Democratic Election 2016 - Hillary Clinton Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Chingylol]

Hope they all check their local laws before doing so... in some areas taking a photo inside a polling station is illegal... Or maybe I don't want them to check the laws.

It is illegal, which is why they're doing it. The local news in my county posted an article about it, and it's grown to 1,000 comments of people like "I'M TAKING MY PIC ON TUESDAY VOTING IN THE BOOTH WITH THE AMERICA FLAG AND THE GOVERNMENT CAN COME KISS MY ASS!!!" etc etc.

I live in a red county unfortunately.

[Merkava]

I have read it. So has the FBI. Nobody has found any evidence she broke the law. Linking the law is NOT evidence that she broke the law genius. Maybe link your actual evidence or stop screaming in the wind.

You didn't read it. If you did, you would not have mentioned "classified information." Just because you got embarrassed on the internet is no reason to lash out at people.

[TrumpIsPresident]

Cunts.

/10char

Haha.

At the end of the day its only the middle class who will suffer under Clinton as they become the underclass in everything but name.

The wealthy will essentially remain wealthy as everything that caters to the wealth advantage will be maintained whereas socialist doctrine decrees that the middle class must merge with the underclass producing whatever the lowest common denominator results in.

The smug jackass in me thinks "good, serves them right" but the humanist thinks it sucks that so many people will have the most productive stage-setting years of their lives wasted.

[Cooper]

Oh, come off it. Jim Crow denied people the right to vote due to a shared characteristic.

And so does what you apparently support. You just happen to replace "skin color" with "intelligence". You propose the same methods (and justifications) that Literacy Test supporters used.

The purpose of voting is to express your opinion as to how the country should be run. If you don't understand how that country is run, or what the candidates stand for, your vote isn't actually communicating your opinion on this issue, in the first place.

It doesn't matter how ill-informed somebody is, they still get to express their opinion. You still don't get to tell people with the legal right to vote that they don't get to vote or that their vote doesn't count. That. Is. Disenfranchisement.

It doesn't matter if you happen to think they're too stupid to vote, they still get to have their vote, and have their vote counted. Anything else is disenfranchisement, and contrary to the principles of a free, democratic society.

If you think people are ignorant on the issues, the solution is to educate them, not to strip them of their vote.

And yeah; stripping people's right to vote because of a felony conviction is significantly worse than what I'm proposing. Here in Canada, felons not only can vote, they can vote while serving their sentences, in prison.

First of all, it's your opinion that it is "significantly worse." Second of all, it's irrelevant and a moral equivalency fallacy; even if denying felons the vote is "worse", that doesn't make enacting Jim Crow-like laws acceptable.

[Merkava]

You know Obama doesn't run the FBI, right?

I don't know. Do you know Obama's job title?

[Matchles]

Jason Chaffetz reunendorsing Trump in 3... 2... 1...

[Macaquerie]

It is illegal, which is why they're doing it. The local news in my county posted an article about it, and it's grown to like 1,000 comments of people like "I'M TAKING MY PIC ON TUESDAY VOTING IN THE BOOTH WITH THE AMERICA FLAG AND THE GOVERNMENT CAN COME KISS MY ASS!!!" etc etc.

At this point, the hipster thing to do is to be in favor of the establishment. #TrustTheProcess #StabilityBitches #ItsWorkedFor240YearsSoWhyShouldItSuddenlyStopWorkingNow

[Merkava]

Roflmao. You are adorable. Still no link to your evidence after multiple requests. Which is evidence you, sir, are full of shit. GL with the night classes!

My link that prosecutorial discretion exists? Google it.

- - - Updated - - -

Funny how you're not worried about how wikileaks got her emails though.

Did I say that I wasn't?

[Cooper]

You know Obama doesn't run the FBI, right?

Not directly, but it is part of the executive branch.

President appoints the Attorney General, who runs the Department of Justice, of which the FBI is part.

[Endus]

Show me that they're talking about the issue that we're discussing.

Wait, you're talking about some fictional other stuff that nobody else is discussing or claiming, that nobody else has noticed?

Because the rest of us are discussing the material the FBI was investigating for potential breaches, and they found none that were actionable.

I've showed you that the law is written clearly, and what it says.

We've been debating the exact wording of the Espionage Act. Now you're saying that's not what this case is concerned with?

Oh, it definitely is. The problem is that you're not reading it properly, and are trying to mangle basic English to mean things it clearly does not.

[Matchles]

My link that prosecutorial discretion exists? Google it.

It does exist, though so does Comey's letter.

[O]ur judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.

...

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.

[alexw]

As a percentage its down quite far. Look the the numbers for the white voters.

Florida electorate -

All FL voters so far: 66.8% white 14.9% Hispanic 12.7% black

FL electorate is more diverse than 2012

https://twitter.com/steveschale/stat...50361439666177

[Merkava]

Wait, you're talking about some fictional other stuff that nobody else is discussing or claiming, that nobody else has noticed?

Because the rest of us are discussing the material the FBI was investigating for potential breaches, and they found none that were actionable.



Oh, it definitely is. The problem is that you're not reading it properly, and are trying to mangle basic English to mean things it clearly does not.

So now you acknowledge that we're back to talking about that?

I'm talking about what I introduced in my first post to you. If you didn't want to discuss it, that would have been the time to mention it.

- - - Updated - - -

Your link that she broke the law. I know English is hard for you. Try to keep up.

And I know looking stupid on the internet is embarrassing for you. You have my sympathies.


Infracted for flaming.

[Wyrt]

Well that settles that. The right can go back to hating the FBI because there is nothing to charge Hillary on.

I'm concerned they'll get whiplash from the sudden change of position. We should get some neck braces for them.

[Merkava]

It does exist, though so does Comey's letter.

I think Obama kinda put his finger on the scale at the least. Paul Callan said the same thing on CNN

JOHN BERMAN (HOST): Does the president commenting on it as much as he did -- he went only so far but said quite a bit -- does that prejudice the case?

PAUL CALLAN: I'm surprised that he went as far as he did. I certainly understand him supporting Hillary Clinton. She was his secretary of state. However, he's also the chief prosecutor in the country, as the president. He appoints the attorney general. He theoretically controls the Justice Department. Does it sound like he's sending a little message to the justice department that I don't think you should prosecute Hillary Clinton? It certainly sounds like that. He should have, I think, said “She was a great secretary of state. I can't imagine she would damage deliberately the interest of the United States, but I'm leaving it entirely in the hands of the Justice Department because I haven't read the e-mails.” And that's the other thing, he says none of these -- he says I would doubt that she'd damage national security. Did he read all of the emails involved? Or is he just talking off the cuff? We don't know because he left his statement vague.

[...]

BERMAN: Could the words be used in an actual trial? His words.

CALLAN: No. I think everything that he said would be inadmissible at trial and it’s really just kind of sending a subliminal message to the investigators.

BERMAN: The question is, is he putting the fingers on the scale of the investigation?

CALLAN: Yeah, I think so.

- - - Updated - - -

You certainly don't mind using them as "evidence".

I said that?

- - - Updated - - -

I guess you don't, because it's not FBI director.

See my reply to Matchles.

[Endus]

So now you acknowledge that we're back to talking about that?

I'm talking about what I introduced in my first post to you. If you didn't want to discuss it, that would have been the time to mention it.

Near as I can tell, that first post to me was here; http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post43148486

It was wrong, for the reasons I've underlined, then, and it remains wrong now. You're reading the text of the Espionage Act incorrectly, in ways that do not work in English grammar, to exclude the adverb "willfully" from apply to the second half of a sentence, when it pretty clearly applies to the whole sentence.

[Belize]

I'm concerned they'll get whiplash from the sudden change of position. We should get some neck braces for them.

Trumps neck is already bent backwards at an odd angle from calling the "Great US Generals that all love him" losers.

Wait.

What if... he was an owl person! AHAH! Hillary is a lizard, Trump is an Owl and all we need is an animal for Johnson and we'd have ourselves the starters for a Pokemon generation!

[Merkava]

Near as I can tell, that first post to me was here; http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post43148486

It was wrong, for the reasons I've underlined, then, and it remains wrong now. You're reading the text of the Espionage Act incorrectly, in ways that do not work in English grammar, to exclude the adverb "willfully" from apply to the second half of a sentence, when it pretty clearly applies to the whole sentence.

You keep referring to the fact that Hillary's emails didn't contain classified material. That's not necessary for the Espionage Act to apply. That's what I'm saying. For our discussion, the element of classified information is irrlevant.

Edit - and I still respectfully disagree on the interpretation of the law.

[Orbitus]

Maybe anyone interested can just go read Vox Day's blog, its really quite interesting if you want to learn about the alt-right

https://voxday.blogspot.com/

I like how even the first one, which of course is some ramblings of a random person, is labeled as a CONSPIRACY THEORY by even their blog standards.
This is at the bottom of the post by this VD person:

Labels: conspiracy, politics

So we can pretty much just throw it right out the window like everything else you fucking post.

[Cooper]

But it's the FBI that is saying they have nothing to charge Clinton with. If they recommended charges and the DOJ refused, you'd have a point.

There was no point to my statement other than that the FBI does, in fact, fall within Obama's realm of responsibility; it's not entirely true to say that he doesn't "run it." Yes, he doesn't run it directly, but as part of the executive branch he is still ultimately responsible for it.