|
Lemming posted:"Optics are horrid"...? For who? Who could possibly care about this? They could be talking on the phone for two hours every day and nobody would know. They talk for thirty minutes in person, and it's a big deal? It's a objective fact that the optics are terrible. Why is it so hard to admit that? Forget Bill or Hillary or Lynch or any specific person and look at it as it is being seen -- a meeting took place, which was purposefully tried to be kept secret, between the AG and the husband of the person who is the subject of a investigation. There is no political theory in which that doesn't equate to bad optics.
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
^^^^^ You don't have to misdirect by mentioning Trump or excusing it away as no big deal, that's not the argument being made ^^^^^Talmonis posted:This is a true statement. It was a bad idea, regardless of intention, as it gives the media something to scream about and pretend there's a horse race. Lynch had to speak about it at the Aspen Summit this morning and publicly affirm that she would abide by the recommendations by the FBI -- even she knows she had to get out in front of it because it looked bad. Clinton's aids had to be asking what Bill was thinking after that meeting. It was a silly move.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:The optics aren't bad, people are loving retarded. I can't even argue against this insanity. Lynch has already said that she didn't speak about the investigation so your argument is that she lied but it was ok because lawyers do this poo poo all the time? And even if that was the case, she decided the best person to meet was not the subject of the investigation or her lawyer but her husband? Holy gently caress, if Lynch's or Clinton's people tried arguing this it'd be loving hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
^^^^^ Do you think this is YCS? You can't be this ignorant ^^^^^Sorus posted:Still don't get how it looks bad. Man bumps into woman he knows that also moves in the same professional circles and has overlapping acquaintances, and have a chat. - Bill didn't 'bump into woman', he waited 30 minutes for her plane to land after learning of it - Their meeting was kept hidden - It's a meeting between the AG and the husband of the person who is the subject of a investigation No conspiracy theories, no tinfoil -- it was just a dumb thing to do. Even Lynch knows it, as she publicly affirmed her complying with FBI recommendations this morning.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes, it's unseemly. Doesn't mean I'm going to vote for Trump, but let's not pluck out our own eyes here. Apparently we have -- USPol as it turns out isn't any better than YCS, and no matter what, any Clinton-related news can't possibly be conceived as negative. Let's all go back to circlejerking about Trump's hands, the real political hot takes that matter.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Do phones not exist in your universe? The reporter who initially discovered the meeting was told no filming or pictures. Information being spread doesn't negate the fact that it was initially tried to kept secret. I'm arguing with a loving fence post here. There's no positives to what they did. If they hadn't have done this there would've been something else republicans would have harped on. This entire discussion could have been avoided easily if Bill had just went on his way. There's no goddamn hidden conspiracy that I'm trying to argue here. I'm just trying to get it through your head that maybe, just loving maybe it looks bad. LOOKS. That's it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:How was it kept hidden if we all knew about it pretty much right after it happened? As I explained earlier, press was prohibited from pictures or filming. Lemming posted:It looks bad the same way that having a hair on your shirt looks bad. It doesn't matter and nobody cares. Again, why do you excuse it? It's either 'This is not bad you're dumb' or 'ok it's bad BUT...' gently caress that poo poo man, admitting without approval doesn't bleed you dry of your liberal blood. Clinton isn't going to personally kick you out of the democratic party.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so really you're just mad that people don't agree with you I was, but then your avatar perked me back up 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
^^^^^ Never give up, never surrender ^^^^^Shimrra Jamaane posted:It's the same people concern trolling every single loving time. Stop responding to them as if they actually want to talk in good faith. No discussions in USPol Circle up and grab the dick to your right and start jerking BetterToRuleInHell fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jul 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Lol didn't realize asking you what your opinion on Sander's attempt to get the HELP chair was "dumpstering" but somehow I think your hiatus won't last long. Shimrra Jamaane posted:It's the same people concern trolling every single loving time. Stop responding to them as if they actually want to talk in good faith. USPol goons like throwing around the label concern trolling like GBS goons do with SJW e: word filter bests me
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
^^^^^ That media outlet was correct, it wasn't bad optics, anybody mentioning or mocking was a idiot, Bush didn't deserve the criticism ^^^^^botany posted:I mean, you might be sick of it, but that's the world we live in. You're completely correct of course that the meeting is uninteresting, but Better is correct that it's bad optics. Optics are not about substance, they're about the climate of political commentary. Saying "this sucks" (which I agree with) doesn't change that it's still true. No, don't get sucked into this, lest you discover you've been a dumb concern troll hater this entire time. BetterToRuleInHell fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Jul 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
MC Nietzche posted:That may be true but Bill Clinton is a master at politics. That pretty much leaves us with two interpretations. Either he forgot how the optics would look or he's signalling that Hillary isn't concerned at all about the FBI probe. My guess would be the second. Now Lynch has committed to following what the FBI recommends and everyone who knows jack all about the email thing knows the FBI is going to say there are no grounds for an indictment. I think Bill, in the moment, doesn't care. Not in a malicious way, as in he doesn't care about Hillary's nomination, that's silly, but he's Bill Clinton. He gets in verbal arguments with BLM activists at campaign rallies, he does his own thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
By the by, Clinton raised almost $70 million for her campaign and the DNC in June 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Joke's on Goodman, I'm voting for Meteor
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Well, I mean he should prolly have recused himself from the ACA case Why?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
the moose posted:Not sure if this has been talked about yet in here. Hahaha what the gently caress does Obama care about transparency, he's on his way out. The administration's estimation is higher that what they've previously acknowledged and even then it's lower than what other non-governmental groups estimate. This isn't some act of transparency and accountability.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Seriously, is that the worst Presidential campaign ad by a non 3rd party candidate in history? It's a literal As Seen on TV commercial. Compare that to the the twitter ads that Clinton's team puts together less than a day later, it's night and day. e: How do you split the video to add text next to the image and not center the text properly, holy poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
At least with poo poo like the Herman Cain ad we could laugh but that Trump ad, man. Just lame all around. vvvvv They got your number now! The assimilation is inevitable! vvvvv
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
I hope you guys are this concerned and sarcastic about people posting poo poo we already knew when Hillary wins the election. I mean, if posting about obvious poo poo that isn't surprising is concern trolling then D&D mods should ban everyone who posts about it since they're CONCERN TROLLS CONCERN TROLLS CONCERN TROLLS
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Phone posted:Context doesn't matter to you since you're so morally superior and above it all. Cool post about complaining about complaining. The context is exactly what you guys are bitching about, news that is obvious and not surprising to anyone. What the gently caress is meta about your first reaction being to complain about someone posting about Hillary poo poo. Even SedanChair explained in the simplest way why news is news, and still you guys are complaining/dismissing. If people are going to bitch about people posting known and obvious poo poo that should carry through about everything without you or anyone else saying 'Well, the context is different therefore I can' bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:it makes me laugh knowing idiots think Bill was getting Lorette to let Hillary off I hadn't even jokingly thought about that. Janet Reno was probably super jealous when that news hit.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
If it's been posted I'll come back and delete this duplicate post but Nigel Farage, after championing the Brexit vote, is stepping down. Burn the house down? Hell yeah! Stay around to clean up? Hell no!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Wow, Comey really underscored how stupid Hillary was during this whole mess. Jesus christ. Please look forward to the attack ads with Comey's soundbites!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:There would be more bed wetting with a non-Trump at least. I thought Jeb was initially considered a serious contender having FL a lock and expecting to have the blessing of the GOP machine?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yeah, and that's in agreement with Clinton. So the people saying this presser proved she lied are incorrect. No they're not -- Cumo matter-of-factly stated that Clinton never fully complied in turning over all her relevant email, which she has repeatedly stated doing so. That is in no way criminal or part of what could be construed as a basis for proceeding forward with charges, but let's not kid ourselves, Clinton has been lying about releasing all her emails.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Mr Jaunts posted:Am I misremembering, or was he also one of the people pushing the "Ferguson Effect" stuff with absolutely no evidence to back it up? Yeah, he was.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
It feels like you guys are retroactively forgiving Bush for the Iraq war if suddenly one person lacks responsibility and the complications of dysfunctional government takes away ownership of said person's mistakes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
axeil posted:One person here literally said "Bush lied, people died" so I think you might be mis-reading things here. WampaLord posted:Wow, she killed 300k people all by herself? Impressive! I don't know man, I don't think Bush killed all those people all by himself.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I framed it that she was 100% responsible for the Iraq War? What are you talking about? You're talking about Clinton, man. I'm surprised you haven't been CONCERNED TROLLED already and had multiple people say to put you on their ignore list.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
PTD please change your avatar I can't handle that cuteness in a serious political debate thread
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
a shameful boehner posted:An objective fact: Clinton has exercised poor, shortsighted judgement about the Iraq war, the invasion of Libya, the response to the coup in Honduras and a host of domestic policies. Here's your problem -- your 'objective facts', which as far as I can tell are indeed objective facts that are not indicative of anything other than the subjects they address, make goons mad so they are terrible opinions of a concern troll
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Hooooly poo poo. This can't be right, Fox News is the very channel that has almost every host and guest tell me that inequality in the workplace doesn't exist and feminism is the crutch that holds women back and is the grand scheme designed to punish men! A man in a position of power demanding sexual favors from a woman? Preposterous! Poppycock! Take your lies somewhere else. Joementum posted:Congrats to the War in Afghanistan on getting renewed for a sixteenth season today Second verse, same as the first How's that hope and change working out for you, Obamabots? I guess Obama likes fruitless wars as much as Bush 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/LukeRussert/status/750697539561742336 This needs to be brought up again because this is Paul Ryan openly stating that a presidential nominee should be openly handicapped in a presidential election by withholding information needed to run their campaign. Pretty hosed up
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/286662-green-party-candidate-prosecute-clinton Does that guy in the back have a hat that says Balls Balls #ItsInOurHands
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Doesn't Clinton also want to provide college debt relief to kids with startups? Is it 'gently caress You, Didn't Get Mine' if I hate the idea of a kid getting debt relief because he created the next Flappy Bird or a company that sends you toilet paper for $5 a month that inexplicably gets valued at $50 million or some other crazy poo poo? e: Trabisnikof beat me to it
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Let me tell you a little secret. there is a reason most start-ups are made by white kids from decently well off parents. Those kids can afford to spend 3 years making next to no money as they have a family that can take care of them. Well, what's going to stop this relief program from going mainly to well-off white kids then? This is the perfect example of racism hidden behind good intentions. I'm sure Clinton means well but I doubt this will be a boon for minority entrepreneurs. e: fixed for spelling brainfarts BetterToRuleInHell fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
DolphinCop posted:alright bring it in folks im sure we can find a way that hillary's plans for reducing debt burdens are actually bad if we put our heads together That's like saying Trump is rich so surely he wouldn't take advantage of tax breaks. People with money look for ways to keep their money.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Somebody help me here. Lynch and the Justice Department haven't issued a decision yet on the Clinton emails so, what is it that she's supposed to testify to next week? Isn't the Republican House actually trying to unduly influence that decision by having her testify about a still ongoing investigation? Can she even do that? N.S.C.I. = Never Stop Congressional Investigations Dexo posted:
WampaLord posted:If they're well off, they don't have debt. You guys have more faith in government programs not being abused by people with wealth/power a lot more than me. BetterToRuleInHell fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 18:25
|
|
those kids don't have to worry about college debt p much at all anyway.
|
Trabisnikof posted:She said she would follow the FBI's decision, which is clearly political influence. Also, the theory that the fix was in with the Clinton/Lynch meeting is a bust since the FBI were the ones who recommended no indictment so they have to keep kicking that dead horse hoping something comes out it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
7c Nickel posted:The first thing is that the private server is a red herring. Yes, it was against internal policy and she could have faced administrative sanctions, but that is a moot point since she's out of office. Neither her server or the gov email she was supposed to use should have had secure data on it. So now we get to the actually potentially illegal stuff. To your bold statement, didn't she have her people print out a email and remove its header so they could fax it? That's pretty much the definition of deliberately taking secured data off a secure system.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 18:40
|
|