E-mail server thing looks bad for Hillary

Post Reply New Topic

Trump got so much primary support because his fan club turned out. Demographically speaking, most of his supporters are older people who'd be at tea party meetings otherwise - the young tend to avoid such politics like the plague.
Will trump get a larger percentage of the youth vote, than did Romney? Probably, but that might not be saying much. As for Trump getting a greater degree of the Latino vote - Trump can repeat over and over again that that's what's going to happen, but wishing for it doesn't make a thing true.
And sure, Clinton doesn't excite the youth to turn out, but that's what the President's endorsement is for, and Bernie's, if he's willing to let bygones be bygones, and put first the liberal ideology he knows is best for the country.

Oh, it's still there. And I concede that this thing with Clinton is just that - rich white privilege - otherwise, she'd be facing charges. Same as how that a$$hole affluenza kid got off, and how that piece of sh*t rich boy rapist got off with just six friggin' months (though the poor boy only eats his favorite foods now just to exist ). Hopefully, Trump's rich man status won't let him get away with that business college scam he was running.

Maybe where you live. In my neck of the woods, the independants I've encountered are younger people who have become sick of the two major parties, but are more often than not liberal.

Independents actually have - slightly - more favourable view of the Democrats than the GOP:




And the Democratic edge with independent voters seems to be increasing, as the 2nd graph demonstrates. Democrat-leaning independents thus appear to be in significant agreement with Democrats on political issues, while GOP-leaning independents appear to be diverging from GOP voters.

Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... ependents/

This kind of s**t goes on all the time. The only reason she isn't being prosecuted is because they would have to prosecute many many more.

I wish she would have just been honest and said "yep, I'm guilty as charged." I would have more respect for her. I don't like the fact that she lied I don't really care that much that she sent some emails she shouldn't have sent. The American public is smarter than this which is why I don't have a whole lot of respect for Clinton.

She should have given up a presidential run? And that would make you feel better?

Republicans have a less favorable view of the GOP themselves than Democrats do of their own party, there is a much bigger internal division and a lot of people that just sit outside the orbit of the party hating both sides. These people helped project Trump to victory in the primary, they are the people that rejected the Bush dynasty and neoconservatism. Trump is not really a conservative in any traditional sense, he is the rejection and rebuke of the brand. Democrats are much more lockstep, less internal divisions, the party bosses keep things under control for the most part and really Bernie is the first person to really test it that I can remember but Bernie isn't a Democrat either.

Hillary is not going to win independents, I'd put money on that. Obama struggled with independents in 2012, she is not going to do better as she is essentially facing an independent.

Yep. The former Tea Partiers and Republican libertarians don't like Trump already. Ever since the Tea Party got up and running (before the RNC pirated it), many Republicans have re-registered as unaffiliated even if they tend to vote Republican.

By the same token, the "progressive," "Occupy Wall Street" and other movementarian parts of the Democratic Party see it as only a means to an end, and have little interest in maintaining it as a viable party. About 30 percent of the moderate "DLC" Democrats left the party years ago; again, by re-registering as unaffiliated voters. These unaffiliated voters would likely find a Libertarian ticket to be preferable to either Hillary or Trump presidency.

Comey answer "no comment" to the question of whether of not there is an ungoing investigation into Clinton Foundation when being questioned by congress today...

Comey, at his Congressional hearing, today: Clinton was "extremely careless; I think she was negligent," but investigators did not find evidence that Clinton intended to do wrong with her email setup. He said they also determined it would have been inappropriate to charge her under a statute allowing for a prosecution based on "gross negligence."

Wait----wait----how does "extremely careless" and "gross negligence", differ? What, because they didn't find "intent" to do wrong? Gimme a break? Absolutely AMAZING!! There's been plenty of lawyers, all over the TV, talking about Comey's comments, and how his comments (Comey's), in his initial statement the other day, lead them to believe Comey had PLENTY of evidence to charge her.

Loretta Lynch is up, on Tuesday.

SOMEBODY needs to lose their job / post, on this!!

One of his questioners even said that he (the questioner) thought anybody else would've been in handcuffs:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-director-set-to-appear-before-congressional-committee-to-answer-questions-on-clinton-investigation/2016/07/07/eb43ec7e-43c1-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html

Comey on 8 Dec 1941:

Calls the 7th a date which will live in infamy.

Describes the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and elsewhere. Calls it unprovoked and dastardly.

Concludes by saying: nonetheless, we shall remain at peace …

You pretty much need an intent of wrongdoing to prosecute someone for this.

I don't know which law's violation was considered in the attempt to be prosecuted, but the federal Logan Act does require an "intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof[.]" To that extent, the content of the "correspondence or intercourse" as described in the act would likely influence an understanding of the intent under the "reasonable person" standard.

no you don't, like not at all

only Hillary can get away with saying "oh I didn't know you can't do that" even tho she did know and has told a thousand bold faced lies about it.

Here's another excerpt, from that article I posted earlier:

Republicans argued that Clinton knew she was skirting the rules, and late in the hearing, Chaffetz pointed to a 2011 email in which Clinton told an aide to turn a fax "into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

They (the FBI) have PROOF that she, KNOWINGLY, was accepting secure documents over NON-secure channels----how is that okay?????????----AND, if nothing else, she LIED and said, MANY TIMES, that she did NOT, knowingly, send or receive any documents that were classified at the time they were sent or received!! Comey said he couldn't "defend" ( I don't think he used that word) anything she said, in PUBLIC----only what she said to the FBI!! WHAT!?!?!?

Quite simple, actually. As the FBI Director explained in his congressional testimony, Hillary Clinton may not have been sophisticated enough to understand how the classification system works.