SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Did Colin Powell Advise Hillary Clinton to Use a Private Email?
Did Hillary tell a friend that she would never allow her emails to be publicly released?
Did Colin Powell Advise Hillary Clinton to Use a Private Email?
Ha, that's what I thought. Then I thought it was some big donor, but I dunno that may be the Stan the man himself.Is that Stan Lee next to her?
To all those insisting those 31k emails unilaterally deleted were (as we now know Hillary blatantly lied about), roughly half (14,900) were in fact work related and belong to the American people. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/fbi-uncovered-at-least-14900-more-documents-in-clinton-email-investigation/2016/08/22/36745578-6643-11e6-be4e-23fc4d4d12b4_story.html
This is yet another thing that by itself should disqualify her from the Presidency. What a shocking degree of out and out lying!!!
Hoping these are released in time to be sorted through before the election!
There is a difference between conspiracies and something being the most logical explanation. In the case of Samuelson, it is almost inconceivable that she wasn't given orders to deleted work related emails. (You don't accidentally misclassify 15k!!!). Since this is not abundantly clear, who ordered it? Did it roll up to Hillary or stop at Mills and Huma.
This is not just "more of the same," it's suggestive of a campaign to destroy government records.
Clinton deleted more emails than she turned over. Her team never actually read all of the emails, skimming subject lines instead. And there was never anyone outside of Clinton's direct orbit brought in to oversee the process. The essence of Clinton's argument regarding this email-sorting process was: Trust me. As in, my team of lawyers found all of the emails that were even tangentially tied to my day job as the nation's top diplomat and turned them over to the State Department.
Justice Department lawyers said last week that the State Department would review and turn over Clinton’s work-related emails to a conservative legal group. The records are among “tens of thousands” of documents found by the FBI in its probe and turned over to the State Department, Justice Department attorney Lisa Ann Olson said Monday in court.
What would be your Article of Impeachment?Hopefully when she is President they can start the impeachment process immediately and send her packing. That would be even better than her losing to Trump.
Incompetence.
She did a really crappy job on a pretty simple thing.![]()
Well, we can't gauge that for sure until she's been in office, but I can't recall, other than perhaps George H. W. Bush, a candidate in my lifetime more prepared to competent in the role of President.
Is that what you think now? I thought it was all deliberate in your opinion?She did a really crappy job on a pretty simple thing.
I don't think she's careless at all. Her private email server created a system that turned out to be careless, but that was a deliberate decision on her part (unfortunately.)It's not funny Tim. She's extremely careless.
...How is the following not pay-for-play -- and how is it therefore not illegal?
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/new-abedin-emails-reveal-hillary-clinton-state-department-gave-special-access-top-clinton-foundation-donors/
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/huma-abedin-teneo-clinton-foundation-email-213965“Judy rodin,” he wrote to Abedin in the shorthand email. “Huge foundation/cgi supporter and close pal of wjc[.] Teneo reps her as well[.] Can you help?”
Uh you can do something deliberately in a really crappy fashion.Is that what you think now? I thought it was all deliberate in your opinion?
You also didn't think the NSA was doing anything wrong. You've got a history of being really wrong about these things. By the way the "extremely careless" is a quote from the Director of the FBI. You disagree with him. Shocking.I don't think she's careless at all. Her private email server created a system that turned out to be careless, but that was a deliberate decision on her part (unfortunately.)
I knew it was a quote. But it never made any sense to me, still doesn't.You also didn't think the NSA was doing anything wrong. You've got a history of being really wrong about these things. By the way the "extremely careless" is a quote from the Director of the FBI. You disagree with him. Shocking.![]()
You've got problems, Tim. Seriously.I knew it was a quote. But it never made any sense to me, still doesn't.
If you watched Hillary's 11 hours of testimony, if you've at all followed her career, the one thing about her that everybody who's known her, critics and fans alike, is that she is an EXTREMELY detailed policy wonk. Carelessness doesn't fit her history at all. I simply don't believe it.
That is my reaction to all your posts, including those under the aliases Flapjacks and Brock Middlebrook.
Well that's a thoughtful response.You've got problems, Tim. Seriously.
Take your pick. Incompetent or deliberately shady, sleazy, and corrupt.Is that what you think now? I thought it was all deliberate in your opinion?
That's fine, but then the alternative is deliberately corrupt.I knew it was a quote. But it never made any sense to me, still doesn't.
If you watched Hillary's 11 hours of testimony, if you've at all followed her career, the one thing about her that everybody who's known her, critics and fans alike, is that she is an EXTREMELY detailed policy wonk. Carelessness doesn't fit her history at all. I simply don't believe it.
Nah. Deliberately paranoid. She was trying to avoid FOIA. Deliberately sleazy, on the edge of the law, I'll buy that. But big deal. And corrupt? No evidence whatsoever of corruption.That's fine, but then the alternative is deliberately corrupt.
The FBI. There is no implication of charges here for Hillary on her email investigation. That book is closed. Whether the Foundation or Teneo or certain people working for them are still under investigation, we have no idea. That's per Comey who refused to say.So just so I understand, these additional 15K emails have already been seen by the FBI? Who said no charges would be brought against Clinton?
No? Deliberately breaking one law to avoid another law? Doesn't qualify as corrupt, I guess.Nah. Deliberately paranoid. She was trying to avoid FOIA. Deliberately sleazy, on the edge of the law, I'll buy that. But big deal. And corrupt? No evidence whatsoever of corruption.
You should stick with extremely careless, "extremely detailed" and meticulous returns this back to intent and that issue was settled in her favor in that she did not intend any of it. You should let that one go.I knew it was a quote. But it never made any sense to me, still doesn't.
If you watched Hillary's 11 hours of testimony, if you've at all followed her career, the one thing about her that everybody who's known her, critics and fans alike, is that she is an EXTREMELY detailed policy wonk. Carelessness doesn't fit her history at all. I simply don't believe it.
IN what world do you live in where Hillary's history of failure is called "competent"?![]()
Well, we can't gauge that for sure until she's been in office, but I can't recall, other than perhaps George H. W. Bush, a candidate in my lifetime more prepared to competent in the role of President.
So I am guessing it is a whole bunch of nothing.The FBI. There is no implication of charges here for Hillary on her email investigation. That book is closed. Whether the Foundation or Teneo or certain people working for them are still under investigation, we have no idea. That's per Comey who refused to say.So just so I understand, these additional 15K emails have already been seen by the FBI? Who said no charges would be brought against Clinton?
Edited just now by SaintsInDome2006
I expect a lot better from you, Tremblay. That's blatantly twisting words for no good reason. 3rd generation latinos aren't going to become a huge portion of the electorate in 3 months. What you DO have is a bubble of democrat voters that isn't going to last forever. The democrats need to figure out how to score big with this while they have it. "Destroying Trump in the correct way" is a nonsense phrase that really doesn't provide any direction. I think its a bad idea to begin with. The correct move is to move to the right in order to pick off enough rural voters to win the House. THEN we can implement a comprehensive agenda for change.Maurile Tremblay said:
Going to go out on a limb and guess that Democratic voters are going to last a lot longer than Republican voters, actuarialy speaking.What you DO have is a bubble of democrat voters that isn't going to last forever.
Hillary's going to win NC without Hispanics. Tell us about GA, MS, AR, TX, MT, UT, IN, MO, SC, LA.![]()
Dave Wasserman @Redistrict 10h10 hours ago
North Carolina: since Trump launch 6/14/15, Hispanic voter registration has increased 22%, vs. 5% for all other voters.
I can't recall, other than perhaps George H. W. Bush, a candidate in my lifetime more prepared to competent in the role of President.
These two posts occurring nearly back-to-back on the same page is pretty awesome.Her private email server created a system that turned out to be careless, but that was a deliberate decision on her part (unfortunately.)
She's sleazy and skirts the edges of the law, but how could anybody think that she's corrupt? I mean, it's not as if she and her husband collect eight-figure (?) incomes from people who would like favors from the government or anything crazy like that.Nah. Deliberately paranoid. She was trying to avoid FOIA. Deliberately sleazy, on the edge of the law, I'll buy that. But big deal. And corrupt? No evidence whatsoever of corruption.
Pretty much sums up the bar setting problems in this country that have allowed our main party options to be Trump and Hillary. And it does so in almost perfect fashion...well done TimNah. Deliberately paranoid. She was trying to avoid FOIA. Deliberately sleazy, on the edge of the law, I'll buy that. But big deal. And corrupt? No evidence whatsoever of corruption.
He was certainly on a roll last night. My favorite though was squis and his suggestion that someone be fired over lying. That's probably to the leader in the clubhouse right now. Tim has some work to doI can't recall, other than perhaps George H. W. Bush, a candidate in my lifetime more prepared to competent in the role of President.
These two posts occurring nearly back-to-back on the same page is pretty awesome.Her private email server created a system that turned out to be careless, but that was a deliberate decision on her part (unfortunately.)
Good point. I usually skim past squistion's posts so I had to go back and look for this one, but yeah you're right that it's tough to beat that one for pure humor value.He was certainly on a roll last night. My favorite though was squis and his suggestion that someone be fired over lying. That's probably to the leader in the clubhouse right now. Tim has some work to do