What's new
By:
Filters

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

  • Total voters
    29
The best part about people getting upset about Clinton using personal email is that lots of government officials have done it over the years and no one got upset about that. Oh, that includes 6+ people of Trump's advisors after he got upset about HRC doing it.
 
silesian said:
Sigh. Smile. Sigh.

I'm on team truth. I dislike HRC quite a bit and oppose most of her policies. I'm a fiscal-conservative/ free-market-capitalist/ small-government/ rule-of-law quasi-libertarian. So keep spouting nonsense about what "team" I'm on, and further proving your ignorance. I'm not on the team of mouth breathers that mindlessly follow Trump. Read Bill Crystal, George Will, and David Brooks, they are on my team.
Click to expand...

Yay, I found someone on my team!! :)

(And I'm a big fan of Bill Crystal as well. Maybe my favorite Twitter follow.)
 
Ron Mexico said:
The best part about people getting upset about Clinton using personal email is that lots of government officials have done it over the years and no one got upset about that. Oh, that includes 6+ people of Trump's advisors after he got upset about HRC doing it.
Click to expand...

What HRC did was wrong. But lots of people have done it. The private email thing is pretty meh, but the fact that there were classified information being sent through unsecured methods. They can be hacked that way. They other emails, who cares about. All of the classified emails along with lots of others were turned over before the rest were deleted. The only ones that mattered were those classified ones and they were turned over. What she did was reckless and wrong. But lets not pretend it was that big of a deal. People were just looking for a reason to justify not liking her. No one got nearly as upset at the lots and lot of other politicians that were and probably are doing it.
 
Bulletproof said:
Kids, the word of the day is "projecting." NPC learned what that word meant this week and he is enamored by it, so he's going to be finding ways to use it in almost every post on jazzfanz. So again, children, please remember, the word of the day is "projecting" so if you hear someone use that word (90% chance it's gonna be NPC this week) throw your hands in the air and go crazy so that we all know you remembered what the word of the day was.

tenor.gif
Click to expand...

Gotta admit. Thats pretty funny.
 
Ron Mexico said:
What HRC did was wrong. But lots of people have done it. The private email thing is pretty meh, but the fact that there were classified information being sent through unsecured methods. They can be hacked that way. They other emails, who cares about. All of the classified emails along with lots of others were turned over before the rest were deleted. The only ones that mattered were those classified ones and they were turned over. What she did was reckless and wrong. But lets not pretend it was that big of a deal. People were just looking for a reason to justify not liking her. No one got nearly as upset at the lots and lot of other politicians that were and probably are doing it.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

No reason to bleach computer chips/drives if there's nothing we would think wrong. And Hillary is smart enough to know what needs to be destroyed.

On the plus side.…. all that stuff still exists somewhere in the webz, and can be found out if we will support the investigation.

And everyone should support that investigation because it is necessary to set the limits on politicians of every stripe.

Let's not just be chumps who don't care.

And that is my definition of Team Truth, sil (and @colton)
 
LogGrad98 said:
I was reading about this on politifact and it is unclear who made the decision to delete. Point is evidence was removed, actually destroyed, but no one was up in arms except the conservatives. The liberals were all fine with it.

My point was not the emails. My point was the rampant hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle. If it's my guy, well you know he is being misrepresented and is the victim. If it's the other guy we just need a rope. This is symptomatic of the current deep divide when no one can look at things objectively or even attempt to come to any level of agreement or consensus. This thread is a great example. Several folks across the aisle from each other repeatedly bashing their faces against a wall, unable to even concede that the other guy might have a minor point. Smugness, contempt, and condescension is de rigueur. It's destructive to the republic imo. Is Trump the one who will fiddle while Washington burns?
Click to expand...
I've never been fine with it. The question as to the punishment though, I think there wasn't enough there to send Hillary to prison. It is absolutely a mark against her. I think many "liberals" would say the same thing.
 
babe said:
I disagree.

No reason to bleach computer chips/drives if there's nothing we would think wrong. And Hillary is smart enough to know what needs to be destroyed.

On the plus side.…. all that stuff still exists somewhere in the webz, and can be found out if we will support the investigation.

And everyone should support that investigation because it is necessary to set the limits on politicians of every stripe.

Let's not just be chumps who don't care.

And that is my definition of Team Truth, sil (and @colton)
Click to expand...

The only stuff that matters is the classified information. She could have sent the other stuff through personal email legally just fine. There is nothing wrong with sending personal emails through personal email. There is also nothing wrong with deleting your personal emails. I dont want every one to know all of my personal business, nor do you. People should not have access to all of your personal emails. The Classified stuff was turned over to the investigation.

Plus again you are not mad at all the other government officials that have done that over the years. There is a long list of people who have done that, you and others have never once said anything about those people and dont care.

But I also know that you have all these crazy conspiracies based on the crap people you listen to on the radio with no real evidence so its pointless to discuss it with you.
 
If and only if:
-The report isn't redacted by Barr (Trump)
-We get to hear from Mueller himself

As it stands, not even the judiciary committee has an unredacted report.

The administration is doing absolutely everything they can to mitigate the damage that this report contains. Because it absolutely contains damaging information.
 
Last edited:
Harambe said:
The same reason no one will click that is the same reason you won't click on CNN or MSNBC. Nice logic, buddy.
Click to expand...

SMH.

Im always clicking on those sites and linking them. Thats how I know they lean left. The media is monopolized by the left. There is no way around it.
 
​
Ron Mexico said:
The only stuff that matters is the classified information. She could have sent the other stuff through personal email legally just fine. There is nothing wrong with sending personal emails through personal email. There is also nothing wrong with deleting your personal emails. I dont want every one to know all of my personal business, nor do you. People should not have access to all of your personal emails. The Classified stuff was turned over to the investigation.

Plus again you are not mad at all the other government officials that have done that over the years. There is a long list of people who have done that, you and others have never once said anything about those people and dont care.

But I also know that you have all these crazy conspiracies based on the crap people you listen to on the radio with no real evidence so its pointless to discuss it with you.
Click to expand...
This whole scandal was a weird one. If I remember correctly it all stemmed from BENGHAZI!!! And then just kind of took on a life of its own. All of the over the top faux outrage followed right along.
 
fishonjazz said:
Nah. If Clinton would have obstructed the investigation like Trump did then she would have been prosecuted. So would Trump if he weren't president.
With Trump you CAN prove enough to indict, at least according to 379 lawyers, what you can't do is prosecute a sitting president in this case unfortunately

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...

Ok.

Ive seen this nonsense being pushed one too many times.

The idea that Hillary would have been prosecuted if she committed a crime, and it had nothing to do with her connections is complete BS.

You really trying to tell me that the ex Senator, Secretary of State, wife of Bill Clinton, and candidate for president of the united states and mega millionaire with a rich history of making connections, had zero connections, and couldnt possibly got out of getting in trouble due to who she is? Really bro? Really?

Its funny how you guys will complain about how rich white men get away with whatever they want. You will tell us all how corrupt parts of the government are, but when it comes to Hillary Clinton, well then everything was just squeaky clean and done by the book. Give me a ****ing break. Im so tired of your intellectual dishonesty.
 
NPC D4617 said:
Ok.

Ive seen this nonsense being pushed one too many times.

The idea that Hillary would have been prosecuted if she committed a crime, and it had nothing to do with her connections is complete BS.

You really trying to tell me that the ex Senator, Secretary of State, wife of Bill Clinton, and candidate for president of the united states and mega millionaire with a rich history of making connections, had zero connections, and couldnt possibly got out of getting in trouble due to who she is? Really bro? Really?

Its funny how you guys will complain about how rich white men get away with whatever they want. You will tell us all how corrupt parts of the government are, but when it comes to Hillary Clinton, well then everything was just squeaky clean and done by the book. Give me a ****ing break. Im so tired of your intellectual dishonesty.
Click to expand...
Lol

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
NPC D4617 said:
SMH.

Im always clicking on those sites and linking them. Thats how I know they lean left. The media is monopolized by the left. There is no way around it.
Click to expand...
The truth is the enemy of the right-wing, so it can appear to a person that isn't good at identifying the truth that real(er) journalism appears more "left".

We live in an age where our beliefs increasingly dictate what the truth is when it should be the other way around, the right-wing isn't unique to this. But Fox news and talk-radio has no interest in the truth, and giving equal footing to Fox/talk radio and real journalism is a disservice to both the truth and to society.

I suggest using NPR, PBS, and the BBC if you find CNN and MSNBC too partisan. On that note, news shouldn't be beholden to profits, it's an easily-identifiable conflict of interest, and if you have a non-profit form of news that reflects the views of the right-wing favorably, I'm happy to examine it.
 
For the record, the Clintons are simply awful. There are obviously worse things, but the Clintons represent just about everything wrong with establishment American politics (though they aren't the worst [take a peak at the history of the people that led the charge on impeaching Bill - a veritable cesspool of characters]).

There is a reason that populism is surging here, and the Clintons aren't close to blameless.
 
Last edited:
One Brow said:
There are many left-biased networks, but CNN isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
If this was the case you would have no problem showing me numerous instances where CNN missed the story to the right (I'm not currently aware of any such misses). They miss to the left very, very frequently. It's because they are heavily biased toward the left and the only people who can't see this are those who are heavily biased toward the left.
 
Trump telling McGahn to defy the judiciary committee's subpoena. This is after Barr (to be sure, a hand-picked Trump loyalist, vetted specifically to take down the report) refused to provide the judiciary committee with an unredacted report.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/07/us/politics/don-mcgahn-subpoena.html
https://www.npr.org/2019/05/06/7206...-for-attorney-general-barr-over-mueller-repor

Trump is challenging my fight against confirmation bias, because I have a tough time believing anything that would imply he's anything other than a cheap grifter that found his way to power because of insane privilege and a penchant for an entertaining brand of lowness and inhumanity.
 
Last edited:
Joe Bagadonuts said:
If this was the case you would have no problem showing me numerous instances where CNN missed the story to the right (I'm not currently aware of any such misses). They miss to the left very, very frequently. It's because they are heavily biased toward the left and the only people who can't see this are those who are heavily biased toward the left.
Click to expand...

What stories did they miss? I think it's fair to ask if they missed them, why?

Help us look.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
If this was the case you would have no problem showing me numerous instances where CNN missed the story to the right (I'm not currently aware of any such misses). They miss to the left very, very frequently. It's because they are heavily biased toward the left and the only people who can't see this are those who are heavily biased toward the left.
Click to expand...

I'm unaware of the definition of "miss to the left" and "miss to the right". If you define them, perhaps I can find that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top