[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Dotini]

Oh and I've already posted that link.

I extracted a direct quote from it because it supports my case and has a nifty photo. Thank you!

 

[Scaff]

I extracted a direct quote from it because it supports my case and has a nifty photo. Thank you!

We already have a conspiracy theory thread, this is not it.

 

[Dotini]

He can be fired. If the Democrats win control of the senate, there's a strong possibility of that happening based on his actions over the last few weeks ... or not, depending on how he plays his cards.

Good question, that of the Trump/FBI affect on the down ballot. Only another day or so to wait and we'll have the answer on this very critical question.

 

[ryzno]

On the basis of evidence that currently doesn't seem to exist.

If it did then she would have been charged.

 

[Sanji Himura]

On the basis of evidence that currently doesn't seem to exist.

If it did then she would have been charged.

Really? Then consider this, Abedin is a top Clinton aide, and Loretta Lynch was first appointed by Bill Clinton to serve as US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Lynch has a conflict of interest, which any competent attorney will capitalize on and get the charges dismissed. Comey knows this and is playing rather loud and loose with Clinton on the off chance that she is elected president. If she does, then Comey can turn over everything he has to Congress to impeach her.

 

[Scaff]

So you will have no problem with providing it then.

Really? Then consider this, Abedin is a top Clinton aide, and Loretta Lynch was first appointed by Bill Clinton to serve as US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Lynch has a conflict of interest, which any competent attorney will capitalize on and get the charges dismissed. Comey knows this and is playing rather loud and loose with Clinton on the off chance that she is elected president. If she does, then Comey can turn over everything he has to Congress to impeach her.

Which is speculation not evidence.

 

[Sanji Himura]

So you will have no problem with providing it then.

I would like to point out that this is also an opinion forum, we don't necessarily have to prove our opinions here as if they were news sources.

 

[Dotini]

I would emphasize the very last thing Comey wants to do is request an indictment, to charge her. First of all, Lynch would turn him down. Secondly, and most, most, most importantly, Obama could pardon her and indemnify her from further prosecution on the evidence. Comey is clever to slowly, patiently build an almighty, devastating case. And wait for Obama to leave office.

• 
  
• 

(Click to enlarge. He's having fun.)

 

[Scaff]

I would like to point out that this is also an opinion forum, we don't necessarily have to prove our opinions here as if they were news sources.

You opened the door by basically laughing in my face when I suggested that evidence doesn't appear to exist.

Don't act surprised when you are then asked the support such a position.

 

[McLaren]

It appears that the FBI are saying that the vast bulk of the emails were duplicates of ones they already had, which would be both quick and easy to weed out, certainly within the timescale involved (I've de-duped larger data-sets on my own in less time, with less resource).

https://www.wired.com/2016/11/yes-donald-trump-fbi-can-vet-650000-emails-eight-days/

That does however raise the question of why that wasn't done before announcing this in the first place?

Ah, alright. I saw Snowden's tweet this morning which basically summed up how it could be done in a couple sentences, but good to see the FBI explain it as well.

 

[Dotini]

So the question remains, why 8 days of Hillary twisting slowly, slowly in the wind?

Possible answers:
1) Accidental:Comey incompetent, befuddled, dithering, forgot about it, lost his car keys or password.
2) Deliberate: Comey enjoys removing wings from flies, having fun. Maybe helping Trump?

 

[Sanji Himura]

You opened the door by basically laughing in my face when I suggested that evidence doesn't appear to exist.

Don't act surprised when you are then asked the support such a position.

It's called a "Preponderance of the evidence". We naturally took a conclusion, Clinton not being charged in this case, and played war games. I certainly didn't laugh in your face, nor did I intend to. The last two pages were filled with nothing but absolute speculation based on what was available to the public. There is a 99.9% chance that we are wrong, but you can't fault us for publicly posting our thoughts about it and you turning around asking for proof that isn't there.

The point is, there is no telling what is going on in Comey's head, but the fact of the matter is that any investigator worth his salt knows that to take down a criminal enterprise, you have to build a case against the bottom people in the enterprise before you go after the higher ups. Otherwise, you will face a situation where the lower tiered people will succeed the higher ups and you are back at square one.

 

[Scaff]

It's called a "Preponderance of the evidence". We naturally took a conclusion, Clinton not being charged in this case, and played war games. I certainly didn't laugh in your face, nor did I intend to. The last two pages were filled with nothing but absolute speculation based on what was available to the public. There is a 99.9% chance that we are wrong, but you can't fault us for publicly posting our thoughts about it and you turning around asking for proof that isn't there.

The point is, there is no telling what is going on in Comey's head, but the fact of the matter is that any investigator worth his salt knows that to take down a criminal enterprise, you have to build a case against the bottom people in the enterprise before you go after the higher ups. Otherwise, you will face a situation where the lower tiered people will succeed the higher ups and you are back at square one.

So I will take that as a no then.

Your not able to provide anything that could substantiate such a position.

 

[Sanji Himura]

So I will take that as a no then.

Your not able to provide anything that could substantiate such a position.

No, we obviously can not. That doesn't mean that we can't express them. We are not trying to say that "The sky is red" as if it were fact. Nor are we trying to say that "The sky is green" as if it were an opinion based on facts. We were trying to explain why the sky is the color that it is based on the fact that "The sky is blue."

To make it relevant, we are not trying to present what we said as if it were fact nor are we trying to present it as if it were an opinion based on facts. We were trying to explain why X could be happening based on the fact that Hillary wasn't charged with a crime on two different investigations.

 

[Biggles]

No, we obviously can not. That doesn't mean that we can't express them. We are not trying to say that "The sky is red" as if it were fact. Nor are we trying to say that "The sky is green" as if it were an opinion based on facts. We were trying to explain why the sky is the color that it is based on the fact that "The sky is blue."

To make it relevant, we are not trying to present what we said as if it were fact nor are we trying to present it as if it were an opinion based on facts. We were trying to explain why X could be happening based on the fact that Hillary wasn't charged with a crime on two different investigations.

Good Lord.

 

[samurai8juice]

James Comey does not get enough credit.

First he says there's a chance Hillary has done wrong in new emails. Republicans rally behind his comments, and eventually the media does what the media does. Democrats begin to complain, calling upon any possible, somewhat reasonable thing they can to try to make anyone except for Hillary look bad, as these can be considered dire circumstances, and they need to protect their heir to Obama.

Now he says that she's cleared. Democrats kinda rally behind her and continue their idea that Hillary now has the Presidency locked, and Republicans go in the corner and pout, and continue the 'Hillary for Prison', etc. rhetoric.

And if you see the DOJ policy on elections and such, and how this close to an election you shouldn't do or say something that can affect the results; no matter what Comey says or does (or what he doesn't say or do), he affects the results.

 

[Scaff]

No, we obviously can not. That doesn't mean that we can't express them. We are not trying to say that "The sky is red" as if it were fact. Nor are we trying to say that "The sky is green" as if it were an opinion based on facts. We were trying to explain why the sky is the color that it is based on the fact that "The sky is blue."

To make it relevant, we are not trying to present what we said as if it were fact nor are we trying to present it as if it were an opinion based on facts. We were trying to explain why X could be happening based on the fact that Hillary wasn't charged with a crime on two different investigations.

Based on no evidence at all, so simply wild speculation.

Which still doesn't explain why my simple request for any evidence to support such speculation was greeted as if I had questioned the blindingly obvious.

To use your own metaphor, it was as if I had asked for evidence the sky is blue.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Based on no evidence at all, so simply wild speculation.

Which still doesn't explain why my simple request for any evidence to support such speculation was greeted as if I had questioned the blindingly obvious.

To use your own metaphor, it was as if I had asked for evidence the sky is blue.

The fact is that we don't have it, and will not have it until well after the election.

 

[killerjimbag]

He can be fired. If the Democrats win control of the senate, there's a strong possibility of that happening based on his actions over the last few weeks ... or not, depending on how he plays his cards. The point is Hoover had decades to consolidate his power at the FBI & collect dirt on politicians - Comey clearly isn't in a comparable position.

If Hillary fires him,think about the storm of controversy. Obama could fire him now. There is something brewing!

 

[Tornado]

You opened the door by basically laughing in my face when I suggested that evidence doesn't appear to exist.

That post wasn't from Sanji.

 

[McLaren]

Obama won't fire him because 1) he's already said he's not going to get involved & 2) he's on his way out anyway, so it's possibly something he doesn't want to end his term with.

And there's just as strong a chance of Trump wanting to get rid of him as well for "failing" to go after Hillary twice. Hillary will just want him gone for nearly costing her an election. Both candidates will likely do it secretly out of spite.

 

[Scaff]

The fact is that we don't have it, and will not have it until well after the election.

So you are continuing to assume it exists. Based on what?

That post wasn't from Sanji.

My bad, however the point still stands.

A reasonable request was greeted with derision and interestingly an utter inability to support the claims made.

 

[ryzno]

So you are continuing to assume it exists. Based on what?


My bad, however the point still stands.

A reasonable request was greeted with derision and interestingly and utter inability to support the claims made.

There is plenty of evidence out there and in this thread, Comey even said it during the grilling he got by Congress. Not much to be said about it really. That's why I found your comment hysterical.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Changing the subject completely, why do Americans vote on a Tuesday?

 

[Biggles]

Based on what?

That's easy: "many people are saying".

 

[Rage Racer]

"Putin is holding two papers. One is an order to assign Trump the US president. The other is the same for Hillary. He hasn't decided yet!".

 

[Scaff]

There is plenty of evidence out there and in this thread, Comey even said it during the grilling he got by Congress. Not much to be said about it really. That's why I found your comment hysterical.

Not sufficient to bring charges, so what do you know of that is sufficient to make the question laughable?

I've asked quite politely a number of times and yet none has been provided.

 

[BobK]

Dear American Friends,

Would you mind taking all necessary measures in order to prevent this man to access your Nuclear codes.

Sincerely,
Milouse

I must decline your request.

First of all, I would be just as concerned about HRC having access to them if not more so.

I do not want the current corrupt administration being replaced by one even more corrupt, which is what I see happening if Clinton wins.

 

[Dotini]

Form my perch it's starting to look like the election night will show Hillary with a winning margin, however slight. If so, the question will become what happens the following day? Will Trump not concede? Will he cry rigging? Will Trump's lawyers file for recounts, investigations of fraud and other charges? Will Trump quit politics and go back to business, or will he take on the mantle of movement leader and leader of the Republican party?

 

[Tornado]

One thing I've been kind of wondering about. If Trump was to win, wouldn't he need to divest himself from pretty much everything?