Hillary's lawyers told her aide to destroy her e-mails

You got a link for this revelation before I pop the champagne cork?

Link:

Newsmax? That's the best you can do?

R1, why do you want marriage equality rolled back (as it would be under a GOP president)?

R4 Never assume. You will invariably err.

R2's link is so poorly written as to be just about incomprehensible.

Such alarmists. SSM is done no matter who is elected president.

R1, Not unless the Dems offer a surprise replacement, who's even better than Clinton. #ElizabethWarren

I'm currently waiting to see how all this will play out.

Now, the Republicans save Rand Paul are all either not qualified or carry substantial past baggage, or belong to Arkham from the outset; The Democrats only have to have a good candidate who could convincingly run against any and all Republican candidates.

Don't you fucking freepers have anything better to do than spam this forum? Fuck off.

R6, it's a dangerous myth that social progress is a one-way ratchet.

Elizabeth Warren is not running, and even if she were, she has about as much chance of being elected as Bernie Sanders. Which is to say, zero.

SSM is very precarious. A GOP president will appoint several SCOTUS justices, who will roll it back. It barely squeaked by this time.

If it does get even more dicey for Hillary, will Joe Biden step up? I'm not an alarmist, but the GOP is in full swing to carry this to a bitter end and beat this drum incessantly.

Joe Biden is also unelectable.

Gentlemen, it's a LONG way to November 2016. Anything can and will happen.

no one cares about this emails stuff

Only one thing can happen at this point: a Republican president in 2016 (probably another Bush).

Care to comment further on your opinion, r13? Not disagreeing, necessarily. If it gets entirely unmanageable for Hillary, will the Dems have no other choice? Not even sure Biden would usurp Hillary, anyway. Bet your boots more unsavory news about Hillary ' s debacle with scrubbed emails/servers will surface little by little. They're going for a long slow death.

He's in his 70s, looks even older, and is prone to gaffes. The media will have a field day with him.

Face it: it's Hillary, or a Republican for president. At this point, the latter is looking more likely. It's over. Gay rights are over. It'll be like it was before Stonewall.

Oh, for fuck's sake. Hillary has had everything thrown at her, from travelgate to being accused of murder... do you really think deleting emails -- when Bush the dumber's White House lost over a million emails from the 9/11 period -- is going to sink her?

You haven't been paying attention.

E-mails? Really, who gives a shit?

If by some chance she doesn't get the nomination, the it's going to have to be Biden. But I hope Cynthia McKinney announces a run. We need someone in the White House who isn't the product of media hype and who can truly tackle the issues. Aside from these three, I can't think of a single other candidate who would be qualified at this point.

R10 Indeed, the point is, that Warren _is_ not running. But she might in the future, if things turn for the worse for Hillary, by which time the Democratic party would be in need of a very credible candidate who is a woman.

IMO, Warren is not running, because she probably has no desire to be president that soon, given that Hillary is such a strong candidate.

R22, there won't be a future if a Republican is elected in 2016.

Jeb Bush will be our next president.

[quote]because she probably has no desire to be president

That, and having to answer that whole Native American thing.

R25, then it will be a choice between "is-she-or-isn't she descended from Native Americans" and "did-she-or-did-she-not destroy the very important e-mails that should never have been destroyed".

Given the facts (that e-mail _was_ deleted), I understand Hillary's e-mail software was not based on Lotus Notes.

R23, There was a future after W. If a Republican is nominated for candidacy, then I hope it will be Rand Paul.

R11, R19, R23: how serious are you about that? What's the route for repealing same sex marriage given a Republican victory? Wouldn't that involve annulling the marriages of hundreds of thousands of people? I don't see how that could get past the Supreme Court. Even most conservatives would find that a tyranny too far... wouldn't they?

Moreover, the republicans are in full meltdown over Trump. Fox was so stymied over it that they called off one of their main attack dogs (that cunt Pirro) and not only did she not deliver one of her outrageous "opening statements" attacking Obama or tell us how the democrats were to blame for every bad thing that has ever happened, she never said the name Trump herself throughout the entire show. When one of her guests brought him up, she just sat there with that botoxed-stretched whore-lipped mouth pulled tight across her veneers and said NOTHING.

Fox tried to politically assassinate Trump, and the teatards have turned on the establishment over it. Trump is going to run third party, drive a wedge between the teatards and the establishment, and guarantee President Clinton again... just like they did in 1990. If you're going to try to kill the king, you'd better make sure you actually do it.

Thank god the teatard base is so stupid they couldn't find their way out of a paper bag with a map, detailed instructions, and a guide dog to lead them.

R27, a conservative majority on the court can and will reverse the decision. They don't care about us or our marriages. You are severely underestimating how much they hate us.

Moreover, R29, the Republicans seem to have moved on from explicitly hating on gays. The GOP debates showed that pretty well, I thought. If there was a place for one of them to say "I will repeal gay marriage if elected" that would have been it.

R26, W nearly destroyed the country. Another one will finish us.

I think by "Not From Here" R7, etc means Not From Earth.

[quote]Now, the Republicans save Rand Paul are all either not qualified or carry substantial past baggage

I'm no fan of ANY of the GOP candidates, but Rand Paul? Too funny...

Yes, R30, fine. You win. A Republican president will be fine. They've moved on from hating us. Everything will be hunky dory. Let's see what you have to say in 4 years when you're posting from the concentration camp.

A NYT'S article that is basically a road map for how the GOP will continue to exploit the email/server conundrum. Not accusing Hillary of anything others haven't done, either side of the aisle, or of blatant wrong doing. It does appear she left herself open. I'm sure this has been a well read article here already. (Catching up with all responses.)

R33, if you think the Republicans will put you in a camp, you're as silly as they are. Or are you satirizing hysterical liberal SJWs?

I'm not satirizing anything. They want to destroy us, and you're playing right into their hands. They want you to think they're "not that bad."

In order to reverse Obergefell, R27, they'd have to bring another case with standing and grounds to reconsider the decision based on some error or application of the 14th Amendment. What case is brewing in the lower courts? For anything to be considered by SCOTUS, it has to ascend through the Federal system and have opposing decisions that demand a higher court review. That process takes years.

Not to mention that the republicans have lost the argument. If they pursue a reversal, they stand to lose the entire generation of younger Americans who think marriage equality is a good thing. Did you not see the republican response to Kasich's comments on marriage at the debate? They cheered him when he said it was time to accept the decision and move on.

R26 No it would be more like "Did Elizabeth intentionally lie about being Native American to advance her career?"

Hillary has at least addressed the email controversy.

Haha, R32, I wish (-:

No, I'm not from the U.S., if that's what you want to know about my nickname.

Rand Paul is the most sane Republican (—or the least insane, if you will :). If he won, and if he appointed a Democrat for VP, then it would be quite good, because both would be able to rally the whole Congress for good causes, and not just half of the legislature.

But I really want a Democrat to win.

[quote]a conservative majority on the court can and will reverse the decision.

How exactly will that happen? The Court doesn't just arbitrarily go back and re-review a case they've already decided. The only way it would be undone is if another case comes to them with the same issues and they decide differently. That's how Brown v BOE overturned Plessy v. Ferguson (segregation) and Lawrence v. Texas reversed Bowers v. Hardwick (sodomy laws). I remember a post from the Gay History troll which observed the anniversary of the Lawrence ruling. Some whiner claimed that the Court would reverse one year later. It's been twelve years now since Lawrence was decided, and it's still the law of the land.

R36, I am convinced both parties hate ordinary people. They all want to destroy us. You're going to dismiss this as some kind of dumb false equivalence, but face the facts: both parties are owned by the banks, both have "anointed" dynastic candidates who got the position on family rather than merit (Bush V Clinton! AGAIN!!!), both love sucking up to Israel.

And you know what happens if we get D rather than R? Just a "nicer" oligarchy. The CEO who's paid 1000x more than you can be a gay man or a tranny now! The medical insurers who'll bankrupt you if you get seriously ill have to obey ENDA! Is that the sum total of what leftwing thought is demanding in America today?

It's impossible to look at the shitshow of American politics without becoming cynical and deciding that democracy is a failure.

[quote]If he won, and if he appointed a Democrat for VP

You really aren't from here, are you? That has literally never happened.

R41 is the tedious "both parties are exactly the same" troll. Ignore.

R42, it must have happened at least once. (I hope a resident DL prez wonk will clear that up downthread.)

To be honest, R41, I want Trump to win. He won't, but I really want him to. For the sole reason that Trump and Sanders are the only candidates who seem to be human beings, and Sanders was gutless when the SJW's attacked him in Seattle.

Trump isn't really rightwing at all. Most of his positions are straight up Democrat. But he'd fuck over the entire US ruling elite, and I want that so badly I can taste it.

Well, both parties are deeply corrupt and for the 1%. Yes the Dems are a bit better. A bit.

Why does this thread suddenly appear as "crossed" out? I don't understand what that is intended to mean in this forum. Please inform. Too hot to handle?

R43, OK, I am tiresome. Sorry.

But not as tiresome as another ticket with a Bush and a Clinton on it. Triangulated within epsilon of whatever policies are calculated to just be slightly less bad than the other guys.

R42 R44

Abraham Lincoln, Republican, chose Andrew Johnson, Democrat for VP. Johnson was there to bring "balance" to the ticket in the 1860 election, hoping to bring a few border states to the ticket. It didn't really work; no southern states actually voted for Lincoln. But the Democratic party was split behind several candidates, and Lincoln did get a majority of the electoral vote.

There hasn't been a ticket with a Bush and a Clinton on it in nearly 25 years.

And a few more interesting tidbits:

The President and VP didn't always run as a ticket. In the original system, the VP was the runner-up. That's how Jefferson got to be VP under Adams, even though they were from different parties. But that was before the Democratic-Republican party split into two separate parties, and since 1804 the President and VP have run as a ticket.

Usually, they were from the same party. The Lincoln case is the only counterexample.

There have been tickets with a Bush or a Clinton on them since 1980, R50.

It's dynastic politics at its most sickening.

Oh, thanks, R49 & R50, aka "DL Prez Wonk" (-:

Hillary knows the game inside out and she has been under so much pressure during her years as the First Lady. She knows what to do and say. There is no way this will get to her. She also knew GOP and Fox News would come after her with this and there is no way she would have begun to campaign if she weren't sure this matter had been handled by the law.

There you have it, Not From Here. It's happened once in 200 years, and only because the president was trying desperately to avoid a civil war (and it didn't work).

R55 TWICE. Lincoln/Johnson, Jefferson/Adams (R51)

Hillary Clinton will be the next President Of The United States.

That ALONE is enough to make conservative heads explode.

ADD to that, the fact that Bill Clinton will ALSO be back in The White House and we now have the perfect storm for ACTUAL aneurisms!

So before we start worrying about marriage equality be overturned (which will never happen regardless of who becomes President!) lets just relax and think about all the mouth-breathers stroking-out as The Clintons triumphantly return to The White House.

Justices Thomas & Scalia will both succumb to the stress. Justice Ginsburg will finally be able to retire. And The Clintons will appoint at LEAST three YOUNG liberal / progressive new Supreme Court Justices.

In the eight years of the second Clinton administration Elizabeth Warren will begin to FINALLY indict, convict, & imprison the vile goblins of Wall St. She will easily become President in 2024. By then the last of the elderly fools who've always voted against their own best interests by voting republican will finally have died out. Fox News will be a thing of the fast, the punchline to a joke we tell at Thanksgiving! Universal (single payer) health care will have been in place for years. With the new progressive government funding for stem cell research will have put us on the fast track to curing cancer, Alzheimer's, heart disease & diabetes etc. The arts, education, & intellectualism will flourish.

The success of the Iranian Nuclear deal implemented years before by President Obama will lead to other Middle Eastern countries also wanting a better standard of living for themselves. Many years without war will usher in the Time of Enlightenment in The U.S. and the world. Some of the casualties either from suicide or stress will be John McCain, Sarah Palin (in prison for treason!), Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, Mike Huckabee, Rick Scott, Bill O'Rielly and many, many others.

Behold the new world.

R57, why not just repeal the 22nd Amendment and make the Clintons and their hangers-on your overlords for life?

What a dystopia you're conjuring up.

[quote]The success of the Iranian Nuclear deal implemented years before by President Obama will lead to other Middle Eastern countries also wanting a better standard of living for themselves.

Don't know whether R57 is ignorantly insane or insanely ignorant.

R58 = freeper fundie cunt

Hardly, R60. I'm a disillusioned socialist.

Immigration is a big problem for working people. Like it or not, immigrants compete with low-skilled American workers for jobs and resources. It's a class issue, since the middle class finds cheap service irresistable.

Fuck these trolls who come here and use anti-gay Newsmax and Breitbart as "sources."

R61 Correct. The wealthy love open borders because it provides them with endless cheap labor. That's what America is now at the dawn of neo-feudalism.

Why is this 5 year old thread alive.

Because her emails!

Who is bumping these ancient threads?

This all seems so quaint now.

The trolls. There is a thread they want to push down the line. They also keep getting their threads greyed out so need to bump threads so they can troll