Politics F.B.I. Begins Review of Clinton Aide’s Emails

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
barfo said:
My best case is one of them gets elected and proves to be a surprisingly good president, and we all live happily ever after.

barfo
Click to expand...
001.jpg
 
barfo said:
What does the phrase 'so far' mean to you?

It applies equally to the Clinton and Trump investigations.

barfo
Click to expand...

Sure it applies equally, but in Clinton's case we and the FBI knows she committed crimes. The big difference between Trump and Clinton, is that she is getting a pass because she paid off the FBI through a campaign donation. She also has ties into the AG's office as well (see the latest Podesta email where he was kept out of jail and admitted as much, by the Asst. AG).

So Barfo, while you have a point, you are mistaken one thing, that is everyone is on a level playing field.
 
Here's more evidence of why Clinton wasn't charged (yet)...

 
blue32 said:
Sure it applies equally, but in Clinton's case we and the FBI knows she committed crimes. The big difference between Trump and Clinton, is that she is getting a pass because she paid off the FBI through a campaign donation. She also has ties into the AG's office as well (see the latest Podesta email where he was kept out of jail and admitted as much, by the Asst. AG).

So Barfo, while you have a point, you are mistaken one thing, that is everyone is on a level playing field.
Click to expand...

Yeah and Trump got a pass on raping a 13 years old girl
 
MARIS61 said:
Because it was apparently Bill Clinton who did it.

Click to expand...

Two wrongs don't make one right and one isn't running for president in the here and now...the Donald is facing about 75 lawsuits currently....if he won, he'd be in court for at least a full term
 
MARIS61 said:
Because it was apparently Bill Clinton who did it.

Click to expand...


This video was made in early October, if they're going to release Bill's sex tape they should probably do it soon.
 
Word is Huma and Weiner are both cooperating fully in the FBI investigation in exchange for leniency on what will likely still be decade-long sentences.

Hillary, who used to gush how Huma "is like a second daughter to me" now refers to her in speeches as "a staffer".
 
This news has clearly had an effect.

IMG_0041.PNG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0041.PNG
    IMG_0041.PNG
    1.5 MB · Views: 23
IMG_0042.PNG RCP has the race so close that if Florida goes Trump, he wins.

241 + 29 = 270, exactly.

FWIW, Trump has been ahead in Florida polling much of the time, and Florida was just flipped by RCP from Trump to Clinton.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0042.PNG
    IMG_0042.PNG
    1.4 MB · Views: 23
Last edited:
538 has it 65% chance Clinton wins. Down from 90%+ a week or so ago.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/05/washington-state-elector-says-wont-vote-for-clinton.html

Robert Satiacum, a member of the Puyallup Tribe, supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary, which the Vermont senator won by approximately a 3-to-1 margin. He said he believes Clinton is a "criminal" who doesn't care enough about American Indians and "she's done nothing but flip back and forth."


He said he has wrestled with what to do, but feels that neither Clinton nor Republican Donald Trump can lead the country.


"She will not get my vote, period," he said in a phone interview with The Associated Press.


Satiacum said he believes Sanders did a better job of reaching out to Native Americans. "She doesn't care about my land or my air or my fire or my water," he said of Clinton.


Americans vote for the president on Election Day, but they're really casting votes for each state's electors, who will decide the next president on Dec. 19.


Predictions Map

See the Fox News 2016 battleground prediction map and make your own election projections. See Predictions Map →


In all but two states (Maine and Nebraska), the winner of the state's popular vote gets all of the state's electors. There's nothing in the Constitution that says the electors are required to vote for a particular candidate, but some states have penalties for so-called "faithless electors." Satiacum faces a $1,000 fine in Washington if he doesn't vote for Clinton, but he said he doesn't care.


"I hope it comes down to a swing vote and it’s me,” he told The Seattle Times. "Good. She ain’t getting it. Maybe it’ll wake this country up."


Satiacum is one of 12 Democratic electors in Washington, which has 12 electoral votes and has not gone for a Republican presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan in 1984.


Satiacum said he has gotten a lot of criticism since he told media outlets last month that he might not vote for Clinton. But he said he has also heard from electors in other states who thanked him for speaking out. He said he hopes some of those electors follow his lead.


At the time of of Satiacum's initial statements, the Puyallup Tribal Council issued a statement saying that he had pledged to support the winner of the state's popular vote Nov. 8 and "risks dishonoring himself" if he does not do so.


According to the National Archives, 99 percent of electors through U.S. history have voted for their party's candidate, and none of the dissenters has ever changed the result of an election.
 
julius said:
Drudge...*snort*

Ok Denny...
Click to expand...

The polls are legit, regardless of the source. They're included in the RCP averages (they don't just use any polls).
 
Denny Crane said:
The polls are legit, regardless of the source. They're included in the RCP averages (they don't just use any polls).
Click to expand...

This board is having a case of deja vue, where in 2012, the a large vocal group of posters were convinced that the polls were going towards the Republican, they cited horrifically biased polls, and were absolutely convinced that Romney would win going away.

So far, you guys track records aren't really good.
 
julius said:
This board is having a case of deja vue, where in 2012, the a large vocal group of posters were convinced that the polls were going towards the Republican, they cited horrifically biased polls, and were absolutely convinced that Romney would win going away.

So far, you guys track records aren't really good.
Click to expand...

I'm n0t convinced. RCP is.

I'm not saying that Trump is winning or going to. Just that this news about more emails has had an effect.
 
What are we going to do about her, I mean she is such a liar!


14956038_1774828792778820_6329366255335241472_n.jpg
 
e_blazer said:
Man, I am tired of this Dem spin. There's a big difference between telling whoppers on the campaign trail and deliberately collusive/deceptive behavior to cover things up.
Click to expand...
This Dem spin? Trump is a GIANT liar, there is no denying that. He lies constantly and it seems like a large part of his base is eating it up and believing these lies. Its not like its 1 thing he is lying about it is constant lies, lies that he isn't called out on and that people believe. Does that make what Clinton did okay, not at all but it doesn't make what Trump is doing okay either.
 
Rhal said:
This Dem spin? Trump is a GIANT liar, there is no denying that. He lies constantly and it seems like a large part of his base is eating it up and believing these lies. Its not like its 1 thing he is lying about it is constant lies, lies that he isn't called out on and that people believe. Does that make what Clinton did okay, not at all but it doesn't make what Trump is doing okay either.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm fully on board with the Trump is a sack of crap train. But what's spin is the notion that all lies are the same. Saying Mexico will have to pay for the wall is pure bull aimed to feed the redneck base. I doubt many of them believe it. Hillary's multiple lies about the email, however are calculated to mislead the public about her culpability. That's been the Clinton way since the days of debating what the definition of is is. Here's a rundown of the 8 lies she told about the email mess:


http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437606/hillary-clintons-eight-email-lies-exposed-james-comey
 
e_blazer said:
Man, I am tired of this Dem spin. There's a big difference between telling whoppers on the campaign trail and deliberately collusive/deceptive behavior to cover things up.
Click to expand...

Do you even know what PolitiFact is?

Hint: Read the name.
 
For the record, PolitiFact was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in reporting.

Those commie pinkos!
 
Stevenson said:
Do you even know what PolitiFact is?

Hint: Read the name.
Click to expand...

Save the snark. I'm not disputing the table of lies. I'm saying not all lies are the same. I don't dispute that Hillary is more truthful with the statements she makes in her campaign, but in my view, the intentional disinformation about emails and similar things in her history is worse.
 
Last edited:
jlprk said:
Does the Bible agree with you?
Click to expand...

I'm terms of sin, no, but since I'm not God my concern is with the impact of corruption on our country. I see that as worse than simply playing footsie with the facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top