Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
We have a person who's main campaign message seems to be vote for me because I'm a woman.

 Goliath wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
We have a person who's main campaign message seems to be vote for me because I'm a woman.

I mean, if you don't look at the campaign message then I can see how it might seem to be that.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
We have a person who's main campaign message seems to be vote for me because I'm a woman.

I mean, if you don't look at the campaign message then I can see how it might seem to be that.

If memory serves, Clinton, or one of her supporters said that woman who don't vote for Clinton should burn in hell, or words to that effect. This was only a few weeks ago. So yes, the gender card is being played, here.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
We have a person who's main campaign message seems to be vote for me because I'm a woman.

I mean, if you don't look at the campaign message then I can see how it might seem to be that.

If memory serves, Clinton, or one of her supporters said that woman who don't vote for Clinton should burn in hell, or words to that effect. This was only a few weeks ago. So yes, the gender card is being played, here.

Romney plans to deliver his speech at 11.30am ET at the University of Utah, but leaked contents of his remarks have already made the contents of the announcement clear.



Here’s what I know: Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He’s playing the American public for suckers: he gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat.

“The president of the United States has long been the leader of the free world,” Romney’s remarks say. “The president and, yes, the nominees of the country’s great parties help define America to billions of people. All of them bear the responsibility of being an example for our children and grandchildren.”

Romney also claims that Trump, if nominated, would help facilitate Hillary Clinton’s ascension to the White House.

“Trump relishes any poll that reflects what he thinks of himself, but polls are also saying that he will lose to Hillary Clinton.”

Trump, speaking on MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning, did not hold back his disdain for the failed Republican nominee, describing Romney as “a man who begged me for my endorsement four years ago”.

“He failed in his campaign, it was a horribly run campaign, Republicans did not even go out to vote, it was a disaster,” Trump said. “He ran one of the worst campaigns in presidential history. That was an election that should have been won by the Republicans. He was a catastrophe.”

In a Twitter storm earlier this morning, Trump declared that establishment Republicans like Romney want to “kill the movement” that he has ignited among discontented voters.

 Goliath wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
We have a person who's main campaign message seems to be vote for me because I'm a woman.

I mean, if you don't look at the campaign message then I can see how it might seem to be that.

If memory serves, Clinton, or one of her supporters said that woman who don't vote for Clinton should burn in hell, or words to that effect. This was only a few weeks ago. So yes, the gender card is being played, here.

Okay, someone said something about people voting for her because she's a woman. In what way does that make it her main campaign message?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

There's never been a female president, let's make history etc etc

 Crimson wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

There's never been a female president, let's make history etc etc

That is one small part of her platform, yes (and perfectly valid one), but is not her whole platform, not even close.
You may disagree with her policies, but she is easily the most experienced and qualified person running.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Clinton's time as SoS certainly gave her a lot of experience of failure

 skyth wrote:
I'm not exactly sure where you are getting failure from her SoS tenure.

 Goliath wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Clinton's time as SoS certainly gave her a lot of experience of failure

Examples please.

The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.

As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents are likely to want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.

The inquiry comes against a political backdrop in which Clinton is the favorite to secure the Democratic nomination for the presidency.

So far, there is no indication that prosecutors have convened a grand jury in the email investigation to subpoena testimony or documents, which would require the participation of a U.S. attorney’s office.

Spokesmen at the FBI and Justice Department would not discuss the investigation. Pagliano’s attorney, Mark J. MacDougall, also declined to comment.

In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said: “As we have said since last summer, Secretary Clinton has been cooperating with the Department of Justice’s security inquiry, including offering in August to meet with them to assist their efforts if needed.”

He also said the campaign is “pleased” that Pagliano, who invoked his Fifth Amendment rights before a congressional panel in September, is now cooperating with prosecutors. The campaign had encouraged Pagliano to testify before Congress.

As part of the inquiry, law enforcement officials will look at the potential damage had the classified information in the emails been exposed. The Clinton campaign has described the probe as a security review. But current and former officials in the FBI and at the Justice Department have said investigators are trying to determine whether a crime was committed.

“There was wrongdoing,” said a former senior law enforcement official. “But was it criminal wrongdoing?”

Clinton has since apologized for what happened: “Yes, I should have used two email addresses, one for personal matters and one for my work at the State Department. Not doing so was a mistake. I’m sorry about it, and I take full responsibility.”

Any decision to charge someone would involve Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, who told Congress when asked last month about the email inquiry: “That matter is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents, FBI agents, as well as the career independent attorneys in the Department of Justice. They follow the evidence, they look at the law and they’ll make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate.”

She added, “We will review all the facts and all the evidence and come to an independent conclusion as how to best handle it.”

Current and former officials said the conviction of retired four-star general and CIA director David H. Petraeus for mishandling classified information is casting a shadow over the email investigation.

The officials said they think that Petraeus’s actions were more egregious than those of Clinton and her aides because he lied to the FBI, and classified information he shared with his biographer contained top secret code words, identities of covert officers, war strategy and intelligence capabilities. Prosecutors initially threatened to charge him with three felonies, including conspiracy, violating the Espionage Act and lying to the FBI. But after negotiations, Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information.

He was fined $100,000 and sentenced to two years of probation. FBI officials were angered by the deal and predicted it would affect the outcome of other cases involving classified information.

Petraeus “was handled so lightly for his offense there isn’t a whole lot you can do,” said a former U.S. law enforcement official who oversaw counterintelligence investigations and described the email controversy as “a lesser set of circumstances.”

The State Department has been analyzing the contents of Clinton’s correspondence, as it has prepared 52,000 pages of Clinton’s emails for public release in batches, a process that began in May and concluded Monday. The State Department has said 2,093 of Clinton’s released emails were redacted in all or part because they contained classified material, the vast majority of them rated “confidential,” the lowest level of sensitivity in the classification system.

Clinton and the State Department have said that none of the material was marked classified at the time it was sent. However, it is the responsibility of individual government officials to properly handle sensitive material.

The email investigation is being conducted by FBI counterintelligence agents and supervised by the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

In a letter filed last month in federal court as part of ongoing civil litigation over Clinton’s emails, the FBI confirmed that it was “working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.” The agency declined to publicly detail the investigation’s “specific focus, scope or potential targets.”

On Tuesday, FBI Director James B. Comey said he was “very close” to the investigation.

Former federal prosecutor Glen Kopp said it is not surprising that agents want to interview Clinton and her aides.

“They are within the zone of interest of the investigation,” he said.

A request to interview her would have to be reviewed by top level officials at both the FBI and the Justice Department, a former official said.

As part of those interviews, the FBI would also seek to establish that Clinton and her aides understood the policies and protocols for handling classified information, former officials said.

Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, declined to comment.

Kendall, who also has represented President Bill Clinton and Petraeus, has navigated similar issues in other cases. During the investigation of President Clinton by independent counsel Ken Starr, for instance, Kendall rebuffed several requests for interviews.

The president was then subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury. In a deal brokered by Kendall, the subpoena was withdrawn and Clinton testified voluntarily in 1998.

Former prosecutors said investigators were probably feeling the pressure of time because of the election. Take action before the election, they said, and you risk being perceived as trying to influence the result. Take action after and face criticism for not letting voters know there was an issue with their preferred candidate.

“The timing is terrible whether you do it before or after,” Kopp said.

The issue of Clinton’s use of a private email server was referred to the FBI in July after the Office of the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community determined that some of the emails that traversed Clinton’s server contained classified material.

Emails that contain material now deemed classified were authored by Clinton but also by many of her top aides, including Jacob Sullivan, who was her director of policy planning and her deputy chief of staff. He is now advising Clinton’s campaign on foreign policy and is thought to be a likely candidate for national security adviser if she is elected president.

The State Department has said that, at the request of intelligence agencies, it has classified 22 Clinton emails as “top secret” and will not release those emails, even in redacted form. “Top secret” is the highest level of classification, reserved for material whose release could cause “exceptionally grave damage to the national security.”

I. Charles McCullough III, the inspector general of the intelligence community, has indicated that some of the material intelligence officials have reviewed contained information that was classified at the time it was sent; the State Department has indicated that it has not analyzed whether the material should have been marked classified when it was sent, only whether it requires classification before being released now.

"very likely" that Hillary Clinton will face questioning from FBI in coming weeks, @jonkarl reports @GMA

— Rick Klein (@rickklein) March 3, 2016

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Months ago, we had a thread about a certain African country that begins with the letter L, and a certain city within that country that begins with the letter B Hilary Clinton was involved...

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 skyth wrote:
I'm not exactly sure where you are getting failure from her SoS tenure.

You gotta be kidding me!

Months ago, we had a thread about a certain African country that begins with the letter L, and a certain city within that country that begins with the letter B Hilary Clinton was involved...

This thread went on for centuries, and because of the actions of a certain user who's name begins with W

everybody on dakka agreed NEVER EVER EVER to talk about this country or that thread ever again, because people died of boredom

Dakka mods passed a rule that says W shall be locked in a room for a 100 years, have his eyes prised open with cocktail sticks, and forced to watch the phantom menace until he goes insanse, should he ever mention Hilary Clinton and that African country...

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Please, God, no, not another 200 pages discussing Clinton emails

HEALTHCARE REFORM TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

Since March of 2010, the American people have had to suffer under the incredible economic burden of the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare. This legislation, passed by totally partisan votes in the House and Senate and signed into law by the most divisive and partisan President in American history, has tragically but predictably resulted in runaway costs, websites that don’t work, greater rationing of care, higher premiums, less competition and fewer choices. Obamacare has raised the economic uncertainty of every single person residing in this country. As it appears Obamacare is certain to collapse of its own weight, the damage done by the Democrats and President Obama, and abetted by the Supreme Court, will be difficult to repair unless the next President and a Republican congress lead the effort to bring much-needed free market reforms to the healthcare industry.

But none of these positive reforms can be accomplished without Obamacare repeal. On day one of the Trump Administration, we will ask Congress to immediately deliver a full repeal of Obamacare.

However, it is not enough to simply repeal this terrible legislation. We will work with Congress to make sure we have a series of reforms ready for implementation that follow free market principles and that will restore economic freedom and certainty to everyone in this country. By following free market principles and working together to create sound public policy that will broaden healthcare access, make healthcare more affordable and improve the quality of the care available to all Americans.

Any reform effort must begin with Congress. Since Obamacare became law, conservative Republicans have been offering reforms that can be delivered individually or as part of more comprehensive reform efforts. In the remaining sections of this policy paper, several reforms will be offered that should be considered by Congress so that on the first day of the Trump Administration, we can start the process of restoring faith in government and economic liberty to the people.

Congress must act. Our elected representatives in the House and Senate must:

Completely repeal Obamacare. Our elected representatives must eliminate the individual mandate. No person should be required to buy insurance unless he or she wants to.
Modify existing law that inhibits the sale of health insurance across state lines. As long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements, any vendor ought to be able to offer insurance in any state. By allowing full competition in this market, insurance costs will go down and consumer satisfaction will go up.
Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system. Businesses are allowed to take these deductions so why wouldn’t Congress allow individuals the same exemptions? As we allow the free market to provide insurance coverage opportunities to companies and individuals, we must also make sure that no one slips through the cracks simply because they cannot afford insurance. We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.
Allow individuals to use Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Contributions into HSAs should be tax-free and should be allowed to accumulate. These accounts would become part of the estate of the individual and could be passed on to heirs without fear of any death penalty. These plans should be particularly attractive to young people who are healthy and can afford high-deductible insurance plans. These funds can be used by any member of a family without penalty. The flexibility and security provided by HSAs will be of great benefit to all who participate.
Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
Block-grant Medicaid to the states. Nearly every state already offers benefits beyond what is required in the current Medicaid structure. The state governments know their people best and can manage the administration of Medicaid far better without federal overhead. States will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse to preserve our precious resources.
Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers.
The reforms outlined above will lower healthcare costs for all Americans. They are simply a place to start. There are other reforms that might be considered if they serve to lower costs, remove uncertainty and provide financial security for all Americans. And we must also take actions in other policy areas to lower healthcare costs and burdens. Enforcing immigration laws, eliminating fraud and waste and energizing our economy will relieve the economic pressures felt by every American. It is the moral responsibility of a nation’s government to do what is best for the people and what is in the interest of securing the future of the nation.

Providing healthcare to illegal immigrants costs us some $11 billion annually. If we were to simply enforce the current immigration laws and restrict the unbridled granting of visas to this country, we could relieve healthcare cost pressures on state and local governments.

To reduce the number of individuals needing access to programs like Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program we will need to install programs that grow the economy and bring capital and jobs back to America. The best social program has always been a job – and taking care of our economy will go a long way towards reducing our dependence on public health programs.

Finally, we need to reform our mental health programs and institutions in this country. Families, without the ability to get the information needed to help those who are ailing, are too often not given the tools to help their loved ones. There are promising reforms being developed in Congress that should receive bi-partisan support.

To reform healthcare in America, we need a President who has the leadership skills, will and courage to engage the American people and convince Congress to do what is best for the country. These straightforward reforms, along with many others I have proposed throughout my campaign, will ensure that together we will Make America Great Again.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I'm not having a go at you, Whembley, I'm just in danger of going stir crazy.

I have campaign work to do for Britain's referendum on European Union membership in June.

I have campaign work to do for the Scottish Parliament elections in May.

On a daily basis, I get bombarded by news about Trump, Europe, and how the world will end if Britain quits the EU.

I'm suffering from the effects of too much freedom and democracy

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

I'm suffering from the effects of too much freedom and democracy

 jasper76 wrote:
Reviews of the plan I've read are saying it does not mention how people who can't afford health insurance will be covered.

That's a pretty huge hole. Any replacement to the ACA will have to address this issue.

 jasper76 wrote:
I'll just say that it's not the answer I'm looking for, and I think expecting states to do right by their poor citizens is quite naive.

 CptJake wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
I'll just say that it's not the answer I'm looking for, and I think expecting states to do right by their poor citizens is quite naive.

The States should darned well be able to understand their own populations and cater to them better than the Federal One Size Fits All answer. State governments should also be a lot more accountable to the citizens of the State than the Fed gov't is. If one governor is screwing it up, recall or send him/her packing in the next election.

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
I'll just say that it's not the answer I'm looking for, and I think expecting states to do right by their poor citizens is quite naive.

The States should darned well be able to understand their own populations and cater to them better than the Federal One Size Fits All answer. State governments should also be a lot more accountable to the citizens of the State than the Fed gov't is. If one governor is screwing it up, recall or send him/her packing in the next election.

Look at Oklahoma if you want to look at states fething over their people and the people being happy about it.