30
   

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

 
 
glitterbag
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2016 11:21 pm
@Blickers,
I never open his videos......
Blickers
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 12:36 am
@glitterbag,
You ain't missed much. They never connect up to the topic under discussion.
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 01:08 am
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Mr. Comey is going to have some explaining to do.


For doing his job? How about a sec of state who had her staff so intimidated, that they didn't bother enforcing rules they knew she was breaking?

glitterbag
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 01:26 am
@Builder,
How interesting. You state that as if you actually know what your talking about.
Builder
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 01:41 am
@glitterbag,
Quote:
You state that as if you actually know what your talking about.


Taking a leaf out of your book. You like? (and it's you're, as in you are). ;-)
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 03:17 am
https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10154767998276336/
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 05:46 am
Quote:
The town will honor an Election Day pause and then, much like with the Christmas truce of World War I, madness will soon resume. If Hillary Clinton is the next president, she might have to deal with a Congress gone criminally insane. It has become a ravenous parliamentary beast determined to ignore the most pressing concerns and instead traffic in investigations. She might even be impeached.

That’s a terrible thing to say, and I can’t imagine any columnist at any time in U.S. history writing such a sentence.
http://wapo.st/2ehRKvd
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 05:52 am
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14915716_1726073927713564_8747192020165512916_n.png?oh=f4972beff7a96c074180737e0e67faa5&oe=589B71CD
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 05:55 am
@izzythepush,
Could be. The control portion of the experiment - frequent use of Tic Tacs - proved completely ineffective at attenuating the aging process.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 06:00 am
@blatham,
Dunno about tic tacs, it always reminds me of this.



They don't really advertise them any more, other mints seem to have taken over. Look what they did to Benedict Cumberpatch.

edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 06:10 am
http://assets.amuniversal.com/a825dbc083b30134eaa8005056a9545d.gif
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 06:36 am
@izzythepush,
Compelling visualization of the female form in first. That's always welcome.

But I don't get the Cumberbatch reference for second.
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 06:40 am
@edgarblythe,
You've become a tad cynical, one might conclude. Would you like me to write a prescription for you to gain access to medical marijuana? Just a mere $50 and America will once again be that shining disco-ball on the hill.

Offer void where prohibited by police with hairy knuckles.
revelette2
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:14 am
How the F.B.I. Reviewed Thousands of Emails in One Week

excerpts:

Quote:
As it turned out, law enforcement officials said, there was no need to review all of the emails, only Ms. Abedin’s. Those emails numbered in the thousands, and even many of those were duplicates of messages that had been looked at previously, officials said.


Quote:

How did the F.B.I. read 650,000 emails so quickly?

Taking to Twitter, Michael T. Flynn, a former Army lieutenant general and top Trump adviser, declared it “IMPOSSIBLE” that the F.B.I. could have scanned 650,000 emails in eight days.

But that figure is misleading. When F.B.I. agents seized Mr. Weiner’s laptop, they did discover about 650,000 emails, but only some of them belonged to Ms. Abedin, agents found. They realized that her emails might be relevant to the F.B.I.’s completed investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server, but those were only a small subset of the total.

So how many emails were reviewed?

The F.B.I. has not said precisely, but officials have placed the number in the thousands.

Reading thousands of emails in eight days still seems like a lot of work.

That number got even smaller relatively quickly. Many of the emails were copies of messages that agents had examined earlier while investigating Mrs. Clinton and her aides. Again, it’s not clear how many were duplicates, but law enforcement officials say it was a substantial number. Filtering software can ferret out duplicates from far larger databases than Mr. Weiner’s hard drive. That could have sped up the review, because the duplicates didn’t need to be examined again, but F.B.I. employees would still have had to personally vet new emails.


Quote:
Why didn’t the government tell us this would only take a week?

The F.B.I. was reluctant to predict how long the review would take, repeatedly trying to lower the public’s expectation that it could finish before Election Day. Even though the number of emails seemed manageable early in the week, there was a chance that agents would discover something along the way that would require extensive follow-up.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Mr. Comey assigned dozens of agents and analysts to the effort, including investigators who had originally worked on the case. Dozens worked around the clock for a week. Law enforcement officials said the review was completed Sunday morning.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:18 am
http://i1383.photobucket.com/albums/ah292/deltaflyer2/graphics/hillary-trump-tank-sm.gif
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:20 am
At this point in their administrations, Reagan's popularity was 52.1, Clinton's was 57 and Obama now is at 57.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:22 am
@blatham,
I used to look up to you, much more than you would guess. Now I look on you as being a sheep for the fleecing. But I don't hold it against you. You are doing what you believe in. I feel sad more than anything else, more and more with each election cycle.
snood
 
  6  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:25 am
@edgarblythe,
I'm sure you understand that calling someone a sheep is insulting.
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:36 am
From Limbaugh's radio show yesterday:
Quote:
RUSH LIMBAUGH (HOST): If [Trump] genuinely loses this thing, he's going to concede it. The fact they're out there trying to tell people that he won't accept defeat no matter what is again, another attempt to taint the guy. It's Hillary Clinton who is tainted, it's the Democrats who are tainted, and by virtue of historical experience I can say that. It's a non-story, nonstarter. Now the lack of Republican support for Trump, now that we can get our teeth into. And I'm telling you, no matter whether he wins or loses folks, there is a civil war coming on the Republican side of the aisle, and it's going to be big. Whether he wins or loses. It'll take a different form or direction depending on whether he wins or loses, but it is going to happen.
http://mm4a.org/2eRuFvS

Limbaugh saying this to his audience ought to help promote a civil war. So we can thank him for that.

But note the bolded portion. The "they" is not defined (unless he did so earlier) but we'll trust he means what he always talks about first and foremost - the liberal media. Then we'll also note that nobody anywhere in the mainstream media (or anywhere else that I've noticed) has said what Limbaugh is claiming has been said.
bobsal u1553115
 
  0  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2016 07:43 am
@blatham,
The mysterious ill-defined faceless "them". Definition: anybody not us.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 10:12:27