And the hits just keep on coming.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/...probe.html

L O FREAKING L

Yup, then there's this:

New DNC boss also bashed Sanders in leaked emails

Quote:Just two months ago, on May 22, Brazile fired a message to DNC communications director Luis Miranda after Sanders endorsed Wasserman Schultz’ primary opponent, and Miranda forwarded Brazile the text of Wasserman Schultz’ statement.

“I saw it this am. How stupid. Don't know how to respond to Bernie anymore,” Brazile wrote.

In another email released by WikiLeaks, Brazile declined a Washington Post interview request two months ago because she was worried what she might say about Sanders’ campaign.

“I have no intentions of touching this,” Brazile wrote to several DNC operatives on May 13. “Why? Because I will cuss out the Sanders camp!”

I do not take much glee in any of this.

Its disgusting. This lady is a serial crook and liar. The fact that she is not under indictment already is a farce.

Quote:A group of 64 House Republicans, in a letter, has asked the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Trade Commission to examine the dealings of the foundation, alleging “criminal conduct” and describing it as a “pay to play” enterprise.

In case you missed this,

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cas....html?_r=0

If The DNC had any decency for America, They would pull the Plug on Her Nomination at the Convention and Run Uncle Joe or Bernie. That place could be a nightmare this week. DNC talking heads this morning were scrambling to get out to the media outlets this email scandal was nothing but an internal squabble and Hillary had nothing to do with it and DWS will step down. Kumbaya. Oh, some are now blaming Trump for the leaks. Even going so far to say He is a Russian spy. You just can't make this clusterfu@k up !

One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

(07-25-2016 02:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

Actual answers...or the answers you want? It doesn't seem to matter much to the right unless they get their desired answer.

(07-25-2016 02:24 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

Actual answers...or the answers you want? It doesn't seem to matter much to the right unless they get their desired answer.

Thanks for confirming my point.

(07-25-2016 02:27 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:24 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

Actual answers...or the answers you want? It doesn't seem to matter much to the right unless they get their desired answer.

Thanks for confirming my point.

Not what I did and you know that. Birth Certificate...Benghazi...E-mail. They got the actual answers, but refused to accept any of them. If this turns out the same, why would anyone believe they'd accept that?

God save the (banana) Republic.

(07-25-2016 02:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:27 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:24 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

Actual answers...or the answers you want? It doesn't seem to matter much to the right unless they get their desired answer.

Thanks for confirming my point.

Not what I did and you know that. Birth Certificate...Benghazi...E-mail. They got the actual answers, but refused to accept any of them. If this turns out the same, why would anyone believe they'd accept that?

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

(07-25-2016 02:00 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Yup, then there's this:

New DNC boss also bashed Sanders in leaked emails

Quote:Just two months ago, on May 22, Brazile fired a message to DNC communications director Luis Miranda after Sanders endorsed Wasserman Schultz’ primary opponent, and Miranda forwarded Brazile the text of Wasserman Schultz’ statement.

“I saw it this am. How stupid. Don't know how to respond to Bernie anymore,” Brazile wrote.

In another email released by WikiLeaks, Brazile declined a Washington Post interview request two months ago because she was worried what she might say about Sanders’ campaign.

“I have no intentions of touching this,” Brazile wrote to several DNC operatives on May 13. “Why? Because I will cuss out the Sanders camp!”

But, Donna was in the dark what the DNC did to Bernie then. But you noticed she said she would not touch this to stay neutral.

I don't like trump and don't want to use his nicknames for people, but is there a better word for Hillary than 'crooked'? She is everything that is wrong with politicians rolled up in one super expensive pant suit.

Brazille was in it. DWS was in on it. Crooked lying Hillary was in on it. The entire rotten carcass needs to be buried to eliminate the stink of corruption.

(07-25-2016 02:24 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

Actual answers...or the answers you want? It doesn't seem to matter much to the right unless they get their desired answer.

actual answers.. with Hillary's hand on the bible while she replies..

(07-25-2016 02:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:27 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:24 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  One way or another enough doubt has been cast that there needs to be answers. Simply because one side of the political apparatus is uninterested does not mean we should be denied answers.

Actual answers...or the answers you want? It doesn't seem to matter much to the right unless they get their desired answer.

Thanks for confirming my point.

Not what I did and you know that. Birth Certificate...Benghazi...E-mail. They got the actual answers, but refused to accept any of them. If this turns out the same, why would anyone believe they'd accept that?

We got the answers on the emails and server. We accept the answer. She committed crimes. It's you that doesn't accept that answer.

And I believe Comey already confirmed during his questioning the Foundation was under investigation.

(07-25-2016 04:41 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-25-2016 02:00 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Yup, then there's this:

New DNC boss also bashed Sanders in leaked emails

Quote:Just two months ago, on May 22, Brazile fired a message to DNC communications director Luis Miranda after Sanders endorsed Wasserman Schultz’ primary opponent, and Miranda forwarded Brazile the text of Wasserman Schultz’ statement.

“I saw it this am. How stupid. Don't know how to respond to Bernie anymore,” Brazile wrote.

In another email released by WikiLeaks, Brazile declined a Washington Post interview request two months ago because she was worried what she might say about Sanders’ campaign.

“I have no intentions of touching this,” Brazile wrote to several DNC operatives on May 13. “Why? Because I will cuss out the Sanders camp!”

But, Donna was in the dark what the DNC did to Bernie then. But you noticed she said she would not touch this to stay neutral.

Oh, no you di'in't just type that.