Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[fwc577]

Are there white cheetos?

https://www.walmart.com/ip/10900155?...&wl13=&veh=sem


They make all kinds of crazy cheetos. Around the Holiday's, you can even get cinnamon sugar ones which are fucking amazeballs.

[AndaliteBandit]

Damn, her campaign knows how to make ads.

[Venant]

What the actual fuck, the Clinton campaign is going so far as to actually write sermons to be delivered in churches?

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails...6106#efmABwADZ

This is just madness, and i'm pretty sure it violates the law in regard to guidelines for a church maintaining non-for-profit standing

Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one "which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."

https://www.irs.gov/uac/charities-churches-and-politics

[Seiklis]

What the actual fuck, the Clinton campaign is going so far as to actually write sermons to be delivered in churches?

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails...6106#efmABwADZ

This is just madness, and i'm pretty sure it violates the law in regard to guidelines for a church maintaining non-for-profit standing


https://www.irs.gov/uac/charities-churches-and-politics

Yea trust me, you don't want to open this door with what evangelical churches get away with

I have no issue going after them, but the cut would be much deeper for the Super Churches if you did

[Dextroden]

Yea trust me, you don't want to open this door with what evangelical churches get away with

I have no issue going after them, but the cut would be much deeper for the Super Churches if you did

It needs to be done. For the good of American politics in general, they need to be gone after and then it needs to be assured no religion gets to mettle.

[GennGreymane]

It needs to be done. For the good of American politics in general, they need to be gone after and then it needs to be assured no religion gets to mettle.

There goes the GOP plan.

[Venant]

Yea trust me, you don't want to open this door with what evangelical churches get away with

I have no issue going after them, but the cut would be much deeper for the Super Churches if you did

It needs to be done. For the good of American politics in general, they need to be gone after and then it needs to be assured no religion gets to mettle.

There is a difference between a church, as an individual entity making political statements, and a church literally having its sermon scripted directly by a political campaign. I agree that churches engaging in political preaching is wrong and in many cases violates the 501c rules, but this case in which sermons are written by a campaign is just so ludicrously over the top its impossible to draw an equivalency.

- - - Updated - - -

There goes the GOP plan.

As I said, its bad for churches to individual engage in this type of politics, but it is exponentially worse to have you sermons being literally written by a political campaign.

[TrumpIsPresident]

What the actual fuck, the Clinton campaign is going so far as to actually write sermons to be delivered in churches?

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails...6106#efmABwADZ

This is just madness, and i'm pretty sure it violates the law in regard to guidelines for a church maintaining non-for-profit standing

https://www.irs.gov/uac/charities-churches-and-politics

Rules don't apply to Democrats.

That's been clearly established.

[Belize]

Are there white cheetos?

They prefer caucasian cheetos, or as the other colors of cheetos call them, priviledged cheetos.

[Vanyali]

I'd note the email is fairly ambiguous (as are most of them..........) - it could mean a full sermon, or it could mean a specific quote from the campaign to churches, or a message inserted that has fuck-all to do with the entirety of the sermon. Why would a full sermon be "good for research"? And how would they push a FULL sermon to many minority churches and NO ONE notices?

[Spectral]

It needs to be done. For the good of American politics in general, they need to be gone after and then it needs to be assured no religion gets to mettle.

I'm in favor of simply treating these giant churches as the for-profit entities that they are, but I'm not sure what you mean when you say "no religion gets to mettle" - could you elaborate?

[fwc577]

Damn, her campaign knows how to make ads.

God damn, I need a fucking tissue.

[Wells]

Rules don't apply to Democrats.

That's been clearly established.

Haha now you people notice how nonsense the "no politics" rule is for churches.

[AndaliteBandit]

God damn, I need a fucking tissue.

My SIL was born deaf, so that one really hit home with my husband and his family. I don't often see him cry.

[Forogil]

I'd note the email is fairly ambiguous (as are most of them..........) - it could mean a full sermon, or it could mean a specific quote from the campaign to churches, or a message inserted that has fuck-all to do with the entirety of the sermon. Why would a full sermon be "good for research"? And how would they push a FULL sermon to many minority churches and NO ONE notices?

I guess this is the sermon that is being discussed (posted sept 14, sermon sept 13th):

https://medium.com/hillary-for-ameri...c96#.8jtop5oja

based on https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5815 "We can get it up on medium as soon as we have a transcript - standing by!", sent sept 13th
So, the secret story is a public sermon given by Hillary Clinton that is publicly available on the web.

[Garnier Fructis]

So, the secret story is a public sermon given by Hillary Clinton that is publicly available on the web.

So more mundane shit that's got everyone's panties in a twist.

[TITAN308]

So I haven't actually read this thread in quite some time.

Out of all the emails coming out, has anyone here who is Democrat actually said "Thats fucked up" to any of them? Even one? Or are every last one of them explainable without reasonable doubt?

[I Push Buttons]

So I haven't actually read this thread in quite some time.

Out of all the emails coming out, has anyone here who is Democrat actually said "Thats fucked up" to any of them? Even one? Or are every last one of them explainable without reasonable doubt?

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/425

This one. He should own up to his feelings towards his colleague.

[Forogil]

So more mundane shit that's got everyone's panties in a twist.

Exactly - because actually figuring out what an e-mail refers takes a couple of minutes of investigation:
* Searching wikileaks for other mails related to the sermon (6 in total) - and failing to find the sermon itself
* Figuring out that 'medium' is a web-publishing platform (Wikipedia is a reliable source)
* Finding the medium web-site and then the speech
* Glancing through it, to realize that it is parish Hillary is part of
An actual reporter should have done it a lot faster than me.

But allegations about some conspiracy takes no time.

[Garnier Fructis]

Exactly - because actually figuring out what an e-mail refers takes a couple of minutes of investigation:

On a previous wikileaks email dump, there was some outrage on this forum because an email showed Hillary calling an Arab guy a 'sand nigger.'

Except that if anyone spent the 3 seconds to click on the source and read it themselves, they very quickly realized that it was just a copy of an op-ed written by an Israeli guy, and that she didn't write any of it herself.

Just another example of failure to actually investigate the contents.