Deleted
Joined: Jun 28, 2024 19:19:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2016 5:36:36 GMT -5
If someone would have "had the stones" to USE 1/10th of the scrutiny they gave to Clinton, she wouldn't have made it to March either. Nah, she made a deal and heads would roll if she wasn't given the presidency. Literally.Exactly my point. No one "had the stones" to stand up for what was right against her political clout and her ties to people with money and power. If the system worked the way it's supposed to we wouldn't have either of these two horrible choices.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,080
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 19, 2016 6:42:18 GMT -5
how would you suggest they USE it, Richard? Ohhh... I dunno... what should be done with blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing... If only we had a system of justice where the doers of wrong could be judged for their crimes... We do have a system of justice, and the right wing part of Congress has spent millions trying to provide blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing, and could not. MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars.
The Bengazhi incident is a perfect example. Every time a special committee failed to find proof that Clinton was personally responsible for those people getting killed, they formed ANOTHER fucking committee. After the ninety eleventh committee meeting, someone snuffling through the lint under the rug got wind of a nongovernment computer that Hillary was using at her home, and then THAT because the subject of ninetyeleven government investigations which finally concluded, guess what, no blatant and obvious proof of wrong doing, or else they would have brought her to trial. (How do you think all the other Congress people on the Hill would hold up if someone subjected their private email to such a through nit picking?)
I really wish the rabid anti-Clintons would just give this a fucking rest. She isn't a hidden lesbian, she didn't murder anyone, she isn't part of some grand conspiracy, she didn't give terrorists the key to the American ambassador's house in Benghazi. She isn't somehow able to do some ninja jedi Vulcan mind meld to cover up all her foul misdeeds so that they can't be discovered. There are no foul misdeeds.
Not to say she hasn't made mistakes, or done stupid shit, and her husband isn't the king of bad husbands, but blatant and obvious proof of criminal wrongdoing that should lead to her arrest - it is just.not.there. Seriously. Or she would be in jail.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 19, 2016 7:37:00 GMT -5
Exactly my understanding of your statement. It's actually got more to do with my belief in life and how it ends than anything to do with Hillary. When it's your time to go, if it's not an assassin's bullet, ... ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/smiley.png)
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,820
|
Post by kadee79 on Oct 19, 2016 8:02:09 GMT -5
If the system worked the way it's supposed to we wouldn't have either of these two horrible choices. Just curious, who would you like to have seen running on both sides? I haven't seen anyone from either side that thrilled me all that much.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Oct 19, 2016 8:17:18 GMT -5
I think people will remember Trump and this election for a long time, I agree. The question is will it affect election results. And I think that in the long term no it won't. The whole election was just so bizarre precisely because it was so out of the ordinary.
There's been a lot of press given to moderate republicans not supporting Trump. Suburban, educated voters (women in particular) who might otherwise be inclined to vote republican instead voting for Hillary. I just don't see that happening in the future unless we have a repeat of this election cycle. And the democrats would be fools to count on it.
in 4-8 years there will be some more pressing matter on voters minds, not Trump. I think the GOP has a long term image problem it needs to address if it wants to remain relevant. But I think a lot of people, democrats in particular, are getting swept up in the moment and assume the sky is falling for the GOP and it will cease totally implode and cease to be a political party. I just don't see that happening. There's too strong of a conservative element in this country for that to happen.
Well, again, I mostly agree. But I think that what WILL change is the GOP will take a little bit more control of the candidate vetting and nominating process. I think I'd like to see that. There were simply too many damn republicans running, and they stayed in the race too long. I can't help but think if the vote hadn't been split for so long, Rubio or Cruz would have won. Furthermore, they didn't do a good enough job of vetting Trump. I thought political parties were supposed to vet candidates so stuff like these sex tapes and groping accusations don't happen.
I'm not sure if super delegates are the answer, but they need to do something to cull the crowd.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Oct 19, 2016 8:22:01 GMT -5
Ohhh... I dunno... what should be done with blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing... If only we had a system of justice where the doers of wrong could be judged for their crimes... We do have a system of justice, and the right wing part of Congress has spent millions trying to provide blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing, and could not. MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars.
The Bengazhi incident is a perfect example. Every time a special committee failed to find proof that Clinton was personally responsible for those people getting killed, they formed ANOTHER fucking committee. After the ninety eleventh committee meeting, someone snuffling through the lint under the rug got wind of a nongovernment computer that Hillary was using at her home, and then THAT because the subject of ninetyeleven government investigations which finally concluded, guess what, no blatant and obvious proof of wrong doing, or else they would have brought her to trial. (How do you think all the other Congress people on the Hill would hold up if someone subjected their private email to such a through nit picking?)
I really wish the rabid anti-Clintons would just give this a fucking rest. She isn't a hidden lesbian, she didn't murder anyone, she isn't part of some grand conspiracy, she didn't give terrorists the key to the American ambassador's house in Benghazi. She isn't somehow able to do some ninja jedi Vulcan mind meld to cover up all her foul misdeeds so that they can't be discovered. There are no foul misdeeds.
Not to say she hasn't made mistakes, or done stupid shit, and her husband isn't the king of bad husbands, but blatant and obvious proof of criminal wrongdoing that should lead to her arrest - it is just.not.there. Seriously. Or she would be in jail.
She's not in jail because we have a democrat president who appointed a democrat attorney general. There was never any snowball's chance in hell a democrat was going to charge another democrat running for national office of a crime. It's a case of party trumping justice.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Oct 19, 2016 8:30:53 GMT -5
For all the talk about social conservatives harming the GOP, actually that hasn't been the case in this election. In fact, Trump is actually the polar opposite of a socially conservative, Christian candidate.
So who knows, maybe Trump does indicate a party shift away from social conservatism. Obviously the primary voters didn't care about that this go around.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Oct 19, 2016 8:41:41 GMT -5
For all the talk about social conservatives harming the GOP, actually that hasn't been the case in this election. In fact, Trump is actually the polar opposite of a socially conservative, Christian candidate.
So who knows, maybe Trump does indicate a party shift away from social conservatism. Obviously the primary voters didn't care about that this go around. BS. The evangelicals are still supporting him for only one reason. His statement that he'd put conservatives on tne SC. (Nevermind the fact that he has a history of breaking promises and a nominee has to be approved by tne senate)
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Oct 19, 2016 8:43:01 GMT -5
Nah, she made a deal and heads would roll if she wasn't given the presidency. Literally.Exactly my point. No one "had the stones" to stand up for what was right against her political clout and her ties to people with money and power. If the system worked the way it's supposed to we wouldn't have either of these two horrible choices. Well we agree a bit finally..definitely one of them should never had been on the ballot...what we are lucky to have though is the other one there and even better when this whole farce is over on Nov 8th when Hillery is declared the winner...we'll be fine I believe for the next four years...
|
|
siralynn
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 8, 2013 10:33:16 GMT -5
Posts: 528
|
Post by siralynn on Oct 19, 2016 8:49:42 GMT -5
She's from America and she represents Americans. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/smiley.png) Not really What nationality are we then? My son was born in San Francisco, and they issued him a US birth certificate and a US social security number. Someone might want to tell the government that they screwed up.
|
|
siralynn
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 8, 2013 10:33:16 GMT -5
Posts: 528
|
Post by siralynn on Oct 19, 2016 8:51:32 GMT -5
If someone would have "had the stones" to USE 1/10th of the scrutiny they gave to Clinton, she wouldn't have made it to March either. Nah, she made a deal and heads would roll if she wasn't given the presidency. Literally. One of my favorite t-shirts says: "the misuse of literally makes me figuratively insane." Seems apropos.
|
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Oct 19, 2016 8:52:14 GMT -5
Ohhh... I dunno... what should be done with blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing... If only we had a system of justice where the doers of wrong could be judged for their crimes... We do have a system of justice, and the right wing part of Congress has spent millions trying to provide blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing, and could not. MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars.
The Bengazhi incident is a perfect example. Every time a special committee failed to find proof that Clinton was personally responsible for those people getting killed, they formed ANOTHER fucking committee. After the ninety eleventh committee meeting, someone snuffling through the lint under the rug got wind of a nongovernment computer that Hillary was using at her home, and then THAT because the subject of ninetyeleven government investigations which finally concluded, guess what, no blatant and obvious proof of wrong doing, or else they would have brought her to trial. (How do you think all the other Congress people on the Hill would hold up if someone subjected their private email to such a through nit picking?)
I really wish the rabid anti-Clintons would just give this a fucking rest. She isn't a hidden lesbian, she didn't murder anyone, she isn't part of some grand conspiracy, she didn't give terrorists the key to the American ambassador's house in Benghazi. She isn't somehow able to do some ninja jedi Vulcan mind meld to cover up all her foul misdeeds so that they can't be discovered. There are no foul misdeeds.
Not to say she hasn't made mistakes, or done stupid shit, and her husband isn't the king of bad husbands, but blatant and obvious proof of criminal wrongdoing that should lead to her arrest - it is just.not.there. Seriously. Or she would be in jail.
Outstanding Happy...u hit the nail right on the head here..summed it up perfectly and as u can see a few of us are agreeing with u...Naturally u know those from the right will be right back with the same f.....g 99th hearing and definitely a week after being sworn in in January , will be calling for another hearing on the first order of business she puts forth as POTUS. guarantee it will not be a easy next four years.. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/sad.png) ............
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 19, 2016 9:44:19 GMT -5
Nah, she made a deal and heads would roll if she wasn't given the presidency. Literally. One of my favorite t-shirts says: "the misuse of literally makes me figuratively insane." Seems apropos. I agree "literally" isn't the correct word because there is zero likelihood that the Clinton's nor their hired assassins would decapitate those they would kill if she doesn't become president. zib has indicated she believes in the Clinton Killing Machine
|
|
siralynn
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 8, 2013 10:33:16 GMT -5
Posts: 528
|
Post by siralynn on Oct 19, 2016 9:47:42 GMT -5
One of my favorite t-shirts says: "the misuse of literally makes me figuratively insane." Seems apropos. I agree "literally" isn't the correct word because there is zero likelihood that the Clinton's nor their hired assassins would decapitate those they would kill if she doesn't become president. zib has indicated she believes in the Clinton Killing MachineWhich is why I was a little surprised about "literal" head-rolling - doesn't play into that narrative about staging a bunch of murders to look like suicides, etc. "He totally decapitated himself!"
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 19, 2016 9:57:29 GMT -5
I agree "literally" isn't the correct word because there is zero likelihood that the Clinton's nor their hired assassins would decapitate those they would kill if she doesn't become president. zib has indicated she believes in the Clinton Killing MachineWhich is why I was a little surprised about "literal" head-rolling - doesn't play into that narrative about staging a bunch of murders to look like suicides, etc. "He totally decapitated himself!" Maybe I shouldn't hijack the thread for an English lesson but I am going to. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/charmed.png) Is "figuratively" the right word in this case?
|
|
siralynn
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 8, 2013 10:33:16 GMT -5
Posts: 528
|
Post by siralynn on Oct 19, 2016 10:04:22 GMT -5
Which is why I was a little surprised about "literal" head-rolling - doesn't play into that narrative about staging a bunch of murders to look like suicides, etc. "He totally decapitated himself!" Maybe I shouldn't hijack the thread for an English lesson but I am going to. ![](http://syonidv.hodginsmedia.com/vsmileys/charmed.png) Is "figuratively" the right word in this case? Yes!
|
|
imawino
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 22:58:16 GMT -5
Posts: 5,362
|
Post by imawino on Oct 19, 2016 10:05:47 GMT -5
She's from America and she represents Americans. ![](http://images.proboards.com/new/smiley.png) Not really Such completely, ridiculously, demonstrably false statements really shouldn't be left unchallenged, but I'm sure there's no point arguing.
You should ask Donald Trump to demand to see Pelosi's birth certificate.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Oct 19, 2016 10:33:41 GMT -5
The scrutinizing that was done was done in a poor and flawed manner (look at the recent FBI investigation for an example)
I am interested in learning about your criminal justice background that would create no doubt that you have superior abilities vs. the FBI.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,653
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 19, 2016 10:40:17 GMT -5
The scrutinizing that was done was done in a poor and flawed manner (look at the recent FBI investigation for an example)
I am interested in learning about your criminal justice background that would create no doubt that you have superior abilities vs. the FBI. I like to refer to this as the "Spy Kids" phenomenon, although there are many more examples of that type of movie/TV show. You know, the ones where kids have to rescue adults because kids with no experience or training are so much more capable than trained professional adults. When you are taught that as a kid, it makes sense to grow up into an adult who is more capable in any area than trained professionals.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,080
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 19, 2016 11:25:24 GMT -5
For all the talk about social conservatives harming the GOP, actually that hasn't been the case in this election. In fact, Trump is actually the polar opposite of a socially conservative, Christian candidate.
So who knows, maybe Trump does indicate a party shift away from social conservatism. Obviously the primary voters didn't care about that this go around. Neither is Trump a fiscally conservative candidate, either.
His plans to cut taxes (especially for the wealthy) would cost us enormous amounts of money. He planned to off set that by shutting down two government agencies - the EPA and Education, if I remember correctly - but both those departments together are only a fraction of all the tax pork he plans to ladle out.
Trump is the billionaire real estate developer's candidate, and that is pretty much it. Oh, and he is the Russian candidate of choice and he will try to get the libel laws changed, because he confuses free speech with libel. That's pretty much all he's concerned about. (Forget about him doing anything on immigration, he needs cheap labor for his golf courses and resorts. That's just shit he's saying to get elected).
I'm convinced if the GOP ran a dedicated public servant, someone with a government track record we can review (and that track record shows fiscal restraint) he would easily win. Neither party in the last two decades has offered much in the way of fiscal control. We would welcome that, IMHO.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Oct 19, 2016 11:31:26 GMT -5
For all the talk about social conservatives harming the GOP, actually that hasn't been the case in this election. In fact, Trump is actually the polar opposite of a socially conservative, Christian candidate.
So who knows, maybe Trump does indicate a party shift away from social conservatism. Obviously the primary voters didn't care about that this go around. Neither is Trump a fiscally conservative candidate, either.
His plans to cut taxes (especially for the wealthy) would cost us enormous amounts of money. He planned to off set that by shutting down two government agencies - the EPA and Education, if I remember correctly - but both those departments together are only a fraction of all the tax pork he plans to ladle out.
Trump is the billionaire real estate developer's candidate, and that is pretty much it. Oh, and he is the Russian candidate of choice and he will try to get the libel laws changed, because he confuses free speech with libel. That's pretty much all he's concerned about. (Forget about him doing anything on immigration, he needs cheap labor for his golf courses and resorts. That's just shit he's saying to get elected).
I'm convinced if the GOP ran a dedicated public servant, someone with a government track record we can review (and that track record shows fiscal restraint) he would easily win. Neither party in the last two decades has offered much in the way of fiscal control. We would welcome that, IMHO.
I agree - as long as he (or she) stays far far away from social issues. (Or are you implying that the GOP would only run a male?)
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,500
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 19, 2016 11:36:09 GMT -5
If Republicans do bend the party back to fiscal conservative values, and social libertarian - which I would love, who would be the leaders of that movement? Is there anyone in the party now that has that theology? Who are those people. Because if they exist and could actually make a difference, I will support them and talk them up. But where are they? Who are they?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,080
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 19, 2016 11:39:53 GMT -5
Neither is Trump a fiscally conservative candidate, either.
His plans to cut taxes (especially for the wealthy) would cost us enormous amounts of money. He planned to off set that by shutting down two government agencies - the EPA and Education, if I remember correctly - but both those departments together are only a fraction of all the tax pork he plans to ladle out.
Trump is the billionaire real estate developer's candidate, and that is pretty much it. Oh, and he is the Russian candidate of choice and he will try to get the libel laws changed, because he confuses free speech with libel. That's pretty much all he's concerned about. (Forget about him doing anything on immigration, he needs cheap labor for his golf courses and resorts. That's just shit he's saying to get elected).
I'm convinced if the GOP ran a dedicated public servant, someone with a government track record we can review (and that track record shows fiscal restraint) he would easily win. Neither party in the last two decades has offered much in the way of fiscal control. We would welcome that, IMHO.
I agree - as long as he (or she) stays far far away from social issues. (Or are you implying that the GOP would only run a male?) No, it was a generic 'he.' In fact, if they could find a good qualified female AND a non white to run, just to demonstrate this is a whole new party with a single minded focus on fiscal reform, they'd be almost guaranteed to win.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,411
|
Post by swamp on Oct 19, 2016 11:42:57 GMT -5
If Republicans do bend the party back to fiscal conservative values, and social libertarian - which I would love, who would be the leaders of that movement? Is there anyone in the party now that has that theology? Who are those people. Because if they exist and could actually make a difference, I will support them and talk them up. But where are they? Who are they? George Pataki.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,080
|
Post by happyhoix on Oct 19, 2016 11:54:47 GMT -5
If Republicans do bend the party back to fiscal conservative values, and social libertarian - which I would love, who would be the leaders of that movement? Is there anyone in the party now that has that theology? Who are those people. Because if they exist and could actually make a difference, I will support them and talk them up. But where are they? Who are they? I don't have specific names but I know where to start look for them - governors of purple states for a start. Or any GOP politicians in a typically Dem stronghold. For them to get elected in the first place they would have already had to drop the far right social agendas, most likely.
They would have the added advantage of already knowing how to work across the aisle with dems, so they can run on a non obstructionist/fiscally conservative platform.
I'm sure there are plenty of good ones out there - they just get elbowed out of the way by the flashier far right anti abortion, anti gay rights, anti all religions except the only one that counts people.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,873
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 19, 2016 15:49:06 GMT -5
Such completely, ridiculously, demonstrably false statements really shouldn't be left unchallenged, but I'm sure there's no point arguing.
You should ask Donald Trump to demand to see Pelosi's birth certificate.
I believe she was born here. What she represents is reprehensible.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,267
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 19, 2016 19:28:47 GMT -5
If Republicans do bend the party back to fiscal conservative values, and social libertarian - which I would love, who would be the leaders of that movement? Is there anyone in the party now that has that theology? Who are those people. Because if they exist and could actually make a difference, I will support them and talk them up. But where are they? Who are they? George Pataki. I did one of the tests early on to see which GOP candidate most aligned with my views. It was George Pataki.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 28, 2024 19:19:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2016 20:09:41 GMT -5
Ohhh... I dunno... what should be done with blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing... If only we had a system of justice where the doers of wrong could be judged for their crimes... We do have a system of justice, and the right wing part of Congress has spent millions trying to provide blatant and obvious proof of wrongdoing, and could not. MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars.
The Bengazhi incident is a perfect example. Every time a special committee failed to find proof that Clinton was personally responsible for those people getting killed, they formed ANOTHER fucking committee. After the ninety eleventh committee meeting, someone snuffling through the lint under the rug got wind of a nongovernment computer that Hillary was using at her home, and then THAT because the subject of ninetyeleven government investigations which finally concluded, guess what, no blatant and obvious proof of wrong doing, or else they would have brought her to trial. (How do you think all the other Congress people on the Hill would hold up if someone subjected their private email to such a through nit picking?)
I really wish the rabid anti-Clintons would just give this a fucking rest. She isn't a hidden lesbian, she didn't murder anyone, she isn't part of some grand conspiracy, she didn't give terrorists the key to the American ambassador's house in Benghazi. She isn't somehow able to do some ninja jedi Vulcan mind meld to cover up all her foul misdeeds so that they can't be discovered. There are no foul misdeeds.
Not to say she hasn't made mistakes, or done stupid shit, and her husband isn't the king of bad husbands, but blatant and obvious proof of criminal wrongdoing that should lead to her arrest - it is just.not.there. Seriously. Or she would be in jail.
Not with her connections, as is already patently obvious due to her lack of being in jail. We get it. Hillary deniers don't see the obvious. Reasonable people just wish they would.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 28, 2024 19:19:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2016 20:11:36 GMT -5
If the system worked the way it's supposed to we wouldn't have either of these two horrible choices. Just curious, who would you like to have seen running on both sides? I haven't seen anyone from either side that thrilled me all that much. I could have gotten behind Sanders (even if some of his ideas were a little "out there")... I didn't see anyone this year from the Republican side that I really liked.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 28, 2024 19:19:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2016 20:24:12 GMT -5
The scrutinizing that was done was done in a poor and flawed manner (look at the recent FBI investigation for an example)
I am interested in learning about your criminal justice background that would create no doubt that you have superior abilities vs. the FBI. The only part of my abilities that is superior to the abilities of the FBI is that my honor and integrity cannot be bought. I will happily and cheerfully and freely admit that they CAN investigate better and more thoroughly than I can. The problem here is that they DIDN'T. I posted a video yesterday in one of these threads that compared Hillary's statements to Comey stating the FBI's position on certain things and Clinton's answers on certain things. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what's plainly visible nor to hear what's clearly audible. (took some Googling, but I found the video)
|
|