Gordon Shumway wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Oh, I don't underestimate any of them but The Donald.

All of them know precisely what they are doing and why they are doing it.

Well, yeah. You can underestimate him and Carson, and Fiiorina. They are all idiots. Thing is, those idiots, are the majority of the GOP base right now. I hope people remember this...

 whembly wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Oh, I don't underestimate any of them but The Donald.

All of them know precisely what they are doing and why they are doing it.

Well, yeah. You can underestimate him and Carson, and Fiiorina. They are all idiots. Thing is, those idiots, are the majority of the GOP base right now. I hope people remember this...

Now now... you know that's not true.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Oh, I don't underestimate any of them but The Donald.

All of them know precisely what they are doing and why they are doing it.

Well, yeah. You can underestimate him and Carson, and Fiiorina. They are all idiots. Thing is, those idiots, are the majority of the GOP base right now. I hope people remember this...

Now now... you know that's not true.

Which part? The part where I want people to remember that the GOP were considering these clowns as possible candidates? No, that is completely true. The fact that they are idiots is definately debatable. Debate away, don't strain yourself.

(CNN)Hillary Clinton said Tuesday she opposes the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, taking sides with progressives who are fighting the 1,179-mile project over environmental concerns.

The announcement, which comes after months of Clinton remaining mum over the hot-button 2016 issue, immediately drew praise from liberals and environmental groups but was criticized by Republican presidential candidates.

"I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone pipeline as what I believe it is -- a distraction from important work we have to do on climate change," Clinton told a community forum in Des Moines, Iowa.

"And unfortunately from my perspective, one that interferes with our ability to move forward with all the other issues," she said. "Therefore I oppose it."

The Democratic 2016 front-runner announced her opposition to the project -- which is still the subject of a years-long State Department review -- as Pope Francis landed in the United States, dominating national media attention.

RELATED: Clinton says decision on Keystone pipeline coming 'soon'

Clinton had not previously disclosed her position on the campaign trail despite consistent questions about her position on the project, which is widely favored by conservatives but opposed by liberals who believe it will contribute to climate change. In explaining her answer Tuesday, Clinton said she didn't want to interfere with a review process that started under her watch.

"I was in a unique position as secretary of state at the start of this process, and not wanting to interfere with ongoing decision-making that the President and Secretary (of State John) Kerry have to do in order to make whatever final decisions they need," Clinton said. "So I thought this would be decided by now, and therefore I could tell you whether I agree or disagree, but it hasn't been decided, and I feel now I've got a responsibility to you and voters who ask me about this."

Speaking to the Des Moines Register's editorial board after the event, Clinton said she had "no idea" she would be asked about the pipeline Tuesday.

But, she said, "I think I owed it to people to say where I stood," adding, "clearly, the time had come for me to answer the question."

Jennifer Palmieri, Clinton's communications director, said in a statement to CNN that Clinton's role as a former secretary of state put her "in a different situation than other candidates."

"Having the experience of being a former secretary of state distinguishes her and her candidacy, but it comes with responsibilities that at times can limit her," Palmieri said. "But we know that the experience is well worth whatever price she may pay politically."

A Clinton campaign aide told CNN that the former secretary of state couldn't wait any longer to explain her position.

"She's been taking on water for (not taking a position) ... She didn't want to jam Secretary Kerry or jam the President but it was just time. It's September," the aide said.

The aide said as pressure had mounted for Clinton to take a position, she wanted to give the administration space but doing so became untenable. The aide noted Clinton's meeting with the Des Moines Register, and the campaign was expecting the question to come up. She wanted to be able to answer, the aide said.

The White House was briefed on Clinton's position prior to her comments Tuesday, another Clinton aide said.

"Also, in the course of discussing her plans for increasing investment in energy infrastructure with labor officials in recent weeks, she privately made her opposition to the pipeline known to them as well," the aide added.

RELATED: Is Hillary Clinton 'likable enough'?

Clio Cullison, a student at Drake University who came to the event after a friend of hers at 350.org, an active climate change advocacy group that has regularly followed Clinton on the campaign trail, asked her to attend and ask Clinton about the pipeline.

"I was really nervous to ask," Cullison told CNN. "I haven't asked any political candidates a question ever, so that was really exciting."

The student added that she "was afraid of her answer, to be honest. I didn't know where she was going to stand. I didn't know if she was going to answer at all. I am really glad she did answer, one, and two, did oppose the Keystone pipeline."

A frequent question on the trail
Clinton has repeatedly been asked about Keystone on the campaign trail but has never answered directly.

"I am not going to second guess (President Barack Obama) because I was in a position to set this in motion," Clinton said at a July event in New Hampshire. "I want to wait and see what he and Secretary Kerry decide."

At the same event, she later added, "If it is undecided when I become president, I will answer your question."

And throughout much of 2013 and 2014, Clinton criss-crossed the country on the paid speaking circuit and later on her book tour. She was asked about Keystone a number of times, particularly in Canada, where the pipeline would originate. At no point did she take a position, however.

Clinton's announcement on Tuesday was met with praise from environmental groups.

Jane Kleeb, director of the anti-pipeline group Bold Nebraska, said the decision "was a long time coming," and demonstrates that Democratic candidates need to pay closer attention to the progressive base.

"Political insiders continue to not give credit to the climate movement and not give credit to farmers and ranchers who are opposed to these risky fossil fuel projects," Kleeb told CNN. "This is a big part of her progressive base -- people who are not just against Keystone but want to see action on climate change."

And Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org, said Clinton has slowly been moving in this direction since 2010, when she said she was "inclined" to approve the project. "It's been a good evolution, always in the right direction," he said.

"Over time, she has come to understand that a defining issue of the next election is climate change and there's no way to address it seriously without this being answered," McKibben said, calling it a "boondoggle" that he expects Obama to reject as well.

2016ers weigh in
Clinton's Democratic presidential opponents have opposed the deal. On Tuesday, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, lambasted her for the delay in taking a position.

"On issue after issue -- marriage equality, drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, children fleeing violence in Central America, the Syrian refugee crisis, and now the Keystone Pipeline, Secretary Clinton has followed -- not forged -- public opinion," O'Malley said in a statement.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said he was "glad" Clinton came out against the pipeline.

"As a senator who has vigorously opposed the Keystone pipeline from the beginning, I am glad that Secretary Clinton finally has made a decision and I welcome her opposition to the pipeline," Sanders said. "Clearly it would be absurd to encourage the extraction and transportation of some of the dirtiest fossil fuel on the planet."

But Republican presidential hopefuls quickly bashed Clinton over the announcement. Jeb Bush slammed Clinton for favoring "environmental extremists" in making her decision.

".@HillaryClinton finally says what we already knew. She favors environmental extremists over U.S. jobs. #KeystoneXL," he tweeted.

Bobby Jindal noted that Clinton's announcement came at the same time Pope Francis arrived in the U.S.

"Hoping that Americans would be distracted by the Pope's visit, Hillary finally admitted she opposes #KeystoneXL," Jindal tweeted, linking to a petition on his campaign website to urge construction of the pipeline.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham fired off a series of tweets, saying the pipeline would help the economy and boost national security by reducing dependence on foreign oli.

"In opposing Keystone pipeline, @HillaryClinton once again shows that she intends to continue the failed polices of the Obama Administration," he said.

 whembly wrote:
Um... lordy... Sharia is actually an islamic legal system.

 whembly wrote:
Ah... so you'd feel that way about folks who didn't vote for Romney because he's a Mormon?

Or, even for poeple voting for Obama simply because he's black?

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
I find it mildly ironic that a portion of the conservative base are doing exactly what they claim they are afraid of about Muslims/Sharia: having an inability to separarate religious doctrine from secular law. Carson wants to base the tax system on tithing. A number of them flat out reject the supreme court's ruling on gay marriage, going so far as to say they will rather follow "the laws of nature or the laws of nature's God."--Mike Huckabee. All of them reject the law of the land in terms of abortion rights.

They are projecting in thinking that a Muslum would not be able to make a distinction between personal faith and Constitutional law. Which is weird when all they would have to do is look across the aisle and see a number of the people in the other party seem to be able to handle it just fine. Of course those people aren't real believers though.

 Frazzled wrote:
Then of course there is the large portion of liberals who can't stand anyone of faith to be in office.

 Frazzled wrote:
I'm just noting, just as there is the hardcore reactionary religious element on the Republican side, there is the hardcore reactionary anti religious side on the Democrat side.

 d-usa wrote:
Maybe it's just a minor technicality that only matters to people who pay attention to actual words and such, but there might just be a tiny difference between "I wouldn't vote for a [faith] president", and "presidential candidates should have to renounce [faith] if they run for office".

 BrotherGecko wrote:
He uses words that are too big. Doesn't support rampant unending military conflict. Is not a fan of corporatism. Isn't really caught up in immigration, islam and other faux issues. He isn't Christian enough. Understands foreign policy and statesmanship...etc etc.

Oh, and he isn't a Republican by modern Republican standards.

 whembly wrote:
Cruz is anything but, "dumb".

Folks underestimating him at your own peril.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Well, yeah. You can underestimate him and Carson, and Fiiorina. They are all idiots. Thing is, those idiots, are the majority of the GOP base right now. I hope people remember this...

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Oh, I don't underestimate any of them but The Donald.

All of them know precisely what they are doing and why they are doing it.

Well, yeah. You can underestimate him and Carson, and Fiiorina. They are all idiots. Thing is, those idiots, are the majority of the GOP base right now. I hope people remember this...

 Frazzled wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Oh, I don't underestimate any of them but The Donald.

All of them know precisely what they are doing and why they are doing it.

Well, yeah. You can underestimate him and Carson, and Fiiorina. They are all idiots. Thing is, those idiots, are the majority of the GOP base right now. I hope people remember this...

No one on that stage was an idiot, even Trump.

I'm sure the professor showed them to be debating ata low level. I'm sure he's just a Republican trying to reform the process...right

Thats the debate CNN wanted. Its also why I didn't watch it.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
He survives off lawyers finding loop holes and corporate corruption.

 LordofHats wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
He survives off lawyers finding loop holes and corporate corruption.

Trump is the original "start up company" guy. he made his fortune by consistently building businesses, not caring if they lasted, and selling all his interests before the business imploded. But because he constantly comes out ahead money wise, he ended up with the silly reputation for being a really good businessman, when he's really much closer to a scam artist.

 LordofHats wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
He survives off lawyers finding loop holes and corporate corruption.

Trump is the original "start up company" guy. he made his fortune by consistently building businesses, not caring if they lasted, and selling all his interests before the business imploded. But because he constantly comes out ahead money wise, he ended up with the silly reputation for being a really good businessman, when he's really much closer to a scam artist.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Or is this presidental bid his ultimate scam?

 LordofHats wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Or is this presidental bid his ultimate scam?

I'm pretty sure Trump is the kind of guy who drinks his own koolaid and is utterly convinced that he really is as awesome as he think he is.

 Jihadin wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Or is this presidental bid his ultimate scam?

I'm pretty sure Trump is the kind of guy who drinks his own koolaid and is utterly convinced that he really is as awesome as he think he is.

Don't we all?
I replace my Kool-Aid though with coffee.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
Or is this presidental bid his ultimate scam?

I'm pretty sure Trump is the kind of guy who drinks his own koolaid and is utterly convinced that he really is as awesome as he think he is.

Don't we all?
I replace my Kool-Aid though with coffee.

Well I personally like to think I'm the humblest guy around (and I'm pretty kick ass).

The FBI has recovered personal and work-related e-mails from the private computer server used by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, according to a person familiar with the investigation.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s success at salvaging personal e-mails that Clinton said had been deleted raises the possibility that the Democratic presidential candidate’s correspondence eventually could become public. The disclosure of such e-mails would likely fan the controversy over Clinton’s use of a private e-mail system for official business.

The FBI is investigating how and why classified information ended up on Clinton’s server. The probe probably will take at least several more months, according to the person, who described the matter on condition of anonymity because the investigation is continuing and deals with sensitive information.

A review by Clinton and her aides determined that about half of the 60,000 e-mails she exchanged during her four-year tenure as secretary of state were of a personal nature, the presidential candidate has said.

Those e-mails, she said, mostly dealt with planning for Chelsea’s wedding, yoga routines and condolence messages.

Clinton said the personal e-mails were deleted from the server and her staff turned over paper copies of the remaining work-related e-mails in December to the State Department for processing and archiving. The FBI obtained Clinton’s server from the Colorado-based company managing it.
Recover E-Mails

Outside computer specialists have said the FBI has the technical capability to recover deleted e-mails. The exact number of personal e-mails recovered by the FBI could not be learned.

Once the e-mails have been extracted, a group of agents has been separating personal correspondence and passing along work-related messages to agents leading the investigation, the person said.

Since the existence of the e-mail system became public in March, Clinton has seen her standing in polls slide, particularly in regards to questions about her trustworthiness. She also has been heavily criticized by congressional Republicans who have raised questions over whether the private server jeopardized the security of sensitive data.

Internal government watchdogs have determined that classified information ended up on the system. Their findings sparked the FBI inquiry.

Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, did not respond to phone calls or e-mails seeking comment. Nick Merrill, a spokesman, said, “We’ve cooperated to date and will continue to do so, including answering any questions about this that anyone including the public may have.”

Iowa Caucuses
The bureau’s probe is expected to last at least several more months, according to the person. That timeline would push any final determination closer to the Democratic presidential primary calendar, which kicks off Feb. 1 with the Iowa caucuses.

A bureau spokeswoman, Carol Cratty, declined to discuss any aspect of the investigation. Emily Pierce, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, also declined to comment.
Clinton is not accused of any wrongdoing. She has said she is confident that material in her e-mails wasn’t marked as classified when it was sent and received through her server. For anyone who mishandled such information, prosecutors must prove that they knowingly did so to charge them with a crime.

The former secretary of state has said she decided to use a private e-mail address -- hrod17@clintonemail.com -- to conduct all of her electronic correspondence as a matter of convenience, to avoid the need to carry two devices, one personal and one professional. She served from 2009 through 2013 as the nation’s top diplomat.
E-Mails Posted

As the result of public information lawsuits, the State Department has posted almost 8,000 of those work-related e-mails on its website. The State Department has determined that dozens of the e-mails contained classified information.

Many of the work-related e-mails contain schedules, press clippings, staffing updates, speech notes, and requests to aides for tech support. Some e-mails are simply requests to speak with people over secure phone lines.

In 2013, the Clintons turned the private server over to a Colorado-based technology company to manage. The firm, Platte River Networks, installed the device in a New Jersey data center and managed and maintained it.

Andy Boian, a spokesman for the Platte River, said the FBI last month asked the company to hand over the server. Platte River asked the Clintons what it should do, and within 24 hours a representative for the Clintons told the company to provide the device to agents, Boian said.

There has been some question as to whether Clinton deleted her messages or took the more thorough and technical step of “wiping” the server. Boian said Tuesday that Platte River had “no knowledge of it being wiped.”

Clinton’s use of a private e-mail system is being examined by congressional committees that have the power to subpoena the FBI to obtain the messages. The e-mails also may be sought under public-information laws.

The FBI isn’t likely to hand over any such messages until its investigation has been completed. Even then, public records laws provide exceptions protecting personal information.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Careful, Whembly, I did warn you some time ago that the deleted emails could just a be a whole bunch of cybersex between her and Bill...

 whembly wrote:

Hey... at least she can say... "I was RIGHT SUCKA! Now your plebs, kindly piss off!"

 Frazzled wrote:
No one on that stage was an idiot, even Trump.

I'm sure the professor showed them to be debating ata low level. I'm sure he's just a Republican trying to reform the process...right

Thats the debate CNN wanted. Its also why I didn't watch it.

 LordofHats wrote:
Trump is the original "start up company" guy. he made his fortune by consistently building businesses, not caring if they lasted, and selling all his interests before the business imploded. But because he constantly comes out ahead money wise, he ended up with the silly reputation for being a really good businessman, when he's really much closer to a scam artist.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
He isn't even that though-he started with a silver spoon in his mouth from daddy. Saw a recent analysis somewhere that I can't find right now, but it basically figured out that had the Donald just invested his inherited money in a mutual fund he would be worth more now than he actually is. He actually did worse by doing anything with it.

 d-usa wrote:
The DoJ already stated that she had the right to delete these emails and didn't break any rules by deleting them.

Of course that all got drowned out in all the "the DoJ should investigate her" noise.

 dogma wrote:
Scandals don't work that way. The opposition will continue to push the matter even if they're in the wrong, because there will never be enough information until the accuser is proven correct; just look at the Benghazi and IRS scandals. And any attempt to positively state "I didn't do it!" simply makes the speaker appear more guilty.

 d-usa wrote:
The DoJ already stated that she had the right to delete these emails and didn't break any rules by deleting them.

Of course that all got drowned out in all the "the DoJ should investigate her" noise.

 dogma wrote:
The opposition will continue to push the matter even if they're in the wrong, because there will never be enough information until the accuser is proven correct;

 motyak wrote:
Apparently Trump got bumped from his O'Reilly appearance. Trouble in paradise?