2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[callou2131]

Why is everyone here bothering to argue with a 15 year old?

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by pgisback

Trump can shoot someone and his supporters will still vote for him.

And if that "someone" is an illegal immigrant, he gets double votes.

[chezball]

Going for a three mile run, suggest others do the same.

[mfisher27]

Since it's been confirmed there were emails sent that contained classified information (your "boys" confirmed this), then it would be a reasonable assumption that she doesn't know what is/isn't classified, no? How could the Secretary of State not know what is classified and what isn't? That's just as bad as having her own server.

Originally Posted by pgisback

The FBI has already said in their year long investigation that they found no evidence she knew she was sending classified material. Gonna be another losing cause to pursue perjury charges. If you even understand what perjury is.

[Davesportscards]

Originally Posted by pgisback

Probably should put me on ignore.

I think the Mods of the forum should put you on the permanent ignore list.

[jcardstore]

Originally Posted by mfisher27

Since it's been confirmed there were emails sent that contained classified information (your "boys" confirmed this), then it would be a reasonable assumption that she doesn't know what is/isn't classified, no? How could the Secretary of State not know what is classified and what isn't? That's just as bad as having her own server.

I already said this exact same thing and it was ignored. I wouldn't expect any type of intelligent response back

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by mfisher27

Since it's been confirmed there were emails sent that contained classified information (your "boys" confirmed this), then it would be a reasonable assumption that she doesn't know what is/isn't classified, no? How could the Secretary of State not know what is classified and what isn't? That's just as bad as having her own server.

From what I heard (and it could be right or wrong, just what I heard) the "classified information" became classified after the fact. In other words it was not classified when it was in her personal email but it did become it after the fact so that was the issue. Please correct me if I am wrong (but show me where you found the information).

[TheHeel]

[jcardstore]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

From what I heard (and it could be right or wrong, just what I heard) the "classified information" became classified after the fact. In other words it was not classified when it was in her personal email but it did become it after the fact so that was the issue. Please correct me if I am wrong (but show me where you found the information).

The FBI press release said that there was classified info at the time it was sent.

[Timmay]

Originally Posted by Timmay

Ok jdandns, Just the email scandal, clear and concise facts.

The Washington Post, of all places, found that not only did Hillary Clinton send and receive classified material on her unsecured email server as Secretary of State, she wrote dozens of classified emails herself.

To understand the implications of this revelation, let’s rewind the clock to early last year, when Clinton first addressed her private email controversy at a press conference held in the United Nations building.

A reporter asked Clinton whether she was “ever specifically briefed on the security implications of using your own email server and using your personal address to email with the president?”

Her answer was emphatic: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

Then she went on: “I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

The first claim had been proved false long ago, once the State Department started releasing what would end up being 2,093 of Clinton’s emails that it said contained classified material.

Once those emails started emerging, Clinton changed her story to say that she never “knowingly” sent or received classified information, because none of the messages were so marked. That excuse fell by the wayside when emails turned up containing information deemed “classified at birth.” Then several showed up that couldn’t be released at all because their classification rating was so high.

The Post’s latest revelations, however, are particularly damning. It found that three-quarters of the classified emails she sent were written by Clinton herself.

Saying she didn’t know the information was classified because it wasn’t marked makes no sense, since she was the one who would have been responsible for marking it in the first place.

And, since she claims that she was “well aware of the classification requirements,” she can’t now claim that she was ignorant of the nature of the information she was sending.

As this story has unfolded over the past year, Clinton has tried to brush it aside as a partisan witch hunt. When that didn’t wash, she tried to blame the State Department for “over classifying” information, or charged that it was just the result of interagency squabbles.

Clinton also tried to smear the inspectors general for State and the intelligence community, both of whom were appointed by President Obama.

But what she has never done is admit the truth. Namely, that she set up her private email account as a way to shield her communications from public scrutiny, a tactic that worked for a time, and that in doing so she gave little thought to the national security implications.

Her cavalier attitude apparently set the tone for the department. The Post notes that top aid John Sullivan “was the most frequent author of classified emails,” and other top officials, Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, “authored dozens of such notes.”

Under the law, gross negligence in handling classified material is all that’s required for a government official to face criminal charges. At this point, is there anyone who can honestly say that Clinton wasn’t being grossly negligent?

Just because she wasn't charged doesn't mean she is innocent. At the very least she was exposed as an habitual liar who will say anything to suite her situation.

If there is any doubt just reread this and substitute Trump for Hillary. Would you feel the same?

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

From what I heard (and it could be right or wrong, just what I heard) the "classified information" became classified after the fact. In other words it was not classified when it was in her personal email but it did become it after the fact so that was the issue. Please correct me if I am wrong (but show me where you found the information).

All verified.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by jcardstore

The FBI press release said that there was classified info at the time it was sent.

Do you have a link to said press release? I would like to read it and I can't seem to find it.

[jcardstore]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Do you have a link to said press release? I would like to read it and I can't seem to find it.

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pr...-e-mail-system

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by jcardstore

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pr...-e-mail-system

Thank you.

[jcardstore]

Originally Posted by jewcer2k5

Thank you.

Sure thing. It's much better being able to go back to civil posts. I think the other guy finally went to sleep

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by JohnRyno

America needs to bring back the Duel. The windbag arguments in this thread would be so much more entertaining if someone got jacked with a musket pellet at the end.

Something, something, something, you're shooting with a bb gun and I'm carrying an anti-tank howitzer!

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by cruiserdaddy7

My point being, you will cast votes for mayor and council members that are bankrupting the city with terrible decisions. I wouldn't point the finger when you are personally voting for people doing the same in your own municipality.

what do you mean? I can finger wag, because the people i would vote for wouldn't give a tax cut to the top tax brackets and cut taxes on businesses and let it ride for years despite the overwhelming evidence that it's killing the budget.

Originally Posted by Ray27Ray52

I often wonder why there are no term limits on members of Congress. It seems like an absolute no brainer. Being a public servant isn't supposed to be a near lifetime job. Has the subject even been broached recently?

term limits would be nice for sure. them bums have been milking us for quite a while.

Originally Posted by JosieD

It has improved over the years. Thank you, President Obama!

My son has a winter birthday and ALWAYS wants to have his party there. Every. single. year. There isn't a bar at the ones in PA like other states that don't adhere to 1880 alcohol laws. Anyway, they have wings now. I want to try them. Have you?

having worked at a CEC in the kitchen years ago, i will say that the pizza isn't half bad. the wings, however, are your standard fare you'd get at any pizza place (like Dominos, pizza hut, etc.)

[TASS]

I'm not even going to waste my team and read anymore than I have to in this thread so I have no idea weather or not this has been mentioned, but thought these were some pretty funny comments made by Mark Cuban, LOL



Trump's biggest debate fear is that @HillaryClinton will make up an acronym for a non-existent agency & DJT will respond thinking it's real," the owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks and star of ABC's "Shark Tank" tweeted.

"Im going to go out on a limb and say that @realDonaldTrump will do everything possible not to debate @HillaryClinton," he wrote just beforehand.

Trump has had difficulty showing his knowledge of topics during Republican primary debates earlier in the election cycle, such as when he seemed to stumble when asked about the nuclear triad.

In an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, Trump also conflated the Quds — the Iranian Revolutionary Guards — with the Kurds. In the same September interview, Trump could not differentiate between Hamas and Hezbollah, two of the chief adversaries of Israel.

Not really much of a Cuban follower but could seriously see this happening, and he's definitely trying to get a rise out of Trump which based on his incessant tweeting is really not that difficult.

[jarrodsalas]

Questions are predetermined. To think that Trump will back out of debates is ridiculous. Somebody else in this thread is saying the same thing over and over again. He will do just fine.

[xavieronly1]

I don't know about you guys... I just can't wait for the presidential debates. It is a must-watch TV.

[Clarka3]

Originally Posted by jarrodsalas

Questions are predetermined. To think that Trump will back out of debates is ridiculous. Somebody else in this thread is saying the same thing over and over again. He will do just fine.

it will be a toss up. if Donald can take over the format and really keep it away from policy he's not comfortable with, he'll kill. If HRC can push the discussion into actual political subjects, he'll get smoked.


at least early on. Trump needs to get some serious advisers that know their stuff to prep for the debate.

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

it will be a toss up. if Donald can take over the format and really keep it away from policy he's not comfortable with, he'll kill. If HRC can push the discussion into actual political subjects, he'll get smoked.


at least early on. Trump needs to get some serious advisers that know their stuff to prep for the debate.

I don't see how he will get smoked at all.

[pgisback]

First new poll out. Reuters has Clinton +5. Landslide is on.

[cruiserdaddy7]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

it will be a toss up. if Donald can take over the format and really keep it away from policy he's not comfortable with, he'll kill. If HRC can push the discussion into actual political subjects, he'll get smoked.


at least early on. Trump needs to get some serious advisers that know their stuff to prep for the debate.

To Trump's credit, he has far more knowledge and control than he did 6 months ago. Also, he's no longer trying to be seen amongst a crowd of 16 other people.

I think he can, and will tame down. Hillary does have an advantage since she flips flops on topics and simply lies. It's been shown in the past and is still true to this day.

[jcardstore]

Originally Posted by Clarka3

it will be a toss up. if Donald can take over the format and really keep it away from policy he's not comfortable with, he'll kill. If HRC can push the discussion into actual political subjects, he'll get smoked.


at least early on. Trump needs to get some serious advisers that know their stuff to prep for the debate.

This is pretty much how I see it. Hillary will absolutely smoke Trump if it's all about policy, especially foreign policy.

[cruiserdaddy7]

Originally Posted by pgisback

First new poll out. Reuters has Clinton +5. Landslide is on.

Polls mean nothing until we see a debate. I think we can both agree on that.