Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, you were supposed to show that they were frivolous, wareyin, something that you have singularly failed to do.

In fact, wareyin, the evidence posted in this thread repeatedly is that courts have ordered relief to the plaintiffs, including requiring the rolling production of documents from Hillary's cowboy server. I know you don't know what that means.
Not dismissed yet. Check.
 
Not dismissed yet. Check.

Huh, you said frivolous. "not dismissed yet" is not frivolous. This is pretty basic actually.

No reason to be defensive. The next time you refuse to post evidence I can start posting actual pleadings/orders from the various courts overseeing the cases (protip, most have been posted in this thread already). Let me know.
 
Huh, you said frivolous. "not dismissed yet" is not frivolous. This is pretty basic actually.

No reason to be defensive. The next time you refuse to post evidence I can start posting actual pleadings/orders from the various courts overseeing the cases (protip, most have been posted in this thread already). Let me know.
I'd much rather you posted the evidence for your accusations in this thread, rather than wasting time going on about frivolous lawsuits. But if that's all you have, stick with your not yet dismissed lawsuits.
 
I'd much rather you posted the evidence for your accusations in this thread, rather than wasting time going on about frivolous lawsuits. But if that's all you have, stick with your not yet dismissed lawsuits.

Hee hee! I bet you would rather we change the subject to anything other than your inability to provide evidence for your claim that that the lawsuits are frivolous. there have been dozens of posts in this thread about the court orders arising out of those lawsuits.

I mean you just stated it again. Seriously, do I seem to be the type of poster who is going to let frivolous claims like yours go unchallenged?

Say, this order does not look frivolous:

http://images.politico.com/global/2015/05/27/hillaryemailorder.pdf

Say wareyin, what gives?
 
Not really.

Blasting Hillary is not the same as the cheap shots people are directing at each other in this thread. Perhaps I wasn't clear earlier.

Davefoc accused me of being a hypocrite (for suggesting people tone down the cheap shots) but I don't think I've dipped even close to some of the more regular posters in this thread. Again maybe I wasn't clear earlier.

...

My sincerest apologies. The hypocrite I had in mind was davefoc. My post was ambiguous on that point and I should have made it clearer when I realized that.
 
Hee hee! I bet you would rather we change the subject to anything other than your inability to provide evidence for your claim that that the lawsuits are frivolous. there have been dozens of posts in this thread about the court orders arising out of those lawsuits.

I mean you just stated it again. Seriously, do I seem to be the type of poster who is going to let frivolous claims like yours go unchallenged?

Say, this order does not look frivolous:

http://images.politico.com/global/2015/05/27/hillaryemailorder.pdf

Say wareyin, what gives?
I've given just as much evidence that the lawsuits you cling to are frivolous as you have that Clinton has done anything wrong. If evidence mattered, you would have something more than your silly 'not indicted yet' slogan. Since you have chosen to post evidence free claims throughout this thread, I've decided to do the same.

Frivolous lawsuits, just haven't been dismissed yet.
 
You did say frivolous, so *chop chop. Bet you can't! As for what you want 16.5 to answer, be specific. Show your work, quotes will do! Chop! Chop!

* I don't really expect an answer here. W's got nothing, and knows it. The spin will be a dance for the dizzy! So hold on!

BUH BYE!

If you actually have to ask for examples of 16.5 making unevidenced claims, you clearly haven't read the thread. They fill the thread, from the claims about spoliation early on, to the claims that the FBI seized Clinton's server, to the claim that Clinton's legal use of a personal server caused these lawsuits you conservatives are clinging to so desperately, and many, many more.
 
Since you have chosen to post evidence free claims throughout this thread, I've decided to do the same.

Yeah, wareyin, we know you decided to post 'evidence free' claims. I am sure that everyone is taking that into account when considering your claims against me.

I did giggle when you said the "not indicted yet" was "our" claim. You and the those of your ilk bring that up, as if not getting indicted is the standard YOU are applying to your Candidates.

Hillary Clinton, Not Indicted!
 
Yeah, wareyin, we know you decided to post 'evidence free' claims. I am sure that everyone is taking that into account when considering your claims against me.

I did giggle when you said the "not indicted yet" was "our" claim. You and the those of your ilk bring that up, as if not getting indicted is the standard YOU are applying to your Candidates.

Hillary Clinton, Not Indicted!

So here is the first use of it I see, looks like your claim to me.

Not yet, lots of plummeting poll numbers and a guy taking the Fifth, tho.

Hillary 2016, Not Indicted yet!
Inspirational.
 
Yeah, wareyin, we know you decided to post 'evidence free' claims. I am sure that everyone is taking that into account when considering your claims against me.

I did giggle when you said the "not indicted yet" was "our" claim. You and the those of your ilk bring that up, as if not getting indicted is the standard YOU are applying to your Candidates.

Hillary Clinton, Not Indicted!

No one who has read this thread needs evidence that you don't have a shred of evidence for your claims. This entire thread is that evidence.

But yeah, Clinton not being indicted yet is your claim. No evidence that she ever will be, but that hasn't stopped you yet.
 
Last edited:
:eek:

Is this another one of those cases where you are intentionally being wrong like wareyin?

Hillary's Inspirational slogan: Hillary 2016, Not a Convicted Felon

Oh the irony. After being called on falsely attributing his statements to others, 16.5 falsely attributes another of his claims to someone else, while accusing others of being intentionally wrong!
 
Any indictments, yet? Any relevant official statement of wrongdoing by Clinton, yet? Oh, right, no evidence.

Oh the irony. After being called on falsely attributing his statements to others, 16.5 falsely attributes another of his claims to someone else, while accusing others of being intentionally wrong!

Bwhahaha!!! Oh wait, we almost forgot:

Since you have chosen to post evidence free claims throughout this thread, I've decided to do the same.

You admitted that you posting evidence free claims.

Check!
 
:eek:

Is this another one of those cases where you are intentionally being wrong like wareyin?

Hillary's Inspirational slogan: Hillary 2016, Not a Convicted Felon

Why don't we just go the conspiracy theory route ...

Hehehehe! The reason she hasn't been indicted yet could not possibly be because she has friends in HIGH PLACES now could it?

:D:D:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
In your world,


Is the same as

:rolleyes: "the same" look it them goalposts go!



Dr. Joseph Dolan: You know, it's a shame about Ed.

Fletch: Oh, it was. Yeah, it was really a shame. To go so suddenly like that.

Dr. Joseph Dolan: He was dying for years.

Fletch: Sure, but... the end was very... very sudden.

Dr. Joseph Dolan: He was in intensive care for eight weeks.

Fletch: Yeah, but I mean the very end, when he actually died. That was extremely sudden.
 
Knock off the bickering, folks. I've moved a few of the worst offenders off to AAH, but if I have to come back in here there will be a new wall paper decorating this place. Something in a yellow color, I think would look perfect to brighten up this atmosphere....
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom