US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Cyborg322]

USA has Trump the UK Boris

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/phot...-trumps-hair#9



https://www.theguardian.com/politics...pictures#img-2

Is it something to do with the Hair ?


Thinking of getting one of these , think it will make me Rich and Famous ?


https://ibb.co/djvHa6

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by u crank

Depends what you mean by dirt. The Clinton email controversy is pretty much fact. As United States Secretary of State she used her family's private email server for official communications, rather than official State Department email accounts maintained on federal secure servers. That's a fact. Over 100 emails ere sent which contained classified information at the time they were sent. That's a fact. By her own admission this hurt her in the election. That's a fact as well.

Like AG Sessions said, there needs to be some base for accusations before special council can be appointed.

As for your "facts", do you have sources for them? You know, actual facts?

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Who sits in a glass house should not throw stones.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...at-hillary-did
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...illary-clinton
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/u...er-bannon.html

I hardly see how other peoples wrong doing excuses Mrs. Clinton. None of those people accepted the nomination to run for President. My point has been that this was one of a number of reasons why she lost. She is on the record blaming FBI Director James Comey, among others for her loss. The DNC was well aware of this but stuck with her. Kind of a comedy of errors. My point was that based just on that 'matter' alone she should not have been the Democratic nominee. End result ..Donald Trump.

[August]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Like AG Sessions said, there needs to be some base for accusations before special council can be appointed.

As for your "facts", do you have sources for them? You know, actual facts?

Sources!, really? What's next? Will we also need source links to claim that the Holocaust actually happened too?

How about an FBI official transcript, is that good enough for you?:

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

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.

[u crank]

@ August. Beat me to it.

There's some light reading there.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by u crank

[..] The DNC was well aware of this but stuck with her. Kind of a comedy of errors. My point was that based just on that 'matter' alone she should not have been the Democratic nominee. End result ..Donald Trump.

She should have refrained from becoming the candidate?
What about Trump's open racism, insults, or his lies too numerous to quote?
Just of all this ***** should never have been allowed to get even close to becoming a nominee. It seems people were just stunned and never thought this bigmouth made it. He appealed to the lowest instincts, and won. Mrs Clinton was much too intellectual.
They wanted a buffoon and they got it. End of story.

Now let's see how he puts her into jail because of eMails. Along with Jeb Bush, and his own advisors.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Catfish

What about Trump's open racism, insults, or his lies too numerous to quote?

Here we go again. Because one person is bad that doesn't make the other one good. I'm not defending Trump. I never have. I'm repeating myself but one of the main reasons that Trump is President is because the other candidate was so obviously flawed. There are other factors but that is one of them. People don't vote for people that they don't like or trust.

She should have refrained from becoming the candidate?

Um, yes. She should have. It was a mistake. it was a mistake for the DNC to let her become a candidate. It was a mistake for her to be careless with sensitive material while in a job like Secretary of State of the USA. And she is still a year later questioning the legitimacy of the election. Unbelievable. She has blamed her loss on everyone but herself. America dodge a bullet.

Mrs Clinton was much too intellectual.

If you are going to equate someones intellect with their moral character, you could be disappointed.

[vienna]

Two interesting first-hand takes on Roy Moore and his 'character':

I know Roy Moore. He’s always been a con artist. --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...=.eb1c91467c73

(Note: the above article has some interesting background information on the history of the US Baptist Church...)...


Roy Moore’s Disingenuous Defense --

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...enuous-defense


If this clown actually wins the Alabama US Senate seat, hopefully the GOP leadership in the Senate will follow-through on their rumblings to oust him at the earliest opportunity...










<O>

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by August

How about an FBI official transcript, is that good enough for you?:

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

Yes, that is good enough.

Did you read the following bit?

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

[..]

As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.

I know there will be intense public debate in the wake of this recommendation, as there was throughout this investigation. What I can assure the American people is that this investigation was done competently, honestly, and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear.

I wonder, why are some people here still so crazy about Hillary?

She doesn't matter anymore. She holds no power (let's be grateful), there won't be some magical return, she is of no importance whatsoever considering the current problems of the United States.

Ironically, those that yell "drain the swamp!" all the time seem to care more about partisan politics rather than actually draining that, by now, really murky swamp in Washington.

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by Catfish

She should have refrained from becoming the candidate?
What about Trump's open racism

Nobody ever called Trump a racist until he had the audacity to run against the anointed successor to Mr. "Change"


...and what's this about Trump losing support and Hillary winning the election? It's the winners that get to write the history, but go on keep trying.

[Catfish]

^ Trump not a racist? No one ever called Trump a racist? A bit delusional today?

One of hundreds of examples, long before his nomination
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...racism-w497876

Besides all that, just look at him and listen to what he says. Only someone who is deaf dumb and blind would not see what is there.

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by Catfish

A bit delusional today?

Speaking of delusions, let's face it Trump is North Vietnam to Hillary's USA

[August]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Yes, that is good enough.

Did you read the following bit?

Well I listened to the whole thing live but the funny thing is that the statute does not mention intent.

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

[Buddahaid]

Then the FBI considered it to be not gross negligence.