2016 Election

[carlos86]

Thanks for proving my point

unnamed FBI source saying, “many previous public corruption cases have been made and successfully prosecuted with much less evidence than what is emerging in this investigation.”

As many as 100 special agents are said to be working on the investigation, including about 50 assigned to work the case on a temporary basis.

Sounds like they are building a case to me.

Over 1,300 documents on Clinton’s server have been deemed classified thus far, with more to come as the State Department continues to release new emails each month. Two of the emails have been judged to have contained “top secret” material at the time they were sent.

 

[lawgator1]

Sounds like they are building a case to me.

Your wishing does not make it so.

 

[Grand Vol]

Your wishing does not make it so.

So would you lose all faith in this Administration if the DOJ declines to prosecute?

Or just give a partisan "meh" about Hillary basically treating classified materials like her junk mail?

 

[lawgator1]

So would you lose all faith in this Administration if the DOJ declines to prosecute?

Or just give a partisan "meh" about Hillary basically treating classified materials like her junk mail?

She was an idiot. And if the right wing shriekers handled it soberly and with anything other than partisan jumping up and down, claiming that an email to pick up milk might have had a super secret attachment, I'd listen. But as usual, they can't help themselves and have tried to manufacture more of it.

 

[Grand Vol]

She was an idiot. And if the right wing shriekers handled it soberly and with anything other than partisan jumping up and down, claiming that an email to pick up milk might have had a super secret attachment, I'd listen. But as usual, they can't help themselves and have tried to manufacture more of it.

So the answer to the question is you giving a partisan "meh" to the situation.

Got it.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

The notion that she will be indicted is far right fantasy. When you post obviously antagonistic but absurd comments about that, you certainly hurt your credibility. The only people who ever seem to talk about it, with any insight, are anonymous sources talking to conservative media.

Of course, who else is going to report it? The liberal media reports on nothing but the republicans. You actually think the guys leaking information will give their names? Really? Do you believe the FBI is investigating at least? If they are investigating there must be at least a smidgen of doubt about her innocence or do they perform investigations on whims? Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[carlos86]

She was an idiot. And if the right wing shriekers handled it soberly and with anything other than partisan jumping up and down, claiming that an email to pick up milk might have had a super secret attachment, I'd listen. But as usual, they can't help themselves and have tried to manufacture more of it.

This isn't about an email saying pick up some milk. This is about an email that had talking points that were deemed classified. I know she is in the wrong because I have a security clearance.

 

[UTCVol]

Paul and Fiorina did not make the cut for this week's debate. Paul says he won't participate in the undercard debate.

 

[Gramps]

Paul and Fiorina did not make the cut for this week's debate. Paul says he won't participate in the undercard debate.

Paul should have been in it instead of Jebby Boy.

 

[Carl Pickens]

I'm flabbergasted by 2 things about Jeb! 1st that the GOP thought they could trot him out there and think he could win, and 2nd really smart people donated millions to him

No kidding.... Even if he was actually the perfect candidate he had about as much hope of being elected as Bin Laden

 

[Vol8188]

Not even close...

Go ahead. Please tell me how they're different?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

She was an idiot. But I will vote for her because she is my party's best chance. Corruption be damned

fify

 

[n_huffhines]

Its also because HRC might be going to jail. The FBI is expanding the investigation into HRC. They are now launching a corruption investigation.

FBI's Clinton probe expands to public corruption track | Fox News

Politicians never go to jail. It's the American way

 

[n_huffhines]

Then that is a good thing. It means people are voting FOR someone rather than the 'anybody but' someone. You don't agree with trump supporters, and that's fine. That is why we all have one vote.

Bernie Sanders' supporters are rabid as well. fwiw

Yeah and Bernie sucks too.

 

[n_huffhines]

Rubio would probably result in the biggest victory for the GOP since 1988.

Sad to say this is probably true. Rs are going to give the Ds another victory with Trump or Cruz vs HRC.

 

[n_huffhines]

Not even close...

Exactly the same

 

[Grand Vol]

Exactly the same

For real?

Huff, even you aren't that dense. I'd expect that kind of talk from 8188, but if you are so blinded to think Rubio and Hillary are a cut of the same cloth, I wouldn't even know where to begin correcting that thought process.

Are you sure you want to stand on the belief that Rubio is a lying, manipulative, pandering career politician that's riding the coattails of a family name and was born with a silver spoon in his mouth? And that his policies are no different than Hillary's?

 

[n_huffhines]

For real?

Huff, even you aren't that dense. I'd expect that kind of talk from 8188, but if you are so blinded to think Rubio and Hillary are a cut of the same cloth, I wouldn't even know where to begin correcting that thought process.

Are you sure you want to stand on the belief that Rubio is a lying, manipulative, pandering career politician that's riding the coattails of a family name and was born with a silver spoon in his mouth? And that his policies are no different than Hillary's?

I agree he has more integrity but that has nothing to do with being a good POTUS. Policy is all that matters, really. Tell us how they are different in that regard.

 

[Grand Vol]

I agree he has more integrity but that has nothing to do with being a good POTUS. Policy is all that matters, really. Tell us how they are different in that regard.

Again, for real?

Let's start with support for the Second Amendment. Are they the same in those regards?

Pulling back the EPA. You think Hillary is going to attempt to curtail that particular agency?

Keystone XL. Has Rubio flipflopped on that issue like Hillary and taken a stance to pander to the environmentalist crowd?

Cap and trade. Rubio directly opposes it. Hillary supports it.

Veterans affairs. Rubio wants to lock down that particular department and start firing those that deserve to be fired. Hillary just wants to toss more money at the problem in a "reform."

Military strength is an area we won't agree on at all, so I'm not going to get into that side of things.

Rubio is anti-Common Core and wants to send it back to the State and local level. Hillary supports it from the Federal side.

Eminent Domain. Rubio wants it gone. Or as a minimum to stop being abused. You think Hillary wants any power from the Federal level gone in this regard?

Repealing the ACA. Rubio stands united in repealing and replacing it with common sense reform. Hillary wouldn't change a thing.

He also opposed the Net Neutrality. That should hit home for you.

Rubio wants to cut off federal spending in sanctuary cities. Hillary applauds the stance they take.

And we won't even get into the tax plans.

Rubio believes in a path to citizenship, but also stopping the flood coming across the southern border. This is something the GOP needs to come to terms with regardless of who gets the nomination. Hillary has already come out and said she'll go "farther" than Obama on granting amnesty.

I could go on, but I realize you won't listen regardless as your mind is made up already. But don't try to fool anyone else that Rubio is the same as Hillary.

Unless you really want to give the similarities...

 

[Grand Vol]

You know what, it's your turn Huff. Educate us as to why Rubio and Hillary are the same please.

 

[n_huffhines]

Again, for real?

Let's start with support for the Second Amendment. Are they the same in those regards?

Pulling back the EPA. You think Hillary is going to attempt to curtail that particular agency?

Keystone XL. Has Rubio flipflopped on that issue like Hillary and taken a stance to pander to the environmentalist crowd?

Cap and trade. Rubio directly opposes it. Hillary supports it.

Veterans affairs. Rubio wants to lock down that particular department and start firing those that deserve to be fired. Hillary just wants to toss more money at the problem in a "reform."

Military strength is an area we won't agree on at all, so I'm not going to get into that side of things.

Rubio is anti-Common Core and wants to send it back to the State and local level. Hillary supports it from the Federal side.

Eminent Domain. Rubio wants it gone. Or as a minimum to stop being abused. You think Hillary wants any power from the Federal level gone in this regard?

Repealing the ACA. Rubio stands united in repealing and replacing it with common sense reform. Hillary wouldn't change a thing.

He also opposed the Net Neutrality. That should hit home for you.

Rubio wants to cut off federal spending in sanctuary cities. Hillary applauds the stance they take.

And we won't even get into the tax plans.

Rubio believes in a path to citizenship, but also stopping the flood coming across the southern border. This is something the GOP needs to come to terms with regardless of who gets the nomination. Hillary has already come out and said she'll go "farther" than Obama on granting amnesty.

I could go on, but I realize you won't listen regardless as your mind is made up already. But don't try to fool anyone else that Rubio is the same as Hillary.

Unless you really want to give the similarities...

How can Rubio oppose eminent domain and support keystone?

They don't differ at all in terms of the size and scope of government, and that's what matters. Rubio can give lip service about the EPA but there would be no qualitative difference in action.

Rubio will not repeal the ACA.

You don't want to get into military strength because there is no difference.

Rubio will do nothing to get feds out of education.

I don't see a qualitative difference on 2nd amendment. You probably think Obama is different from Reagan, but they aren't. This is always a funny issue to me.

Good point on net neutrality.

Rubio will grow government just as much. He'll spend as much. He'll wage war as much. I didn't mean to say they are led around by the same special interests. Of course there are differences in that regard.

 

[Grand Vol]

How can Rubio oppose eminent domain and support keystone?

Supporting the approval of the international portion of the Keystone XL. Which has nothing to do with eminent domain.

They don't differ at all in terms of the size and scope of government, and that's what matters. Rubio can give lip service about the EPA but there would be no qualitative difference in action.

And your proof on this is?

Rubio will not repeal the ACA.

He won't? Even though that's a campaign pledge?

What does Rand have to say about it?

You don't want to get into military strength because there is no difference.

You are off the deep end here. And it shows your utter lack of knowledge in the matter so you talk out your ass.

Rubio will do nothing to get feds out of education.

Oh, really? So him taking the same stance as Rand means something entirely different?

You're worse than LG.

I don't see a qualitative difference on 2nd amendment. You probably think Obama is different from Reagan, but they aren't. This is always a funny issue to me.

You avoid the point. Do continue avoiding what I bring up.

Good point on net neutrality.

Oh, I figured he's the devil and is just lying about it.

Rubio will grow government just as much. He'll spend as much. He'll wage war as much. I didn't mean to say they are led around by the sanem special interests. Of course there are differences in that regard.

And you base this on?

Come on, defend your positions with substance instead of "he says one thing, but really means another."

 

[Grand Vol]

Let me ask this question more succinctly for you Huff...

Why is it Rubio is lying when he makes pledges, yet when Rand says the same thing it's the gospel?

 

[n_huffhines]

I've been around the block enough to know what guns he will actually stick to. Keystone has a special interest behind it. That's why i don't doubt his position there. It's croneyism. So he'll sign off on it only to oppose it on ED grounds?

The EPA is a special interest that is powerful and he will get little gain out of opposing them so he won't.

How long have you been paying attention to politics? The Rs have been talking about reigning in the EPA as long as i've been alive and they never do anything. Trump is the one guy i actually believe when he makes promises that have historically been empty R promises. Rubio will disappoint you.

 

[n_huffhines]

Let me ask this question more succinctly for you Huff...

Why is it Rubio is lying when he makes pledges, yet when Rand says the same thing it's the gospel?

Well, Rand has consistently voted for small government. I have admitted various times i don't know that he would stick to his guns. I find the fact that the establishment despises him to be a pretty convincing indicator of his dedication to small government. Nobody in the establishment is afraid of Rubio. This should worry you/everyone.