The Clinton Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Being a mod sucks anyway. Makes it a job.

So the State Department reopened it's probe on the emailgate. That's good.

The FBI is going to get the Congressional referral to investigate the perjury charges. What happens there?
 
Being a mod sucks anyway. Makes it a job.

So the State Department reopened it's probe on the emailgate. That's good.
You're not missing out on anything especially these days, trust me.

The FBI is going to get the Congressional referral to investigate the perjury charges. What happens there?
Probably nothing, but I'm glad this whole situation is being kept in circulation.
 
Being a mod sucks anyway. Makes it a job.

So the State Department reopened it's probe on the emailgate. That's good.

The FBI is going to get the Congressional referral to investigate the perjury charges. What happens there?

That's why I'm an Administrator....... :cwink::loco:
 
Being a mod sucks anyway. Makes it a job.

So the State Department reopened it's probe on the emailgate. That's good.

The FBI is going to get the Congressional referral to investigate the perjury charges. What happens there?

Next to nothing.

Perjury is damn near impossible to prove because it is a crime that requires a showing that the person willingly and knowingly lied. "I misspoke" or "I forgot that I did that" are both valid defenses to perjury and virtually impossible to overcome because it is the Defendant's word vs the state's and as I said earlier, ties favor the Defendant.

FBI will get a referral, FBI will investigate. FBI will pass it along to DOJ (probably without a recommend to prosecute because short of a memo in which she expresses her intent to lie under oath there is no way to prove it or even make a prima facie case). DOJ will decline to prosecute. Republicans will ***** and moan but will ultimately be able to do nothing due to the fact that Congress cannot order the Executive to do anything. Process will repeat.
 
Perjury has a higher burden of proof than the possible charges before.
 
Intent to do what? Remove federal records from US custody.

What 3rd party? Anyone she authorized to access the classified federal records. Her IT pros and attorneys.

What was her intent? To remove federal record from US custody.

What did she intend to "give to a "3rd party"? Classified Federal records.

Why was she giving this information to that "3rd party"? Gross negligence.

What was gained by turning over information to the "3rd party"? Concealment from State Department information governance protocols for the IT Pros. And you tell me what she had to be gained by turning over the information to her attorneys.

Again, she broke the law the moment she took the classified Federal records outside of US Custody. Nothing else matters.


Um, yeah...other things do matter. But, ok..... I am not one that likes to beat dead horses....so I'll just leave it at. "ok". :)
 
What exactly is the difference between a mod and an administrator?
An Admin can change your username and get a bigger avvy threshold than others apparently. :hehe:

So in other words, not much.
 
I used to think only admins could ban people....then I found out I could do that too.
 
Thanks for letting it slide. I was really worried there for a second.

Here man, jeez... For the salty butt hurt.

$(KGrHqFHJBsFIE2jpzs2BSB3FVfKQg~~_32.JPG
 
Here man, jeez... For the salty butt hurt.

$(KGrHqFHJBsFIE2jpzs2BSB3FVfKQg~~_32.JPG
I prefer the Huggies unscented wipes. Get that pampers business out of here.

I'm a big kid now. We can donate the pampers to Hillary for all the **** she's in. :lmao:
 
I prefer the Huggies unscented wipes. Get that pampers business out of here.

I'm a big kid now. We can donate the pampers to Hillary for all the **** she's in. :lmao:
And yet is still whooping the piece of crap who calls soldiers losers. Amazing really.
 
And yet is still whooping the piece of crap who calls soldiers losers. Amazing really.

Weeeeellll, not sure about that after Tuesday...Rasmussen Polls have Trump ahead, within margin of error, but ahead...and according to their polls, most disagreed with what Comey had to say.

BUT, in a Pew Poll that came out today, she is ahead of him by 9 points....

Sooooooo, who knows. I just don't think it is a "whoopin'" at the moment. ;)
 
I wouldn't trust Rasmussen. It always tends to favor Republicans. Plus the only polls that matter are the swing states.
 
I'm sure you backed up Bush when he took us into Iraq. He was not prosecuted and the left only wanted to smear him.....riiiiiight?

Clinton knowingly made a huge mistake and walked away just like Bush.

I wouldn't equate the two. Bush wanted to go into Iraq no matter what, and it costs thousands of lives and billions of dollars. It's impossible to say what the cost of Clinton's lies were unless someone comes forward with evidence he/she hacked her email.
 
I wouldn't trust Rasmussen. It always tends to favor Republicans. Plus the only polls that matter are the swing states.

Hmmmm...they aren't as bad as people think. Pew, is however, probably one of the best so I do tend to look at their numbers more often. Rasmussen does a lot of averaging of their polls which is actually a good thing, in case one question tends to skew one way or the other. Not all polls do that....
 
Fun food for thought. If Clinton violated the law (she didn't) with her email scandal, than George W. Bush sure as hell violated the Espionage Act by leaking Valerie Plame's information.

Agreed on this one. You can't tell me the dark lord didn't bend if not knowing broke the law on a lot of things the public does not know about.
 
Weeeeellll, not sure about that after Tuesday...Rasmussen Polls have Trump ahead, within margin of error, but ahead...and according to their polls, most disagreed with what Comey had to say.

BUT, in a Pew Poll that came out today, she is ahead of him by 9 points....

Sooooooo, who knows. I just don't think it is a "whoopin'" at the moment. ;)
I think it is telling that in a time that should be horrible for her, on average she has pulled out a larger lead. The past 6 weeks have been bad for her, and she is pulling away in most polls. FiveThirtyEight gives her a 76% chance of winning and she seems to be dominating the swing states.
 
Hmmmm.... maybe prove that Rove, Armitage and Libby did....but not sure the evidence was there to convict Bush. And of course did find Libby guilty of most all of the counts against him.
 
I think it is telling that in a time that should be horrible for her, on average she has pulled out a larger lead. The past 6 weeks have been bad for her, and she is pulling away in most polls. FiveThirtyEight gives her a 76% chance of winning and she seems to be dominating the swing states.

True...but as we know, the only polls that count are on election day, and the lever the people pull. ;)
 
There was a 2% chance at one point that Trump would win the Republican nomination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,359
Messages
22,091,095
Members
45,886
Latest member
Elchido
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"