Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dog Town said:
So brilliant, some one childishly copied it! Very, "I know you are but what am I"!:rolleyes:
Classic Shillary!
Click to expand...

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Try posting some arguments with evidence, instead of bare assertions ,laughing dogs, and ad hominems, then perhaps someone will take you seriously.
 
Slick Hilly Caught Lying, AGAIN!

Anyone surprised?
Just a few weeks ago, MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell asked Clinton about the arrangement that Abedin had at the State Department. Not only was Abedin working as one of her top aides, but she was also working for the Clinton Foundation and for a private firm, Teneo, that also had ties to the Clintons.

Was it "appropriate for her to be taking a State Department salary and also be paid by an outside company closely associated with your husband, by you?" asked Mitchell. Clinton's answer: "Well, I was not directly involved in that, but everything that she did was approved under the rules as they existed by the State Department."
But documents uncovered by Judicial Watch show that Clinton personally signed off on paperwork to approve Abedin's special status.
Click to expand...
http://news.investors.com/ibd-edito...-caught-in-lie-about-top-aide-huma-abedin.htm
 
Last edited:
Dog Town said:
I find it humorous how many keep focusing on jail time. I don't think anyone is suggesting this.
Click to expand...

I was merely responding to the posts that claimed mishandling confidential info like this could lead to jail time. It seemed odd to me. And, it seems there aren't any example available to support that view of what she did. So, bringing up jail time is admittedly silly, but it wasn't really the Shillaries that did it.
 
Dr. Keith said:
I was merely responding to the posts that claimed mishandling confidential info like this could lead to jail time. It seemed odd to me. And, it seems there aren't any example available to support that view of what she did. So, bringing up jail time is admittedly silly, but it wasn't really the Shillaries that did it.
Click to expand...

Wasn't directed at you. There are plenty of others. Many of them Shillaries!:D
 
Dog Town said:
Wasn't directed at you. There are plenty of others. Many of them Shillaries!:D
Click to expand...

Yeah, we're all just imagining all those posts in this and the Email thread... you know, the ones cheering for "criminal charges", the ones saying "jail time" and the ones trying to pull together various regulations to prove that what she did was criminal.

"Oh, no one's saying she should go to jail..." Well, except for those who are. So now we're gonna play butter-won't-melt-in-our-mouths innocent? What is the purpose of defining "criminal", other than to say that it should be applied. Maybe Sunmaster could stop in and explain the purpose of the exercise.

Keep up with "Shillaries!". It's working, I'm sure. Well, other than the fact that there are no real Hillary supporters that I can see. Mostly you're seeing posters who just like to knock down the concerted conservative campaign. Meh? I don't particularly like Hillary. If a candidate showed up who I could support and who had a chance, I'd be happy to see someone other than Hillary running. But I'm not going to ask the Dem party to shoot itself in the foot and nominate someone who the GOP is drooling over running against. My vote, because of the nasty partisan politics in the country is ABR - Anybody But a Republican. I could care less if it's Hillary. I'll vote for the person with the best chance of further reducing the New Republican Party to a memory.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I wonder if there are as many 'Trump tells another lie' in the Trump thread.
Click to expand...

Well, you could look. There's certainly a lot of criticism of Trump. I think it's a mistake to imagine that distaste for Clinton somehow is support for Trump or anybody else. One difference between them is that Trump makes outrageous claims ("Immigrants are rapists", "Obama's a Muslim") that are too over-the-top ridiculous to even try to refute with facts. But Clinton has a long history of making specific statements of fact that are later proven to be false. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...llary-clinton-e-mail-story-couldnt-get-worse/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...cd66bc-5ed9-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/clinton-emails-benghazi-213940
 
Bob001 said:
I think it's a mistake to imagine that distaste for Clinton somehow is support for Trump or anybody else.
Click to expand...

This is what cracks me up! The Shillaries think by disliking HRC you must be a Republican.

Reminds me of arguing with Twoofers!
:hb:
 
Dog Town said:
This is what cracks me up! The Shillaries think by disliking HRC you must be a Republican.

Reminds me of arguing with Twoofers!
:hb:
Click to expand...

Well, I am a right wing loon, but, I haven't placed a scrap of support anywhere yet.
Until the time I have someone, anyone, worth my current support, I'm putting my thoughts and posting energy towards the one person I want no where near the leavers of power.
I won't even try to mask my strong distaste for the cackling granny from Arkansas one bit.
Hell, I'll take a third Obama term if that's what it would take to keep her out of the White House, at least without a tour guide present.
Frankly, I wish someone would throw a bucket of water on her and just put her out of our misery, once and for all.
 
I notice you said you'd take Obama over Clinton. It's interesting you didn't say you'd take anyone from the Clown Car over Clinton.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I notice you said you'd take Obama over Clinton. It's interesting you didn't say you'd take anyone from the Clown Car over Clinton.
Click to expand...

Not exactly what I said, I said this impossible thing...

Mike! said:
Hell, I'll take a third Obama term if that's what it would take to keep her out of the White House, at least without a tour guide present.
Click to expand...

That obviously can't happen at present, but it's also an impossible worst case scenario, which I'd still rather have over Hillary being made President. Clear enough for you?
 
Last edited:
Is Hilary guilty of perjury as defined here:
18 U.S. Code § 1621 – Perjury generally

Whoever—

(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or

(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;

is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.
 
ryu238 said:
Is Hilary guilty of perjury as defined here:
18 U.S. Code § 1621 – Perjury generally

Whoever—

(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or

(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;

is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Care to point out what testimony at which hearing you are asking about?
 
It's not a lie if Hillary says it!

And besides, the buck stops with Huma!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom