When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

@georgeob1,

Quote:

The record of these events as described variously by; Hillary herself, The State Department IG, the NSA reviewers and the FBI Director, etc. are inconsistent and contradictory in a number of points, so questions of veracity exist before any hackers are involved. You appear to be ignoring all that.

The variations in the record between all of them is so small as to be almost nonexistent. You want to build a mountain out of a speck of dust.

On the other hand we have Trump who has declared he is a brilliant businessman but we see he lost more than $916,000,000. That would seem to be a rather large discrepancy.

1 Reply

@parados,

$916 million loss is yuge! The biggest problem is that Trump wasn't the one who lost; his small donation ended up as a $916 million write-off for him.
Anyone here want to invest with Trump?

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
The State Department is slow-walking a number of FOIA requests for these materials, in defiance of the law and several court orders, and it is at least conceivable that this may be their purpose

The State Department is following the law about checking with other agencies for possible classified information before releasing the materials. When laws conflict, which would you prefer, that they not bother to check to see if any of the material would harm national security or that they take a little more time?

If so they are showing a good deal more zeal for the law than they demonstrated earlier with respect to Hillary's well known e amil addresses. Moreover it appears several Federal District juddges don't agree with you based on their response to suits over extremely protracted FOIA responses.

It appears that you are meticulous when it suits you but very loose otherwise. There is a word for that.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

has been spending time

All depends on what your definition of 'has been' was.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

She was a good Secty of State, other than the legal but poor decision on choice of servers thing. She may think of such things but she's understands discretion regarding with whom she might share that confession.

She's no tRump. He blabbers anything that just might cross his mind. She can keep it to herself.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

That's called control; necessary for any politician who has to deal with other head's of state.
Trump already has several strikes against him; bigotry (ban all Muslims; history of racial discrimination against blacks), his loose tongue, his thin skin, and his ignorance about world affairs.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

or "maturity" hahahahah

0 Replies

Damn, that Pence guy must be GOOD! The GOP put out a newsletter declaring that after fact checking, the consensus is that Pence won the Veep debate! They mistakenly put out an already-written message before the debate has even happened!

http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/57f43cb01a0000f3045b7136.png

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mike-pence-rnc-winner-kaine_us_57f43b67e4b04c71d6f0c7bd?section=&

2 Replies

@snood,

He won the debate, and he still had time to build his time machine while Kaine was speaking.

He came back from tomorrow to let us know how it went.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

How many small business did he stiff when he declared his $916,000,000 bankruptcy? Now that he is a billionaire again do you think he will offer to pay them back for their loss?

0 Replies

@snood,

It was just a given!

0 Replies

@Kolyo,

Kolyo wrote:

He won the debate, and he still had time to build his time machine while Kaine was speaking.

He came back from tomorrow to let us know how it went.

That's one explanation. I have an alternative one:
The GOP is full of shyt.

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

The GOP is full of shyt.

You are so correct but if you were able to understand that the DNC has the same problem you could be a member of my group. I do understand those social currents and the confirmation biases that you face are hard to resist.

0 Replies

I love Hillary don't you. She knows me so well before ever meeting me just as she understands 50% of the trump supporters.

She thinks that we do not realize what she is saying even though we agree with her on many issues but not on the issues of her pay to play. I can only guess she is able to justify that behavior in her mind. Why would I expect her to know what the attorney's preamble is when 90+% of other attorneys do not?

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_preamble_scope.html

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

She thinks that we do not realize what she is saying even though we agree with her on many issues but not on the issues of her pay to play.

Please explain to us how Hillary herself has gained through your charge of "pay to play?"

The Clinton Foundation has helped children all around the world. Hillary has made it her life career to help other people. Who has Trump helped other than himself? Do you know that Trump called Mexicans "criminals and rapists?" Do you know Trump scammed other people through his Trump University and not paying contractors that worked on his property? And you want him to be our president? Unbelievable!

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Please explain to us how Hillary herself has gained through your charge of "pay to play?"

Sure! Hillary and Obama are making history for the DNC just as others are doing for the RNC. I am not saying they are stupid but rather they are extremely smart but I do think they may view themselves similar as the slave masters of the past could view their behavior.
That is as being ethically similar to the way we view ourselves today. Ethics are subjective, just as all other human concepts are as well, "such a math, English, Ethics and so on, "you name it. we make up our reality as we go.

Hillary and Obama have both engaged in pay to play within the DNC. They seem very similar to the mafia, RNC or any other gang.

Who else has the ability to charge hundreds of thousands of dollars for their speeches that the Clintons have done?
People in the future will be way smarter than us and will have all the videos to analyze and use a scientific method to help with their understanding of the corruption of the past.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

Who else has the ability to charge hundreds of thousands of dollars for their speeches that the Clintons have done?

Literally every past president.
Probably 30+ congress people.
Hundreds of movie stars.
Hundreds of athletes.
Dozens of coaches.
Many CEOs.
Many industry leaders.
Paris Hilton and other socialites.

I mean Hillary Clinton is the most recognized woman in the world. That has value in our society.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

What law are you claiming Hillary broke with her email addresses?

I have a zeal for ACTUAL laws. The judges are frustrated by the time it is taking but that doesn't mean the judges prefer that the emails not be checked for classification.

Quote:

It appears that you are meticulous when it suits you but very loose otherwise. There is a word for that.

The words for it is "false equivalency" on your part. Your opinions do not a law make.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

How could you possibly forget Donald Trump on the list? He actually charges more per speech than Hillary does.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote georgeob1:

Quote:

Let's suppose that Assange releases some alleged Hillary e mails that were not among those Hillary provided in printed paper form to the State Department. What shall we make of them? No direct comparison can be made because Hillary ordered the destruction of the electronic records in violation of existing law and Federal regulation.

We've only spent 100 pages on this thread alone about the emails. You want to spend more. When Hillary gets elected, will you still be posting about Emails? Hillary had both State Department and personal Emails on her Email account. Hillary was only obligated to provide the Emails on her server which had to do with State Department business, she was under no prohibition to get rid of the personal Emails on her server. So she did.

Second, any Emails that has been through the Russian intelligence service-or perhaps originated with- cannot be taken as the truth unless independently verified. You said that any Email Assange produces that is bad for Hillary should be assumed to be true.

2 Replies

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know