(08-26-2016 08:20 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Anybody who was inclined to back Hillary that article rings true. The selective outrage you guys drum up. That rings true to me. Just sayin.

You just don't get it, do you? Trump is the anti-GWB. This line only strengthens Trump. All you are doing here is comparing Crooked Hillary to GWB after spending 2 months comparing her to Obama. Why would I vote for someone just like GWB and Obama? They are why we are in decline.

Hence Trump.

(08-26-2016 08:06 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Riiiiigggggghhhhttttt. Nothing to see here. The federal judge said why even bother?
The whole Hillary email fiasco was a political opportunity for opponent research. It worked. Congrats. Still hypocrits.

Are you clinging to the false equivalency because you truly don't understand the difference between what she did and what Powell/Rice/Bush did, or because you are simply carrying Hillary's water?

I think Hillary will win, I voted for her in the primary, and I don't really see much difference between her and Trump. But she committed criminal offenses that would put you or me behind bars for 40 years. Comey admitted that. He stated that she had committed all the required elements of several crimes, but recommended not prosecuting because he could not determine "intent." Problem with that line of reasoning is that the crimes involve do not include as an element the "intent" that Comey could not find.

Nothing ever so little had been made into so much, but in tactical terms it was brilliant. Thank God you guys nominated Trump.

I think you are way off base on the prison stuff Owl. It's was and continues to be political.

(08-26-2016 08:30 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Nothing ever so little had been made into so much, but in tactical terms it was brilliant. Thank God you guys nominated Trump.

I think you are way off base on the prison stuff Owl. It's was and continues to be political.

https://electionbettingodds.com/

(08-26-2016 08:18 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Aren't we all.

Nope, just the sheep.

(08-26-2016 08:38 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  https://electionbettingodds.com/

It looks like the Brexit odds just before the actual numbers started coming in.

(08-26-2016 08:42 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-26-2016 08:38 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  https://electionbettingodds.com/

It looks like the Brexit odds just before the actual numbers started coming in.

Jill Stein has the same odds that Nate Silver gave Berni in Michigan.

(08-26-2016 08:30 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I think you are way off base on the prison stuff Owl.

You're also not an attorney, and as far as I know you've never held a TS security clearance. If you had been/done those things, you'd understand my reasoning very clearly.

Ask the sailor who just got a prison sentence for doing something far less criminal.

So you guys are totally ok with not even making a peep in threads regarding the 15,000 lost emails or the sailors who are jailed for far lesser offenses, but as soon as something comes up about a perceived offense almost a decade ago that isn't even close to the same thing as this you are all in?

PATHETIC MAN.

You need a friend or someone who cares about you to tell you to step away from the keyboard. You are humiliating yourself.

I'm neither and I find this hysterical so keep it up!

Bush lost his emails but Hillary eased her emails. That is the difference. LOL

(08-26-2016 10:01 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Bush lost his emails but Hillary eased her emails. That is the difference. LOL

The next time someone tries to quote a link that shows liberals are smarter than conservatives, I am going to link this entire thread and shut the debate down for good.

(08-26-2016 10:01 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Bush lost his emails but Hillary eased her emails. That is the difference. LOL

False equivalence.

W isn't on the ballot. Try to focus.

Sent from my XT1565 using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-26-2016 07:11 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-25-2016 09:37 PM)ODUsmitty Wrote:  The article lost me at this point........

"Colin Powell—Bush’s secretary of state and the team player dispatched to the floor of the U.N. to deliver some of the lies about Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction......."

No slant or bias here.

Right. Pathetic article. It would be bad if it were a blog, let alone something in Newsweek.

Newsweek was last sold and acquired by the new owner for

1 dollar.

I'd say it's worth every penny of it... It's a total rag. Lost all credibility YEARS ago.

(08-25-2016 09:22 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-...ght-493120

The frenzy and furor over Hillary Clinton’s email habits while at the State Department, now into their 16th month and still going strong, have predictably and effectively chipped away at her reputation, so a sizable majority of Americans (67 percent in a poll last month) find her “untrustworthy.”

That’s what a year of FBI investigation—leading to no recommended charges—a budding congressional investigation and a relentless right-wing watchdog’s lawsuit buy you in American politics.

But take a moment away from pawing through the tens of thousands of her personal and professional emails now on public view and consider the long list of elected and appointed Republicans who have done exactly the same thing as Clinton—and worse............

I don't see anything in there about ignoring protocol and establishing a private server and conducting state business on such a server in violation of that protocol.

If you did that at your job, you would be fired. If I did it at mine, I would not only be fired, but subject to criminal charges (HIPPA). The lowest clerk at my hospital is subject to more severe penalties merely for LOOKING at patient data that they don't have a legitimate reason to be looking at... much less exposing it to external servers not under the control of the hospital.

You won't find anybody who supports a D to find fault here. It's absolutely murky at best. You won't find anybody who is an R supporter to find the moral equivalent. This is why it doesn't register more. It's a Rohrshach at this point. Plenty of smoke for both sides to find cover.

What I think is the most telling example of the Trumpistas. Trump flipped flopped on his most held dear primary position and nary a pep on here. People are so entrenched into their positions you can't dissuade them. That we are so into politics here that we actually try to find points and counterpoints is the definition of insanity. I'm telling you that Hillary supporters think the email thing is bull****. The investigations are total bull**** and only political. Dems wish we spent half the time on the 2008 collapse and the Iraq War deception. We think Benghazi is small potatoes to the Iraq War and the 2008 financial collapse. ThAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL. Is she dirty. Yeah, but she's our dirty and the alternative is worse.

(08-26-2016 01:40 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  You won't find anybody who supports a D to find fault here. It's absolutely murky at best. You won't find anybody who is an R supporter to find the moral equivalent. This is why it doesn't register more. It's a Rohrshach at this point. Plenty of smoke for both sides to find cover.

What I think is the most telling example of the Trumpistas. Trump flipped flopped on his most held dear primary position and nary a pep on here. People are so entrenched into their positions you can't dissuade them. That we are so into politics here that we actually try to find points and counterpoints is the definition of insanity. I'm telling you that Hillary supporters think the email thing is bull****. The investigations are total bull**** and only political. Dems wish we spent half the time on the 2008 collapse and the Iraq War deception. We think Benghazi is small potatoes to the Iraq War and the 2008 financial collapse. ThAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL. Is she dirty. Yeah, but she's our dirty and the alternative is worse.

I'll put you down for Hillary.

(08-26-2016 01:40 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Trump flipped flopped on his most held dear primary position and nary a pep on here.

What position was that?

Immigration?

Only those on the left actually believed that he was talking about something substantially different from 'where he is now', or that he had a chance in hell of accomplishing it, whether or not we thought he was serious or should.

You don't actually believe that building a wall and making Mexico pay for it means building it and sending them a bill that we expect to be paid, do you?

This is what happens to people when they constantly tell people 'what they believe' over their protests.... Maybe what you call his most held dear primary position wasn't really something that many people cared about, other than to stop being so afraid of offending people that you can't admit that there is a problem? IMO< that's the biggest thing Trump brings to the table...