|
By no means do I suspect that Hillary will be indicted, nor do I particularly want that to happen. Still, I have to wonder if skeezy business of some variety has transpired at some point. If this is the case, would it not be beneficial to wait until after she wins the nomination to spring an indictment? That way the Dems have nobody to fall back on? I could imagine an indictment being rather damaging to a campaign, even if she never got convicted of anything afterwards. Am I just paranoid or is this something that could happen?
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:20 |
|
|
Solfrann posted:This will not stop the republicans from using this as reasons not to do anything once she's in office, and to keep pushing impeachment for her entire term. Yeah I agree with some others, you're reaching here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Solfrann posted:This will not stop the republicans from using this as reasons not to do anything once she's in office, and to keep pushing impeachment for her entire term. They were already going to spend at least 4 years just repeating Benghazi, this isn't actually going to make any difference. Also unless things have changed since I last paid attention, she hasn't actually done anything truly egregious in comparison to her State predecessors. Like the big, big difference is she went and had a private email server at her house. All totally idiotic and self inflicted, but nowhere near a national disgrace or criminal offense.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Anchor Wanker posted:By no means do I suspect that Hillary will be indicted, nor do I particularly want that to happen. Still, I have to wonder if skeezy business of some variety has transpired at some point. If this is the case, would it not be beneficial to wait until after she wins the nomination to spring an indictment? That way the Dems have nobody to fall back on? I could imagine an indictment being rather damaging to a campaign, even if she never got convicted of anything afterwards. The FBI or DOJ isn't waiting for Hillary to become the Democratic nominee what logic is this
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Gyges posted:All totally idiotic and self inflicted, but nowhere near a national disgrace or criminal offense. The saddest thing is just how boring and lame the email scandal is. God knows if there was anything actually damning in there it would be front page on every conservative news site and talked about on Fox News for hours a day. Instead it's just "Hey, how do I use the DVR to record Homeland? K thx -Hilldawg"
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Solfrann posted:This will not stop the republicans from using this as reasons not to do anything once she's in office, and to keep pushing impeachment for her entire term. Fortunately, this entirely made up reason to justify obstructionism isn't actually any worse than whatever other entirely made up reason they'd use in its absence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The modern primary system dates from 1972. I'd cite New Hampshire and 1952 as where the system started to come together, but the point remains that as we understand it the primary system outright didn't exist pre-WWII, so menino's question is kinda troublesome to answer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Gyges posted:They were already going to spend at least 4 years just repeating Benghazi, this isn't actually going to make any difference. The difference is in the development of cyber security guidelines. These did not exist in the early 2000's in any real form. Even now, the entire government is poorly executing cyber security and most branches are flopping and twitching on how to make it work. But the one thing that has been explicity clear in the last 10 years is "don't cross the streams".
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:I'd cite New Hampshire and 1952 as where the system started to come together, but the point remains that as we understand it the primary system outright didn't exist pre-WWII, so menino's question is kinda troublesome to answer. I thought the whole superdelegates thing on the Dem side didn't happen til 1981 (after the utter mess that was the 1980 election).
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Someone has to be paying Kasich to stay in at this point. There's no way he can possibly win, even with his idiot plan of splitting the vote just enough but not too much to ensure a brokered convention. Even if the rioting Ted Cruz and Donald Trump delegates somehow allowed the RNC to repeal the requirement that the nominee have won 8 primary contests, why in the gently caress would the convention then turn to Kasich? At that point they could nominate anyone else, up to and including the desiccated corpse of Reagan. There aren't enough seat belts to buckle for the insane acceleration needed for Team Kasich to pull that poo poo off. There's no telling what will happen at the convention - right now the winds are pointing towards the GOP establishment coalescing behind Cruz as the "anti-Trump" ticket but Cruz's delegate fuckery is pissing Trump off mightily and increasing the risk of Trump running as a third party candidate. However if the GOP establishment ratfucks Cruz too and instead goes behind Kasich, maybe Trump will be so disgusted he'll just quit the election altogether.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Oracle posted:I thought the whole superdelegates thing on the Dem side didn't happen til 1981 (after the utter mess that was the 1980 election). Yes because party leaders were concerned about unelectable candidates taking over the party because they did away with party leadership having a role after 1968 and got McGovern and Carter. Superdelegates are dumb but they also as of yet have not overturned the voters' choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Anchor Wanker posted:By no means do I suspect that Hillary will be indicted, nor do I particularly want that to happen. Still, I have to wonder if skeezy business of some variety has transpired at some point. If this is the case, would it not be beneficial to wait until after she wins the nomination to spring an indictment? That way the Dems have nobody to fall back on? I could imagine an indictment being rather damaging to a campaign, even if she never got convicted of anything afterwards. You're being paranoid. In fact, you are doing exactly what the GOP is trying to do - saying "Sure, there's no proof she's done anything wrong and we've spent literally tens of millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours investigating to find nothing more incriminating than not knowing how to operate a VCR, but darn it PEOPLE ARE TALKING so she must be shady". That is quite literally their objective, and the reason behind the 24/7 cacophony that's been going on for twenty-five years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:You're being paranoid. In fact, you are doing exactly what the GOP is trying to do - saying "Sure, there's no proof she's done anything wrong and we've spent literally tens of millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours investigating to find nothing more incriminating than not knowing how to operate a VCR, but darn it PEOPLE ARE TALKING so she must be shady". That is quite literally their objective, and the reason behind the 24/7 cacophony that's been going on for twenty-five years. Oh no, I don't suspect Hillary of wrongdoing. By skeezy business I was referring to something within the Doj or FBI. Like somebody convincing someone else to toss a BS indictment at her. I get it's pretty tin foil hat-ish but I dunno, I thought it might be worth asking about anyways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Anchor Wanker posted:Oh no, I don't suspect Hillary of wrongdoing. By skeezy business I was referring to something within the Doj or FBI. Like somebody convincing someone else to toss a BS indictment at her. I get it's pretty tin foil hat-ish but I dunno, I thought it might be worth asking about anyways. Filing spurious criminal charges against a Presidential nominee sounds like an excellent way to commit career suicide and spend the rest of your life in court defending defamation lawsuits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:The saddest thing is just how boring and lame the email scandal is. God knows if there was anything actually damning in there it would be front page on every conservative news site and talked about on Fox News for hours a day. I stopped taking it seriously the instant that the contents of her spam folder became headline news. Seeing the news media freak out about "ZOMG HILLARY CLINTON WAS PERSONALLY TARGETED BY RUSSIAN HAXX0RZ!!!!111!eleven!!", when the reporters themselves were likely the first human beings to be aware of those emails even existing, was the final nail in that particular coffin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Which is glorious because Cruz winning the nomination after getting fewer votes will violently (as in literal fights at the convention) destroy the party Why will there be fights at the convention when practically every Trump vote flips to Cruz on the second ballot thanks to moles like these in the delegates?  EDIT: Pretty sure Cruz gets the nom at this point. Trump needs more than 50%+1 because I bet he will have a number of faithless delegates (party rules be damned; you can be sure the party will gladly ignore their faithlessness because it was "for a good cause"), and that's BEFORE we get to the second ballot. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Apr 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:Filing spurious criminal charges against a Presidential nominee sounds like an excellent way to commit career suicide and spend the rest of your life in court defending defamation lawsuits. Or a great way to make millions of dollars through speaking fees, paid appearances on Fox News, and a GoFundMe
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
So that whole DC Madam story was a big ol' nothingburger, huh? Has the lawyer guy even said anything else lately?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:So that whole DC Madam story was a big ol' nothingburger, huh? Has the lawyer guy even said anything else lately? SCOTUS blocked the madam from releasing any info.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:So that whole DC Madam story was a big ol' nothingburger, huh? Has the lawyer guy even said anything else lately? I think he just wanted attention. He filed an appeal with Justice Thomas. When that's inevitably denied again, he'll probably threaten to release it and never actually do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
I really think getting screwed at the convention is exactly what Trump wants. He can bow out of the race without it being "his choice" and make a fortune off of interviews, book deals, etc. It's definitely a better option than losing by a landslide in the general, cause then he'd be 'A Loser." And Trump is not a loser if the GOP dicks him over, he's just the victim.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:SCOTUS blocked the madam from releasing any info. The Court isn't what stopped the madam from releasing info.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:The Court isn't what stopped the madam from releasing info. True. I'm just reporting the last info I know about it. Put quotes around "blocked" and there you go
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Person Dyslexic posted:I really think getting screwed at the convention is exactly what Trump wants. He can bow out of the race without it being "his choice" and make a fortune off of interviews, book deals, etc. It's definitely a better option than losing by a landslide in the general, cause then he'd be 'A Loser." And Trump is not a loser if the GOP dicks him over, he's just the victim. Also, if he makes it to the convention he can and there is a possibility he will sell the nomination back to the GOP. I mean yeah that's technically extortion... but I mean if that was brought to trial would I personally vote to convict?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
So to recap, her and her merry gang of idiots intentionally put classified information on a non-governmental server that was stored in her private residence. They also sent this information to/from private Blackberries, including while they were in foreign countries (because if there's one thing that's absolutely secure, its the wireless network in a foreign country). They got the classified information out into the unclass realm by pulling up classified documents on one SIPR or JWICS terminal and then typing the information onto an unclassified terminal, intentionally leaving out any classification markings that were present on the original document in an attempt to hide the fact that it was classified; this was done in at least once instance at the direct behest of Clinton. This classified information included, among other things, information from multiple IC SAPs as well as information that was protected by HCS (i.e., stuff that had the potential to put HUMINT sources at risk.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Was wondering if there had been anything suspicious about the DC madam's death, but after a bit of research it does seem pretty conclusively to have been a suicide. Either that or somebody is real fuckin' good at their job.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
Another Armyman25 post completely devoid of any real information. Bravo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:So to recap, her and her merry gang of idiots intentionally put classified information on a non-governmental server that was stored in her private residence. They also sent this information to/from private Blackberries, including while they were in foreign countries (because if there's one thing that's absolutely secure, its the wireless network in a foreign country). They got the classified information out into the unclass realm by pulling up classified documents on one SIPR or JWICS terminal and then typing the information onto an unclassified terminal, intentionally leaving out any classification markings that were present on the original document in an attempt to hide the fact that it was classified; this was done in at least once instance at the direct behest of Clinton. This classified information included, among other things, information from multiple IC SAPs as well as information that was protected by HCS (i.e., stuff that had the potential to put HUMINT sources at risk. There's not enough time in the day for me to detail how wrong you are on all of this. Go back to YCS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Was wondering if there had been anything suspicious about the DC madam's death, but after a bit of research it does seem pretty conclusively to have been a suicide. Either that or somebody is real fuckin' good at their job. If it was staged then at least we know the CIA wasn't involved. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Oh I thought that was Armyman's summation of that dumb wordpress article.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:So to recap, her and her merry gang of idiots intentionally put classified information on a non-governmental server that was stored in her private residence. They also sent this information to/from private Blackberries, including while they were in foreign countries (because if there's one thing that's absolutely secure, its the wireless network in a foreign country). They got the classified information out into the unclass realm by pulling up classified documents on one SIPR or JWICS terminal and then typing the information onto an unclassified terminal, intentionally leaving out any classification markings that were present on the original document in an attempt to hide the fact that it was classified; this was done in at least once instance at the direct behest of Clinton. This classified information included, among other things, information from multiple IC SAPs as well as information that was protected by HCS (i.e., stuff that had the potential to put HUMINT sources at risk. Stopped right there since that isn't correct. I read the rest after I quoted your bullshit. You're making a lot of leaps and outright errors but then filling it in with technical talk from your days in a SCIF to make it sound more impressive and damning as if you actually had a clever point to make. Really it just sounds stupid. Boon fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Apr 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:What if he mobilizes the Ohio NG in response to rioting due to a ratfucking of Trump. He then uses those troops to "persuade" the GOP at gunpoint or implied gunpoint to hand the nomination to the only candidate who can beat hillary in November™ The GOP still gets destroyed by in-fighting and Clinton then gets to spend the next several months playing attack ads showing the convention chaos including the nominee and Kaisch using the military to "calm the situation" and just coincidentally get the nomination. meristem posted:It has transpired that Obama has apparently already seen an advance copy of the entire next season of Game of Thrones. Finally grounds for impeachment? I hope he drops spoilers mid-conversation with the GOP leadership.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Person Dyslexic posted:I really think getting screwed at the convention is exactly what Trump wants. He can bow out of the race without it being "his choice" and make a fortune off of interviews, book deals, etc. It's definitely a better option than losing by a landslide in the general, cause then he'd be 'A Loser." And Trump is not a loser if the GOP dicks him over, he's just the victim. he definitely didn't want to make it this far at first. the only thing that explains why he's still in the race is ego
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:he definitely didn't want to make it this far at first. the only thing that explains why he's still in the race is ego I'm not sure why people say this. Like, what has given anyone that impression other than, "No way he can be that tone-deaf" Especially since we've learned that since the beginning, he's basically been driving this train. Is it so hard to believe that he could be authentic in his buffoonery?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure his only purpose at the start was trolling Jeb Bush.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Boon posted:I'm not sure why people say this. Like, what has given anyone that impression other than, "No way he can be that tone-deaf" http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/03/28/trump_super_pac_director_stephanie_cegielski_writes_letter_on_why_she_s.html quote:The former director of a pro-Donald Trump Super PAC officially defected from Team Trump on Monday with an essay on xoJane about how she lost faith in her candidate of choice. Stephanie Cegielski, a strategist and communications specialist, says she was brought in to run the Make America Great Again Super PAC last summer, but ultimately came to realize what everyone who hasn’t fallen under the Trump spell could sniff from the very beginning: Trump is wholly unprepared to be president and is only out for himself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:I'd cite New Hampshire and 1952 as where the system started to come together, but the point remains that as we understand it the primary system outright didn't exist pre-WWII, so menino's question is kinda troublesome to answer. Why don't we just elide the 'post WWII' part then...any good research on the primary/caucus system design and its relation to turnout and engagement?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Dexo posted:I'm pretty sure his only purpose at the start was trolling Jeb Bush.  Mission Accomplished.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/03/28/trump_super_pac_director_stephanie_cegielski_writes_letter_on_why_she_s.html Ah well, there we are then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:20 |
|
|
Boon posted:I'm not sure why people say this. Like, what has given anyone that impression other than, "No way he can be that tone-deaf" it doesn't make any sense for Trump to actually want to be president, he doesn't get anything from it and i believe he's too smart to want to do it (at first) out of sheer ego stroking. it makes a lot of sense for him to run, get some free press coverage and bulk up his public image while convincing a whole flock of rural rubes that he's a smart rich guy, then bow out with a respectable third place or whatever - but he struck the motherlode of populist resentment. now the question is if he's in over his head and can't figure out how to bow out while maintaining face or if it really got to his head and he's convinced himself he can save america
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 17:26
|
|