The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
No offense, but I find that a seriously laughable concern. If there are any believers, the betting window is back open...
On rereading this it sounded harsh even with the "no offense", so let me explain what I meant.

The places where Clinton is winning by larger margins are the most populous (California, New York, NJ, Illinois) and other large population states. The places where Trump is winning big are low populations states (Dakotas, Montana, Idaho, Oklahoma) and pretty much no large cities. The larger states where Trump might win (like Texas, Ohio, Florida) he is only likely to win or lose by a few percentage points so no overwhelming share of votes. So I would expect that Clinton's share of the popular vote may be larger than even her electoral win, but I sincerely doubt she would lose it.

That's what I should have said.
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
After a weekend where I might have thought Weinergate would have died down, it seems this is going to be a big deal today and in the future.

Politically I would have thought everyone already had all email issues baked into one's decision already. But, there are two things that seem to keep bubbling this thing up. The first is that it seems likely there are going to be actual legal problems for a number of people who's names we know in regards to what comes out of this investigation. Some Democrat supporting people are beginning to realize a Clinton administration may very well have members under indictment when she takes office if she wins and want her to withdraw or otherwise reversed their endorsement "for the good of the country." (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html --- http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ws-support-hillary-renewed-fbi-investigation/ )

Along with that is that fact that, absent giant meteor coming to a town near you, this is going to be in the news for the rest of the election. It is a sensational story and the actual accusations against Weiner may make Trump's comments less outrageous. ("Grab her by the pussy" in a private conversation with an adult friend v. “I would bust that tight pussy so hard and so often that you would leak and limp for a week.” allegedly said by an adult to a 15 year old girl.) Sure, one is running for President and the other is not. It just hurts the narrative that only Trump would say such horrible things. I don't believe the poll tightening before the weekend had anything to do with opinion of the population changing so drastically as much as the pollsters bringing the gap back to reality to keep from being considered partisan when the last poll is measured against the actual election results. However, for whatever reason, before the current information came out, they closed substantially. Whatever narrative the Clinton Campaign had planned for the final week better be yuge and fabulous or the final momentum of the race is going to be against them. Shit rolling downhill tends to accelerate.

At the core of the problem for Hillary is that there are alleged to be hundreds of thousands of messages found. The current wild ass guess of the media is that the reason for them being on the "device" is because basic cloud back-up. The people claiming to be smart enough to run the country, with all the lawyers and experts at their disposal and hours and hours of time to consider the issue in great specificity, don't really know how computers operate. (At least modernly.) That ignorance might help on eventual "intent" issues on criminal indictments on classified material. Ignorance it not a big plus in a political campaign however.

The potential here is that all (At least some.) of the emails that were bleached previously, may still exist. Since the FBI, the NY police department and Special Victims Unit, the Federal Prosecutors of NY and NC, and the NC police (Place where the purported victim is alleged to live.) all have access for investigatory reasons, this is not going to go away with a wink and a handshake on the tarmac. As to how it interacts with other investigation paths is where We The People have no idea. (She does. Her call for the FBI to release what they have could be fixed by her releasing all the emails. At the very least, I believe her lawyer (Kendall) still has a USB key in his safe of all the email on the servers before the bleaching.) It is clear there is no way to look through all the e-mails before the election and the FBI has months of investigation in front of them to figure out if the new information points to any crimes.

02172010judge021710.slideshow_main.prod_affiliate.91.jpg
 
Last edited:

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
James Comey’s Steaming Manure Pile
by Martin Longman
October 31, 2016 11:26 AM

The article began, “A load of manure was dumped outside the Democratic Party headquarters…” and you could be forgiven for thinking it was the local Cincinnati paper’s coverage of FBI Director James Comey’s decision to throw red meat to the Republican base by making wholly unsubstantiated suggestions and innuendos related to the bureau’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server.

In truth, however, this was no metaphor. For the second time, someone actually pulled a truck up to the Warren County, Ohio Democratic headquarters and unloaded a full load of manure on their doorstep.

A load of manure was dumped outside the Democratic Party headquarters in Warren County.

“What reasonable person thinks this is OK????” party chair Bethe Goldenfield said in a post in the Greater Cincinnati Politics Facebook Group. “I won’t be responding to anyone who thinks this is acceptable behavior. It is ILLEGAL!”

The same thing happened in 2012, Goldenfield noted. The suburban Cincinnati county is overwhelmingly Republican; Mitt Romney got 69 percent of the vote four years ago. It’s been almost 40 years since a Democrat was elected to countywide office.

Goldenfield told The Enquirer the Warren County Sheriff’s Office called her around 7:45 a.m. Saturday alerting her to the manure pile outside the Lebanon building. Deputies met party officials later to review video.​

The local Republican Party denied any knowledge or responsibility and even offered to help clean up the mess.

Harry Reid thinks that James Comey’s manure dump may have been illegal, too, although the consensus of the larger Justice Department community seems to be that it was merely irresponsible and boneheaded at best or malicious and unjustifiable at worst.

Even former Bush Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey is calling it an “unworthy choice.”

What no one really disputes is that Comey’s letter to conservative Republican chairman in Congress was a steaming pile of shit.

Here’s how former Attorney General Eric Holder puts it:

…I am deeply concerned about FBI Director James B. Comey’s decision to write a vague letter to Congress about emails potentially connected to a matter of public, and political, interest. That decision was incorrect. It violated long-standing Justice Department policies and tradition. And it ran counter to guidance that I put in place four years ago laying out the proper way to conduct investigations during an election season. That guidance, which reinforced established policy, is still in effect and applies to the entire Justice Department — including the FBI.

The department has a practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations. Indeed, except in exceptional circumstances, the department will not even acknowledge the existence of an investigation. The department also has a policy of not taking unnecessary action close in time to Election Day that might influence an election’s outcome. These rules have been followed during Republican and Democratic administrations. They aren’t designed to help any particular individual or to serve any political interest. Instead, they are intended to ensure that every investigation proceeds fairly and judiciously; to maintain the public trust in the department’s ability to do its job free of political influence; and to prevent investigations from unfairly or unintentionally casting public suspicion on public officials who have done nothing wrong.​

A lot of people are suggesting that the Democrats were fine with Comey when he announced in July that there would be no prosecution of Clinton for using a private email server as Secretary of State, but Holder sets them straight.

This controversy has its roots in the director’s July decision to hold a news conference announcing his recommendation that the Justice Department bring no charges against Hillary Clinton. Instead of making a private recommendation to the attorney general — consistent with Justice Department policy — he chose to publicly share his professional recommendation, as well as his personal opinions, about the case. That was a stunning breach of protocol. It may set a dangerous precedent for future investigations. It was wrong.​

The only thing that has changed is that back in July it was the Republicans who were incensed enough to call for Comey’s resignation. Today, the Democrats have joined them.
 
cybrguy,
  • Like
Reactions: steama

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Trump’s philanthropic boasts struggle under scrutiny
10/31/16 12:43 PM—Updated 10/31/16 12:51 PM

By Steve Benen
For months, Donald Trump’s charitable foundation has struggled to withstand scrutiny, facing one controversy after another. But even looking past the beleaguered foundation, there’s a broader question about the lengths the Republican presidential hopeful has gone to give the appearance of generosity, without the necessary follow-through.

The Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold reported over the weekend:

For as long as he has been rich and famous, Donald Trump has also wanted people to believe he is generous. He spent years constructing an image as a philanthropist by appearing at charity events and by making very public – even nationally televised – promises to give his own money away.

It was, in large part, a facade. A months-long investigation by The Washington Post has not been able to verify many of Trump’s boasts about his philanthropy.

Instead, throughout his life in the spotlight, whether as a businessman, television star or presidential candidate, The Post found that Trump had sought credit for charity he had not given – or had claimed other people’s giving as his own.
The article featured a doozy of a story from 1996, when the Association to Benefit Children held a ribbon-cutting ceremony for a new nursery school serving children with AIDS. A variety of major New York figures and donors were on hand, including Donald Trump.

The trouble, as it turns out, is that Trump hadn’t been invited. He simply showed up unannounced, walked onto the stage, took a seat – a seat, as Farenthold reported, that had been assigned to a developer who had given generously to build the nursery – and smiled for the photographers. He was even seen dancing the Macarena.

Trump hadn’t contributed a dime to the Association to Benefit Children. In fact, after the event, Trump “left without offering an explanation,” and never wrote a check to benefit the charity.

While it may seem crude to put it in these terms, according to the Post’s reporting, Donald Trump effectively crashed a charity event – for a nursery school helping children with AIDS – in order to give people the false impression that he’d done something nice for those kids.

And if you’re wondering what kind of person would do such a thing, the answer, apparently, is the kind of person who may be elected president of the United States in eight days.

After reading this, I tried to come up with the most (ahem) charitable interpretation possible. Maybe Trump was confused and wandered into the wrong ribbon-cutting event. Perhaps he intended to help the nursery school, but the check got lost in the mail.

But the reason it’s so difficult to give Trump the benefit of the doubt is his overall track record. As Slate noted, “Although Trump, particularly through his foundation, did give some money to charity over the years, much of it was self-serving and the dollar amounts of his contributions were often much less than what he made it seem.”

This includes the most generous contribution the Trump Foundation ever made: $264,631 to restore the Pulitzer Fountain, “a turned-off, crumbling feature” near Central Park. And while that sounds like a nice gesture, the fountain is located outside the Trump-owned Plaza Hotel, which means that the donation actually served to benefit part of his broader real-estate enterprise.

As Brian Galle, a professor of tax law at Georgetown University, told the Post, “It shows you what this [foundation] is all about. Which is basically just about advancing Trump’s interests.”
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
This Is What Happens When Your Opponent Becomes Your Enemy
by Nancy LeTourneau
October 31, 2016 12:53 PM

It all started with the politicization of the news media. Fox News and other right wing outlets sprang to life on the contention that the mainstream media operated with a liberal bias that needed to be balanced with a conservative bias. That created this notion that things formerly accepted as “facts” had a political bias. All disagreements were cast as “he said/she said” that formed the basis of both-sider-ism. It was only a matter of time before things like science and basic math became politicized. Under those circumstances, there is no common ground in the epistemically closed bubble. Your opponent becomes objectified as the “other side” and quickly turns into the enemy that must be defeated all costs.

That is now the mindset we’re seeing when it comes to the current situation with the FBI. Those on the right will tell you that the process of investigating Hillary Clinton was politicized by the leadership at DOJ (i.e., AG Loretta Lynch) while the left shouts the same thing about FBI Director James Comey. It is literally a “he said/she said,” and simply yelling louder that your side is right doesn’t change that. It just deepens the polarization. But it’s one thing when politicians are cast in that light. It’s a whole other level of dysfunction when the very institutions we rely on to carry out justice are painted with the same brush.

That is why one of the norms we’ve expected from our government over the years is that federal bureaucracies are staffed with career civil servants who continue in their positions from one administration to another regardless of which party wins the presidency. We need to trust these people to do their jobs regardless of the politics involved. It appears that, based on what we’ve learned recently about the investigations of Hillary Clinton, that is another norm that has been breeched within the FBI. Without uncovering any evidence of wrongdoing, there are agents that continue to insist otherwise. It is difficult to imagine a motive other than politicization within the ranks for why that is happening.

But the truth is, based on how our politics are going these days, it is almost impossible to avoid getting caught up in the battle that is currently underway. Republicans have abandoned the idea of disagreeing over policy issues and replaced it with the idea that political opponents are the “enemy” that threatens us. So…rather than a disagreement over health care reform, we hear accusations that President Obama isn’t an American citizen and doesn’t really love our country. Hillary Clinton doesn’t simply have a different view over how to grow our economy, she is a crook and needs to be locked up.

For almost eight years President Obama has been trying to make the case to Republicans that this was the wrong approach. I’ll simply provide you with one example from his 2015 State of the Union speech where he talked about “a better politics.”

So the question for those of us here tonight is how we, all of us, can better reflect America’s hopes…

Imagine if we broke out of these tired old patterns. Imagine if we did something different. Understand, a better politics isn’t one where Democrats abandon their agenda or Republicans simply embrace mine. A better politics is one where we appeal to each other’s basic decency instead of our basest fears. A better politics is one where we debate without demonizing each other; where we talk issues and values, and principles and facts, rather than “gotcha” moments, or trivial gaffes, or fake controversies that have nothing to do with people’s daily lives…

If we’re going to have arguments, let’s have arguments, but let’s make them debates worthy of this body and worthy of this country.​

The trouble is…changing that is a two-way street and – at least so far – Republicans are broadcasting that they’re going to double down on their approach when the target turns from Obama to Clinton. In other words, if they lose the White House again, the plan is to continue their rejection of actual governing in order to make sure that all of this turns into a lose/lose for the rest of us. That approach is affecting us all…including agents at the FBI apparently.

So @OldNewbie, WTF. You in the wrong thread or something? In case you are confused, this is the Presidential Candidates thread...

Mod note: Posts merged. If you have a probelm with a member's post, please hit the report button.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cybrguy,

t-dub

Vapor Sloth
The FBI does not have a warrant to look at the emails.
They do now. They got it Sunday night.
The FBI has not seen the emails.
They will now. ALL 650,000 of them.
The FBI is not re-opening anything.
Oh yes they have.
The FBI, knowing nothing of the emails, can't have the goods on anyone.
They had meta data they used to get the warrant.
On another topic, it is looking like Comey clearly violated the Hatch Act
That is what Harry Reid thinks, however, Comey did not time this. It was the investigators looking at Weiner's laptop, which Huma was backing up her phone to, who told Comey they might have something pertinent to the investigation.

I see Weiner throwing Huma under the bus to help with his case, then I see Huma throwing Hillary under the bus to help with her case.

This investigation is going to take a while. I still see shades of Nixon here where we may have a president taking office only to be indicted afterwards. What a mess.
 
Last edited:

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
So @OldNewbie, WTF. You in the wrong thread or something? In case you are confused, this is the Presidential Candidates thread...
Are you saying one of the Presidential Candidates (and her minions) are not trying to distract from the email story or trying to blame the messenger?

We can say that is the job of a campaign and think nothing of it. I don't think pointing out what is happening is wrong or inappropriate for the thread.
 

jay87

Well-Known Member
I wanna have a reality check here.

So email conspiracies means you're too crooked to be president.

Sexual assault, habitual lying, sexist tendencies, racist tendencies, sociopathic behavior, and a complete ignorance of any political issue remotely related to the president is perfectly acceptable for a presidential candidate?

I feel as though Donald Trump has lowered the collective bar of what is considered acceptable for a presidential candidate, but only for him.

Clinton's email scandal gets brought up again, oh no the sky is falling.

Donald has another sexual assault victim speak out, "oh well it's ok, that's just typical Donald :tup:"

:bang:
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
I see Weiner throwing Huma under the bus to help with his case, then I see Huma throwing Hillary under the bus to help with her case.
I don't doubt that about Weiner, but I don't think Huma would do that under any circumstances. I'm quite sure Huma would take a bullet for Hillary if she thought it would help her...

That is what Harry Reid thinks, however, Comey did not time this. It was the investigators looking at Weiner's laptop, which Huma was backing up her phone to, who told Comey they might have something pertinent to the investigation.
There is no reason to release this before it has been investigated other than to cover his own ass with republicans who might complain. Protocol insists that he wait, and he chose not to. That was an active decision that he made, inappropriately to many including myself. I wonder why he didn't call me first...
 
Last edited:
cybrguy,

t-dub

Vapor Sloth
I don't doubt that about Weiner, but I don't think Huma would do that under any circumstances. I'm quite sure Huma would take a bullet for Hillary if she thought it would help her...
I respectfully disagree. Huma is in big trouble methinks and I see her cutting a deal. Time will tell of course, however Weiner is facing 50 years in prison and Huma, well, she apparently lied to the FBI about turning over all e-mails and devices she was using. Not sure what penalties she faces but they could be quite substantial. Generals have gone down for doing less.

Maybe you know her better than I do. Which is quite possible as I do not know her at all.
 
t-dub,

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
I respectfully disagree. Huma is in big trouble methinks and I see her cutting a deal. Time will tell of course, however Weiner is facing 50 years in prison and Huma, well, she apparently lied to the FBI about turning over all e-mails and devices she was using. Not sure what penalties she faces but they could be quite substantial. Generals have gone down for doing less.

Maybe you know her better than I do. Which is quite possible as I do not know her at all.
Huma has been a loyal...employee of Hillary for a very long time and I don't think it likely she will turn. Some put her closer to her than either Bill or Chelsea. The Clinton's are not known for giving their trust easily.

I think the ramifications are potentially so great to this finding that I cannot believe, absent blue dress like insurance in case things go bad, Huma knew of the emails being on the "devices". Since her loyalty to Hillary seems to exceed her desire for self-preservation, I don't believe she kept them on purpose. While she may have "lied" about what the emails contain, I don't think she lied about herself not being in possession of more. In her case, I think it ignorance over basic modern computer functions rather than mendacity in regards to the emails on Fredo's devices.
 
Tranquility,

Baron23

Well-Known Member
This is very funny if you look at it correctly. People who support the Democrat party had absolutely no complaints about the FBI making clear statements to Congress and the public that he was not recommending prosecution (commenting on an active investigation, yeah).

But when he makes statements to Congress and the public commenting on an active investigation that is not beneficial to HRC and they all come out howling.

Look....in my opinion this guy was in a no win situation. Either be accused of trying to influence the election or be accused of coverup and obfuscation. Personally, I favor openness and transparency and it doesn't surprise me that HRC is complaining because openness and transparency have been anathem to her for all of her public life.

There is only one person responsible as the root cause of all of this and that's HRC. If she didn't try to circumvent rules and laws in her almost clinically paranoid attempt to evade scrutiny, then none of this would be happening. Reminds me of that saying, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime. All of this are just her past actions and decisions coming home to roost.

I'm getting pretty old, I remember Nixon and it is he that HRC most reminds me of in terms of base personality.

Trump...well, he doesn't remind me of anybody we have ever put up for office (sigh).

So, that's our choice....Richard Nixon or your drunk pervert uncle.
 

grokit

well-worn member
Donald has another sexual assault victim speak out, "oh well it's ok, that's just typical Donald :tup:"
This is absolutely a non-issue, as bill clinton is also a sexual predator trying to get (back) into the white house. These men are both big stinking piles of human excrement in regards to respecting women.

Choose your poison carefully!

:myday:
 
Last edited:

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
I keep hearing Trump say worse than Watergate. I don't think anybody really knows yet. Do They?

All of these innuendos and half truths are hurting our election process. I don't know how there can be a fair vote now IMO.

Im really pissed off with this circus show. It's unexceptable to me.

Edit
I also have been wondering why CNN would use Cory Lewandowski. He is obviously biased and really worthless as a news commentator. I turn the channel when he's talking. Lately I've been turning into MSNBC more.

I think this is BS that this isn't going to hurt Hillary Clinton's chances. Of course it will. We will be stuck with this low life crazy idiot as president. Its not just the embarrassment - this maniac could blow up the world. Remember he was wondering why we don't use nuclear weapons.:mental:
 
Last edited:

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Obviously it pays over at CNN to be a white guy rather than a black woman...

At CNN, Donna Brazile is Out, but Corey Lewandowski Stays
by Nancy LeTourneau
October 31, 2016 3:52 PM

When Donna Brazile became interim DNC chair this summer, her contract as a political commentator for CNN was suspended. Rightly so. But recent hacks of private emails that were released by Wikileaks suggest that she informed the Clinton campaign of a question she could expect at one of the presidential debates. Because of that, the cable news channel severed their ties permanently with Brazile.

I’m not worried about Brazile. She is a talented political consultant who will have no trouble remaining gainfully employed. But CNN’s reaction to this situation raises a few concerns for me. The idea that someone can get fired based on information that was disseminated due on a hack into private emails should concern us all. Perhaps CNN authenticated this particular email from Brazile via other avenues. We aren’t privy to that information, but I certainly hope so. At this point I’m not ready to buy into the idea that any of the emails released by Wikileaks are authentic. Regardless of that, CNN’s response provides a serious incentive to breech privacy for nefarious purposes.

Perhaps even more concerning is that this is the same network that continues to employ former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski – even after FEC filings show that he is being paid by Trump for “strategy consulting.” We also know that Donald Trump requires everyone to sign “non disparagement” agreements. So Lewandowski is probably legally bound to avoid any criticism of his former boss. CNN is basically granting a microphone to the Trump campaign in the guise of political commentary.

Note that Brazile initially suspended her contract with CNN, not because she worked directly for a presidential candidate, but because she went to work for a candidate’s party.
Lewandowski, on the other hand, continues to work directly for a candidate and maintains his contract with the network. Now…Brazile is permanently terminated for providing information to Clinton’s campaign. That is basically the task of a “strategy consultant.” And yet Lewandowski will continue in his position because no one has hacked or leaked emails documenting the information he has provided to the Trump campaign.
 

RUDE BOY

Space is the Place
I keep hearing Trump say worse than Watergate. I don't think anybody really knows yet. Do They?

All of these innuendos and half truths are hurting our election process. I don't know how there can be a fair vote now IMO.

There is no real comparison of this to the watergate scandal which lead to the resignation of a sitting President and 48 outta 69 of those republicans indicted being found guilty.

It's all Bullshit sound bites to influence those voters who know nothing about history.
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Im really pissed off with this circus show. It's unexceptable to me.
I'm not sure what anyone expected to see when they chose a carnival barker to be the republican nominee for President of the United States. It was sure to be a shit show from the beginning.

I can see him now, standing outside the strip club soliciting customers.

"Come on in come on in, see the show. Tits and ass everywhere you look. You can even grab them in the pussy, just like I do."

Circus is a very generous description...
 

Tranquility

Well-Known Member
I keep hearing Trump say worse than Watergate. I don't think anybody really knows yet. Do They?
I agree, WE don't know. The people who know what is in the emails know. I can't see how it can be "worse" than Watergate as that had a sitting president being accused of the illegal acts. Even with the potential depth and breadth of the unproven allegations, they really cannot measure up.

The fear is if such continues after the election. (And, the accompanying investigations.)

All of these innuendos and half truths are hurting our election process. I don't know how there can be a fair vote now IMO.
Isn't most all of our election process mired in innuendos and half truths? Even though we seem to keep asking for steak, all the politicians give us is the sizzle.

Im really pissed off with this circus show. It's unexceptable to me.
Agreed. If it were my ball, I'd have taken it home long ago. For a hoot, Google: politician clown cartoon . I think some others agree.

I also have been wondering why CNN would use Cory Lewandowski. He is obviously biased and really worthless as a news commentator. I turn the channel when he's talking. Lately I've been turning into MSNBC more.
Using people of bias is a part of the commentary show process. Reasonable people who agree is not must see TV.

(As to if he is "worthless", I'll have to leave it to others. I don't watch much TV news.)
 
Top Bottom