WaPo: FBI uncovered tens of thousands more emails that Clinton didn't disclose (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 31, 2024, 01:22:14 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  WaPo: FBI uncovered tens of thousands more emails that Clinton didn't disclose (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: WaPo: FBI uncovered tens of thousands more emails that Clinton didn't disclose  (Read 2164 times)
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,535
United States


« on: August 22, 2016, 05:21:07 PM »

So if nobody cares, how come nobody trusts Hillary?

No, the faux scandal did its job. The point is there's nothing more it can do. If ~550 days of email spam didn't move your vote, why would a few more days make a difference?
No difference? Hillary lied to the FBI. She withheld work documents that at best show obstruction of justice, at worst, possibly bribery. She's literally inching dangerously close to Nixonian territory.

Of course, Hillary has an inclination for removing documents. Ask Jeffrey Zeifman and the other members of the House Judiciary Committee investigation.

So if nobody cares, how come nobody trusts Hillary?

If people cared, she would be losing.
That doesn't answer the question. Why do people think she is more untrustworthy than Trump?

If that were the case then why is Trump losing?

The emails would be impactful if it was actually hurting her poll numbers and they aren't since she is  on pace to win by a pretty large margin.
My candidate is losing because he's Trump. I voted for him out of protest and a hope to leave a mark on the Presidency. I don't really care if he wins or loses, but I sure do care about Hillary Clinton becoming our President when these very troubling allegations are floating about. When IceSpear, who so often and so masterfully slayed the Bernie-bros can only say "12 people care. That's it" as a response, then you know that the Clinton-cult has no arguments left.
Dude give it a rest.  The only people who give two sh**ts about this are blind partisans who were never going to vote for her in the first place.  Your endless pounding on this issue does nothing. 
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,535
United States


« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2016, 05:22:07 PM »

I love how the usual suspects cannot actually defend Hillary Clinton, so instead they basically are just calling the average voter and hoping and praying that they won't care. This is a serious public image issue for her. The email albatross is as bad for her as Trump's comments on the Khan family are for him.
No, calling the family of a dead solider horrible names is much worse, but continue on your rants.
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,535
United States


« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2016, 05:26:19 PM »

The lack of an indictment makes the emails a non-issue. You can't indict people on the internet with no law degree or credentials, that is left up to the authorities and the authorities didn't find anything to indict on.
Didn't your hear, they were bought off.  That is the answer to everything that doesn't go the way of republicans.
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,535
United States


« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2016, 05:31:01 PM »
« Edited: August 22, 2016, 05:32:47 PM by JerryArkansas »

The lack of an indictment makes the emails a non-issue. You can't indict people on the internet with no law degree or credentials, that is left up to the authorities and the authorities didn't find anything to indict on.
Well yeah, they couldn't indict Hillary on obstruction of justice because they didn't know she obstructed justice. Why is a court ordering the release of more documents today if these newly found and obviously withheld work related emails not a serious sign that something is at the very least suspicious?
In the name of transparency?  It may be that.  Why go to something bad right off the bat. 

I love how the usual suspects cannot actually defend Hillary Clinton, so instead they basically are just calling the average voter and hoping and praying that they won't care. This is a serious public image issue for her. The email albatross is as bad for her as Trump's comments on the Khan family are for him.
No, calling the family of a dead solider horrible names is much worse, but continue on your rants.
Let me rephrase this so the rest of the forum understands what you are trying to say:
SHUT UPZ SHUT UPZ I'M RIGHT I'M RIGHT YOU ARE WRONG SHUT UP.


See someone isn't happy with me.  But great personal attack.  Real big man you are.
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,535
United States


« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2016, 02:49:46 AM »

The sort of people basing their vote on email server maintenance weren't going to be voting for Clinton in the first place.
Nobody is basing their vote on the scandal itself as much as what it says about her character, especially as she continuously makes attacks on Trump. I've never heard the expression "two evils" used so often and so seriously in any election in my lifetime. People might think Trump is a joke, but they certainly don' t view Hillary as this shining beacon of clean politics and honor.
I don't know a single person that would have voted for Clinton before that is refusing to vote for her now because of emails. Also, people don't view Clinton as a "shining beacon" because she has faced 3 decades of polarizing personal attacks from the GOP. A sustained campaign like that is going to impact public opinion, especially during election cycle.
So when exactly did the vast right wing conspiracy start? Around the time that the Muslim Brotherhood and the KGB anointed a young Kenyan born child to be the President of the United States who would implement socialism through minor regulations of the insurance industry?

The lack of an indictment makes the emails a non-issue. You can't indict people on the internet with no law degree or credentials, that is left up to the authorities and the authorities didn't find anything to indict on.
Well yeah, they couldn't indict Hillary on obstruction of justice because they didn't know she obstructed justice. Why is a court ordering the release of more documents today if these newly found and obviously withheld work related emails not a serious sign that something is at the very least suspicious?

The FBI saw these emails already, they are not new to the FBI. What is being ordered to be released is at the request of an extremely right-wing political organization called Judicial Watch wanting the records.
This from the arch-conservative Washington Post, which totally didn't go to war with Richard Nixon or anything like that ever....

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uncovered. These are "previously undisclosed" documents according to the Hill. You are no Goebbels, Dr. Scholl, but I'll give you credit for at least matching them in enthusiasm. At least you do a better job than Baghdad Bob!

I would edit the Nazi reference if I were you. You certainly don't want another deleted post. I'm no the Nazi here. Just saying.

With that said, you are not getting it. The FBI saw these emails as part of the investigation which concluded with no charges. You are under the impression that there is an indictment pending, which is wrong.

I am not waiting for an indictment, that'd imply that I have faith in the system. I do suspect that the damage of the allegations are strong enough to weaken her. These emails were "uncovered" by the FBI according to every source I've read. These emails were not handed over by Clinton originally. They were hidden. Were they intentionally hidden? We will not know, as there was not enough evidence of a cover-up to show criminal intent. But Comey did, in that press conference, indict Clinton not criminally but rather rhetorically-that is, to say, that he clearly and adequately displayed that Clinton panics under pressure, has little regard for established rules and protocol, etc.

Then there is of course the matter of the Clinton Foundation, which very well may be under FBI investigation as we speak. If the FBI wasn't investigating the Clinton Foundation, would they not come out and confirm it? Or is Comey part of the vast right-wing conspiracy too?

Also, you know who liked to threaten people's right to speech? Nazis.

I didn't threaten your right to free speech, I just reminded you of the board rules against personal attacks like calling people Nazis. I don't get why people claim free speech on a message board. Message boards are not the government, they are private.
Being called a "Nazi" isn't really a personal attack around here considering Evergreen calls me it twice a week and nobody bats an eye, nor should they. You ought to grow some big, beautiful, thick, orange, TRUMP skin.
So should you instead of launching into large tirades all over the board.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 13 queries.