Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[-Nurot]

Please link me where I excused Donald's sexual assaults or even compared him to Cosby, it's sad you need to lie to attack me, you should run for office.

He said Clinton, not Cosby, but it is a fitting comparison nonetheless. Saw this little nugget the other day as well.

[zenkai]

He said Clinton, not Cosby, but it is a fitting comparison nonetheless. Saw this little nugget the other day as well.

LMAO!! That's a good one.

- - - Updated - - -

Cosby? Who the fuck said anything about Cosby? Let me ask you a question, when you are in public do you imagine guys in suits are out to get you? When women smile at you in public do you feel they are trying to rob you for a free meal? Do you imagine there are people hiding under your bed or hiding microphones in the lamp fixtures?

I had no idea why I wrote Cosby, it was probably because I was reading a story about him. But still, I never excused Trumps behavior, I said it's funny that people are pissed about what he said but they are not pissed at what Bill Clinton did. That's not hypocrisy that's pointing out others.

[Lenonis]

We don't know when it was set up. We don't know exactly what Huma means when she says "our office." They're clearly concerned about the appearance of her giving this speech as an announced candidate for President, and of course we don't know what the Moroccans got for their money. I don't think it's the smoking gun some on the right seem to think it is, but it raises some eyebrows.

For someone who argues rigorously that you cannot read into things without crystal clear context I'm surprised you are doing so here.

[Breccia]

For someone who argues rigorously that you cannot read into things without crystal clear context I'm surprised you are doing so here.

You're surprised by Merkava latching onto something that fits his narrative, even if it doesn't make sense?

[Lenonis]

You're surprised by Merkava latching onto something that fits his narrative, even if it doesn't make sense?

*shrug* If there is one thing Merkava has going it's a certain level of consistency in his recent postings.

[Merkava]

For someone who argues rigorously that you cannot read into things without crystal clear context I'm surprised you are doing so here.

But you're missing the point. I'm not reading into anything. My point is that there's uncertainty. Huma is either referring to "our office" as the office of Hillary the Secretary of State or the office of Hillary the candidate for President. And you simply don't know when the CGI in Morocco was arranged.

- - - Updated - - -

You're surprised by Merkava latching onto something that fits his narrative, even if it doesn't make sense?

1. What's my narrative in here?
2. Assuming you can articulate that, why doesn't it make sense?

[Lenonis]

But you're missing the point. I'm not reading into anything. My point is that there's uncertainty. Huma is either referring to "our office" as the office of Hillary the Secretary of State or the office of Hillary the candidate for President. And you simply don't know when the CGI in Morocco was arranged.

Let me just phrase it this way (and then I'll drop it because it's not really relevant). You do not appear to be holding this information to the same level of rigor you have in previous exchanges. And I'm honestly not sure why.

[Dsc]

I'll say it again, Hillary will not get the same numbers of minorities that Obama got. There is no enthusiasm for her, and that is why she is beating the woman drum. She needs white woman to have any hope, and I can't wait to see the final numbers even if Trump loses.
The pollsters keep telling us how badly Trump is doing with white women with college degrees (WWWCD). They always report this with a certain glee because it validates their set-in-stone notion that only really stupid people would support Trump. But if one has been paying attention for the last forty years, it is easy to see why that particular group would loathe Mr. Trump.

After all, since the late sixties, they have been taught that the "correct" attitudes toward race, class, and gender are all-important, above all else. Such attitudes are more important than the economy, than national security, more important than freedom or education. So of course they will vote against Trump with confidence that they are doing the right thing, the intellectually superior thing. Who cares about jobs, debt, or terrorism when they feel their gender is not being properly valued? Trump spoke crudely about women! That's it. He must not be elected. The future of the country be damned.
------------These WWWCD have double standards, the hypocrisy of which escapes them completely. Bill was a Democrat, and Trump is a nominal Republican. The other thing they learned in college was that you never, ever vote Republican.
I am a 41 year old college student, in an enviro sci program, in Whitey McCrackerstan.... the "kids" are stupid motherfuckers. They know Hillary is a crook, and are voting she or the Green Party.
BUT, there is one ray of hope. I have a 30 something black female from Milwaukee in my class... she's a Trump supporter, without me uttering a word. SHE gets it!.
I can only imagine the silent black vote Trump is going to get. These stupid white 20 something college kids not so much. but they'll be hung over/smoking pot.

The black mom is going to vote.

[Merkava]

Let me just phrase it this way (and then I'll drop it because it's not really relevant). You do not appear to be holding this information to the same level of rigor you have in previous exchanges. And I'm honestly not sure why.

My entire point is that there is uncertainty. I used the phrase "we don't know" 3 times in four sentences.

If your entire point is that I'm reading into something, why don't you actually tell me me what you think I'm reading into?

[Lenonis]

I'll say it again, Hillary will not get the same numbers of minorities that Obama got.

Which minorities do you mean?

Because you probably have a point when it comes to blacks, but Latinos are very motivated to vote against Trump and that could give her more support than Obama got with Latinos. LGBT folks may swing more her way as well. And women (although not technical a minority) -- no doubt Clinton will get more women voters than Obama did.

But even with all this the lack of enthusiasm on the Trump side is likely to dwarf the Clinton side. Trump's unfavorables are worse than Hillary's -- something that everyone likes to ignore when they talk about how disliked Hillary is.

[Deleted]

I'll say it again, Hillary will not get the same numbers of minorities that Obama got. There is no enthusiasm for her, and that is why she is beating the woman drum. She needs white woman to have any hope, and I can't wait to see the final numbers even if Trump loses.
The pollsters keep telling us how badly Trump is doing with white women with college degrees (WWWCD). They always report this with a certain glee because it validates their set-in-stone notion that only really stupid people would support Trump. But if one has been paying attention for the last forty years, it is easy to see why that particular group would loathe Mr. Trump.

After all, since the late sixties, they have been taught that the "correct" attitudes toward race, class, and gender are all-important, above all else. Such attitudes are more important than the economy, than national security, more important than freedom or education. So of course they will vote against Trump with confidence that they are doing the right thing, the intellectually superior thing. Who cares about jobs, debt, or terrorism when they feel their gender is not being properly valued? Trump spoke crudely about women! That's it. He must not be elected. The future of the country be damned.
------------These WWWCD have double standards, the hypocrisy of which escapes them completely. Bill was a Democrat, and Trump is a nominal Republican. The other thing they learned in college was that you never, ever vote Republican.
I am a 41 year old college student, in an enviro sci program, in Whitey McCrackerstan.... the "kids" are stupid motherfuckers. They know Hillary is a crook, and are voting she or the Green Party.
BUT, there is one ray of hope. I have a 30 something black female from Milwaukee in my class... she's a Trump supporter, without me uttering a word. SHE gets it!.
I can only imagine the silent black vote Trump is going to get. These stupid white 20 something college kids not so much. but they'll be hung over/smoking pot.

The black mom is going to vote.

You are right. She'll get more. Going by the polls for the past year, over 85% of the minorities are voting for Hillary.

They don't care whether Hillary is a crook, nobody but the mental basket of deplorables care about it, and you know why?

Because an elected crook is still better than an elected pig.

- - - Updated - - -

Which minorities do you mean?

Because you probably have a point when it comes to blacks, but Latinos are very motivated to vote against Trump and that could give her more support than Obama got with Latinos. LGBT folks may swing more her way as well. And women (although not technical a minority) -- no doubt Clinton will get more women voters than Obama did.

But even with all this the lack of enthusiasm on the Trump side is likely to dwarf the Clinton side. Trump's unfavorables are worse than Hillary's -- something that everyone likes to ignore when they talk about how disliked Hillary is.

Even with all the wikileaks drama surrounding Hillary, she's close to being tied, or is tied or is winning in nearly all American states.

Give or take a few more weeks of Trump's crying and insults to everyone, she'll probably win by a monster score.

Going by the current simulation, she's passing obama's insane victories over republican candidates.

[Lenonis]

Going by the current simulation, she's passing obama's insane victories over republican candidates.

I have no doubt Hillary is just bursting with glee that she ended up facing Trump. I would imagine she's aware of how difficult it would have been to beat a more traditional, more moderate, less controversial candidate.

The main question is going to end up if Hillary can do enough in 4 years to have a good chance at re-election.

[jakeic]

I have no doubt Hillary is just bursting with glee that she ended up facing Trump. I would imagine she's aware of how difficult it would have been to beat a more traditional, more moderate, less controversial candidate.

The main question is going to end up if Hillary can do enough in 4 years to have a good chance at re-election.

Ah, the more moderate, less controversial republican as rare and majestic as the unicorn.

[The Emperor]

As a Russian I'm actually kinda happy and excited that Clinton s gonna be the next POTUS. Her self righteous attitude, her disregard of people below her, her careless handling of confidential infos, her soft character(and yeah, I can see through that incoherence when she was talking tough, her eyes were full of fear, she maybe a bit bloodthirsty, sitting 1000 miles away from Libyan civil war and cheering gleefully that Gaddafi died, but when under direct pressure, such people usually falter and concede, while Trump looks more like a never give up kind of guy) and her poor health would make for a finest material for manipulation by us. Oh boy, bring that old lady on.

[cubby]

You're surprised by Merkava latching onto something that fits his narrative, even if it doesn't make sense?

He can't see past his own narrative - forever stuck in email land. He never got over Hillary being cleared of any wrong doing by the FBI.

- - - Updated - - -

I have no doubt Hillary is just bursting with glee that she ended up facing Trump. I would imagine she's aware of how difficult it would have been to beat a more traditional, more moderate, less controversial candidate.

The main question is going to end up if Hillary can do enough in 4 years to have a good chance at re-election.

With people so polarized against her (rightly or wrongly), a second term seems highly unlikely.

[Lenonis]

Ah, the more moderate, less controversial republican as rare and majestic as the unicorn.

Probably shouldn't have said moderate.

But Bush, Kasich, Rubio, Christie (excluding of course current legal woes) all would likely have been more challenging for Clinton.

Even Cruz (gak), Paul, Fiorina, Huckabee would likely have done better than Trump. Maybe.

It's hard to look at the list of primary contenders and find one who would have done worse than Trump. I'll go ahead and say Carson because he is so uncharismatic and says such stupid things that I think he'd have been at best an equal disaster for the GOP.

- - - Updated - - -

With people so polarized against her (rightly or wrongly), a second term seems highly unlikely.

You do realize that's why people said she'd never win this time around right?

All it'll take is a relatively smooth 4 years and the GOP picking another awful candidate to have her waltz into another 4 years. I'm not saying it'll be easy, but I also would argue it isn't unlikely. It's also another 4 years of the GOP's old white base to die off and be replaced by younger more minority voters in the electorate.

[cubby]

You do realize that's why people said she'd never win this time around right?

All it'll take is a relatively smooth 4 years and the GOP picking another awful candidate to have her waltz into another 4 years. I'm not saying it'll be easy, but I also would argue it isn't unlikely. It's also another 4 years of the GOP's old white base to die off and be replaced by younger more minority voters in the electorate.

Good point - and the GOP certainly did her a huge favor with their establishment train wreck. Definitely won't be easy, but I do see what you are saying. It would also take a lot of good deeds from her during the first 4 years without any more contrived controversies. Or real ones, for that matter.

[zenkai]

Hacked emails show Clinton pushed for charity meeting in Morocco



WASHINGTON -- Hacked emails reveal internal disagreement among top aides to Hillary Clinton about her determination to hold a Clinton Foundation summit in Morocco that later drew attention over its reliance on large financial pledges from foreign governments.

Clinton aide Huma Abedin bluntly wrote in the January 2015 email that “if HRC was not part of it, meeting was a non-starter” and then warned: “She created this mess and she knows it.”

It was an uncharacteristic remark from a confidant known for her abiding loyalty to Clinton over the years.

The hacked email was among more than 4,000 messages posted Thursday on the website of the WikiLeaks organization. The emails were stolen from the accounts of John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman.

In Wednesday’s final presidential debate, Donald Trump said he doubted the conclusion by U.S. intelligence officials that the Russian government is behind a string of recent targeted cyberattacks and subsequent leaks to influence the election.

“[Clinton] has no idea if it’s Russia, China or anybody else. Hillary, you have no idea. Our country has no idea,” Trump said on the debate stage.

Clinton sharply criticized the Republican nominee for using the stolen emails to attack her, as well as a past statement encouraging hackers to leak more.

“I find it deeply disturbing,” she said, adding that a number of U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russian hackers “at the highest levels of the Kremlin.”

In her email, Abedin told Podesta and current Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook that the lavish May 2015 meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative was based on a $12 million pledge from Moroccan King Mohammed VI to host the event.

“The King has personally committed approx. $12 million both for the endowment and to support the meeting,” Abedin wrote.

Clinton Foundation records do not show any direct pledge of funding from the king or government of Morocco to the charity. Commitments to the charity’s CGI program are agreements only to aid the program’s international projects, not to directly fund the Clinton Foundation itself.

The Clinton Foundation has faced ethical concerns before for its foreign government ties.

Officials at the charitable organization have said before that they would need to curb their donor policy if Hillary Clinton becomes president. Trump, Clinton’s general election opponent, has seized on the Clinton Foundation, alleging that Hillary Clinton and her aides gave megadonors special access while she was secretary of state.

Clinton was no longer serving as secretary of state at the time of the meeting in Marrakesh. Sponsor donations have sometimes been used to defray the costs of meetings for CGI, the foundation’s program of worldwide charity and development projects.

Politico has reported that the meeting was partly supported by a pledge of at least $1 million from OCP, a Moroccan phosphate export firm whose directors at the time included several top Moroccan government ministers, including the heads of the nation’s foreign affairs and interior ministries.

Among the other listed attendees were several corporate figures who had met with Clinton when she was secretary of state or were long-time political fundraisers.

They included entertainment magnate Haim Saban and his psychologist wife, Cheryl, who are bundlers for Clinton’s presidential campaign and met with her several times during her State Department tenure. Other philanthropic attendees included political backers Jay Snyder and Steven Wozencraft.

The internal email exchange between Abedin, Mook and Podesta reveals that there was internal disagreement ahead of time over Clinton’s push for the Moroccan meeting.

“Came up on our call with HRC. John flagged the same issues we discussed, Huma. HRC says she’s still considering,” Mook wrote.

The Clinton campaign was not immediately available to comment on the newly released WikiLeaks email.

In her message, Abedin said that Clinton’s personal appearance at the planned meeting was a key element in the Moroccan decision to host the event.

“The condition upon which the Moroccans agreed to host the meeting was her participation,” Abedin wrote. She added that “CGI also wasn’t pushing for a meeting in Morocco and it wasn’t their first choice.”

But days after OCP’s role in the Marrakesh meeting was publicized, Clinton decided not to attend. Her decision came despite a November 2014 email in which Abedin insisted “no matter what happens, she will be in Morocco hosting CGI on May 5-7, 2015. Her presence was a condition for the Moroccans to proceed so there is no going back on this.”

A week after the donation from OCP was revealed in April, the Clinton Foundation announced it was tightening its policy on donations from foreign governments, agreeing to allow financial gifts only from six nations that had previously supported the foundation’s health, poverty and climate change programs. Those nations were Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom.

In August, former President Bill Clinton said that if his wife is elected, the family’s foundation would no longer accept any donations from foreign governments or corporations, or from U.S. companies.

[Lenonis]

Already discussed. Hillary resigned as secretary of state in 2013 so the timeline of this doesn't add up if you are angling for a pay-for-play charge.

[Breccia]

Clinton was no longer serving as secretary of state at the time of the meeting in Marrakesh.

And she was not Secretary of State when the emails were sent. So assuming the email is even real, she got $12 million for charity for a speech? Awesome!

Emails were from Jan 2015. Clinton didn't announce running till April and many many people have said she was a poor choice, only losing to Trump and maybe Cruz -- and Trump hadn't announced his candidacy yet.

I'll remind those of you playing along at home, the Clinton Foundation remains a highest-rated charity spending 88% of its money at the destination. The Clintons themselves donate every year, six or seven figures, and the Foundation is under federal oversight (they all are) and have open tax records. Which, incidentally, don't have this guy's name on them. They do have the Kingdom of NORWAY on them, so apparently, Clinton is now beholden to pickled herring.

- - - Updated - - -

Already discussed. Hillary resigned as secretary of state in 2013 so the timeline of this doesn't add up if you are angling for a pay-for-play charge.

Don't you ninja my post when I'm finding Norwegian bribery dammit!