TrackerNeil Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Therefore, Politics has no business in the selection of Judges. And that is the heart of our disagreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 2 minutes ago, Fez said: So we'll see how it plays out the next few days, but for now I am officially panicking about the election for the first time. And Comey should be impeached for interfering with the election; though he won't be of course. And your opponents want Comey impeached for failure to indict Sec. Clinton. Another example of why Politics has no business in the judiciary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: And your opponents want Comey impeached for failure to indict Sec. Clinton. Another example of why Politics has no business in the judiciary. Its not about the substance of the investigation, whatever it is, its about how Comey acted about it. Is there any reason to release this news 11 days before the election? And if there is a reason, give us that reason, don't release a 3 paragraph statement that is entirely vague. This is an entirely political action by Comey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 8 minutes ago, Fez said: So we'll see how it plays out the next few days, but for now I am officially panicking about the election for the first time. And Comey should be impeached for interfering with the election; though he won't be of course. Frankly, I just don't know enough to make any judgments on this development yet, and by all reports Corney is supposedly a stand-up guy. But the timing un-fucking-believable. I mean, unless you're living in a bubble, how the hell do you not think this is going to interfere with the election? It's either a transparent attempt at manipulation or being obtuse to the point of absurdity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Just now, Fez said: Its not about the substance of the investigation, whatever it is, its about how Comey acted about it. Is there any reason to release this news 11 days before the election? And if there is a reason, give us that reason, don't release a 3 paragraph statement that is entirely vague. This is an entirely political action by Comey. Perhaps because this is when the information came to light and sitting on it for 11 days is just as political a decision as releasing it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ariadne23 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 9 minutes ago, Fez said: This is an entirely political action by Comey. Do you really think so? The man cannot possibly be a Trump supporter. He's kind of a prig though, right? Not mych of a pragmatist? Maybe it's just a "this is my sworn duty and let the chips fall where they may" kind of thing. I mean, wouldn't delaying the investigation because it is so close to the election be a political decision, akin to, say, obscuring the existence of Al Qaeda operations in Libya for national security reasons until after an election? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 What freaking unrelated case? That's my question. And yes, I'm officially freaking out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 2 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Sologdin, Can the President force recess appointments? Technically yes, practically no. http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/is-a-recess-appointment-to-the-court-an-option/ The last sentence really hurts: Quote The bottom line is that, if President Obama is to successfully name a new Supreme Court Justice, he will have to run the gauntlet of the Republican-controlled Senate, and prevail there. The only real chance of that: if he picks a nominee so universally admired that it would be too embarrassing for the Senate not to respond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Just now, Ariadne23 said: Do you really think so? The man cannot possibly be a Trump supporter. He's kind of a prig though, right? Not mych of a pragmatist? Maybe it's just a "this is my sworn duty and let the chips fall where they may" kind of thing. I mean, wouldn't delaying the investigation because it is so close to the election be a political decision, akin to, say, obscuring the existence of Al Qaeda operations in Libya for national security reasons until after an election? Exactly. He released when he received it because failure to release it would be a political decison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Perhaps because this is when the information came to light and sitting on it for 11 days is just as political a decision as releasing it now. Again, then tell us the information! Read the letter Comey sent its textbook "raises concerns" nonsense with no specifics. Beyond that, generally its not FBI policy to comment on ongoing investigations anyway; yet they were happy to give regular updates last time and now he makes this statement now. He's under no obligation to inform Congress of this issue; his only obligation is to lead the investigation and then close it with whatever action is appropriate at its end. Releasing this letter does nothing but make this into a political situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 8 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Perhaps because this is when the information came to light and sitting on it for 11 days is just as political a decision as releasing it now. I'm trying to withhold judgment until I learn what's going on. It could be that these supposedly new emails are indeed significant enough to reopen the investigation and send a letter to congress eleven days before the election. But wow, the timing of this has all my alarm bells ringing. I mean, unless it's information that clearly shows Clinton did something illegal with intent, it sure feels like manipulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guess who's back Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 What stupid shit is Trump going to say right now to take media focus away from Hillary? Anyone want to bet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 5 minutes ago, Fez said: Again, then tell us the information! Read the letter Comey sent its textbook "raises concerns" nonsense with no specifics. Beyond that, generally its not FBI policy to comment on ongoing investigations anyway; yet they were happy to give regular updates last time and now he makes this statement now. He's under no obligation to inform Congress of this issue; his only obligation is to lead the investigation and then close it with whatever action is appropriate at its end. Releasing this letter does nothing but make this into a political situation. Are you sure he's under no obligation to update his testimony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guess who's back Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 1 minute ago, The Great Unwashed said: That was my first question as well: what unrelated case? Would the FBI be the lead agency looking into Russian hacking of the DNC and Clinton campaign officials' emails? That was where my first thought went, but then if Wikileaks had that information, they'd have released it already, right? Consider me heading towards panic-mode. Panic of getting a criminal impeached? You must be crazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 10 hours ago, Wethers said: Edited to add - not unprecedented systematically block any and all nominations for 5 straight years while the opposing party is in the White House? Has that been done in the last 100 years (other than starting last year)? Honest question, perhaps it has, in which case it would be a much-needed history lesson for me. No, not in the last century and not for 5 years straight, but blocking of multiple candidates did occur shortly before the Civil War under Tyler and Fillmore. 1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I agree I just can't see how Trump can win this. There are a few ways, but none of them is likely: 1) A very late October surprise that is extremely damaging to Clinton (e.g. something absolutely critical to national security in those new emails Comey just found which is already in the hands of Russia or China). Of course, if something like this was out there, it is not at all clear why it was not released earlier which makes it rather unlikely. 2) The polls are misleading. There is two general ways this can happen and Trump would probably need a combination of them going his way to win: 2a) A systematic error. The polls are not truly independent: they make quite a few common assumptions about the electorate. It's possible that certain groups of people have more or fewer members voting that the polls expected which would skew the results. 2b) Statistical fluctuations. Clinton's lead is not that large compared to the uncertainty on the result. If you look at FiveThirtyEight, none of the key states is outside the uncertainty band. Of course, a substantial number of them falling in Trump's corner of the distribution based on statistical fluctuations alone is not very likely, but it is not impossible. FiveThirtyEight currently rates Trump's chances of winning at 18% whereas the prediction markets have them at 10%. This kind of probability is comparable to, for example, tossing three fair coins and having all three come up heads -- not likely, but hardly impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jasta11 Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 If this turns the tide, the Democrats are going to officially hate this guy forever. We'll see exactly how this affects things. This might be exactly what Trump needed, but I'm not sure solid evidence is going to show up in time to really break Clinton's lead. What I'm puzzled with, is why the FBI needed to send an open letter to Congress. Is this required of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 5 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said: Are you sure he's under no obligation to update his testimony? That's what I suspect and it may be why he was called in to testify 10 seconds after his initial report was released. Tempra? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Guess who's back said: Panic of getting a criminal impeached? You must be crazy I know I shouldn't respond to this, but Clinton cannot be "impeached" because at the moment she hold no federal office. Impeachment only applies if someone is accused of something that might get them removed from an official government position. Otherwise the term would be indictment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frog Eater Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jasta11 said: What I'm puzzled with, is why the FBI needed to send an open letter to Congress. Is this required of them? I thought about that as well, and all I can think of is that they found something that shows that Clinton lied or intentionally misled the FBI, and he is pissed enough to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris the Blade Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 25 minutes ago, Fez said: Its not about the substance of the investigation, whatever it is, its about how Comey acted about it. Is there any reason to release this news 11 days before the election? And if there is a reason, give us that reason, don't release a 3 paragraph statement that is entirely vague. This is an entirely political action by Comey. Oh god yea this is politically motivated. If he expects me to believe they didn't have this earlier he can shove a cactus directly up his ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.