What's new
By:

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

Will You Accept the Findings of the Muller Probe?

  • Total voters
    29
silesian said:
What evidence do you have that this was her reason? Because I'm sure you could prove it in a court of law.
Click to expand...

Because the law is there for that reason.... to make sure our politicians can't pull a bunch of crap we can never know about.

The only way anyone can evade the law is to break it. In the FOIA-accessible inventory of American government information, everything will become accessible someday.

Obama and a lot of foreign folks had her "private" email and used it. For important business.
 
babe said:
Because the law is there for that reason.... to make sure our politicians can't pull a bunch of crap we can never know about.

The only way anyone can evade the law is to break it. In the FOIA-accessible inventory of American government information, everything will become accessible someday.

Obama and a lot of foreign folks had her "private" email and used it. For important business.
Click to expand...

I asked you how you know that was her reason. Please answer and stop deflecting. Because I know you wouldn't be completely speculating about what is in her mind. That would be disingenuous.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Well her illegality is pretty similar to Trump's. You now, can't exactly prove enough to indict.
Click to expand...

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
 
LogGrad98 said:
Well never know because she deleted thousands (according to the FBI) of state Dept emails before turning over the curated set she gave the doj.

Point is you were in essence blaming the Russians for uncovering her email problem rather than acknowledging that maybe she should have been following state department protocol in the first place. Hard to uncover wrongdoing if there isn't any wrongdoing. Hence blaming the ones who outed rather than the one who did the bad thing.
Click to expand...
From what I remember she didn't delete the emails. The emails were deleted though. Just not by her. I could be wrong though. I think @Bulletproof knows better than me.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
silesian said:
I asked you how you know that was her reason. Please answer and stop deflecting. Because I know you wouldn't be completely speculating about what is in her mind. That would be disingenuous.
Click to expand...

Hillary has been quite direct about her belief in open borders and one world governance, and has directly stated her contempt for Americans such as Judicial Watch, who are the most effective users of FOIA procedures. She mocked initial charges of her crime.
How anyone can believe she didn't know what she was doing, or had no purpose behind it, is astonishing. You have to be solidly on that "team" to not want it prosecuted.
 
babe said:
Hillary has been quite direct about her belief in open borders and one world governance, and has directly stated her contempt for Americans such as Judicial Watch, who are the most effective users of FOIA procedures. She mocked initial charges of her crime.
How anyone can believe she didn't know what she was doing, or had no purpose behind it, is astonishing. You have to be solidly on that "team" to not want it prosecuted.
Click to expand...

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.

And you still have not answered my very simple question so I assume that you are making **** up.

Have a good day.

smile. sigh. smile.
 
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...

I thought it was 379 former federal prosecutors. Federal Prosecutors = Lawyer, not all Lawyer = Federal Prosecutor. Difference seems to be obvious; "I think we can do this" vs "I have been a part of similar"
 
fishonjazz said:
From what I remember she didn't delete the emails. The emails were deleted though. Just not by her. I could be wrong though. I think @Bulletproof knows better than me.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
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?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top