2016 USA Presidential election thread I: The warm-up

[Minions]

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails...0#searchresult

Wikileaks released 1000 Clinton emails.

Anyone bored enough to see if anything is interesting out of that?

It is nothing. They just sorted the emails released by the U.S. State Department.

[Krandor]

They should still be sitting on the 80 or so GBs swiped from the DNC, but this "release" is nothing.

[BerenTebogo]

yall still make Bentleys right

p. sure BMW does that now.

[Zealot]

http://www.worldstopexports.com/unit...s-top-exports/

[Gredival]

Mrs. Clinton would even schmooze differently than the past few presidents have. Not one to do business over golf or basketball, she would bring back the intimate style of former Presidents Ronald Reagan and Lyndon B. Johnson, negotiating over adult beverages. Picture a steady stream of senators, congressmen and other leaders raising a glass and talking policy in the Oval Office with her and her likely chief of staff, John D. Podesta, as her husband pops in with a quick thought or a disarming compliment.


....

Deeply confident that she would perform better as the president than as a political candidate, Mrs. Clinton wants to pursue a whole new approach at the White House [....] From policy goals and personnel to her instinct for patiently cultivating the enemy, Mrs. Clinton thinks she would be a better dealmaker than President Obama if she finds willing partners on the other side.

via the New York Times

[Zealot]

Obama would've been a hell of a dealmaker had he willing partners on the other side; that doesn't really say anything, NYT.

[Dantrag]

I bet bill wishes he got this much head:

Obama would've been a hell of a dealmaker had he willing partners on the other side; that doesn't really say anything, NYT.

Isn't that the case with... every political figure... ever?

[Zealot]

FDR got a lot done just by forcing it through, but he had WWII going on.

[Gredival]

Obama would've been a hell of a dealmaker had he willing partners on the other side; that doesn't really say anything, NYT.

Actually it's a point about methodology. Clinton is old school and wants to be cutting deals person to person, wine-and-dine the opposition over cigars. It's different from how Obama tried to negotiate and compromise by offering concessions, but didn't really have sit-downs with McConnell or Boener to do it.

In other words, it's not about policy it's about personality. Make the politicians feel powerful, like well politicians, instead of trying to hold them accountable and assuming they will act responsibly when you offer fair compromises in the public eye.

[Gredival]

FDR got a lot done just by forcing it through, but he had WWII going on.

Well LBJ also just straight up harassed people into doing what he wanted.

[Zealot]

Well LBJ also just straight up harassed people into doing what he wanted.

Yeah but LBJ could literally beat you to death with his wang.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Gredival]

FBI press conference. 110 emails with classified info on server. No evidence Clinton or colleagues intended to violate laws but they were "careless." Notes that the "security culture of the State Department" was "generally lacking"

FBI will refer case to DoJ who will make decision regarding prosecution.

This seems like a way for the FBI to appear neutral by basically not deciding to prosecute, but make it look like underhanded (or in Trump's words, rigged) when the DoJ doesn't go forward.

[Krandor]

Being careless isn't a defense but let's ignore all these times she was careless.

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

So yup, anyone but Hillary would be charged.

[Gredival]

I don't think anyone has ever tried to argue that what she did wasn't careless.

"To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."

So yup, anyone but Hillary would be charged.

No, what they are deciding now is criminal repercussions, which is entirely different from internal security and administration sanctions.

So there's no question that a normal employee would be hit much harder for this than anyone high in a chain of command in the respect they would lose their job, she's not a rank-and-file worker who gets fired. The question is whether or not what she did is sufficiently "criminal" enough to merit prosecution for someone in a similar position, which seems exceedingly untrue when you look at how Petraeus was only charged with "mishandling" classified info when he knowingly transmitted it.

[Salodin]

At the least she should lose her clearance though, just like every one else would. She can always reinstate it when she's POTUS.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

[Krandor]

I appreciate that even if he's not recommending indictment that Comey still reinforced that she's still extremely careless with classified material so I can continue to dislike her.

[archibaldcrane]

At the least she should lose her clearance though, just like every one else would. She can always reinstate it when she's POTUS.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Except her and Trump are already receiving national security briefings as the presumptive nominees, so she has to maintain her clearance.

[BerenTebogo]

I could be 100% wrong here but I believe that is a clearance that is inherent to the position, not the normal security clearance being otherwise discussed. Reason for this thinking is that Donald's previous financial history (bankruptcies and periods of intense debt that was turned around to wealth, etc) are big red flags for higher sec. clearance and can be reasons to be denied for.

Others who know more can correct me if I am wrong.

[ringthree]

I am curious if anyone knows more about campaign finance laws than I do and can any light to the fact that the Trump campaign sent solicitation e-mails to non-Americans? Isn't that illegal?

[Andalusian girls]

how did you nerds not lead with this

Comey said the FBI investigations into more than 30,000 emails — and others pieced together from data “fragments” — determined that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” The findings now go to the Justice Department.

0% chance she gets prosecuted.