Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

[Noztradamus]

As I previously said,I would vote for a liar over a liar who is also an authoritarian,egotistical,narcissic idiot any day of the week.

latter is both of them. Coin toss time?

 

[PhantomWolf]

latter is both of them. Coin toss time?

Seriously? One of them has that they will use the Military to "persuade" China to do what they are told, on their website as a major policy. You think that this is a coin toss on who is better?

 

[Noztradamus]

Seriously? One of them has that they will use the Military to "persuade" China to do what they are told, on their website as a major policy. You think that this is a coin toss on who is better?

That's policy, not the personal qualities dudalb is concentrating on

liar who is also an authoritarian,egotistical,narcissic idiot

Hillary ticks all the boxes.

 

[Travis]

Team Bernie you say? You must have been on the scout team that mimics the other team's plays, because most of your arguments came right out of the Team Hillary playbook.

You both have evidence I didn't vote for Bernie?

Unless you do I'd advise you to not challenge my allegiance.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Since when is meeting with the Secretary of State a crime?

U.S. Code 18, section 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations:

"Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both."​

Notable example:

"On July 27, 1974, the House of Representatives charged President Richard M. Nixon with the first of three articles of impeachment for obstruction of justice after he refused to release White House tape recordings that contained crucial information regarding the Watergate scandal."​

 

[lionking]

Whenever I feel a bit down, I read this thread. The comedy routine of Hillary haters is a great laugh. I can't wait to witness the exploding heads when she wins.

 

[jhunter1163]

U.S. Code 18, section 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations:

"Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both."​

Notable example:

"On July 27, 1974, the House of Representatives charged President Richard M. Nixon with the first of three articles of impeachment for obstruction of justice after he refused to release White House tape recordings that contained crucial information regarding the Watergate scandal."​

There is no investigation into Clinton's calendar. Your citation does not apply. Yet another fail.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

There is no investigation into Clinton's calendar. Your citation does not apply. Yet another fail.

"It is almost always the cover-up rather than the event that causes trouble." -- Senator Howard Baker, circa 1974

 

[catsmate]

<snip>

We're still awaiting the proof of the illegalities you're alleging.

 

[catsmate]

It's all over the place. You just have to open your eyes.
<rant snip>

So no evidence then.

 

[jhunter1163]

And meanwhile, outside the Fox News bubble, Hillary continues to pull away.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...points-in-national-poll/ar-AAhBrvJ?li=BBnb7Kz

 

[sunmaster14]

So no evidence then.

I have presented plenty of evidence in the Hillary email thread. None of it has been seriously disputed, unless you count 5th grade taunts as cogent rebuttals.

By the way, I asked you a series of questions. Should I infer that the answer to all of them is "no?"

 

[DavidJames]

I have presented plenty of evidence in the Hillary email thread.

Partisan pontificaters are satisfied their own words are all that's needed to claim a win, not skeptics.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...

Hillary ticks all the boxes.

Clinton is no idiot. And as for the narcissism, the issue with Trump is that his narcissism crosses the line over to the pathologic side.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Partisan pontificaters are satisfied their own words are all that's needed to claim a win, not skeptics.

QFT

 

[sunmaster14]

Partisan pontificaters are satisfied their own words are all that's needed to claim a win, not skeptics.

Do you consider yourself a skeptic? If so, can you please point me to something you wrote that demonstrates it?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Do you consider yourself a skeptic? If so, can you please point me to something you wrote that demonstrates it?

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Trump seems less likely to lead you into a war? You haven't been paying attention at all then.

What have I not been paying attention to?

Whatever.

A lot of the people voting for Jill Stein this year are in the #NeverHillary camp. Apparently some people are having trouble understanding what "never" means.

That's actually a crap article that's already been discussed here.

Rally? Where?

 

[The Big Dog]

Partisan pontificaters are satisfied their own words are all that's needed to claim a win, not skeptics.

QFT

Lolz!

 

[Axiom_Blade]

But if you throw your vote away on some third party that has no chance whatsoever of winning, I hope you find President Donald Trump an acceptable outcome.

"You shouldn't vote for a third party, because they have no chance of winning."
Why do they have no chance of winning?
Because people don't vote for them...