2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 07:32PM

Given the current spectre of terrorism that has overshadowed this election I am surprised that neither candidate has not suspended their campaigns and come together to propose policies that would help the American people. I get the we need a lively debate but not when the economic & security situation is this difficult.

AbusesToilets · 18-09-2016 07:37PM

The potential disruption of the electoral process by a foreign state is pretty incredible development. Totally unprecedented in its scale and possible implications.

What level of interference will be tolerated before counter action must be taken?

Brian? · 18-09-2016 07:59PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Given the current spectre of terrorism that has overshadowed this election I am surprised that neither candidate has not suspended their campaigns and come together to propose policies that would help the American people. I get the we need a lively debate but not when the economic & security situation is this difficult.

Neither of the candidates have any power to do anything yet, they'd be suspending their campaigns for nothing. Do you think Obama would welcome Trump into the White House and ask him advice on dealing with ISIS?

RobertKK · 18-09-2016 08:07PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

Seriously? Who are you trying to fool with that sort of outright fabrication? I hope it's just yourself, because everyone who isn't blinded by irrational hatred of Hillary Clinton is already aware of the objective and indisputable fact that Trump is vastly more dishonest than Clinton.

All I said is the lies of Hillary Clinton should also be jumped on in the same way Trump's lies should be.

You sound like you want her to be Bill who gets lots of free rides.

20Cent · 18-09-2016 08:09PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Given the current spectre of terrorism that has overshadowed this election I am surprised that neither candidate has not suspended their campaigns and come together to propose policies that would help the American people. I get the we need a lively debate but not when the economic & security situation is this difficult.

bad precedent to set if someone with a pressure cooker and some fertiliser can halt an election campaign.

Amerika · 18-09-2016 08:12PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Survey says...No

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/revisiting-clinton-and-classified-information/
http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/07/14/hillary-clinton-emails-congress-fact-check-jake-tapper-origwx-fy.cnn

So she's been found guilty of perjury in a court of law she has?

We would first need a Justice Department with some integrity to first bring some charges before that could happen. But with Obama's politically obsessed DOJ we knew that would never happen. Comely chickened out and created new law (intent) when he recommended no charges... After laying out a litany of reasons why Hillary should be charged with crimes.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 08:27PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Given the current spectre of terrorism that has overshadowed this election I am surprised that neither candidate has not suspended their campaigns and come together to propose policies that would help the American people. I get the we need a lively debate but not when the economic & security situation is this difficult.

Because "campaign suspension" is a nauseating move which voters don't respond positively to, either as a combination of it being an obvious political ploy (the exact opposite of not campaigning; like how Trump went to hand out toys, said he didn't want cameras there, and now actively uses the footage in commercials) or because it sends the message that they are giving up. Several politicians have tried this the last few elections, it didn't work out well.

http://www.usnews.com/news/campaign-2008/articles/2008/09/24/mccain-suspends-campaign-shocks-republicans

Note instead that Bernie Sanders, while campaigning, still participated in the Senate this last year on numerous occasions without making sycophantic grandiose statements saying "Look at me, doing my job!"

Suryavarman · 18-09-2016 08:37PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

No evidence, are you having a laugh? Does the Director of the FBI admitting she lied not count as truth in your book? Or the video of her giving said testimony?

I have no irrational hatred of her. It is founded on her well documented actions, most recently her handling of classified materials.

Actions which you studiously avoided answering questions about previously I might add.

Did Clinton and her staff transmit classified materials on an unsecure network?

Did Clinton allow people without clearances to view said classified materials?

I await you response to those questions with evidence of me being incorrect.

She didn't knowingly do any of that so there was no crime committed.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 08:38PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

She didn't knowingly do any of that so there was no crime committed.

At minimum, intent can't be proven.

AbusesToilets · 18-09-2016 08:42PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

She didn't knowingly do any of that so there was no crime committed.

So you are admitting that your claim I was incorrect in saying that Clinton's actions broke the law was wrong then?

The laws covering classified materials don't deal in intent.

Disgraceful decision by the DoJ to not pursue charges.

ebbsy · 18-09-2016 08:45PM

Doesn't matter. The name crooked Hillary has stuck so job done as far as Trump is concerned.

I had him at 3/1 I see his odds are now half that with PP.

B_Wayne · 18-09-2016 08:50PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

So you are admitting that your claim I was incorrect in saying that Clinton's actions broke the law was wrong then?

The laws covering classified materials don't deal in intent.

Disgraceful decision by the DoJ to not pursue charges.

We already discussed this, the aforementioned documents were not clearly labeled as confidential so there's a fair argument that Clinton was entirely unaware of the fact. So you can't really claim it's clear cut cause it simply isn't...

AbusesToilets · 18-09-2016 08:55PM

B_Wayne wrote: »

We already discussed this, the aforementioned documents were not clearly labeled as confidential so there's a fair argument that Clinton was entirely unaware of the fact. So you can't really claim it's clear cut cause it simply isn't...

The documents being on an unsecured network is the crime, their markings are a minor issue in comparison.

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 09:04PM

Overheal wrote: »

Because "campaign suspension" is a nauseating move which voters don't respond positively to, either as a combination of it being an obvious political ploy (the exact opposite of not campaigning; like how Trump went to hand out toys, said he didn't want cameras there, and now actively uses the footage in commercials) or because it sends the message that they are giving up. Several politicians have tried this the last few elections, it didn't work out well.

http://www.usnews.com/news/campaign-2008/articles/2008/09/24/mccain-suspends-campaign-shocks-republicans

Note instead that Bernie Sanders, while campaigning, still participated in the Senate this last year on numerous occasions without making sycophantic grandiose statements saying "Look at me, doing my job!"

Not if the two candidates stood together and showed they are both united on keeping America & the World Safe from economic and social harm. Neither side could gain from this move and it would have the benefit of making the current political climate improve greatly.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 09:06PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The documents being on an unsecured network is the crime, their markings are a minor issue in comparison.

All the same the application of the law in previous cases has been mixed. If it wasn't Hillary Clinton, there wouldn't be near this much concern.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 09:08PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Not if the two candidates stood together and showed they are both united on keeping America & the World Safe from economic and social harm. Neither side could gain from this move and it would have the benefit of making the current political climate improve greatly.

Never, that I am aware, has such a thing happened and I don't expect it to at this time either.

It is still the role of the current Congress and Administration to see to those matters.

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 09:12PM

Overheal wrote: »

Never, that I am aware, has such a thing happened and I don't expect it to at this time either.

It is still the role of the current Congress and Administration to see to those matters.

A state of emergency should have been held after the Orlando killings, never happened. People talk about the outcry of Islamic hatred across the world. Those in power neglected their role to safeguard the Muslim community by allowing terror sirens go off and not inform the public what the gvt is going to do to address the fear of repeated attacks.

AbusesToilets · 18-09-2016 09:16PM

Overheal wrote: »

All the same the application of the law in previous cases has been mixed. If it wasn't Hillary Clinton, there wouldn't be near this much concern.

Flipside being that if it wasn't Clinton, prosecution would have been pursued imo.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 09:21PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

A state of emergency should have been held after the Orlando killings, never happened. People talk about the outcry of Islamic hatred across the world. Those in power neglected their role to safeguard the Muslim community by allowing terror sirens go off and not inform the public what the gvt is going to do to address the fear of repeated attacks.

Federal law states when emergency powers can be enacted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emergencies_Act

Those powers are

Congress may authorize the government to call forth the militia to execute the laws, suppress an insurrection or repel an invasion.

Congress may authorize the government to suspend consideration of writs of habeas corpus "when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

Felony charges may be brought without presentment or grand jury indictment in cases arising "in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger."

A state government may engage in war without Congress's approval if "actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

I don't see what a national state of emergency would have accomplished for a shooting in Orlando, and why no such criticism is levied for similar shootings, such as Aurora Colorado and Newtown Connecticut. Oh right, it was a Muslim, so we have to lose our collective minds.

The Governor of Florida, Rick Scott, did declare a state of emergency locally for the city of Orlando. Seems like an appropriate, reactionary response. Wish I could see the guy do the same for the medical and water scandals he and his administration are criticized for. But that has little to do with the Presidential race so I digress.

http://www.centralfloridafuture.com/story/news/2016/06/12/gov-scott-declares-state-emergency-orlando/85791262/

The fact that you don't know this leads me to again suggest to you to actually pre-validate the things you say are actually true.

Suryavarman · 18-09-2016 09:23PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

So you are admitting that your claim I was incorrect in saying that Clinton's actions broke the law was wrong then?

The laws covering classified materials don't deal in intent.

Disgraceful decision by the DoJ to not pursue charges.

No, because her actions didn't break the law. Hence the lack of prosecution.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 09:26PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

No, because her actions didn't break the law. Hence the lack of prosecution.

I wouldn't be quick to say that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mo-brooks-hillary-clinton_us_5625053de4b0bce3470156eb

Pro Hoc Vice · 18-09-2016 09:33PM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The documents being on an unsecured network is the crime, their markings are a minor issue in comparison.

The markings are exactly the issue in a criminal case you know that but you lie to promote your own libertarian agenda. You know your candidate can't take votes from Trump so you attack the one they might abandon. Enjoy the racist you are helping to take the USA 50 years into the past hope you can sleep soundly.

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 09:36PM

Overheal wrote: »

Federal law states when emergency powers can be enacted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emergencies_Act

Those powers are

I don't see what a national state of emergency would have accomplished for a shooting in Orlando, and why no such criticism is levied for similar shootings, such as Aurora Colorado and Newtown Connecticut. Oh right, it was a Muslim, so we have to lose our collective minds.

The Governor of Florida, Rick Scott, did declare a state of emergency locally for the city of Orlando. Seems like an appropriate, reactionary response. Wish I could see the guy do the same for the medical and water scandals he and his administration are criticized for. But that has little to do with the Presidential race so I digress.

http://www.centralfloridafuture.com/story/news/2016/06/12/gov-scott-declares-state-emergency-orlando/85791262/

The fact that you don't know this leads me to again suggest to you to actually pre-validate the things you say are actually true.

The US is currently at war with ISIS and many of the perpetrators of the attacks in the American homeland are ISIS recruits. I would contend that is a strong case for calling for a National Emergency to combat all those who have links to Islamic Terrorist organizations that America is currently at war with.

K-9 · 18-09-2016 09:41PM

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

The markings are exactly the issue in a criminal case you know that but you lie to promote your own libertarian agenda. You know your candidate can't take votes from Trump so you attack the one they might abandon. Enjoy the racist you are helping to take the USA 50 years into the past hope you can sleep soundly.

Mod
Attack the post please, not the poster.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 09:44PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The US is currently at war with ISIS and many of the perpetrators of the attacks in the American homeland are ISIS recruits. I would contend that is a strong case for calling for a National Emergency to combat all those who have links to Islamic Terrorist organizations that America is currently at war with.

The FBI, CIA, NSA, USAF, USN, USMC, US Army, DHS, DOJ, and other tertiary services are already carrying out this mission, under the law (in most cases), with laws such as the USA Patriot Act and bases like Guantanamo, without the need for an activation of emergency powers.

What emergency powers would they require to do their job any quicker? The only alternative I could see was internment camps for brown people, which is not going to happen. Specifically, what more do you expect them to do? Please research your answer to make sure its not already being done..

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 09:51PM

Overheal wrote: »

The FBI, CIA, NSA, USAF, USN, USMC, US Army, DHS, DOJ, and other tertiary services are already carrying out this mission, under the law (in most cases), with laws such as the USA Patriot Act and bases like Guantanamo, without the need for an activation of emergency powers.

What emergency powers would they require to do their job any quicker? The only alternative I could see was internment camps for brown people, which is not going to happen. Specifically, what more do you expect them to do? Please research your answer to make sure its not already being done..

Clearly this is an absurdly shocking election campaign and the terrorists are taking advantage of the political environment that has emerged. That terrorist attack in Orlando should have concentrated those in positions of power to a common approach on eradicating terrorism in all its forms. Instead it is used to accuse one of the candidates of being a bigot.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 09:56PM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Clearly this is an absurdly shocking election campaign and the terrorists are taking advantage of the political environment that has emerged. That terrorist attack in Orlando should have concentrated those in positions of power to a common approach on eradicating terrorism in all its forms. Instead it is used to accuse one of the candidates of being a bigot.

Are you going to answer the question?

You raised the point that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton should come together on terrorism (and other issues) citing inadequate response to the Orlando shooting. What do you feel wasn't done that should have been done, and what do you feel should be done going forward that isn't already being done?

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 10:07PM

Overheal wrote: »

Are you going to answer the question?

You raised the point that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton should come together on terrorism (and other issues) citing inadequate response to the Orlando shooting. What do you feel wasn't done that should have been done, and what do you feel should be done going forward that isn't already being done?

As I said they should suspend their campaign even temporarily. Convene a press conference together and announce plans for their advisors to cooperate with security forces when it comes to matters relating to terrorism. At present Clinton is accusing Trump of inciting terror. She is pitting all responsibility for future attacks on him and he has already suffered reputational damages.

By convening joint press meeting it would prove to the public they see eye to eye on all matters relating to the safety of American civilians. It would have been a nice gesture if at the recent ceremonies Trump & Hillary were to have stood next to each other facing the flag. The current situations shows the gulf the two parties are at. Both candidates appealing very much to their own core voters.

Independents might not vote at all this election.

Overheal · 18-09-2016 10:10PM

That doesn't sound like anything that would improve in any way of substance our policy on terror that already exists. A joint press conference by two opposing candidates won't happen; all their advisers cooperate with the Pentagon already..

KingBrian2 · 18-09-2016 10:17PM

Overheal wrote: »

That doesn't sound like anything that would improve in any way of substance our policy on terror that already exists. A joint press conference by two opposing candidates won't happen; all their advisers cooperate with the Pentagon already..

The Trump camp is very dissatisfied with the safety of America and with good cause. Clinton by contrast does not recognize a terrorist threat when it occurs. Boston, Orlando, Nice, Paris, Brussels, Istanbul, Damascus & Baghdad. Americans are being targeted and the handiwork of the terrorists are everywhere to be seen.

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Comments