Hillary Clinton to Announce 2016 Run for President on Sunday

[BIT-Sharon]

The prolonged prologue to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s second run for the White House will reach its suspenseless conclusion on Sunday: The former secretary of state, senator and first lady is to announce that she will indeed seek the Democratic nomination for president.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-to-announce-2016-run-for-president-on-sunday.html?_r=0

[Sithara007]

She has good chances of winning the coming elections. What do you say people?

[Pentax]

Just the latest in a long line of worthless fucks to occupy the Oval Office.

Get real, this is the most qualified person for president?  Bill's Wife?

The American people are lazy and the system is broken.  She has gone far on name recognition alone and wouldn't have had a snowball's chance in hell of a Senate seat much less the White House if she wasn't recognizable and, in that, is the pitiful state of American politics.  

People are too lazy, by and large, to actually research candidates.  They do not demand the best.  They don't even demand basic qualifications, aside from those spelled out as the minimum to run.

They follow their party line and vote for someone they recognize as if it's a fucking cocktail party, instead of demanding and vetting a qualified candidate for one of the most important jobs in the entire country.

And money rules the day, not qualifications.  The system is so awash in money that money has become the system.

It's a damn joke.

[Sithara007]

Money was the system and it will be in future also. God has created us in such a way that we all are defined by our selfishness. Money is not God but it's not less than God either.

[Pentax]

Money was the system and it will be in future also. God has created us in such a way that we all are defined by our selfishness. Money is not God but it's not less than God either.

Well that's a whole nuther philosophical discussion I imagine.

[Rmcdermott927]

Unfortunately, the current 2 party system makes it damn near impossible to have someone qualified.  It will take a popular candidate from one of the parties splitting off and becoming independent to change things.   People are stuck in the way of thinking Democrat or Republican.   Any other candidates are never even thought about.   It's unfortunate because they are usually the most qualified.

[BuzzAldren]

I wouldn't piss in her mouth if her teeth were on fire.

she's a damn liar just like her hubby Bill "depends on the what the meaning of is is" Clinton

[Bitware]

I believe it will be difficult for Hillary Clinton to overcome the hurdles of the Benghazi incident as well as the illegalities of her maintaining a State Department email server in her home/office and unlawfully deleting a potion of those emails that were legally required to be stored in the National Archives, let alone her deficiencies during the Bill Clinton administration and her time as Senator. These are all serious issues and blatantly unlawful and even some felonious activities. Opponents may even bring up Whitewater and other scandals from decades past to add more to the list.

The Email Scanel Issues of legality, or a lack thereof:

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records. - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2008-title44/pdf/USCODE-2008-title44-chap31-sec3101.pdf
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information," and those emails are public information if not determined to be state secrets, which they have not. Mrs. clinton does not ahve the authority to bdetermine them to be state secrets. - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ231/html/PLAW-104publ231.htm
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress." - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title36-vol3/pdf/CFR-2012-title36-vol3-part1222.pdf
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison. - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/pdf/USCODE-2009-title18-partI-chap93-sec1924.pdf

Now, it will probably never be known what exactly was in those deleted emails, but we do know that she blatantly broke the law and by maintaining the private email server for government use and deleted those emails. We can surmise that she didnt want anyone reading them because of their content. Then we can assume they - or some of them - concerned the Benghazi incident. It's unknown whether or not she will be indicted, but you dont need an indictment to be considered political poison, because you have her blatantly breaking the law in so many ways. Then then there is her conflicting and combative testimony before Congress.

All that said, Elizabeth Warren has always stated that she will never run against Hillary Clinton, so I believe Elizabeth Warren's appearance on the political stage for presidential candidacy for the 2016 race will be the determining factor for the DNC's decision whether or not they deem Hillary Clinton as electable in 2016, so keep an eye on Elizabeth Warren to understand how the DNC views Hillary's electabiliy... that is, if the DNC considers Hillary unelectable and can convince Warren to run. Warren's feminist and female-centric ties with Clinton may be stronger than DNC pressure. I am really not sure, but you can be sure that if Warren runs, Hillary is extremely weak.

[BuzzAldren]

I believe it will be difficult for Hillary Clinton to overcome the hurdles of the Benghazi incident as well as the illegalities of her maintaining a State Department email server in her home/office and unlawfully deleting a potion of those emails that were legally required to be stored in the National Archives, let alone her deficiencies during the Bill Clinton administration and her time as Senator. These are all serious issues and blatantly unlawful and even some felonious activities. Opponents may even bring up Whitewater and other scandals from decades past to add more to the list.

The Email Scanel Issues of legality, or a lack thereof:

• The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records. - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2008-title44/pdf/USCODE-2008-title44-chap31-sec3101.pdf
• FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information," and those emails are public information if not determined to be state secrets, which they have not. Mrs. clinton does not ahve the authority to bdetermine them to be state secrets. - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ231/html/PLAW-104publ231.htm
• The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress." - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title36-vol3/pdf/CFR-2012-title36-vol3-part1222.pdf
• Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison. - http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/pdf/USCODE-2009-title18-partI-chap93-sec1924.pdf

Now, it will probably never be known what exactly was in those deleted emails, but we do know that she blatantly broke the law and by maintaining the private email server for government use and deleted those emails. We can surmise that she didnt want anyone reading them because of their content. Then we can assume they - or some of them - concerned the Benghazi incident. It's unknown whether or not she will be indicted, but you dont need an indictment to be considered political poison, because you have her blatantly breaking the law in so many ways. Then then there is her conflicting and combative testimony before Congress.

All that said, Elizabeth Warren has always stated that she will never run against Hillary Clinton, so I believe Elizabeth Warren's appearance on the political stage for presidential candidacy for the 2016 race will be the determining factor for the DNC's decision whether or not they deem Hillary Clinton as electable in 2016, so keep an eye on Elizabeth Warren to understand how the DNC views Hillary's electabiliy.

In principle I agree that these are serious issues.  I doubt, however, that people will actually care.  they will lockstep with their party and vote for this crazy bitch anyhow.

[Snail2]

She has good chances of winning the coming elections. What do you say people?

I'm outside of the touch line but I think unfortunately she has a good chance.

[jaysabi]

She has good chances of winning the coming elections. What do you say people?

I'm outside of the touch line but I think unfortunately she has a good chance.

That's not unreasonable. No worthwhile democratic challenger means an easy democratic nomination, and that automatically means a 50% chance to win.

[ashour]

She has good chances of winning the coming elections. What do you say people?

I'm outside of the touch line but I think unfortunately she has a good chance.

I agree with that she has good chances since she was so long in the white house .

[cellard]

So when is Andreas Antonopoulous going to run for presidency? I want a Bitcoin advocate president so I dont fall asleep when they do their speeches.

[Sithara007]

I wouldn't piss in her mouth if her teeth were on fire.

she's a damn liar just like her hubby Bill "depends on the what the meaning of is is" Clinton

Everyone is liar in politics. That's a damn dirty business. Whoever think that they are serving their country are just day dreaming.

[bryant.coleman]

She has good chances of winning the coming elections. What do you say people?

She is almost certain to win the elections in 2016. The demography has changed radically. There is a steep growth in the number of Mexican voters, and a moderate growth in the number of the black voters. Both these sections will vote overwhelmingly for her.

[BuzzAldren]

She has good chances of winning the coming elections. What do you say people?

She is almost certain to win the elections in 2016. The demography has changed radically. There is a steep growth in the number of Mexican voters, and a moderate growth in the number of the black voters. Both these sections will vote overwhelmingly for her.

No doubt and do not forget women.  Women put the first clinton in the white house (with a lot of help from Ross Perot).  they put the latest jerkoff there also.

I think Hillary wins easily and the very thought makes me want to puke.  that fucking cunt should be nowhere near the Oval Office.

The other issue, aside from the two party system which is itself a joke, is that the republicans have no-one.  That whole party is looking kookier by the day and what they are cranking out as presidential candidates won't win another election in our lifetimes.

[Wilikon]

#WhyImNotVotingForHillary

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23WhyImNotVotingForHillary&src=typd

[hdbuck]

US people are fucked.

[Wilikon]

Clinton to spend $37.92 for every vote in $2.5 Billion  campaign

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-to-spend-37.92-for-every-vote-in-2.5b-campaign/article/2563004

[Wilikon]

More than 2 MILLION of Hillary Clinton's Twitter followers are fake or never tweet – and she's already under fire for 'buying' fake Facebook fans




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html