American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems
Discussion
Jimbeaux said:
The statutes clearly state that intent is not even a consideration, if the rules are broken regarding emails, etc. then it is criminal. There is no dispute she crossed that line, even the State Dept. said so. Other public servants have gone away for far less than what we know she already did. Yet, she will skate, as the Clintons have always done. No wonder even polled Democrats say she is "un trustworthy".
There is an alternative theory - could it be that what she's being accused of is (in the main) froth and hype generated by her opponents? People have posted volumes of stuff on the Internet about what she has supposedly done wrong. To the average person it's hard to tell what is true and what isn't. Some have even posted various tinfoil hattery conspiracy theories about associates of hers being killed in mysterious circumstances, stuff which is fairly easy to disprove.Now the FBI do this sort of thing for a living. They will have access to all the evidence. They will have access to the best legal advice. Of ALL the people who have an interest in this case they are the ones best placed to judge whether or not she has committed a crime and whether she should be charged.
Surely a rational view would be that either she hasn't actually done anything wrong or, if she has, it was so trivial as to not actually need legal action?
I use the word rational but then I'm talking about a constituency where 29% of people think Obama is a muslim.....
Jimbeaux said:
As to Trump, his list shows Newt Gingrich, Chris Kritie, and Gov. Pence at the top. I suspect Gingrich first and Pence second on my probability list.
Had Rubio or Kasich been the nominee, HRC would have already lost this race IMO; they would have been better canidates.
maybe Rubio and Kasich have principles... Kasich would have been a far better proposition for the GOP than Trump but then you reap what you sow.....Had Rubio or Kasich been the nominee, HRC would have already lost this race IMO; they would have been better canidates.
Countdown said:
Jimbeaux said:
The statutes clearly state that intent is not even a consideration, if the rules are broken regarding emails, etc. then it is criminal. There is no dispute she crossed that line, even the State Dept. said so. Other public servants have gone away for far less than what we know she already did. Yet, she will skate, as the Clintons have always done. No wonder even polled Democrats say she is "un trustworthy".
There is an alternative theory - could it be that what she's being accused of is (in the main) froth and hype generated by her opponents? People have posted volumes of stuff on the Internet about what she has supposedly done wrong. To the average person it's hard to tell what is true and what isn't. Some have even posted various tinfoil hattery conspiracy theories about associates of hers being killed in mysterious circumstances, stuff which is fairly easy to disprove.Now the FBI do this sort of thing for a living. They will have access to all the evidence. They will have access to the best legal advice. Of ALL the people who have an interest in this case they are the ones best placed to judge whether or not she has committed a crime and whether she should be charged.
Surely a rational view would be that either she hasn't actually done anything wrong or, if she has, it was so trivial as to not actually need legal action?
I use the word rational but then I'm talking about a constituency where 29% of people think Obama is a muslim.....
However, on top of the ill-advised Bill Clinton-A.G. tarmac meeting, HRC flies with Obama on Air Force One for a campaigne event today. Obama will not allow stink to rub off on him. I have total confidence in the FBI, however, I think they know when they are beaten and will not request indictment, despite her having broken the statutes according to even the State Dept. Countdown said:
Jimbeaux said:
As to Trump, his list shows Newt Gingrich, Chris Kritie, and Gov. Pence at the top. I suspect Gingrich first and Pence second on my probability list.
Had Rubio or Kasich been the nominee, HRC would have already lost this race IMO; they would have been better canidates.
maybe Rubio and Kasich have principles... Kasich would have been a far better proposition for the GOP than Trump but then you reap what you sow.....Had Rubio or Kasich been the nominee, HRC would have already lost this race IMO; they would have been better canidates.
scherzkeks said:
CanAm said:
Forgive me if this has been posted before, but I am reminded of the slogan reused in the French presidential elections some years ago, "Vote for the crook, not the Nazi".
Who is the "Nazi" in the present-day scenario? Regarding Clinton, curious to see if the stuff about Bill and Jeffery Epstein gets brought up. That could get quite ugly.
scherzkeks said:
Who is the "Nazi" in the present-day scenario?
Regarding Clinton, curious to see if the stuff about Bill and Jeffery Epstein gets brought up. That could get quite ugly.
It's Trump who has to worry about Epstein. You do know that there is a current federal rape case ongoing against Trump (and Epstein) for underage sex with a girl procured by Epstein? I'm sure nothing will come of it but this is a man (Trump) who was accused of rape by his own ex wife and who has a long history of demeaning women. He loves to boast about liking a "nice piece of ass", who's to say that his tastes don't extend to younger "ass"?Regarding Clinton, curious to see if the stuff about Bill and Jeffery Epstein gets brought up. That could get quite ugly.
Jimbeaux said:
As to Trump, his list shows Newt Gingrich, Chris Kritie, and Gov. Pence at the top. I suspect Gingrich first and Pence second on my probability list.
Had Rubio or Kasich been the nominee, HRC would have already lost this race IMO; they would have been better canidates.
I'm hoping he will pick Pence. Then Pence will be completely out of work after November. Pence is a religious bigot so he ticks that box and he's also scarily anti women's choice which ticks another. He's deeply unpopular in his home state which makes him desperate so he's going to be ar5elicking like crazy to get some a few minutes in the national spotlight before his career is completely done.Had Rubio or Kasich been the nominee, HRC would have already lost this race IMO; they would have been better canidates.
Newt? I can't believe anyone takes that seriously but it would be fun to see 2 big mouthed angry septuagenarian adulterers lying (literally) on the top of the GOP ticket.
Christie is damaged goods and has made himself look ridiculous in the past few months.
I like Kasich even though I don't agree with his policies and he's been smart enough to distance himself from Trump. He doesn't have the charisma for a national campaign though. Rubio gets flustered very easily and is basically lazy (worst attendance record in the Senate). Clinton would destroy him.
unrepentant said:
It's Trump who has to worry about Epstein.
Actually, it is an issue for both candidates. I'd also like to remind you that I find them both deplorable.http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/30/t...
Edited by scherzkeks on Tuesday 5th July 16:08
scherzkeks said:
unrepentant said:
It's Trump who has to worry about Epstein.
Actually, it is an issue for both candidates.http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/30/t...
Bill Clinton isn't running.
There is a FEDERAL RAPE CASE ongoing against Trump over his dealings with Epstein.
This is an issue for Trump. Sex scandals involving Bill don't even register anymore.
London424 said:
A press conference on now I'm reading on Twitter.
fbi recommending no charges against hillary . interesting as they state she has broken the law,unintentionally of couse, just carelessness .oh dear, more ammo for trump . can the americans not just start this process again without either trump or clinton ? surely a disaster in the making when either is elected ?
wc98 said:
London424 said:
A press conference on now I'm reading on Twitter.
fbi recommending no charges against hillary . interesting as they state she has broken the law,unintentionally of couse, just carelessness .oh dear, more ammo for trump . can the americans not just start this process again without either trump or clinton ? surely a disaster in the making when either is elected ?
whoami said:
wc98 said:
London424 said:
A press conference on now I'm reading on Twitter.
fbi recommending no charges against hillary . interesting as they state she has broken the law,unintentionally of couse, just carelessness .oh dear, more ammo for trump . can the americans not just start this process again without either trump or clinton ? surely a disaster in the making when either is elected ?
Just watched the FBI statement on the BBC. I really think this is going to damage HRC. Notwithstanding the lack of charges being brought against her, the fact that over 100 top secret e mails and further secret e mails were held on insecure servers, - less secure than even Gmail, and the fact that it it is clear from the position of the FBI that HRC or anybody in her position must have known that this was not appropriate not only calls into question HRCs judgement and honesty, it also plays to the growing narrative around HRC that she feels that the rules do not apply to her.
If Trump (shudder) plays this properly, and if the media allows it to gain traction, then this could be the slow acting poison that effectively loses the election for HRC.
If Trump (shudder) plays this properly, and if the media allows it to gain traction, then this could be the slow acting poison that effectively loses the election for HRC.
andymadmak said:
Just watched the FBI statement on the BBC. I really think this is going to damage HRC. Notwithstanding the lack of charges being brought against her, the fact that over 100 top secret e mails and further secret e mails were held on insecure servers, - less secure than even Gmail, and the fact that it it is clear from the position of the FBI that HRC or anybody in her position must have known that this was not appropriate not only calls into question HRCs judgement and honesty, it also plays to the growing narrative around HRC that she feels that the rules do not apply to her.
If Trump (shudder) plays this properly, and if the media allows it to gain traction, then this could be the slow acting poison that effectively loses the election for HRC.
I can only imagine the carnage this would cause if it were a Republican, especially Trump that was involved in this. We'd be able to hear the screams from the SJW's over here!If Trump (shudder) plays this properly, and if the media allows it to gain traction, then this could be the slow acting poison that effectively loses the election for HRC.
andymadmak said:
Just watched the FBI statement on the BBC. I really think this is going to damage HRC. Notwithstanding the lack of charges being brought against her, the fact that over 100 top secret e mails and further secret e mails were held on insecure servers
Yeah, because the general public really care about data security. 
If the best her opponents can come up with is that Hilary doesn't really pay much attention to IT best practices they are really clutching at straws.
boxxob said:
Fittster said:
Yeah, because the general public really care about data security.
If the best her opponents can come up with is that Hilary doesn't really pay much attention to IT best practices they are really clutching at straws.
I think even the 'general' pubic can understand that the mishandling of classified/sensitive material damages trust and brings the judgement of Billary in to question, at the very least. Whether this changes the opinion of people to affect votes is another matter. If the best her opponents can come up with is that Hilary doesn't really pay much attention to IT best practices they are really clutching at straws.
I sense this won't be the end of the revelations.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff