Democrats: We Don’t Care If Hillary Clinton Is Indicted...Please explain this idiocy

The idiocy is the thread premise – it fails as a straw man fallacy.

A straw man fallacy occurs when a lie is contrived about one’s opponent in an effort to misrepresent the opponent’s positon on a given issue – in this case the lie that Clinton is subject to an ‘indictment.’

Those who have contrived the lie then attack that lie (straw man) and claim ‘victory’ when ‘defeated.’
 
6.2 million "Brownshirts" of the DNC selected Obama - twice. That's a lot of stupidity.
Hell, they'd elect Herman Goerring - as long as he had a DNC affiliation.
These idiots don't vote by character, qualifications. They vote by the DNC affiliation. Also - being black is another advantage. I'm surprised Al Sharpton didn't run this time to take full advantage of Liberal stupidity in the voting booth.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
The idiocy is the thread premise – it fails as a straw man fallacy.

A straw man fallacy occurs when a lie is contrived about one’s opponent in an effort to misrepresent the opponent’s positon on a given issue – in this case the lie that Clinton is subject to an ‘indictment.’

Those who have contrived the lie then attack that lie (straw man) and claim ‘victory’ when ‘defeated.’
The fact is that the thread hits right where it was intended and has caused you to babble about straw men.

LOL

MAIN-snowden.jpg
 
Democrats: We Don't Care If Hillary Clinton Is Indicted - Breitbart

So if you do not care if Hillary is indicted and belongs in prison, would you care if Hillary picked Edward Snowden for her VP? What if Hillary picked Bernie Madoff for her VP even though he is in prison, I mean Hillary could pardon him if she got elected. Do Democrats have any morals?

She promised them free stuff taken from other people, that's all they care about. These people are gone, beyond repair, in the pockets of the democrat plantation.

Dishonesty comes to them naturally...
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
"Breitbart"

lol

Brietbart, LOL. What a fucking buffoon. It's a RASMUSSEN POLL he's reporting on stupid. The one that says Hillary is leading Trump. You OK with that from RASMUSSEN, you stupid fucking shiteater?

Brietbart, LOL.

What a brain-dead cocksucker.
Nice language, you learn that from Hillary?

Democrats: We Don't Care If Hillary Clinton Is Indicted - Breitbart

So if you do not care if Hillary is indicted and belongs in prison, would you care if Hillary picked Edward Snowden for her VP? What if Hillary picked Bernie Madoff for her VP even though he is in prison, I mean Hillary could pardon him if she got elected. Do Democrats have any morals?
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
 
Democrats: We Don't Care If Hillary Clinton Is Indicted - Breitbart

So if you do not care if Hillary is indicted and belongs in prison, would you care if Hillary picked Edward Snowden for her VP? What if Hillary picked Bernie Madoff for her VP even though he is in prison, I mean Hillary could pardon him if she got elected. Do Democrats have any morals?

She promised them free stuff taken from other people, that's all they care about. These people are gone, beyond repair, in the pockets of the democrat plantation.

Dishonesty comes to them naturally...

Why do you say stupid things like that? Does it give you a boner?
 
Didn't you know its all a vast right wing conspiracy. The thing is bad shit seems to dog the Clinton's, problems the Republican party did not create.
 
The idiocy is the thread premise – it fails as a straw man fallacy.

A straw man fallacy occurs when a lie is contrived about one’s opponent in an effort to misrepresent the opponent’s positon on a given issue – in this case the lie that Clinton is subject to an ‘indictment.’

Those who have contrived the lie then attack that lie (straw man) and claim ‘victory’ when ‘defeated.’

Did you see the word 'if' in there? Discussing a hypothetical is not a straw man.

Polls have shown that some dems think she should continue even if she's indicted.

Let's parse further, and restrict that to those that would, so you don't go derpity-derp derping down the path to another false logical fallacy claim, as there seem to be a shitload of dems that would...
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
Hillary is guilty, as she has admitted to not turning over all documents.
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
Hillary is guilty, as she has admitted to not turning over all documents.

Guilty of what broken law?
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
Hillary is guilty, as she has admitted to not turning over all documents.

Guilty of what broken law?


18 U.S. Code Chapter 37 - ESPIONAGE AND CENSORSHIP

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Grow up fool
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
Hillary is guilty, as she has admitted to not turning over all documents.

Guilty of what broken law?


18 U.S. Code Chapter 37 - ESPIONAGE AND CENSORSHIP

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Grow up fool
yes but that doesn't count because hillary is a perfect angel and can do no wrong
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
Hillary is guilty, as she has admitted to not turning over all documents.

Guilty of what broken law?


18 U.S. Code Chapter 37 - ESPIONAGE AND CENSORSHIP

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Grow up fool
yes but that doesn't count because hillary is a perfect angel and can do no wrong

Incorrect. She is a flawed candidate. Has legitimate trust issues. But....she's not corrupt.
 
I'm not a democrat, but I would have to have a look at the indictment before making a judgement. And....an indictment does not mean guilt.

Everything I have read and heard about this email business informs me that Hillary broke no laws. She probably broke some State Department rules....and criticism of her actions is warranted.

She is more qualified and capable than Donald Trump. So, she will get my vote unless more damning chargers and evidence are brought forward.
Hillary is guilty, as she has admitted to not turning over all documents.

Guilty of what broken law?


18 U.S. Code Chapter 37 - ESPIONAGE AND CENSORSHIP

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Grow up fool
yes but that doesn't count because hillary is a perfect angel and can do no wrong

Incorrect. She is a flawed candidate. Has legitimate trust issues. But....she's not corrupt.

Wrong Hillary Clinton is guilty of losing defense information, she has admitted so. See she is required by law to hand over all of the emails that she sent or received, and she has admitted to deleting them which is a Federal crime. Read and weep 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

That said if she handed over the emails she would already be in prison for racketeering. Which by the way the FBI is investigating.
 

Forum List

Back
Top