guaranteed to come out with something mad that they could run with as a headline story.

Ultimately, the reason why he can point to the media negatively reporting on him is that the regular mind-farts, the racist rhetoric and insulting anyone who disagreed with him made it too easy - he brought it on himself and there's no point in moaning about the media when he actively played them....

gosplan

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I believe lying to victims families then going on television and calling them liars is more than just "porkies".

I don't get the Benghazi thing. Can you please explain what she said?

I read your last piece and it referred to her as a liar many times and said the proof is out there. But it was very light on details.

What did she actually say/lie about?

Overheal

Obama sat down with Maher this weekend finally and they talked among other topics about the role of the media. I think it's worth a look, one crux of the discussion was largely that a profit driven economy is great for production, but has had some very unintended consequences in certain realms: like healthcare, prisons and law enforcement, and the media. Have to say i fully agree, capitalism is great until the profit motive becomes more important than these essential motives of truth and information, of justice and safety, and health and welfare. Not before another generation passes do I think we'll see a well mixed society in this regard but we have to start thinking about it.

On another subject entirely I haven't had time to really form my own viewpoint on Haiti as I haven't had time to digest information and process spin either way on it. I'm starting with this write up from slate as I've found them to be a reasonable sources so far but if anyone wants to chime in I'll be chewing it over

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/09/the_truth_about_the_clintons_and_haiti.html

Overheal

gosplan wrote: »

I don't get the Benghazi thing. Can you please explain what she said?

I read your last piece and it referred to her as a liar many times and said the proof is out there. But it was very light on details.

What did she actually say/lie about?

She met with families as the caskets were coming in at an Air Force base and told one of the mothers they would catch whoever was responsible for making the Movie that the administration pinned as the reason for the attack in the initial days after the event. Communications wth Chelsea Clinton suggest that Hillary knew it wasn't the case and the administration was investigating it as a planned attack.

Hank Scorpio

rossie1977 wrote: »

What investigation into the Clinton foundation? There is currently an investigation into trump charity though

gosplan

Overheal wrote: »

She met with families as the caskets were coming in at an Air Force base and told one of the mothers they would catch whoever was responsible for making the Movie that the administration pinned as the reason for the attack in the initial days after the event. Communications wth Chelsea Clinton suggest that Hillary knew it wasn't the case and the administration was investigating it as a planned attack.

So they denied it being an organised terrorist incident, instead claiming it was a kind of 'mass hysteria' thing inspired by the release of some film?

Overheal

gosplan wrote: »

So they denied it being an organised terrorist incident, instead claiming it was a kind of 'mass hysteria' thing inspired by the release of some film?

Pretty much. The attack came during the 2012 election season, 2 months before the vote, and a big part of Obamas platform was keeping Americans safe.

Sofa Spud

Overheal wrote: »

Obama sat down with Maher this weekend finally and they talked among other topics about the role of the media. I think it's worth a look, one crux of the discussion was largely that a profit driven economy is great for production, but has had some very unintended consequences in certain realms: like healthcare, prisons and law enforcement, and the media. Have to say i fully agree, capitalism is great until the profit motive becomes more important than these essential motives of truth and information, of justice and safety, and health and welfare. Not before another generation passes do I think we'll see a well mixed society in this regard but we have to start thinking about it.

On another subject entirely I haven't had time to really form my own viewpoint on Haiti as I haven't had time to digest information and process spin either way on it. I'm starting with this write up from slate as I've found them to be a reasonable sources so far but if anyone wants to chime in I'll be chewing it over

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/09/the_truth_about_the_clintons_and_haiti.html

As I watched that yesterday I had a chuckle to myself thinking about how Trump would be completely incapable of having such a conversation where thoughts were articulately made, where perceptive points were made that demonstrated a dept of knowledge whilst showing a level of openness and doubt that he didn't always have the answer.

Then I thought about how Trump could win and sweated a little...

TheOven

Sofa Spud wrote: »

As I watched that yesterday I had a chuckle to myself thinking about how Trump would be completely incapable of having such a conversation where thoughts were articulately made, where perceptive points were made that demonstrated a dept of knowledge whilst showing a level of openness and doubt that he didn't always have the answer.

Then I thought about how Trump could win and sweated a little...

Trump has to be kept away from twitter by his campaign. Yet everyone else is meant to trust him to be in charge of a country.

bajer101

I think you really are pissing against the wind trying to talk to talk to Trump supporters. A politically agnostic Facebook friend of mine posted a clip of Trump lying about how Obama dealt with the Trump supporter at his rally. This FB friend of mine wouldn't have had much interest in the election but was shocked at how Trump had obviously lied, so posted the evidence. A Trump supporter friend of their's posted a rebuttal that was just incredible. They claimed that Obama was belittling the Trump supporter and that Trump was correct in his assessment of Obama's response.

When I read that, I just despaired. I realised that you may as well be talking to the cat as trying to have a rational discussion with some people. And then I watched the BBC documentary tonight on the Obama presidency and I despaired further. Watching someone like Obama who is a true Statesman and all round decent person, and comparing that to the likes of that clown Trump is just heart breaking.

Sofa Spud

TheOven wrote: »

Trump has to be kept away from twitter by his campaign. Yet everyone else is meant to trust him to be in charge of a country.

There's an unintentionally funny interview with Kellyanne Conway during the week where the way she talked about trying to manage Trump and his phone was like a mother trying to manage her kids (she has a lot) without kicking off a tantrum. Something about suggesting "here's some interesting things to tweet about today" instead of telling him not to tweet as he'd end up throwing a strop. Not sure I've explained it well but if you look around on the net you'll find it...

Nody

bajer101 wrote: »

When I read that, I just despaired. I realised that you may as well be talking to the cat as trying to have a rational discussion with some people. And then I watched the BBC documentary tonight on the Obama presidency and I despaired further. Watching someone like Obama who is a true Statesman and all round decent person, and comparing that to the likes of that clown Trump is just heart breaking.

For moments like that I recommend my personal saying which can be applied in every situation and can be yours on a printed tie from China or a shirt from Bangladesh (exactly like Trump's quality wears) at a competitive price:

I stood amidst chaos and a voice spoke down from the sky to me and said "Smile; because things could be worse" and I smiled and things got worse.

BorneTobyWilde

bajer101 wrote: »

I think you really are pissing against the wind trying to talk to talk to Trump supporters. A politically agnostic Facebook friend of mine posted a clip of Trump lying about how Obama dealt with the Trump supporter at his rally. This FB friend of mine wouldn't have had much interest in the election but was shocked at how Trump had obviously lied, so posted the evidence. A Trump supporter friend of their's posted a rebuttal that was just incredible. They claimed that Obama was belittling the Trump supporter and that Trump was correct in his assessment of Obama's response.

When I read that, I just despaired. I realised that you may as well be talking to the cat as trying to have a rational discussion with some people. And then I watched the BBC documentary tonight on the Obama presidency and I despaired further. Watching someone like Obama who is a true Statesman and all round decent person, and comparing that to the likes of that clown Trump is just heart breaking.

Tribute videos tend to look positive for the subject.

For me this email story is black and white.
There is an espionage statute and what Hillary did broke laws. She received a subpoena and then went psycho on her devices with a hammer plus she deleted 33000 emails. She then went on to lie to FBI over and over. This was all proved. She also hid this latest device that contained 650000 emails.
I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone . People who argue with facts are difficult to argue with.
Just say yes I agree with you and she's going to get away with it, as I can then agree with you on that point.

Rainman16

James Comey has cleared Clinton. A huge blow to the Trump campaign.
Clinton will now surely win.

Overheal

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Tribute videos tend to look positive for the subject.

For me this email story is black and white.
There is an espionage statute and what Hillary did broke laws. She received a subpoena and then went psycho on her devices with a hammer plus she deleted 33000 emails. She then went on to lie to FBI over and over. This was all proved. She also hid this latest device that contained 650000 emails.
I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone . People who argue with facts are difficult to argue with.
Just say yes I agree with you and she's going to get away with it, as I can then agree with you on that point.

If it was that simple she would be in front of a grand jury right about now.

ancapailldorcha

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Please don't just dump videos here without any sort of opinion or analysis.

Hank Scorpio

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

For me this email story is black and white.

There's still some shining lights like Trey Gowdy in public office so don't give up yet.

The double standards are sickening to say the least.

Navy Sailor takes some photos on a submarine and is sent to prison.

Hank Scorpio

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Please don't just dump videos here without any sort of opinion or analysis.

Fair enough. I`ll add that he asked me for a source that there's an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

The video I posted shows Tom Fuentas, who served 29 years in the FBI confirming the investigation, pointing out his sources are multiple heads in the FBI still working there and others on the outside.

aloyisious

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

More "porkies" from Clinton.

If you listen to Comyn's replies, you won't hear him directly link HRC to the deletion of any emails by use of her name and this fact WAS NOT pursued by the Congressman. Even when it came to the devices traces of deletions were found on, Comyn said there was the chance that the deletions were caused by handling of the devices during replacement work on them. Listen to what the congressman said at the very start of his question and answer session with Comyn (not on the shortened version above) then to the actual questions and ask yourself this: did he intend to really give himself time to really grill Dir Comyn? The 2nd question was a two-parter and his response just that there was mail sent, without him naming the sender.

Comyn's responses left escape routes for Hillary, her staff and (importantly for Comyn) himself should anyone go deeper into that Q and A session in congress. The only thing that he and the FBI committed to about Hillary was that she was careless in the handling of emails and use of the devices, and that was self evident and unavoidable, a safe conclusion for him to reach and state without career and retirement benefit repercussions.

Sofa Spud

Sofa Spud wrote: »

There's an unintentionally funny interview with Kellyanne Conway during the week where the way she talked about trying to manage Trump and his phone was like a mother trying to manage her kids (she has a lot) without kicking off a tantrum. Something about suggesting "here's some interesting things to tweet about today" instead of telling him not to tweet as he'd end up throwing a strop. Not sure I've explained it well but if you look around on the net you'll find it...

Here's the link - http://uk.businessinsider.com/kellyanne-conway-on-managing-trump-its-like-saying-to-someone-how-about-having-2-brownies-and-not-6-2016-10?r=US&IR=T

BorneTobyWilde

Overheal wrote: »

If it was that simple she would be in front of a grand jury right about now.

In a European Justice system all this nonsense would have being dealt with sharply.
She is getting protected. I will have to accept that like every other person.
It's like she has to be more guilty to get charged with a crime. She is not guilty enough with all her actions and cover ups to date. We need more on her. We require her to take a hammer to more devices, we require her to lie more and more to the FBI, we require her to have more hidden devices, we require her to have more classified emails than she already had on her private email server. We need more.
It's incredible , but people will except it as those people what her to win and the people who don't except it are obviously deplorable simple people who have no right to question it.
It's over. Trump is fighting a war he can't win.

rossie1977

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

In a European Justice system all this nonsense would have being dealt with sharply.
She is getting protected. I will have to accept that like every other person.
It's like she has to be more guilty to get charged with a crime. She is not guilty enough with all her actions and cover ups to date. We need more on her. We require her to take a hammer to more devices, we require her to lie more and more to the FBI, we require her to have more hidden devices, we require her to have more classified emails than she already had on her private email server. We need more.
It's incredible , but people will except it as those people what her to win and the people who don't except it are obviously deplorable simple people who have no right to question it.
It's over. Trump is fighting a war he can't win.

If there was something on her..anything, they would have found her guilty!

The fbi headed by a Republican couldn't find anything on her despite an 18 month enquiry. She was dragged up before a Republican dominated congress and they found no wrong doing regarding Benghazi.

This is just more bs by the Republicans to try and bring down their opponents. Bill Clinton had to deal with the marijuana allegations in college and a supposed affair with Jennifer Flowers in the weeks leading up to 1992. Obama had the birth cert and muslim allegations.