Dead candidate walking...

Doesn't matter anyway. The damage has already been done. To herself!

She's already lost 1/3 of her supporters she had last spring. The rest are waiting for 'Gropin' Joe Biden' to announce to abandon ship.

"This is a big fuckin' deal."

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The prosecutor for the Petraeus case claims Hillary did not commit a crime. Her case is different from the Petraeus case.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...21242/?ref=yfp

The prosecutor for the Petraeus case claims Hillary did not commit a crime. Her case is different from the Petraeus case.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...21242/?ref=yfp Originally Posted by flghtr65

Interesting. This should get some people on here foaming at the mouth.

The prosecutor for the Petraeus case claims Hillary did not commit a crime. Her case is different from the Petraeus case.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...21242/?ref=yfp Originally Posted by flghtr65

Please tell us who the prosecutor worked for on the Petraeus case.......never mind. It was the Obama Justice Department. What do you expect them to say?

Please tell us who the prosecutor worked for on the Petraeus case.......never mind. It was the Obama Justice Department. What do you expect them to say? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

So you deny the general's guilt? He admitted to it. He is merely saying that according to the law, with what we presently know, she has not committed a crime. You're bringing all your past hatred and her past shit into this decision, but we're talking about this incident in particular, not everything else. This is why you would make a terrible instrument of the law in whatever capacity you chose. You are an emotional, weak-minded turd who is unable to think critically or distinguish even the smallest nuance in any situation. You are a shotgun. What we need is a scalpel. Get it, admiral?

There were 60,000+ emails on her machine. She turned over 30,000 emails that were deemed work related. The 30,000 emails that were deemed personal were not turned over. She had the server wiped clean to get rid of her personal emails. Colin Powell had a personal email. He did not have a personal server. Originally Posted by flghtr65

That was not her call to make. Fact is, she is a known liar. We can't take her word for anything. ALL emails were to be turned over. We don't know what was in the ones she erased. She is a known liar. She should be charged.


And, really? 30,000 personal emails in four years about yoga, Chelsea's wedding and fun times with Bill? How many personal emails do you send in a year?


You are in Hillary Fantasyland, Fluffy. Acute Kool-Aid poisoning. Get help!

That was not her call to make. Fact is, she is a known liar. We can't take her word for anything. ALL emails were to be turned over. We don't know what was in the ones she erased. She is a known liar. She should be charged.


And, really? 30,000 personal emails in four years about yoga, Chelsea's wedding and fun times with Bill? How many personal emails do you send in a year?


You are in Hillary Fantasyland, Fluffy. Acute Kool-Aid poisoning. Get help! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Let's break this down, shall we. You don't think someone like Clinton could send roughly 7500 personal emails in a year? 7500 emails a year breaks down to 625 a month, which breaks down to 21 a day, in a 30-day month. You don't think that someone who moves in the circles she moves in could possibly send 20 personal emails a day? Hell, I send 10 and I'm not Hillary Clinton or SOS. You're obviously off on this one, so let's move on.

The question is whether she knowingly sent classified material. Knowingly, is the operative word. That has to proven. I know, the pesky law again, but it still needs to be proven. You still need proof... and her being a lying, cheating scumbag isn't enough. You need a smoking gun.

Actually, when dealing with this, the issue is not whether she knowingly sent classified. It is whether a reasonable person (in her position) would be expected to know. And separately, whether she was grossly negligent of policies/procedures specifically in place to avoid unintentional spillage. Those are what she is blatantly in violation of.

Where where you assholes when Dubya was killing thousands of innocents without evidence of wrongdoing?

Emailing?

So you deny the general's guilt? He admitted to it. He is merely saying that according to the law, with what we presently know, she has not committed a crime. You're bringing all your past hatred and her past shit into this decision, but we're talking about this incident in particular, not everything else. This is why you would make a terrible instrument of the law in whatever capacity you chose. You are an emotional, weak-minded turd who is unable to think critically or distinguish even the smallest nuance in any situation. You are a shotgun. What we need is a scalpel. Get it, admiral? Originally Posted by WombRaider

Twice in one thread...I'm starting to think that this stupidity of yours is real. Where exactly do I even mention the guilt or innocence of the general? I didn't. That is your rotting brain talking. So I guess I can address the rest of the post.....that's all there is so I'm done here. #Whatamoron

Let's break this down, shall we. You don't think someone like Clinton could send roughly 7500 personal emails in a year? 7500 emails a year breaks down to 625 a month, which breaks down to 21 a day, in a 30-day month. You don't think that someone who moves in the circles she moves in could possibly send 20 personal emails a day? Hell, I send 10 and I'm not Hillary Clinton or SOS. You're obviously off on this one, so let's move on.

The question is whether she knowingly sent classified material. Knowingly, is the operative word. That has to proven. I know, the pesky law again, but it still needs to be proven. You still need proof... and her being a lying, cheating scumbag isn't enough. You need a smoking gun. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Oh get real will ya. If an Oompa Loompa like you can send ten emails a day, what makes you think Clinton can't find a way to send out twenty one?


Jim

It doesn't matter whether Hillary deleted her confession of what happened in Benghazi or the recipe for an energy smoothie. What goes on her server is the property of the government (and therefore the people) of the United States. She has no right, legally or morally, to erase, alter, or delete any of it. To do so is a crime. She has admitted to her crime, now she wants to argue the magnitude of it.

The prosecutor for the Petraeus case claims Hillary did not commit a crime. Her case is different from the Petraeus case.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...21242/?ref=yfp Originally Posted by flghtr65

I like Hillary. But didn't Nixon get in trouble for erasing some of the recordings from the Oval Office? I think this is something similar - don't you think Tricky Dick would have erased a few incriminating emails?


Hell, I erase incriminating emails - and I'm not required by law in any official government capacity to save them, unlike TimmyTard, who holds an official position somewhere, if you believe his bragging.

That was not her call to make. Fact is, she is a known liar. We can't take her word for anything. ALL emails were to be turned over. We don't know what was in the ones she erased. She is a known liar. She should be charged.


And, really? 30,000 personal emails in four years about yoga, Chelsea's wedding and fun times with Bill? How many personal emails do you send in a year?


You are in Hillary Fantasyland, Fluffy. Acute Kool-Aid poisoning. Get help! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

woomby the posting whore probably sends that many e-mails to all of his reach around crew and his other employees of the 'holes franchises. Since he's so starved for attention, he probably sends out AT LEAST that much. Just look at how he puffs up his post count number here.

.