Quantcast

2016 speculation thread

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
41,151
10,092
does anyone see the problem with having the only impeached president within the last hundred years campaigning for someone?
if bill being impeached didn't matter to you before......why bitch about it now?
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
22,001
7,882
Colorado
Bernie: We'd like to do the April debate in NY, before the primary

Hillary's Campaign: We're not going to have one until your tone changes

Internet: But you said for the toughest job in the world you should be "willing to debate anytime, anywhere". Plus he's only talking policy, not about your FBI investigation or other questionable activities. What tone are you referring to and how are you going to respond to Trump's attacks if you can't handle Bernie? #tonedownforwhat

(Less than 2 days later)

Hillary's Campaign: We'd gladly have a debate with Bernie in NY before the primary there. #whichHillary

:bonk:
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
22,001
7,882
Colorado
Came here to post this. Took me 2+ hours to read last night. If she doesn't get indicted at the minimum, I have lost all faith (what little I had left) in our legal system. What she's done is appallingly illegal, at best on the very dark grey side of illegal/legal. One thing to point out is that this was put together by a Hillary supporter, so it's not politically motivated. It was some guy that wanted to see what the big fuss was about.

There is a snowball's chance in hell that I will vote for her now. If the election is close, I might actually vote Republican to keep her out of office. If it's not close, I will be most likely voting for Jill Stein, as that will still take away from her but stay in line with my beliefs (mostly).
 

mykel

closer to Periwinkle
Apr 19, 2013
5,483
4,211
sw ontario canada
Can you give me the Coles Notes version in bullet form?
I be quite interested, but it is just too much to wade through with this damn brain-ache.
Cheers!
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
She's a pretty angry liar: http://www.salon.com/2016/03/31/watch_clinton_goes_off_on_greenpeace_activist_i_am_so_sick_of_you_bringing_up_my_fossil_fuel_money/

Although the activist from the environmental group asked if the former secretary of state will “reject fossil fuel money” overall, Clinton implied she has not received any, instead making a misleading distinction between the corporations themselves and individuals tied to them.

It is true that Clinton’s campaign has not gotten money directly from fossil fuel corporations, or any other companies, as this would violate election law. Rather, many of the people raising money for Clinton’s campaign work for large oil and natural gas corporations.

“Nearly all of the lobbyists bundling contributions for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign have at one time or another worked for the fossil fuel industry,” Mother Jones revealed in a July exposé.

She has received enormous help, Mother Jones reported, from “Democratic Party lobbyists who have worked against regulations to curb climate change, advocated for offshore drilling, or sought government approval for natural gas exports.”

Environmental news website Grist has also shown how Clinton rakes in money from fossil fuel interests. The outlet notes that her campaign does not receive money directly from fossil fuel companies; rather, she “is getting a lot of money from fossil fuel executives and lobbyists acting as bundlers (fundraisers who collect donations) who represent fossil fuel companies.”

Among the prominent contributors to Clinton’s campaign are lobbyists for Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP America, America’s Natural Gas Alliance and more.

Clinton’s campaign also has links to the Keystone XL pipeline, a project of the corporation TransCanada that has faced a series of delays since it was commissioned in 2010. Environmental scientists like former NASA official James Hansen have warned it would mean “game over for the climate,” and activists have protested it for years.

In June 2015, Clinton’s campaign announced that it had hired a former major TransCanada lobbyist as a consultant.

As secretary of state, Clinton also pushed for the pipeline. In 2010, she said her department was “inclined” to sign off on the project.

During her tenure as head of the State Department, Clinton also advocated strongly on behalf of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, or TPP, which environmental and labor groups warn would be disastrous for the climate and local economy. Although the deal is 6,000 pages long and addresses a variety of obscure issues, it does not mention the phrase “climate change” once.

Despite openly supporting them for years, after pressure from the Sanders campaign, Clinton now claims she opposes both the Keystone XL pipeline and TPP.

Clinton has also received millions of dollars in speaking fees from Wall Street banks and corporations. In fact, in just 12 of such speeches, Clinton made approximately $3 million, more than most Americans will earn in their lifetimes.

She has been asked numerous times to release transcripts of her paid speeches, but refuses to do so.

An investigation by the Wall Street Journal furthermore revealed that Bill Clinton’s speaking fees grew rapidly when his wife served as secretary of state.

Fellow presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has refused to take contributions from fossil fuel corporations. In July 2015, The Nation magazine created a pledge calling on presidential candidates to reject money from fossil fuel corporations. Clinton did not endorse it.
More from Vice News in early March:
https://news.vice.com/article/fossil-fuel-investors-are-pumping-millions-of-dollars-into-hillary-clintons-campaign

 
Last edited:

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
22,001
7,882
Colorado
Can you give me the Coles Notes version in bullet form?
I be quite interested, but it is just too much to wade through with this damn brain-ache.
Cheers!
Without pulling the individual items, basically her NDA was broken multiple times with talking with people from the Clinton Foundation. He usage of a private server, while not illegal, stepped her around FOIA, which is illegal. The fact that her server was not secure violated a few laws. In summary, what she did should open her up to large fines and upwards of 10+ years in prison. It's ugly.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
88,748
26,966
media blackout
Without pulling the individual items, basically her NDA was broken multiple times with talking with people from the Clinton Foundation. He usage of a private server, while not illegal, stepped her around FOIA, which is illegal. The fact that her server was not secure violated a few laws. In summary, what she did should open her up to large fines and upwards of 10+ years in prison. It's ugly.
tl;dr clinton's watergate.
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
22,001
7,882
Colorado
tl;dr clinton's watergate.
This. It's Watergate level shit for sure.

The fact that she didn't have the email for the ambassador in Benghazi is scary, because they have emails (including proof that a few were deleted) of her talking about the attack as it's occurring, with a Clinton Foundation employee via their AOL account. Totally unsecured and proof that she had deleted, not delivered State business emails, despite the supeona to do such.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
88,748
26,966
media blackout
in a way its kind of a good thing that this is starting to come to light now before the general election is underway, because it would pretty much guarantee the GOP. still a chance to get a *ahem* proper candidate the dem nomination.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
41,151
10,092
funny stuff.....if only bernie wasn't running....there would be no criticism...
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
funny stuff.....if only bernie wasn't running....there would be no criticism...
Clearly not if you were informed. Bernie announced a year ago. People have been pointing out these issues long before even on left:

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/10/clinton-tips-hand-favor-transcanadas-massive-pipeline

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

Also Clinton's ties to Monsanto were well noted 16-17 years ago, I read it back then whilst researching food safety and genetic engineering at Cornell. I posted about that here in 2008: http://ridemonkey.bikemag.com/threads/cloned-meat-and-disease.195356/#post-2798923
 

Beef Supreme

Turbo Monkey
Oct 29, 2010
1,434
73
Hiding from the stupid
This. It's Watergate level shit for sure.

The fact that she didn't have the email for the ambassador in Benghazi is scary, because they have emails (including proof that a few were deleted) of her talking about the attack as it's occurring, with a Clinton Foundation employee via their AOL account. Totally unsecured and proof that she had deleted, not delivered State business emails, despite the supeona to do such.
Jesus Christ. This is another pure nothingburger. She is as likely to be indicted for killing Vince Foster as she is for this.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,104
10,670
AK
Read it before you make your decision.
I can't believe I'm doing this:

That's a pretty one-sided article, one-sided as in many assumptions are made and the issue is far from obvious based on my knowledge of both the computer systems and proof that is required for such things. Some of the descriptions about how gov email works are wrong. I honestly think she did it for convenience and didn't think fully about the implications, but it's more of a mess than it is a good prosecution case. Many assumptions or "facts" are stated, but when fully researched and arranged into to "proof", I have serious doubts whether they would line up like the author claims. Maybe the FBI can sort something out that is enforceable, but there may be a bigger failure of the system too. There may be expectations of being briefed, available and able to receive emails that are just not realistic given the systems they use. That wouldn't surprise me based on my experience and waiting for the government to reach the technology level of 2000, which by the way just takes moar $$$. Many of the document rules and classification rules are impossible to follow. I can tell you I take cyber security courses that completely contradict reality, not in a subjective way, but in an objective logic-fallacy type way.

In all honestly, I hope this can leverage Bernie to the forefront, I think he's a far better candidate with far less baggage, but I also don't think the email issue or Benghazi are really what the opposition wishes they are. I think their strategy is to repeat them over and over enough times so that they can be...
 

Beef Supreme

Turbo Monkey
Oct 29, 2010
1,434
73
Hiding from the stupid
I can't believe I'm doing this:

That's a pretty one-sided article, one-sided as in many assumptions are made and the issue is far from obvious based on my knowledge of both the computer systems and proof that is required for such things. Some of the descriptions about how gov email works are wrong. I honestly think she did it for convenience and didn't think fully about the implications, but it's more of a mess than it is a good prosecution case. Many assumptions or "facts" are stated, but when fully researched and arranged into to "proof", I have serious doubts whether they would line up like the author claims. Maybe the FBI can sort something out that is enforceable, but there may be a bigger failure of the system too. There may be expectations of being briefed, available and able to receive emails that are just not realistic given the systems they use. That wouldn't surprise me based on my experience and waiting for the government to reach the technology level of 2000, which by the way just takes moar $$$. Many of the document rules and classification rules are impossible to follow. I can tell you I take cyber security courses that completely contradict reality, not in a subjective way, but in an objective logic-fallacy type way.

In all honestly, I hope this can leverage Bernie to the forefront, I think he's a far better candidate with far less baggage, but I also don't think the email issue or Benghazi are really what the opposition wishes they are. I think their strategy is to repeat them over and over enough times so that they can be...
I agree with most of this. The biggest distinction is that I don't think the article comes any where near showing criminal intent which would be necessary.

I like Bernie but he isn't going o win. I'm honestly not convinced that is a bad thing. I do appreciate his pulling Hillary to the left and I think the next President needs to address the concerns he taps into. I'd love to see him as Vice President.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
41,151
10,092
Clearly not if you were informed. Bernie announced a year ago. People have been pointing out these issues long before even on left:

http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/10/clinton-tips-hand-favor-transcanadas-massive-pipeline

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

Also Clinton's ties to Monsanto were well noted 16-17 years ago, I read it back then whilst researching food safety and genetic engineering at Cornell. I posted about that here in 2008: http://ridemonkey.bikemag.com/threads/cloned-meat-and-disease.195356/#post-2798923
no shit sunshine.

i was referring to the forum in general.
 

Toshi

butthole powerwashing evangelist
Oct 23, 2001
39,709
8,728
IIRC Mitttens and ¡Jeb!, among others, already set the precedent for private email servers. I totally agree it's a bad idea for security and is designed to make an end run around FOIA but unfortunately there's precedent. It's not like Hillary was being an evil genius here.
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
22,001
7,882
Colorado
IIRC Mitttens and ¡Jeb!, among others, already set the precedent for private email servers. I totally agree it's a bad idea for security and is designed to make an end run around FOIA but unfortunately there's precedent. It's not like Hillary was being an evil genius here.
I made a good stab at reading it. It's turgid and makes a lot of assertions and fails to include a clearly stated summary beyond "she's toast".

I decided without deep research that the article's quite likely to be paid for agitprop.

Talked with a buddy who is an atty in Congress and he agrees that a lot of the assertions are off, but the end summary is correct. See the below Washington Post article:

Congressional Attorney Friend said:
"It has nothing to do with Benghazi and in many cases he is wrong about the law. It's that once you have CLASS on a device, it becomes property of the US Govt. Defacto, the server and all email on it belong to the govt, including the personal emails. It's about the Clinton Global Initiative (effectively using the Clinton Foundation to globally launder money) because there appears to be evidence of that from the server too."
 

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
Fool me once, shame on you (Bush); fool me twice, shame on me (Obama); fool me thrice, let's not go there (Clinton):

"The Panama Papers illuminate a key aspect of why the system isn't working–because globalization has allowed the capital and assets of the 1 % (be they individuals or corporations) to travel freely, while those of the 99 % cannot. Globalization is supposed to be about the free movement of people, goods, and capital. But in fact, the system is set up to enable that mobility mainly for the rich (or for large corporations). The result is global tax evasion, the offshoring of labor, and an elite that flies 35,000 feet over the problems of nation states and the tax payers within them."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/04/472985787/heres-what-you-need-to-know-so-far-about-panama-papers

http://www.ibtimes.com/panama-papers-obama-clinton-pushed-trade-deal-amid-warnings-it-would-make-money-2348076

Not foolin: http://usuncut.com/politics/panama-papers-bernie-sanders-white-house/

 
Last edited:

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
41,792
19,103
Riding the baggage carousel.