Just a hypothetical question here. With this gong show of an election it would not surprise me if things come out that would disqualify both the GOP and DEM candidates. Do the respective parties pick a new ticket or does the VP choice pick a ticket or the 2nd in primaries (Cruz and Sanders) get moved to lead on each respective ticket?
Interesting take, yeah that would be real messy. However, I think if they really had something concrete with criminal activity on Trump, it would have gotten out by now.
I thought about there might be some executive order Obama could issue to stay President until things got sorted..... Or indefinitely.
I was watching real time tonight and they were talking about the timing of the FBI announcement. A guest made a pretty good point that had the FBI said nothing now and waited instead for the election to be over then that looks like the FBI was trying to lessen the impact for Clinton. So they might just be taking the precautionary route. Still though, I don't see how the Anthony Weiner investigation should have anything to do with Clinton, and if there's nothing incriminating then they really shouldn't have brought it up.
It seems like there was significant internal pressure from inside the bureau to re-open the case. Many people who worked on it couldn't believe how sideways the investigation turned. For an organization that prides itself on nobody being above the Law, it was tough to deal with watching Hillary skate again with "dah I'm bad at the internet". Yes let her have nuke codes
You would have thought the Comey letter would have been extremely well received by the Trump cult. Strangely though that doesn't appear to be the case. In fact they seem to think it's a distraction technique to divert attention away from the Wikileaks stuff or something bigger that is going to be dropped. I don't know, this to me is clearly worse than anything we've seen from Wikileaks, but I'm not in the cult so I couldn't tell you why they think this is actually not a good thing.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
It seems like there was significant internal pressure from inside the bureau to re-open the case. Many people who worked on it couldn't believe how sideways the investigation turned. For an organization that prides itself on nobody being above the Law, it was tough to deal with watching Hillary skate again with "dah I'm bad at the internet". Yes let her have nuke codes
Im sorry but I am not aware of this. Can you please offer me some more info on these people and their statements.
Fair enough. I'm just trying to give a little difference of opinion to liven things up. The RA RA RA Hillary stick gets so tiring. Yay group hugs for everyone who supports Hillary, we're so virtuous and clever.
But by that logic why is there this thread even? I think the biggest issue Calgary has is not having a great right-winger, wouldn't you agree? I'm originally from the 403 BTW
Given trumps temperament Hillary is the better choice unless she is in jail or disqualified from holding office. If that happens Tim Kaine is a better choice than trump.
So unless you can make a case for why a Trump presidency will be better than a Hillary one. Something no one has succeeded in doing you really shouldn't be complaining about a Ra Ra Hillary thread.
Negatives:
-unbelievable unstable
-no experience
-can't work with people
-other world leaders except Putin hate him
-doesn't understand the job
-horrible understanding of foreign affairs
-doesn't understand immigration
-Xenophobic
-doesn't understand nuclear policy
-thinks he's smarter than the generals
-has absolutely no plans
-doesn't understand how government works
-is the candidate of the KKK
Etc, etc
The Following User Says Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
I say what Comey has done, and Trump and his hateful followers have done, and many of the Trump apologists on TV cable stations have done, is nothing less than McCarthyism at its worst. I say, as an attorney, that Comey, by writing this letter that he knew would be made public just 10 days before a presidential election, has acted so improperly and outside the boundaries of law and ethics that he should resign and, after investigation by legal ethical authorities and the Justice Department Office of Professional Responsibility, could be disbarred from law enforcement and the practice of law.
I say that Comey has a moral and ethical responsibility to disclose all the emails Clinton has demanded he disclose and hold a press conference to warn all against jumping to conclusions based on his fact-free letter and call out those who have done so. And apologize to the American people for his “extreme carelessness” in writing this letter without facts and without legal or ethical authority.
"James Comey fails to follow Justice Department rules yet again"
This letter not only violated Justice rules on commenting on ongoing investigations but also flew in the face of years of precedent about how to handle sensitive cases as Election Day nears.
Justice traditionally bends over backward to avoid taking any action that might be seen by the public as influencing an election, often declining to even take private steps that might become public in the 60 days leading up to an election. For an example, in one case of which I am aware, the FBI opened an investigation into a high-ranking public official shortly before an election but delayed sending any subpoenas until after the election for fear that they might leak and unfairly tarnish the official. Indeed, that investigation ultimately concluded with no charges.
Comey’s subordinates have argued through anonymous quotes to reporters that he felt compelled to update Congress because of his previous explanations to them. But that just exposes how ill-advised his earlier statements were. Furthermore, even if he felt compelled to update Congress at some point, he could have followed Justice guidelines and done so after the election.
Supporters of the FBI director also argue that he would have been criticized had he withheld this information until after the election. But he didn’t actually provide Congress or the public with any substantive information. Instead, he provided just enough detail to allow Republicans to make speculative charges about Clinton, but not enough to allow her to defend herself. In fact, in the hours since Comey’s letter was released, media outlets have reported often-contradictory details about what the FBI is actually examining, another inevitable result of his actions.
"National Security Justice officials warned FBI that Comey’s decision to update Congress was not consistent with department policy"
Senior Justice Department officials warned the FBI that Director James B. Comey’s decision to notify Congress about renewing the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server was not consistent with long-standing practices of the department, according to officials familiar with the discussions.
Comey told Justice Department officials that he intended to inform lawmakers of newly discovered emails. These officials told him the department’s position “that we don’t comment on an ongoing investigation. And we don’t take steps that will be viewed as influencing an election,” said one Justice Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the high-level conversations.
“Director Comey understood our position. He heard it from Justice leadership,” the official said. “It was conveyed to the FBI, and Comey made an independent decision to alert the Hill. He is operating independently of the Justice Department. And he knows it.”
I have been doing more research on Hillary Clinton, and now I think she is criminal.
I want to say Pro Trump things in this thread, but I am now afraid I will be Banned by Pro-Hillary Mods.
Alot of bullies in this thread, bullying Illuminaughty.
Please don't ban me by posting this.
Saying pro-Trump things won't get you banned. Insulting the moderators by saying they'll ban you because of a different position will get you banned, because moderators have better things to do than try to give you the benefit of the doubt while wading through your childish b.s.
Notice there's other adults in this thread that don't seem to worry about being banned. If you have to wonder if what you're doing will get you banned, you're doing it wrong.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
Negatives:
-unbelievable unstable
-no experience
-can't work with people
-other world leaders except Putin hate him
-doesn't understand the job
-horrible understanding of foreign affairs
-doesn't understand immigration
-Xenophobic
-doesn't understand nuclear policy
-thinks he's smarter than the generals
-has absolutely no plans
-doesn't understand how government works
-is the candidate of the KKK
Etc, etc
He's also a demagogue and an ignoramus.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
I have been doing more research on Hillary Clinton, and now I think she is criminal.
I want to say Pro Trump things in this thread, but I am now afraid I will be Banned by Pro-Hillary Mods.
Alot of bullies in this thread, bullying Illuminaughty.
Please don't ban me by posting this.
Care to champion the cause? Let's debate the merits of either candidate, so I can show you just how poorly informed you are.
Can I play? I hate to see you pick on the 98 pound weakling of the forum, so can I take his place. How about I take you out behind the woodshed and bitchslap the #### out you instead (with the mods permission of course)?
Might I suggest standard debate format with three statements on subjects of character, qualifications, and policies, with a rebuttal on each statement post, and a maximum of two rebuttals to the primary rebut. Does that meet your sensibilities? Since you state this is a Hillary Clinton fan club forum, that means I hold the affirmative position. You have the floor (if you have the sack) to make your case on Trump's character.
I have been doing more research on Hillary Clinton, and now I think she is criminal.
Do share! Do share! I'm dying to see this in-depth research! Can't wait to see what Alex Jones has to say on the subject.
Quote:
I want to say Pro Trump things in this thread, but I am now afraid I will be Banned by Pro-Hillary Mods.
Alot of bullies in this thread, bullying Illuminaughty.
Please don't ban me by posting this.
I have been doing more research on Hillary Clinton, and now I think she is criminal.
I want to say Pro Trump things in this thread, but I am now afraid I will be Banned by Pro-Hillary Mods.
Alot of bullies in this thread, bullying Illuminaughty.
Please don't ban me by posting this.
Worst post of the year?
Pretending you may get banned for being pro-Trump or accusing people of being bullies? Illuminanughty hasn't been banned yet, you think they will ban you for saying people are ganging up on him?
Do one of two things:
List you research in clear point form of each item all in one post that has led you to this conclusion and why you feels it makes her a crook for a debate to occur, and don't make a generic statement with no foundation. People then can debate your facts and research.
Or-
State you are pro trump and think Hillary is a crook, but expect people to react confused and post counter examples of how they think Trump is a criminal when you don't post why.
Grow up.
The Following User Says Thank You to Kavvy For This Useful Post:
Nothing wrong with debating and being apart of a discussion if you feel you're on the other side. But when you're trying to create conflict and act with a constant defensive/aggressive posting style you're disrupting the thread IMO.
The Following User Says Thank You to Drak For This Useful Post:
