[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

The party nominees are named. Now who do you support?

  • Total voters
    278
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
How convenient that there happens to be a law that actually prevents the FBI from investigating a politician in the run-up to an election... you couldn't make this stuff up.
 
Way off topic but... I wonder if an Atheist could ever become President? These "Christians" ain't doing much to help America, and they don't act very Christian either.
 
ryzno
Way off topic but... I wonder if an Atheist could ever become President? These "Christians" ain't doing much to help America, and they don't act very Christian either.
Click to expand...
I think America is along way from excepting it, even when someone is clearly one they have to pretend they are not.
 
ryzno
Way off topic but... I wonder if an Atheist could ever become President? These "Christians" ain't doing much to help America, and they don't act very Christian either.
Click to expand...

I'm sure plenty of presidents and candidates are effectively practising atheists. Taking an hour out of your Sunday morning to 'attend' church is such a vote winner that it's a no-brainer to tick that box.
 
Dotini
The journalist of this WSJ article informs us of the internal FBI feud as well was the FBI/DOJ feud over the current HRC investigation.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/laptop-...to-hillary-clintons-private-server-1477854957
Click to expand...
No doubt Mr. Comey will be looking for a new job at some time in the near future.

I see a whole new way here to break the Clinton defenses here. If Huma has emails from Hillary that are pertinent to the investigation and at the same time didn't reveal that she had those emails to the F.B.I. at some point in the original investigation, it would seem to me that she's guilty of some kind of obstruction of justice or similar charge on a federal level. If that is the case, they now have leverage in the form of prosecutorial immunity as a carrot to dangle in front of Huma as a way of breaking through the Clinton wall of silence surrounding the inner goings on within the Clinton camp.

This really could blow the whole thing wide open. If Huma starts singing like a canary and telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, under oath, it'll be a real game changer. It's going to be an interesting 8 days;)
 
Touring Mars
How convenient that there happens to be a law that actually prevents the FBI from investigating a politician in the run-up to an election... you couldn't make this stuff up.
Click to expand...
If I've glanced over the headlines correctly, the law prohibits them from interfering in an election campaign?
If that's the case, would it not be interference if they chose not to investigate when, without the election, they would have investigated?
 
Touring Mars
How convenient that there happens to be a law that actually prevents the FBI from investigating a politician in the run-up to an election... you couldn't make this stuff up.
Click to expand...

Which is why people on both sides are pissed (as I said earlier) that this has been so public for Clinton, when it shouldn't have been. It's confusing because as a voter, I'd rather it be public because it brings into character a candidate even if they're innocent or guilty. It just shows they run risks that could be seen as law breaking and only after being investigated were borderline let's say. Kind of like the July ruling on all of this, the first time around.
 
S_Bridge
If I've glanced over the headlines correctly, the law prohibits them from interfering in an election campaign?
If that's the case, would it not be interference if they chose not to investigate when, without the election, they would have investigated?
Click to expand...
Exactly. The whole "interfering with the election" thing is just a smokescreen and scare tactic, attempting to bring Comey into line. That ship has sailed, unfortunately. Ironic how some of the top Dems were praising Comey during and after the earlier investigation into Clinton and have now reversed course completely.
 
Johnnypenso
No doubt Mr. Comey will be looking for a new job at some time in the near future.

I see a whole new way here to break the Clinton defenses here. If Huma has emails from Hillary that are pertinent to the investigation and at the same time didn't reveal that she had those emails to the F.B.I. at some point in the original investigation, it would seem to me that she's guilty of some kind of obstruction of justice or similar charge on a federal level. If that is the case, they now have leverage in the form of prosecutorial immunity as a carrot to dangle in front of Huma as a way of breaking through the Clinton wall of silence surrounding the inner goings on within the Clinton camp.

This really could blow the whole thing wide open. If Huma starts singing like a canary and telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, under oath, it'll be a real game changer. It's going to be an interesting 8 days;)
Click to expand...
However if Clinton wins, she will just site the Fifth and get a Pardon anyway.
 
mustafur
However if Clinton wins, she will just site the Fifth and get a Pardon anyway.
Click to expand...
Possible, which is probably why Comey brought this into the light of day now, instead of after the election. If enough information gets out as to the content of the emails, assuming there is something incriminating in there of course, then Clinton won't be able to cover it up so easily. If he waited until after the election and she won, you'd have to guess that we'd never have heard about this at all.
 
The thing is though, if the Clintons use the tactics of the 90s they will be ruined with modern media, the bought Mainstream media doesn't have the monopoly like it did back then so it can't be swept under the rug.
 
Johnnypenso
If Huma has emails from Hillary that are pertinent to the investigation and at the same time didn't reveal that she had those emails to the F.B.I. at some point in the original investigation, it would seem to me that she's guilty of some kind of obstruction of justice or similar charge on a federal level. If that is the case, they now have leverage in the form of prosecutorial immunity as a carrot to dangle in front of Huma as a way of breaking through the Clinton wall of silence surrounding the inner goings on within the Clinton camp.

This really could blow the whole thing wide open. If Huma starts singing like a canary and telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, under oath, it'll be a real game changer. It's going to be an interesting 8 days;)
Click to expand...
Yes.
Supposedly Abedin had previously testified under oath that there were no other devices upon which HRC's emails were stored. Then the FBI found the one in the Weiner case. Oops, that would seem to leave Huma open to a perjury charge.
 
This race just keeps on giving.

05-daily-gifdump-86.gif
 
Indeed. Seen from a distance it would be purely entertaining, but the USA, as a country, is far too important and powerful for anyone anywhere to dismiss this tragicomedy as irrelevant.

Hearing the news and reading this thread I get a NASCAR feeling about all this. I think there's a serious chance we might be heading for a "big one".

Back to reading status now ...
 
The Hatch Act of 1939, officially An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities, is a United States federal law whose main provision prohibits employees in the executive branch of the federal government, except the president, vice-president, and certain designated high-level officials of that branch, from engaging in some forms of political activity.

Source: Wikipedia

This isn't political. This was a well-timed moved for the FBI to save face. In fact, they were punished by the DOJ in the way of removing agents from the Clinton Foundation investigation in the process of this announcement.
 
Dennisch
This race just keeps on giving
Click to expand...
Yeh, it's more exciting than F1 at the moment - there's just a 4 point gap between the two contenders with just two weeks of the season left. Hillary has had a couple of mechanical failures but Donald has had several spectacular failures including a DNF in Mexico. Once they were actually good friends, but now they are fierce rivals - even though it appears that they are in fact on the same team.
 
Touring Mars
Yeh, it's more exciting than F1 at the moment - there's just a 4 point gap between the two contenders with just two weeks of the season left. Hillary has had a couple of mechanical failures but Donald has had several spectacular failures including a DNF in Mexico. Once they were actually good friends, but now they are fierce rivals - even though it appears that they are in fact on the same team.
Click to expand...
For most of his life Donald was on the blue team, a liberal on the same team as Hill. But now, sensing opportunity, he's switched sides to the red team.
 
BobK
I'm afraid that article is behind a paywall. Could you give us a brief synopsis, or does the title say it all?
Click to expand...
Sadly, I too now hit the paywall, or I would post it in full. It's very long. The article is hot news on TV and reddit, so eventually it will come back.

But I read it in full. The short summary is yes, they are feuding internally in the FBI, and the FBI is feuding with the justice department. The DOJ appears to be highly partisan, with Lynch infamously meeting on the tarmac with Bill. The DOJ is clearly trying to stifle the investigation, and not fully succeeding. Thanks to Comey, maybe McCabe, and some but not all agents in the district offices. Corruption at the top of the administration, confusion below. As David Hobbs might say, "Its a clag-fest CYA-fest"

The journalist, Devlin Barrett, clearly has deep connections in the FBI.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that there is any confusion(if anything the confusion is at the top), conflict yes. Looks pretty simple. A lot of FBI guys decided that Clinton's first investigation should never have been abandoned. They had had enough, and started resigning. Comey had to act, he had to stop the sinking ship. Unfortunately he's now stuck.
 
Touring Mars
How convenient that there happens to be a law that actually prevents the FBI from investigating a politician in the run-up to an election... you couldn't make this stuff up.
Click to expand...

It is "convenient" (reads "imperative") for any Democracy to have such safeguards. They may looks strange at first glance, but Democracies goes better with than without if you think twice.
 
Milouse
It is "convenient" (reads "imperative") for any Democracy to have such safeguards. They may looks strange at first glance, but Democracies goes better with than without if you think twice.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not.

Transparency and justice are the corner stones of any democracy. If someone is doing things that are illegal or unethical, they don't get a free pass from investigations and prosecution just because "they are running for president." Politicians should not a be protected class; that makes them dictators.

We voters have a right to know everything about the people we are voting to put in office, whose job is to represent us, our needs, protect us, and to secure our place on a global scale.
 
There is an arrangement whereby the FBI will not overtly investigate candidates just prior to an election. Covertly is a different matter.
 
Dotini
Yes.
Supposedly Abedin had previously testified under oath that there were no other devices upon which HRC's emails were stored. Then the FBI found the one in the Weiner case. Oops, that would seem to leave Huma open to a perjury charge.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but she might be able to reasonably say that she wasn't aware that there were mail backups on there. Certainly she's claimed in the past to be unaware of what's on his laptop... :)
 
BobK
Something that shouldn't be overlooked here is there is no requirement whatsoever that the electors should be chosen as a result of any popular election whatsoever. In other words, the state Legislature could simply appoint such electors as it chooses, or empower the state governor to do so with their consent.
Click to expand...

That's why I don't understand why electors just vote what their state won. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, unless there are state laws regarding this as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Posts

Back