Hillary Clinton is Done: part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, there was nothing important in the ones I read. So, I assume that Pubs are desperately hoping that there is something in the ones they haven't read. Again, what is it that they are wishing was in those?

sounds legit

:rolleyes:
 
I just realized that I had to delete text messages from my phone because the inbox was full. I wonder what felony I was covering up?

Why you deleted the messages is irrelevant. Of course you would come up with some mundane reason why you did it.

How your political enemies can spin the fact that you deleted the messages is all that matters to them.
 
What degree was that? The server wasn't under her control at the time the emails were deleted from it, and the protocol used was pretty standard as far as decommissioning hardware is concerned. There were also 3 months of backup tapes, and as far as I understand it was all backed up to the cloud as well.

I've scrubbed drives from university systems on the way out. We used a (retired) DoD protocol. Did our thorough scrubbing of data inherently suggest malfeasance, too?
 
Just when we think Hillary is done, Trump screws the pooch again.

Then the evil Hillary doll has to be dragged out of it's trunk again.
 
Just when we think Hillary is done, Trump screws the pooch again.

Then the evil Hillary doll has to be dragged out of it's trunk again.


n4VCqhQ.jpg
 
Fake cartoon.

It was nice of the Democrats to allow the independent Sanders to run in their primary, but that didn't mean the DNC owed him anything.
.....

Sanders fulfilled the requirements to be on the Democratic ballot in every state. If the DNC gets to select the candidate by itself, why have primaries and caucuses at all? What the DNC owed the voters is even-handed treatment of all candidates.
 
Sanders fulfilled the requirements to be on the Democratic ballot in every state. If the DNC gets to select the candidate by itself, why have primaries and caucuses at all? What the DNC owed the voters is even-handed treatment of all candidates.

Not really. Sanders isn't even a Democrat.

A political party owes people who vote for a candidate of another party nothing. The object is to defeat those voters and their candidate.
 
Last edited:
Yes, there was nothing important in the ones I read. So, I assume that Pubs are desperately hoping that there is something in the ones they haven't read. Again, what is it that they are wishing was in those?

The harbingers of the fall of civilization need rely on no such hope. The mere implication that "something" incriminating might be found in an email at some time is more than sufficient to hardwire many Trumpkin brains.
 
I have a question. I keep hearing about the Hillary Clinton emails over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. You picture rows of Pubs sitting in lotus position chanting emails ... emails in an attempt to gain political enlightenment.

So, what is it that you believe is in the emails? I assume that you believe the emails contain evidence of a crime. What crime and how was Clinton involved?

Exactly. Government officials should be free to do their job without letting the public see the records. Hillary didn't want everybody looking over her shoulder. Maybe they'd see some e-mail where she revealed something embarrassing. A crime of taste; maybe she would accidentally disclose that she liked ketchup on her hotdogs instead of mustard.
 
Last edited:
Not really. Sanders isn't even a Democrat.

A political party owes people who vote for a candidate of another party nothing. The object is to defeat those voters and their candidate.

Sanders was not the "candidate of another party." That would be Trump. The DNC's and Hillary's blindness to the issues raised by Sanders and Trump contributed mightily to Trump's success.
 
Exactly. Government officials should be free to do their job without letting the public see the records. Hillary didn't want everybody looking over her shoulder. Maybe they'd see some e-mail where she revealed something embarrassing. A crime of taste; maybe she would accidentally disclose that she liked ketchup on her hotdogs instead of mustard.

Clinton's mistake was insisting on -- and going to great lengths to impose -- one email address for all of her communications. Most of us have multiple addresses for different purposes. Most people in her situation might have established one government address for broad State Dept. communications, another government address for consultations with her closest advisers, and multiple private addresses for her foundation business, her speaking and book business, her family, her yoga classes, ordering from Amazon, etc. The only emails subject to FOIA and records-storage requirements would have been the government addresses, and even some of those could have been excluded/protected on confidentiality grounds. Sometimes smart people can be really stupid.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom