Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That was not how it sounded.One cannot paint all Liberals or all Conservatives with one broad brush.I would say that "wrong think" still goes both ways. It goes with the personality and not the political leaning.The opposite is also true. People might say they are for Trump until they get into the booth. Interesting election though. My wife and I are thinking about coming over for it.
I think the "vote trump, say otherwise" trend is greater than they opposite. Remember the left is the current champion of punishing "wrongthink, not the Right. They took that from us a few decades ago and ran with it.
Not as much as it used to. Libertarian leanings run far stronger on the right these days, and your classical liberals on the left are finding even themselves under attack by the "special snowflakes" and their older enablers.
Right now your evangelicals are far more interested in others leaving them the hell alone than going out and trying to change others via government action. The pendulum has swung away from them for the time being.
I wasn't. I was denoting specific types on both sides.
That was not how it sounded.One cannot paint all Liberals or all Conservatives with one broad brush.I would say that "wrong think" still goes both ways. It goes with the personality and not the political leaning.I think the "vote trump, say otherwise" trend is greater than they opposite. Remember the left is the current champion of punishing "wrongthink, not the Right. They took that from us a few decades ago and ran with it.
Not as much as it used to. Libertarian leanings run far stronger on the right these days, and your classical liberals on the left are finding even themselves under attack by the "special snowflakes" and their older enablers.
Right now your evangelicals are far more interested in others leaving them the hell alone than going out and trying to change others via government action. The pendulum has swung away from them for the time being.
I wasn't. I was denoting specific types on both sides.
It was your first comment.That was not how it sounded.One cannot paint all Liberals or all Conservatives with one broad brush.I would say that "wrong think" still goes both ways. It goes with the personality and not the political leaning.
Not as much as it used to. Libertarian leanings run far stronger on the right these days, and your classical liberals on the left are finding even themselves under attack by the "special snowflakes" and their older enablers.
Right now your evangelicals are far more interested in others leaving them the hell alone than going out and trying to change others via government action. The pendulum has swung away from them for the time being.
I wasn't. I was denoting specific types on both sides.
I pointed out that your old school liberals, those who are definitely on the left, are being eaten by their own. How is that painting with a broad brush?
It was your first comment.That was not how it sounded.One cannot paint all Liberals or all Conservatives with one broad brush.Not as much as it used to. Libertarian leanings run far stronger on the right these days, and your classical liberals on the left are finding even themselves under attack by the "special snowflakes" and their older enablers.
Right now your evangelicals are far more interested in others leaving them the hell alone than going out and trying to change others via government action. The pendulum has swung away from them for the time being.
I wasn't. I was denoting specific types on both sides.
I pointed out that your old school liberals, those who are definitely on the left, are being eaten by their own. How is that painting with a broad brush?
I did.It was your first comment.That was not how it sounded.One cannot paint all Liberals or all Conservatives with one broad brush.
I wasn't. I was denoting specific types on both sides.
I pointed out that your old school liberals, those who are definitely on the left, are being eaten by their own. How is that painting with a broad brush?
Then why didn't you respond to that?
This. No breach, no intent to breach, no crime. It really is that simple.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
I did.It was your first comment.That was not how it sounded.I wasn't. I was denoting specific types on both sides.
I pointed out that your old school liberals, those who are definitely on the left, are being eaten by their own. How is that painting with a broad brush?
Then why didn't you respond to that?
One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
Whatever.I did.It was your first comment.That was not how it sounded.
I pointed out that your old school liberals, those who are definitely on the left, are being eaten by their own. How is that painting with a broad brush?
Then why didn't you respond to that?
and then I elaborated, and you decided to ignore the elaboration and respond to the 1st post again.
Feel free to interpret these events as meaning that "Crooked Hillary" is an appropriate label. You know what label isn't appropriate though? "Criminal".One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
She lied! She lied to the American people (several times) and it remains to be seen whether she lied to the FBI.
The label "Crooked Hillary" fits her like a glove.
Crooked Hillary is a criminal. A lot of criminals never get caught, but that certainly doesn't mean they are not criminals. So both terms are indeed appropriate in describing the Beast.Feel free to interpret these events as meaning that "Crooked Hillary" is an appropriate label. You know what label isn't appropriate though? "Criminal".One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
She lied! She lied to the American people (several times) and it remains to be seen whether she lied to the FBI.
The label "Crooked Hillary" fits her like a glove.
People are also innocent until proven guilty in the US. She played the system in a way many find to be unsavory, but it wasn't illegal. To be quite honest, if she's had a 25-year character assassination, years of politically charged investigations from powerful individuals, and they still couldn't find anything illegal that she did despite her being "extremely reckless" and half of the US political machine with a deeply vested interest seeing her fail, I'm really inclined to believe she at least followed the letter of the law. And more importantly, there was insufficient evidence to prove any shady activities she did were anything outright illegal.That makes her not a criminal.Crooked Hillary is a criminal. A lot of criminals never get caught, but that certainly doesn't mean they are not criminals. So both terms are indeed appropriate in describing the Beast.Feel free to interpret these events as meaning that "Crooked Hillary" is an appropriate label. You know what label isn't appropriate though? "Criminal".One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
She lied! She lied to the American people (several times) and it remains to be seen whether she lied to the FBI.
The label "Crooked Hillary" fits her like a glove.
According to the FBI testimony before Congress, over 100 emails contained classified information and some of Clinton's correspondents had had their accounts hacked. This, of course, doesn't include the 33,000 emails Clinton deleted before the FBI could gain access to them. There is no way to know how much damage Clinton did to national security. Clearly, Clinton's greatest accomplishment in life has been staying out of prison despite being involved in criminal activity throughout most of her adult life.Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System
You've got to read this statement. The most partisan and misleading smear I have ever read that's supposed to be an unbiased report from the Head of the FBI.
Peppered through are statements like this:
I should add here that we found no evidence that any of the additional work-related e-mails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.
Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
Bore markings??????????? What the fuck is "bore markings". When I was in the service, I worked in military intelligence.
There was no "bore markings". Things were stamped top secret, secret and confidential. And today's classified emails have what's called "water markings", like in this passport:
It's either marked or it's not. No such thing as "bore markings". The government isn't shy about marking classified info.
Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.
So that’s what we found.
Which means you found nothing.
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.
We did not see those things here.
As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.
I know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation—including people in government—but none of that mattered to us. Opinions are irrelevant, and they were all uninformed by insight into our investigation, because we did the investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way. I couldn’t be prouder to be part of this organization.
Only facts matter? Go back through his statement. It's filled with speculation. This is one disgraceful and partisan speech that calls into question the professionalism of the Head of the FBI.
In every job she has had in her adult life, she has proved herself to be both corrupt and incompetent. The fact that she has not been indicted by a Democratic AG is should not be surprising, since she has been just one step ahead of the law all of her life. In fact, her greatest accomplishment in life has been staying out of prison despite being involved in criminal activity throughout her adult life.People are also innocent until proven guilty in the US. She played the system in a way many find to be unsavory, but it wasn't illegal. To be quite honest, if she's had a 25-year character assassination, years of politically charged investigations from powerful individuals, and they still couldn't find anything illegal that she did despite her being "extremely reckless" and half of the US political machine with a deeply vested interest seeing her fail, I'm really inclined to believe she at least followed the letter of the law. And more importantly, there was insufficient evidence to prove any shady activities she did were anything outright illegal.That makes her not a criminal.Crooked Hillary is a criminal. A lot of criminals never get caught, but that certainly doesn't mean they are not criminals. So both terms are indeed appropriate in describing the Beast.Feel free to interpret these events as meaning that "Crooked Hillary" is an appropriate label. You know what label isn't appropriate though? "Criminal".One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
She lied! She lied to the American people (several times) and it remains to be seen whether she lied to the FBI.
The label "Crooked Hillary" fits her like a glove.
But go ahead and call her one if you want. I don't mind you being incorrect if you don't.
A criminal how? Make it good.Crooked Hillary is a criminal. A lot of criminals never get caught, but that certainly doesn't mean they are not criminals. So both terms are indeed appropriate in describing the Beast.Feel free to interpret these events as meaning that "Crooked Hillary" is an appropriate label. You know what label isn't appropriate though? "Criminal".One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
She lied! She lied to the American people (several times) and it remains to be seen whether she lied to the FBI.
The label "Crooked Hillary" fits her like a glove.
She has had a stellar career. Why has she been corrupt and incompetent?In every job she has had in her adult life, she has proved herself to be both corrupt and incompetent. The fact that she has not been indicted by a Democratic AG is should not be surprising, since she has been just one step ahead of the law all of her life. In fact, her greatest accomplishment in life has been staying out of prison despite being involved in criminal activity throughout her adult life.People are also innocent until proven guilty in the US. She played the system in a way many find to be unsavory, but it wasn't illegal. To be quite honest, if she's had a 25-year character assassination, years of politically charged investigations from powerful individuals, and they still couldn't find anything illegal that she did despite her being "extremely reckless" and half of the US political machine with a deeply vested interest seeing her fail, I'm really inclined to believe she at least followed the letter of the law. And more importantly, there was insufficient evidence to prove any shady activities she did were anything outright illegal.That makes her not a criminal.Crooked Hillary is a criminal. A lot of criminals never get caught, but that certainly doesn't mean they are not criminals. So both terms are indeed appropriate in describing the Beast.Feel free to interpret these events as meaning that "Crooked Hillary" is an appropriate label. You know what label isn't appropriate though? "Criminal".One wonders where one comes up with such patent nonsense.The far right fringe of the GOP seems to be "legally challenged" these days.
Oh well. The fruit does not ever fall far from the nut tree.
(There was NO BREACH ergo Hillary is NOT guilty of anything except foolishness which still beat's Trump The Chump's overall insanity.)
She lied! She lied to the American people (several times) and it remains to be seen whether she lied to the FBI.
The label "Crooked Hillary" fits her like a glove.
But go ahead and call her one if you want. I don't mind you being incorrect if you don't.
