(June 9, 2016 at 11:52 am)Divinity Wrote:

(June 8, 2016 at 8:09 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Hilary looks like Professor Umbridge and Trump looks like an Oompa Loompa.

Just an observation.

Trump reminds me of Lord Voldemort.  Xenophobic.  "Going to build a wall, and make muggles pay for it."

The Mexicans think that he will.

(June 9, 2016 at 11:50 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(June 8, 2016 at 8:13 pm)Mermaid Wrote: Seriously. He needs to make his concession speech so we can all just move ON.

Alternatively, he needs to make sure that his supporters views are at least considered when it comes to the party platform, which is presumably why he is meeting with Obama today. He'll also probably make a deal with Clinton in regards to a position in her administration.

This is exactly what Clinton did back in 2008. She conceded to Obama 4 days after he secured enough delegates.

Well Clinton hasn't hit the magic number, and I don't think she'll do any favors for Bernie to make him want to work under her, or convince a large portion of his supporters to back her. The thing with Obama is that he's a corporatist establishment person too. Someone with similar views to her. Bernie and Hillary are not very similar in views.

Sanders just made a statement after meeting with Obama and Biden.  I don't have a problem with anything he said.  Unlike his supporters he knows it is over but he is going to go out on his own terms.  Fine.  He's earned that. 

He made it clear that his number one priority is making sure that Drumpf is defeated.

Also apparently Rowling found the Voldemort comparison a bit unfair. To Voldemort.

(June 9, 2016 at 11:52 am)Divinity Wrote:

(June 8, 2016 at 8:09 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Hilary looks like Professor Umbridge and Trump looks like an Oompa Loompa.

Just an observation.

Trump reminds me of Lord Voldemort.  Xenophobic.  "Going to build a wall, and make muggles pay for it."

The idea of a wall is stupid because of how expensive it would be. But in principle, as much as I dislike Trump, I see nothing wrong with keeping people from coming into the US illegally.

People from neighboring countries and from all over the world are welcome to move here, but they should do so legally, like everywhere else in the world. 

My immediate family and I migrated here from South America when I was 7 years old. A few years later, a big chunk of my extended family from my dad's side moved here as well, also from South America. We all did it legally. There's no reason why the law shouldn't apply to some people.

(June 7, 2016 at 2:36 pm)dyresand Wrote:

(June 7, 2016 at 1:49 pm)Tiberius Wrote: I'm sure you'll be aware of it if it happens. Don't get me wrong, I've said before that Clinton will likely be the nominee if things stand, however there's a difference between "likely nominee" and "actual nominee". For the Republicans it's a different story; they have no superdelegates so Trump is guaranteed the nomination on pledged delegates alone.

If this election has shown us anything though, it's that unlikely things can and sometimes will happen. Trump went from being a joke candidate to front-runner to presumptive nominee to edging within 4 points of Clinton in national polls. Clinton, as I think even you will admit, is a far from ideal candidate. She has numerous skeletons in her closet, is under investigation by the FBI, and has already flip-flopped on several issues.

Assuming the FBI investigation doesn't lead to an indictment, Clinton will likely become the Democratic nominee, and she'll have a decent chance against Trump. If the FBI do recommend indictment, that will be more ammo for Trump and the Republicans, and I predict Trump will win the election. In that scenario, I believe the best thing for the DNC would be to deny Clinton the nomination.

Don't forget Bernie again if Hillary goes to jail Bernie again has a higher chance of beating Trump.

I guess you missed the story where General Petraeus was found to have given hundreds of actual classified documents to his biographers and plead guilty to a misdemeanor and paid a fine?

Go look for it.  It was just in the last few days.  The FBI investigated that one, too.

(June 9, 2016 at 5:14 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I guess you missed the story where General Petraeus was found to have given hundreds of actual classified documents to his biographers and plead guilty to a misdemeanor and paid a fine?

Go look for it.  It was just in the last few days.  The FBI investigated that one, too.

Except that felony charges were pursued by the FBI (namely lying to the FBI, and violating the Espionage Act), but the DoJ decided not to file the charges (source). Now, the DoJ could decide to do the same with Clinton I suppose, but if they do I suspect they'll be a shitstorm of controversy. Petraeus for one, wasn't running for President.

The case involving Clinton is also more complex on several levels, going right back to her decision to use a private server for government emails, having people with no security clearance access that server, having off-site backups (and apparently not knowing about them) at a private company, and of course the fact that for months the server was vulnerable on the Internet, which increases the likelihood that it was hacked into.

Petraeus knowingly gave someone without clearance Top Secret Documents. That Hillary had a vulnerable server is far less of an offense than what Petraeus did.

(June 9, 2016 at 6:09 pm)Divinity Wrote: Petraeus knowingly gave someone without clearance Top Secret Documents. That Hillary had a vulnerable server is far less of an offense than what Petraeus did.

Hillary knowingly gave people without clearance access to a server which was found to contain classified information, and knowingly sent emails containing such information (including as reported yesterday, several instances of CIA operative names) over the Internet. There's some degree of security in physically handing someone documents that just doesn't exist on the Internet without proper security protocols in place (which weren't on Clinton's server).

As I've said before, the buck stops with Clinton on her server. She was the one who demanded that it be set up, so ultimately she is responsible for it, especially as it was not approved by anyone else at the State Department.

We know who received the documents that Petraeus gave out. We don't know who may have intercepted the documents which Clinton sent / stored on her server. That's the scary reality of the investigation. Perhaps it was nobody, but given the fact that hackers routinely scan the Internet looking for vulnerable servers, and the fact that the guy who ran the server suspected it was being attacked, I don't really find it very likely that nobody ever got in.

Quote:which was found to contain classified information

Not quite.  Those documents were classified after the fact.  The documents Petraeus turned over were stamped Top Secret.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/02/us/pol....html?_r=0

Quote:William Weld, the vice-presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party, said Wednesday that he believed Hillary Clinton had done nothing “criminal” in using personal email as secretary of state.

You can't say that about Petraeus.