Jump to content

US Election: Saint Bernard the obstinant


Kalbear

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Shryke said:

It's a tough call and a bit of a gamble on her part.

Which has me wondering how nervous they are internally. Some of the actions Clinton's campaign has taken as of late seem like moves the trailing candidate would do.

45 minutes ago, Shryke said:

It's a tough call and a bit of a gamble on her part.But he's a valuable resource when he keeps his mouth under control. The problem is he tends to fly off the handle alot these days. But I seriously question if she could get him to keep his mouth shut if she tried. And who would really believe he wasn't involved at all anyway?

So I do sorta imagine he's ending up involved because him not being involved just wasn't gonna fly and if he's gonna be there campaigning and shit ya might as well play off the best thing people remember him for.

I agree that there was no way Hillary, or anyone else for that matter, could muzzle Bill for the entire campaign. And he would have had some role in the campaign regardless. I'm just a little surprised that she announced that she's basically handing off a big chunk of her domestic policy to Bill.

41 minutes ago, Shryke said:

To be fair, once Sanders finally drops she'll have Obama doing that for her.

And Campaign Obama is Obama's ultimate evolution.

Yeah, Obama's the main reason I'm not terribly nervous, yet. I also think the polls are still meaningless, though fun to look at. Let's see her numbers a month after Sanders finally ends his campaign. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

I don't see why it would be unethical, honestly. It's like saying that it would be unethical to support any Democrat that has any issues out there. He isn't the head of the FBI or the Justice department. He cannot direct either to investigate or drop investigations (that _would_ be unethical). Maybe if it went to a jury trial or something (it wouldn't), but otherwise I don't see the issue. 

I think he's more worried about uniting the Sanders supporters and making sure that they feel like the process has been played out correctly. Once that's done, I don't think he'll hesitate for a second to try and get Clinton the win, because I think that his legacy is meaningless without a Democrat in office after he is. Especially if it's Trump. 

Actually, he can order investigations to start or stop.  The Director of the FBI gets orders from him and the Attorney General.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bold Barry Whitebeard said:

Actually, he can order investigations to start or stop.  The Director of the FBI gets orders from him and the Attorney General.

He can order a special investigation to start or stop. Since that isn't this, it doesn't apply.

 Once someone is under investigation he cannot tell them to stop without legal request, and this is by design. 

Point of fact, not only is what you said not true, it works the other way around - the FBI can actually ask the state department to stop investigating things that the FBI is investigating. And, in fact, did so in this case. In fact, the 104 year history of the FBI is littered with examples of the FBI and the presidency coming to blows - and the FBI coming out on top. 

Now, Obama attempting to influence the investigation is probably bad. Obama saying that Clinton is awesome? Not remotely an issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Notone said:

Talking about ongoing criminal investigations.

How's the NY DA doing concerning Trump University.

Not that great, as it turns out.

Quote

 

A New York appeals court ruled Tuesday that presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump can challenge a fraud case against him and his real estate school before the state’s highest court, a decision that makes it much more likely the case won’t go to trial until after the November election.

The unanimous ruling by a panel of judges represents a victory for Mr. Trump as he moves closer to locking down the Republican nomination. By adding another stage of litigation, Tuesday’s decision could spare Mr. Trump a potential campaign disruption of a trial where he could be called to testify.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Which has me wondering how nervous they are internally. Some of the actions Clinton's campaign has taken as of late seem like moves the trailing candidate would do.

I don't see that at all. The Bill thing is a gamble but not a "I'm worried" gamble. It's a "We've got to do SOMETHING with Bill, but what?" gamble. And I don't see anything else that looks like a trailing candidate to me.

 

Quote

I agree that there was no way Hillary, or anyone else for that matter, could muzzle Bill for the entire campaign. And he would have had some role in the campaign regardless. I'm just a little surprised that she announced that she's basically handing off a big chunk of her domestic policy to Bill.

What else would you give him though? It's what Bill Clinton best known for. At least, on the positive side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kalbear said:

He can order a special investigation to start or stop. Since that isn't this, it doesn't apply.

 Once someone is under investigation he cannot tell them to stop without legal request, and this is by design. 

Point of fact, not only is what you said not true, it works the other way around - the FBI can actually ask the state department to stop investigating things that the FBI is investigating. And, in fact, did so in this case. In fact, the 104 year history of the FBI is littered with examples of the FBI and the presidency coming to blows - and the FBI coming out on top. 

Now, Obama attempting to influence the investigation is probably bad. Obama saying that Clinton is awesome? Not remotely an issue. 

What does the State department have to do with whether the President controls the FBI?  Nothing.

The FBI is part of the Department of Justice, which is part of the Executive Branch.  The President is the head of the Executive Branch.  The President nominates the head of the DoJ, which sits atop the FBI.

From the very article you link,

Quote

Johnson knew how to twist Hoover's arm: "Now I don't want these Klansmen to open their mouths without your knowing what they're sayin'. Now nobody needs to know it but you, maybe, but we ought to have intelligence on that state … I want you to have the same kind of intelligence that you have on the communists."

Johnson was telling Hoover to go after the Klan in language he understood. Hoover obeyed. He would subvert them and sabotage them, so long as Johnson commanded that it be done. The FBI broke the Ku Klux Klan like dry twigs. The civil rights laws were passed, and Johnson won in a landslide, with the votes of millions of white liberals and newly enfranchised black citizens.

Clearly, Johnson directed the FBI to investigate the KKK.

There are grey areas of course, like when Louis Freeh's FBI investigated the President for perjury.  But as we saw in the article you linked, when Mueller confronted Bush over warantless wiretapping, Mueller didn't just say no, he threatened to resign.  because he doesn't have the authority to just say no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Maester Drew said:

You know, I used to see one positive of a Trump presidency. The Republicans and the Democrats in Congress would unite and work together to stop his crazy plans.

You think so? You mean all those #NeverTrump Republicans who pivoted right to #EventuallyTrump? You mean the Republicans who filibustered a cabinet appointment? The Republicans who got involved in the Terri Schiavo business? Those Republicans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I think he's more worried about uniting the Sanders supporters and making sure that they feel like the process has been played out correctly. Once that's done, I don't think he'll hesitate for a second to try and get Clinton the win, because I think that his legacy is meaningless without a Democrat in office after he is. Especially if it's Trump. 

Obama is keeping quiet because ya don't want the President interfering in the primary process for obvious reasons.

That said, the Obama Admin has very clearly been signalling that they support Clinton and doing so more and more as this drags out. And his people (from his campaign and such) are already either working for Clinton or been publicly endorsing her over Sanders since basically the start.

My impression is they too are tired of this shit dragging on and just want to get to the part where everyone can start shitting on Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

You think so? You mean all those #NeverTrump Republicans who pivoted right to #EventuallyTrump? You mean the Republicans who filibustered a cabinet appointment? The Republicans who got involved in the Terri Schiavo business? Those Republicans?

Forgive me Tracker, but did you miss part of my post that said "used to"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

You think so? You mean all those #NeverTrump Republicans who pivoted right to #EventuallyTrump? You mean the Republicans who filibustered a cabinet appointment? The Republicans who got involved in the Terri Schiavo business? Those Republicans?

Yeah, the #NeverTrumps all folded like a pack of cards made of butter on a hot day. The best way I saw this put was that for #NeverTrump to go anywhere, it would have to be #JustThisOnceClinton. And that was never gonna happen.

They can bitch and whinge all they want about Trump and what he represents, they still see him as more representative of them then Clinton, which really says something about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

You think so? You mean all those #NeverTrump Republicans who pivoted right to #EventuallyTrump? You mean the Republicans who filibustered a cabinet appointment? The Republicans who got involved in the Terri Schiavo business? Those Republicans?

80% of Republican voters say  that they want their politicians to support Trump. Even Lindsey Graham is backing Trump at this point.

The idea that congress would unite to stop Trump is a pipe dream borne of lack of knowledge of the prisoner's dilemma. 

Quote

What does the State department have to do with whether the President controls the FBI?  Nothing.

The state department is under direct control of the President. The FBI...is not. The FBI has jurisdiction over matters when they involve the State Department. I would think that kind of matters a big deal. 

Yes, the President can ask for things from the FBI - but he cannot order them. He can in theory call for someone's resignation, though there's a lot of grey area there. Mostly, you seem to have a really wrong idea of what the Presidential authority is with respect to micromanaging. In any case, there's no problem with the President campaigning for someone who is also being investigated provided that the President isn't interfering with said investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shryke said:

What else would you give him though? It's what Bill Clinton best known for. At least, on the positive side.

Well, now that Bill is a vegan, he can take over Michelle Obama's White House victory garden.

That honestly makes more sense than putting him "in charge" of the economy. 

As Paul Krugman noted today on the economic boom times during Bill's time in office: 

Quote

Mostly, he had the good luck to hold office when good things were happening for reasons unrelated to politics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it makes me unhappy to have Bill Clinton involved in any way, at all. I hope that that was kind of a trial balloon. Though honestly, having 'confidence' in the economy is essentially the only thing that a President can actually do to make much of a difference, so maybe that'll do something?

Mostly, Clinton has been a problem so far and I don't want him there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

The state department is under direct control of the President. The FBI...is not. The FBI has jurisdiction over matters when they involve the State Department. I would think that kind of matters a big deal. 

Yes, the President can ask for things from the FBI - but he cannot order them. He can in theory call for someone's resignation, though there's a lot of grey area there. Mostly, you seem to have a really wrong idea of what the Presidential authority is with respect to micromanaging. In any case, there's no problem with the President campaigning for someone who is also being investigated provided that the President isn't interfering with said investigation.

You seem to have very little understanding of how the federal government is set up.  What part of the FBI being a part of the Department of Justice don't you understand? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shryke said:

I don't see that at all. The Bill thing is a gamble but not a "I'm worried" gamble. It's a "We've got to do SOMETHING with Bill, but what?" gamble. And I don't see anything else that looks like a trailing candidate to me.

Could be. Either way we'll likely never know. Another example is the way she has been talking recently about potential VP candidates. It sounds like she's open to an individual who could be a high risk/reward VP pick, which is the type of move a trailing candidate would consider. A candidate with a lead usually avoids risky decisions. And since Hillary is generally a risk averse person, it seems somewhat out of character to me. 

18 minutes ago, Shryke said:

What else would you give him though? It's what Bill Clinton best known for. At least, on the positive side.

Honestly Idk. But there is a difference between calling him an adviser and giving him a functional role in her administration, should she win.

Also, this campaign has got to be killing Bill. He can't be himself and his legacy is getting trashed, sometimes by his own wife. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bold Barry Whitebeard said:

You seem to have very little understanding of how the federal government is set up.  What part of the FBI being a part of the Department of Justice don't you understand? 

The part where the president has direct authority to issue orders to the FBI. What part don't you understand about that? 

Especially when the FBI is investigating the state department. That is kind of a big deal. What do you imagine that Obama can actually do, here? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The state department is under direct control of the President. The FBI...is not. The FBI has jurisdiction over matters when they involve the State Department. I would think that kind of matters a big deal. 

Yes, the President can ask for things from the FBI - but he cannot order them. He can in theory call for someone's resignation, though there's a lot of grey area there. Mostly, you seem to have a really wrong idea of what the Presidential authority is with respect to micromanaging. In any case, there's no problem with the President campaigning for someone who is also being investigated provided that the President isn't interfering with said investigation.

Again, from the article you posted,

Quote

On 2 July 1964, Johnson ordered Hoover to go to Mississippi and proclaim the omnipotence of the FBI. The director was dubious; he thought the civil rights workers, not the racists, were the primary problem. "Whatever you do, you're going to be damned," Hoover said. "Can't satisfy both sides." Then he got a direct order from the president. "Ain't nobody going to damn you," said Johnson, who was secretly taping the telephone call. "Ain't anybody in this country has the respect you have."

Johnson knew how to twist Hoover's arm: "Now I don't want these Klansmen to open their mouths without your knowing what they're sayin'. Now nobody needs to know it but you, maybe, but we ought to have intelligence on that state … I want you to have the same kind of intelligence that you have on the communists."

Johnson was telling Hoover to go after the Klan in language he understood. Hoover obeyed. He would subvert them and sabotage them, so long as Johnson commanded that it be done.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - but that was an unofficial order from LBJ to Hoover. And in fact, it was an illegal one. Do you honestly believe that this is the authority that Obama actually has in this day and age? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

The part where the president has direct authority to issue orders to the FBI. What part don't you understand about that? 

Especially when the FBI is investigating the state department. That is kind of a big deal. What do you imagine that Obama can actually do, here? 

The biggest lever that he has, which offers the most insulation, is to order the Attorney General not to indict.  The FBI only investigates, it's the DoJ which decides whether to indict or not.  If the President really wanted to, he could order the investigation ended.  He probably wouldn't since that would be political poison, but he could if he wanted. 

Just now, Kalbear said:

Yes - but that was an unofficial order from LBJ to Hoover. And in fact, it was an illegal one. Do you honestly believe that this is the authority that Obama actually has in this day and age? 

It wasn't unofficial.  The President can absolutely tell the FBI to investigate whomever it wants, as long as there is a federal crime being investigated.  He can also tell the FBI which crimes not to investigate.  The President can say, "Hey FBI, drop your bank robbery investigations and focus on Al Qaeda."  Or he can say, "Hey, stop with the white collar fraud investigations and focus on cyber intrusions."

As long as there is sufficient predication, the President can order the FBI to investigate anything he wants.  He could order an investigation into whether the Ferguson Police Department committed a hate crime.  Do you really think all those investigations happened without Presidential approval?  Most of these recent federal investigations into police shootings probably were mandated, since it was clear that the elements of the crime weren't met, but it would look bad if the government did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...