BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Clinton is just as bad. Asking women to vote for Clinton because she's a woman, is a terrible idea for running a political campaign.

You keep saying that, but why? I don't know where you are getting this at all. Hillary Clinton's campaign has built almost nothing on her gender.

Clinton is running on "If you look into the future, you will see me looking back at you from the Oval Office. Which list of mine do you want to be on when the day comes?"

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

You keep saying that, but why? I don't know where you are getting this at all. Hillary Clinton's campaign has built almost nothing on her gender.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
The BBC is reporting that the final difference between Clinton and Sanders was 0.2%. linky

That seems a lot closer than expected, does it not?

I think Hillary won by 3 delegates, and 6 of them were decided via coin toss.

She was 6 for 6 in the coin toss mechanism.

Man... she needs to pick my next lotto numbers.

See if we can settle Benghazi via coin toss?

 ProtoClone wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Clinton is just as bad. Asking women to vote for Clinton because she's a woman, is a terrible idea for running a political campaign.

You keep saying that, but why? I don't know where you are getting this at all. Hillary Clinton's campaign has built almost nothing on her gender.

Clinton is running on "If you look into the future, you will see me looking back at you from the Oval Office. Which list of mine do you want to be on when the day comes?"

I don't know if it is her, herself, as it so much the outlining people spreading that message.

I have heard pundits scoff when a woman says they are voting for Sanders. They act like women should be voting for Clinton because, hey, they are both women after all.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

You keep saying that, but why? I don't know where you are getting this at all. Hillary Clinton's campaign has built almost nothing on her gender.

She may not be pandering directly to women voters (or thinking she is).... but in damn near every debate, she's made some idiot remark along the lines of "first woman president" which instantly makes me not want to vote for her.

I don't recall Obama ever running on "first black man in the oval office," though that could also be due to time and not actually paying close attention in those days. I just think it's a cheap parlor trick to try and run on "first" milestones.

BREAKING: Hillary Clinton Put Spies’ Lives at Risk
It's not the 'nothing-burger' Clinton allies have tried to portray -- lives are literally at stake.

For months you’ve read about EmailGate in this column. I’ve elaborated how Hillary Clinton, the apparent Democratic frontrunner for President this year, put large amounts of classified information at grave risk through slipshod security practices by herself and her staff. Now that scandal has taken a significant turn for the more ominous.

Last Friday afternoon the State Department’s latest court-mandated release of Hillary Clinton’s emails from when she was Secretary of State caused a new political firestorm. While many more emails were released by Foggy Bottom, some with redactions due to classified materials they contained, twenty-two emails totaling thirty-seven pages of text were withheld entirely at the request of the Intelligence Community. Those twenty-two emails, deemed “unclassified” by Ms. Clinton and her staff, were judged to be Top Secret in reality.

Since Top Secret is the U.S. Government’s highest official classification level, this revelation exploded months of denials from the Clinton presidential campaign that Hillary had done no wrong. The Federal government defines Top Secret materials as “information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.” The disclosure of Top Secret information is a serious criminal matter that normal Americans face prosecution and substantial jail time for perpetrating.

Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton over the weekend continued to deny any wrongdoing in EmailGate, painting the scandal as just more political theater by her enemies. Echoes of the “vast right-wing conspiracy,” the Clintonian 1990s bogeyman, are now distinctly audible. Moreover, she compared the story to the attack on our Benghazi consulate in 2012, which may not help her politically, given the lingering problems that tragedy still causes Ms. Clinton in certain quarters.

Most controversially, Hillary and her mouthpieces have kept pushing the line that none of this information was “marked” classified when it appeared in her personal emails, despite the fact that this claim, even if true, does not mitigate any disclosure of classified information. Her defense seems to be that neither she nor anybody on her staff were able to recognize that Top Secret information was actually Top Secret, which is hardly a ringing endorsement of Hillary’s qualifications to be our next commander-in-chief.

Mysteries abound in this latest trove of emails. One of the big ones is that four emails from Sidney Blumenthal, Hillary’s close friend and factotum, were withheld by the Intelligence Community because they were judged to be entirely classified. How Mr. Blumenthal, who held no U.S. Government position after January 2001, when Bill Clinton left the White House, had access to classified information a decade after that is not explained.

This column has previously detailed how Mr. Blumenthal was running an impressive private intelligence agency for the Secretary of State, and that his emails to Ms. Clinton inexplicably included highly sensitive Top Secret Codeword intelligence from the National Security Agency. Since Mr. Blumenthal’s emails were illegally accessed by a private hacker, they can be safely assumed in to be in the hands of numerous foreign intelligence services. There’s a lot here that the FBI needs to unravel to understand EmailGate’s full complexity – and illegality.

Nevertheless, Hillary has upped the ante by demanding that the twenty-two Top Secret emails that have been withheld by the State Department be released to the public so Americans can see that they are in fact innocuous, as Ms. Clinton and her defenders maintain. Yet this is pure political theater: she surely knows that the emails are not going to be released on security grounds anytime soon, probably not for several decades, at least.

What, then, is in those twenty-two emails? Contrary to the assertions of Team Clinton that the information was benign, a “nothing-burger” to cite her allies, implying that the overzealous Intelligence Community has classified information that doesn’t need protection, their contents are Top Secret with good reason. Hillary has opted for cries of “overclassification” as her last line of defense in EmailGate, notwithstanding that’s the choice of any officials in Washington, DC, who have broken secrecy laws and have no leg left to stand on.

Today FoxNews has reported that those twenty-two Top Secret emails included “operational intelligence” that involves espionage sources and methods, adding that lives have been put at risk by Hillary’s mishandling of this information.

I can confirm that the FoxNews report, which lacks any specifics about exactly what was compromised, is accurate. And what was actually in those Top Secret emails found on Hillary’s “unclassified” personal bathroom server was colossally damaging to our national security and has put lives at risk.

Discussions with Intelligence Community officials have revealed that Ms. Clinton’s “unclassified” emails included Holy Grail items of American espionage such as the true names of Central Intelligence Agency intelligence officers serving overseas under cover. Worse, some of those exposed are serving under non-official cover. NOCs (see this for an explanation of their important role in espionage) are the pointy end of the CIA spear and they are always at risk of exposure – which is what Ms. Clinton’s emails have done.

Not only have these spies had their lives put in serious risk by this, it’s a clear violation of Federal law. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, enacted due to the murder of the CIA’s station chief in Athens after his cover was blown by the left-wing media, makes it a Federal crime to divulge the true identity of any covert operative serving U.S. intelligence if that person has not previous been publicly acknowledged to be working for our spy agencies.

People really go to jail for breaking this law. John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer, recently emerged from two years in prison for unauthorized disclosure of classified information, including exposing the identity of an Agency colleague who was serving under cover.

Anyone possessing political memory will recall that this law was also the centerpiece of the 2003 scandal surrounding Valerie Plame, a CIA NOC officer whose identity appeared in the media after it was exposed by the George W. Bush White House. Ms. Plame became a liberal icon of sorts, complete with high glamour, while the affair became an obsession for much of the mainstream media, despite the fact that the spy was physically unharmed by the leak.

Indeed, Valerie Plame parleyed the ruckus into a successful post-CIA career and she remains in the limelight. In a perverse irony, last weekend she was in New Hampshire campaigning for Hillary Clinton. Neither Ms. Plame nor much of the media seem interested in their candidate’s far greater compromise of classified information, including the identities of NOCs like Valerie Plame once was.

Hillary’s emails also include the names of foreigners who are on the CIA payroll, according to Intelligence Community officials. Since it can be safely assumed that several foreign intelligence agencies intercepted Ms. Clinton’s unencrypted communications, this directly threatens the lives of the exposed individuals. “It’s a death sentence,” explained a senior Intelligence Community official: “if we’re lucky only agents, not our officers, will get killed because of this.” (Agents are foreigners working for U.S. intelligence while officers are American staffers.)

CIA and the entire Intelligence Community are in panic mode right now, trying to determine which of our intelligence officers and agents have been compromised by EmailGate. At a minimum, valuable covers have been blown, careers have been ruined, and lives have been put at serious risk. Our spies’ greatest concern now is what’s still in Hillary’s emails that investigators have yet to find.

And what about those 30,000 emails that Ms. Clinton had deleted? “I’ll spend the rest of my career trying to figure out what classified information was in those,” stated an exasperated Pentagon counterintelligence official, “everybody is mad as hell right now.” “The worst part,” the counterspy added,” is that Moscow and Beijing have that information but the Intelligence Community maybe never will.”

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Most of the support I hear for Clinton over Sanders is based on the idea that she'd support Israel and bust heads as needed. She's like a Democratic authoritarian in their eyes.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I must admit I've seen more of the Republican debates than the Democratic ones.

 jasper76 wrote:

 skyth wrote:
Am I the only one more scared of the thought of a president Cruz than a president Trump?

No you are not. Cruz is a fundamentalist Christian who intends to impose Christianity on the populous via political means. He is miles away more frightening than Trump IMO, but fortunately he is so unpalatable to everyone outside the religious right bubble that a Cruz nomination would all but garuntee a Democratic victory.

 whembly wrote:
...and here's why Clinton's #Emailgate is a big deal:

Spoiler:

http://observer.com/2016/02/breaking-hillary-clinton-put-spies-lives-at-risk/

BREAKING: Hillary Clinton Put Spies’ Lives at Risk
It's not the 'nothing-burger' Clinton allies have tried to portray -- lives are literally at stake.

For months you’ve read about EmailGate in this column. I’ve elaborated how Hillary Clinton, the apparent Democratic frontrunner for President this year, put large amounts of classified information at grave risk through slipshod security practices by herself and her staff. Now that scandal has taken a significant turn for the more ominous.

Last Friday afternoon the State Department’s latest court-mandated release of Hillary Clinton’s emails from when she was Secretary of State caused a new political firestorm. While many more emails were released by Foggy Bottom, some with redactions due to classified materials they contained, twenty-two emails totaling thirty-seven pages of text were withheld entirely at the request of the Intelligence Community. Those twenty-two emails, deemed “unclassified” by Ms. Clinton and her staff, were judged to be Top Secret in reality.

Since Top Secret is the U.S. Government’s highest official classification level, this revelation exploded months of denials from the Clinton presidential campaign that Hillary had done no wrong. The Federal government defines Top Secret materials as “information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.” The disclosure of Top Secret information is a serious criminal matter that normal Americans face prosecution and substantial jail time for perpetrating.

Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton over the weekend continued to deny any wrongdoing in EmailGate, painting the scandal as just more political theater by her enemies. Echoes of the “vast right-wing conspiracy,” the Clintonian 1990s bogeyman, are now distinctly audible. Moreover, she compared the story to the attack on our Benghazi consulate in 2012, which may not help her politically, given the lingering problems that tragedy still causes Ms. Clinton in certain quarters.

Most controversially, Hillary and her mouthpieces have kept pushing the line that none of this information was “marked” classified when it appeared in her personal emails, despite the fact that this claim, even if true, does not mitigate any disclosure of classified information. Her defense seems to be that neither she nor anybody on her staff were able to recognize that Top Secret information was actually Top Secret, which is hardly a ringing endorsement of Hillary’s qualifications to be our next commander-in-chief.

Mysteries abound in this latest trove of emails. One of the big ones is that four emails from Sidney Blumenthal, Hillary’s close friend and factotum, were withheld by the Intelligence Community because they were judged to be entirely classified. How Mr. Blumenthal, who held no U.S. Government position after January 2001, when Bill Clinton left the White House, had access to classified information a decade after that is not explained.

This column has previously detailed how Mr. Blumenthal was running an impressive private intelligence agency for the Secretary of State, and that his emails to Ms. Clinton inexplicably included highly sensitive Top Secret Codeword intelligence from the National Security Agency. Since Mr. Blumenthal’s emails were illegally accessed by a private hacker, they can be safely assumed in to be in the hands of numerous foreign intelligence services. There’s a lot here that the FBI needs to unravel to understand EmailGate’s full complexity – and illegality.

Nevertheless, Hillary has upped the ante by demanding that the twenty-two Top Secret emails that have been withheld by the State Department be released to the public so Americans can see that they are in fact innocuous, as Ms. Clinton and her defenders maintain. Yet this is pure political theater: she surely knows that the emails are not going to be released on security grounds anytime soon, probably not for several decades, at least.

What, then, is in those twenty-two emails? Contrary to the assertions of Team Clinton that the information was benign, a “nothing-burger” to cite her allies, implying that the overzealous Intelligence Community has classified information that doesn’t need protection, their contents are Top Secret with good reason. Hillary has opted for cries of “overclassification” as her last line of defense in EmailGate, notwithstanding that’s the choice of any officials in Washington, DC, who have broken secrecy laws and have no leg left to stand on.

Today FoxNews has reported that those twenty-two Top Secret emails included “operational intelligence” that involves espionage sources and methods, adding that lives have been put at risk by Hillary’s mishandling of this information.

I can confirm that the FoxNews report, which lacks any specifics about exactly what was compromised, is accurate. And what was actually in those Top Secret emails found on Hillary’s “unclassified” personal bathroom server was colossally damaging to our national security and has put lives at risk.

Discussions with Intelligence Community officials have revealed that Ms. Clinton’s “unclassified” emails included Holy Grail items of American espionage such as the true names of Central Intelligence Agency intelligence officers serving overseas under cover. Worse, some of those exposed are serving under non-official cover. NOCs (see this for an explanation of their important role in espionage) are the pointy end of the CIA spear and they are always at risk of exposure – which is what Ms. Clinton’s emails have done.

Not only have these spies had their lives put in serious risk by this, it’s a clear violation of Federal law. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, enacted due to the murder of the CIA’s station chief in Athens after his cover was blown by the left-wing media, makes it a Federal crime to divulge the true identity of any covert operative serving U.S. intelligence if that person has not previous been publicly acknowledged to be working for our spy agencies.

People really go to jail for breaking this law. John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer, recently emerged from two years in prison for unauthorized disclosure of classified information, including exposing the identity of an Agency colleague who was serving under cover.

Anyone possessing political memory will recall that this law was also the centerpiece of the 2003 scandal surrounding Valerie Plame, a CIA NOC officer whose identity appeared in the media after it was exposed by the George W. Bush White House. Ms. Plame became a liberal icon of sorts, complete with high glamour, while the affair became an obsession for much of the mainstream media, despite the fact that the spy was physically unharmed by the leak.

Indeed, Valerie Plame parleyed the ruckus into a successful post-CIA career and she remains in the limelight. In a perverse irony, last weekend she was in New Hampshire campaigning for Hillary Clinton. Neither Ms. Plame nor much of the media seem interested in their candidate’s far greater compromise of classified information, including the identities of NOCs like Valerie Plame once was.

Hillary’s emails also include the names of foreigners who are on the CIA payroll, according to Intelligence Community officials. Since it can be safely assumed that several foreign intelligence agencies intercepted Ms. Clinton’s unencrypted communications, this directly threatens the lives of the exposed individuals. “It’s a death sentence,” explained a senior Intelligence Community official: “if we’re lucky only agents, not our officers, will get killed because of this.” (Agents are foreigners working for U.S. intelligence while officers are American staffers.)

CIA and the entire Intelligence Community are in panic mode right now, trying to determine which of our intelligence officers and agents have been compromised by EmailGate. At a minimum, valuable covers have been blown, careers have been ruined, and lives have been put at serious risk. Our spies’ greatest concern now is what’s still in Hillary’s emails that investigators have yet to find.

And what about those 30,000 emails that Ms. Clinton had deleted? “I’ll spend the rest of my career trying to figure out what classified information was in those,” stated an exasperated Pentagon counterintelligence official, “everybody is mad as hell right now.” “The worst part,” the counterspy added,” is that Moscow and Beijing have that information but the Intelligence Community maybe never will.”

So...

#SpyLivesMatters?

 CptJake wrote:

 whembly wrote:
...and here's why Clinton's #Emailgate is a big deal:

Spoiler:

http://observer.com/2016/02/breaking-hillary-clinton-put-spies-lives-at-risk/

BREAKING: Hillary Clinton Put Spies’ Lives at Risk
It's not the 'nothing-burger' Clinton allies have tried to portray -- lives are literally at stake.

For months you’ve read about EmailGate in this column. I’ve elaborated how Hillary Clinton, the apparent Democratic frontrunner for President this year, put large amounts of classified information at grave risk through slipshod security practices by herself and her staff. Now that scandal has taken a significant turn for the more ominous.

Last Friday afternoon the State Department’s latest court-mandated release of Hillary Clinton’s emails from when she was Secretary of State caused a new political firestorm. While many more emails were released by Foggy Bottom, some with redactions due to classified materials they contained, twenty-two emails totaling thirty-seven pages of text were withheld entirely at the request of the Intelligence Community. Those twenty-two emails, deemed “unclassified” by Ms. Clinton and her staff, were judged to be Top Secret in reality.

Since Top Secret is the U.S. Government’s highest official classification level, this revelation exploded months of denials from the Clinton presidential campaign that Hillary had done no wrong. The Federal government defines Top Secret materials as “information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.” The disclosure of Top Secret information is a serious criminal matter that normal Americans face prosecution and substantial jail time for perpetrating.

Nevertheless, Hillary Clinton over the weekend continued to deny any wrongdoing in EmailGate, painting the scandal as just more political theater by her enemies. Echoes of the “vast right-wing conspiracy,” the Clintonian 1990s bogeyman, are now distinctly audible. Moreover, she compared the story to the attack on our Benghazi consulate in 2012, which may not help her politically, given the lingering problems that tragedy still causes Ms. Clinton in certain quarters.

Most controversially, Hillary and her mouthpieces have kept pushing the line that none of this information was “marked” classified when it appeared in her personal emails, despite the fact that this claim, even if true, does not mitigate any disclosure of classified information. Her defense seems to be that neither she nor anybody on her staff were able to recognize that Top Secret information was actually Top Secret, which is hardly a ringing endorsement of Hillary’s qualifications to be our next commander-in-chief.

Mysteries abound in this latest trove of emails. One of the big ones is that four emails from Sidney Blumenthal, Hillary’s close friend and factotum, were withheld by the Intelligence Community because they were judged to be entirely classified. How Mr. Blumenthal, who held no U.S. Government position after January 2001, when Bill Clinton left the White House, had access to classified information a decade after that is not explained.

This column has previously detailed how Mr. Blumenthal was running an impressive private intelligence agency for the Secretary of State, and that his emails to Ms. Clinton inexplicably included highly sensitive Top Secret Codeword intelligence from the National Security Agency. Since Mr. Blumenthal’s emails were illegally accessed by a private hacker, they can be safely assumed in to be in the hands of numerous foreign intelligence services. There’s a lot here that the FBI needs to unravel to understand EmailGate’s full complexity – and illegality.

Nevertheless, Hillary has upped the ante by demanding that the twenty-two Top Secret emails that have been withheld by the State Department be released to the public so Americans can see that they are in fact innocuous, as Ms. Clinton and her defenders maintain. Yet this is pure political theater: she surely knows that the emails are not going to be released on security grounds anytime soon, probably not for several decades, at least.

What, then, is in those twenty-two emails? Contrary to the assertions of Team Clinton that the information was benign, a “nothing-burger” to cite her allies, implying that the overzealous Intelligence Community has classified information that doesn’t need protection, their contents are Top Secret with good reason. Hillary has opted for cries of “overclassification” as her last line of defense in EmailGate, notwithstanding that’s the choice of any officials in Washington, DC, who have broken secrecy laws and have no leg left to stand on.

Today FoxNews has reported that those twenty-two Top Secret emails included “operational intelligence” that involves espionage sources and methods, adding that lives have been put at risk by Hillary’s mishandling of this information.

I can confirm that the FoxNews report, which lacks any specifics about exactly what was compromised, is accurate. And what was actually in those Top Secret emails found on Hillary’s “unclassified” personal bathroom server was colossally damaging to our national security and has put lives at risk.

Discussions with Intelligence Community officials have revealed that Ms. Clinton’s “unclassified” emails included Holy Grail items of American espionage such as the true names of Central Intelligence Agency intelligence officers serving overseas under cover. Worse, some of those exposed are serving under non-official cover. NOCs (see this for an explanation of their important role in espionage) are the pointy end of the CIA spear and they are always at risk of exposure – which is what Ms. Clinton’s emails have done.

Not only have these spies had their lives put in serious risk by this, it’s a clear violation of Federal law. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, enacted due to the murder of the CIA’s station chief in Athens after his cover was blown by the left-wing media, makes it a Federal crime to divulge the true identity of any covert operative serving U.S. intelligence if that person has not previous been publicly acknowledged to be working for our spy agencies.

People really go to jail for breaking this law. John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer, recently emerged from two years in prison for unauthorized disclosure of classified information, including exposing the identity of an Agency colleague who was serving under cover.

Anyone possessing political memory will recall that this law was also the centerpiece of the 2003 scandal surrounding Valerie Plame, a CIA NOC officer whose identity appeared in the media after it was exposed by the George W. Bush White House. Ms. Plame became a liberal icon of sorts, complete with high glamour, while the affair became an obsession for much of the mainstream media, despite the fact that the spy was physically unharmed by the leak.

Indeed, Valerie Plame parleyed the ruckus into a successful post-CIA career and she remains in the limelight. In a perverse irony, last weekend she was in New Hampshire campaigning for Hillary Clinton. Neither Ms. Plame nor much of the media seem interested in their candidate’s far greater compromise of classified information, including the identities of NOCs like Valerie Plame once was.

Hillary’s emails also include the names of foreigners who are on the CIA payroll, according to Intelligence Community officials. Since it can be safely assumed that several foreign intelligence agencies intercepted Ms. Clinton’s unencrypted communications, this directly threatens the lives of the exposed individuals. “It’s a death sentence,” explained a senior Intelligence Community official: “if we’re lucky only agents, not our officers, will get killed because of this.” (Agents are foreigners working for U.S. intelligence while officers are American staffers.)

CIA and the entire Intelligence Community are in panic mode right now, trying to determine which of our intelligence officers and agents have been compromised by EmailGate. At a minimum, valuable covers have been blown, careers have been ruined, and lives have been put at serious risk. Our spies’ greatest concern now is what’s still in Hillary’s emails that investigators have yet to find.

And what about those 30,000 emails that Ms. Clinton had deleted? “I’ll spend the rest of my career trying to figure out what classified information was in those,” stated an exasperated Pentagon counterintelligence official, “everybody is mad as hell right now.” “The worst part,” the counterspy added,” is that Moscow and Beijing have that information but the Intelligence Community maybe never will.”

So...

#SpyLivesMatters?

At one point I was a SAP guy so believe I understand a tiny bit about the types of things that get put under a SAP. When I read some of the emails contained SAP material I was appalled. I know the ramifications of that type of info getting out of the SAP, and it is not ever a good thing.

 whembly wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Apologies if this has been done to death before, but where is the birther movement against Ted Cruz's eligibility for President?

When you think of all the hassle that Obama got, it's only fair that the Democrats respond in kind

Democrats started that whole thing during the Clinton vs Obama primary in '08.

There is no 'Cruz birther' movement at the moment.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
So how exactly did Iowa get put on this pedestal. From what I've been seeing its one of the lease diverse states thats no where near representative of the country as a whole.

 jasper76 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Apologies if this has been done to death before, but where is the birther movement against Ted Cruz's eligibility for President?

When you think of all the hassle that Obama got, it's only fair that the Democrats respond in kind

Democrats started that whole thing during the Clinton vs Obama primary in '08.

There is no 'Cruz birther' movement at the moment.

There damn well should be. Cruz was not only born in Canada, he was a Canadian citizen up until 2 years ago.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
So how exactly did Iowa get put on this pedestal. From what I've been seeing its one of the lease diverse states thats no where near representative of the country as a whole.

 whembly wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Apologies if this has been done to death before, but where is the birther movement against Ted Cruz's eligibility for President?

When you think of all the hassle that Obama got, it's only fair that the Democrats respond in kind

Democrats started that whole thing during the Clinton vs Obama primary in '08.

There is no 'Cruz birther' movement at the moment.

There damn well should be. Cruz was not only born in Canada, he was a Canadian citizen up until 2 years ago.

So... what are you implying?

That he's a sooper-sekret Loonie who want's to re-integrate the US and Canada... all for the express purpose of acquiring the tastefully, wonderful maple syrups?

 jasper76 wrote:
@whembley: Anyway, I already tried to fight this battle many pages ago, and I seem to be a lone warrior on this issue.

 jasper76 wrote:
Yeah, even if we did get a court decision on Cruz's eligibility, I admit that it would likely be ruled in his favor, but its an open question and one that has not been litigated.

Honestly, the dual citizenship thing is more problematic to me in principal than the born on Canadian soil thing.

And the smug douchebag with a punchable face thing is another issue I can't get past.

 jasper76 wrote:
Honestly whembley, I do not think that someone who has ever been a citizen of another country should be qualified to become POTUS.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Honestly whembley, I do not think that someone who has ever been a citizen of another country should be qualified to become POTUS.

You do realize that you can be a dual citizen and still be natural born? This is the case when a child is born to US parents in another country or on a military installation.

The issue is that while the Constitution says that a person has to be a "natural born citizen" to be eligible for the office, it is not defined anywhere in the text.

 jasper76 wrote:
Honestly whembley, I do not think that someone who has ever been a citizen of another country should be qualified to become POTUS.

 Ouze wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
So how exactly did Iowa get put on this pedestal. From what I've been seeing its one of the lease diverse states thats no where near representative of the country as a whole.

It's sort of a political tautology: Why is Iowa's primary first in the nation? Because Iowa's primary is first in the nation.

Alternately, read this.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Honestly whembley, I do not think that someone who has ever been a citizen of another country should be qualified to become POTUS.

Well... I think that's a bit far.... I mean what if 29 years from now, my daughter (who by age would be eligible) wanted to become president? She was born in Germany to two US servicemembers. By law she currently is a citizen of both Germany and the US. By what you posted, she shouldn't be eligible to become POTUS because she's been a citizen of another country.



Now, I agree that someone the age of Cruz who is what... in his 40s, 50s? only just a couple years ago, "got around" to renouncing his Canadian citizenship as a political ploy, shouldn't be in this game, especially without having the "special circumstances" that a military family would.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Honestly whembley, I do not think that someone who has ever been a citizen of another country should be qualified to become POTUS.

Well... I think that's a bit far.... I mean what if 29 years from now, my daughter (who by age would be eligible) wanted to become president? She was born in Germany to two US servicemembers. By law she currently is a citizen of both Germany and the US. By what you posted, she shouldn't be eligible to become POTUS because she's been a citizen of another country.



Now, I agree that someone the age of Cruz who is what... in his 40s, 50s? only just a couple years ago, "got around" to renouncing his Canadian citizenship as a political ploy, shouldn't be in this game, especially without having the "special circumstances" that a military family would.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Apologies if this has been done to death before, but where is the birther movement against Ted Cruz's eligibility for President?

When you think of all the hassle that Obama got, it's only fair that the Democrats respond in kind

 d-usa wrote:

FYI: unless you guys lives in Germany for 8 years years your daughter does not have German citizenship AFAIK. Citizenship laws were updated in 200(?)