Trump supporters don't want to talk about Trump

[fredtoast]

(05-14-2018, 11:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: We know Hills ran a tight ship during her time in the White House. 

She sure did.

Republicans investigated her for the full 8 years and found nothing.

Then when she was Sec of State same thing happened.  About a dozen hearings on Benghazi and again, nothing.

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2018, 05:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: She sure did.

Republicans investigated her for the full 8 years and found nothing.

Then when she was Sec of State same thing happened.  About a dozen hearings on Benghazi and again, nothing.

They found plenty, but Comey just concluded she was too ignorant to realize she was breaking the law.

But  it's not about Hills. I was simply pointing out that Trump was not running against Obama; he was running against and equally flawed candidate. Who secured her party's nomination through deceit. 

[fredtoast]

(05-15-2018, 07:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: They found plenty, but Comey just concluded she was too ignorant to realize she was breaking the law.

Being too ignorant to know you are breaking the law is no legal defense.

He thought she was "careless" but concluded that she could not be prosecuted for breaking any laws because she had not been "grossly negligent."

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2018, 07:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Being too ignorant to know you are breaking the law is no legal defense.

He thought she was "careless" but concluded that she could not be prosecuted for breaking any laws because she had not been "grossly negligent.

Sure words were changed, but actions were not. She was shown to have broken the law. Not sure how anyone can deny that. They just decided she didn't "mean" to break the law.
But regardless; is being "careless" with government documents a sign of running a tight ship? 

[fredtoast]

(05-15-2018, 07:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  She was shown to have broken the law. Not sure how anyone can deny that. 

I can deny it because that is the official findings of the FBI investigation with which the Department of Justice agreed.  She had to be "grossly negligent" to break the law and she was not.

Just like with Benghazi she was only found to have broken laws within the right wing echo chamber.

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2018, 07:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I can deny it because that is the official findings of the FBI investigation with which the Department of Justice agreed.  She had to be "grossly negligent" to break the law and she was not.

Just like with Benghazi she was only found to have broken laws within the right wing echo chamber.

Surprisingly, you didn't and the main question asked, you simply chose to answer the one before regardless. So allow me to ask it again:

Is being "careless" with government documents a sign of running a tight ship?


And I have 0 issue with her action in Bengazhi. As I said when the whole email scandal broke. The best the Hillary faithful could hope for was that Hillary was incompetent. Luckily for them Comey decided that is exactly what she was.

[GMDino]

(05-15-2018, 07:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: They found plenty, but Comey just concluded she was too ignorant to realize she was breaking the law.

But  it's not about Hills. I was simply pointing out that Trump was not running against Obama; he was running against and equally flawed candidate. Who secured her party's nomination through deceit. 

For shame.  

[GMDino]

I do love the right wing's mantra of "Hillary was guilty!" with no charges filed and her testifying before congress....and then spinning around to say Trump can't be guilty because he hasn't been charged with anything yet!

Too funny.

"Lock her up" was such a great campaign slogan!  I can't wait to hear it when he runs again!

[Dill]

(05-15-2018, 05:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: She sure did.

Republicans investigated her for the full 8 years and found nothing.

Then when she was Sec of State same thing happened.  About a dozen hearings on Benghazi and again, nothing.

Stop exaggerating!  There were only SEVEN!!  

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2018, 08:20 PM)GMDino Wrote: For shame.  

(05-15-2018, 08:20 PM)GMDino Wrote: For shame.  

So nice you had to say it twice, but that was the exact conclusion. It's all that kept her from being charged with a crime. Hell, she even admitted to her ignorance. 

How about you: Is being "careless" with government documents a sign of running a tight ship? 

[GMDino]

(05-15-2018, 08:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So nice you had to say it twice, but that was the exact conclusion. It's all that kept her from being charged with a crime. Hell, she even admitted to her ignorance. 

How about you: Is being "careless" with government documents a sign of running a tight ship? 

My apologies for offending your moral board code by accidentally clicking twice too fast.

Seems to me you want to make two distinct arguments:

1) Clinton was sloppy because of the email situation 

2) She was "guilty" despite never being charged.

I'm sure it makes total sense in a world where we have the BEST people in the WH who are not sloppy nor use personal email servers nor have trouble getting even a security clearance. 

[*bfine32*]

(05-15-2018, 08:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: My apologies for offending your moral board code by accidentally clicking twice too fast.

Seems to me you want to make two distinct arguments:

1) Clinton was sloppy because of the email situation 

2) She was "guilty" despite never being charged.

I'm sure it makes total sense in a world where we have the BEST people in the WH who are not sloppy nor use personal email servers nor have trouble getting even a security clearance. 

So I'll take it that you do not wish to answer the direct question either. 

BTW, I'm not offended by your fast clicking. 

[GMDino]

(05-15-2018, 08:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So I'll take it that you do not wish to answer the direct question either. 

BTW, I'm not offended by your fast clicking. 

How about I answered your question by dissecting what you were "trying" to say?

But keep up with the "she's guilty" stuff.  It might help when Mueller wraps up his investigation.  

[Dill]

(05-15-2018, 08:25 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote:  No, the reason they have had trouble with dismantling a failed law was just as I said the guy who created it said, once it is passed the morons we fooled will not allow the government to take it back. They banked on HRC being president and thought it would be around  forever, but now as rates spike, no individual mandate and long term no way to pay for the subsidies will end it over time.The freebies it created for the poor weer paid for by young Americans without health issues mandated to buy insurance they did not need, adding insurance to those in a household up to 26 years old was being paid for by the middle class spike in premiums. Those get huge subsidies again paid for by the middle class.

It is typical socialist philosophy, have others pay for things others can't afford. The problem is the middle class could not afford and as result a new president who said he would dismantle Obama Care over time was elected. The American people have rejected Obama Care, the middle class have rejected Obama Care and why blue states turned red.

Imagine what the approval would be if those 19 Republican controlled states had activated the Medicare supplement to Obamacare.

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/poll-finding/kaiser-health-tracking-poll-february-2018-health-care-2018-midterms-proposed-changes-to-medicaid/

[NATI BENGALS]

(05-15-2018, 08:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So nice you had to say it twice, but that was the exact conclusion. It's all that kept her from being charged with a crime. Hell, she even admitted to her ignorance. 

How about you: Is being "careless" with government documents a sign of running a tight ship? 

How would you rank Hills email thing against some of the recent stuff?

Like a national security adviser indicted who failed to register as a foreign agent.

Family members personally given security clearance by the prez who are possibly compromised who later can not get security clearance.

Use of private email.

Fighting for chinese jobs for a company who makes spy phones that threaten national security.  

Russian oligarch money to pay off porn stars with sean hannitys lawyer and a guliani diahrea mouth defense.

Speaking of tight ships. Just wondering since you are obviously a stickler for tight ships...

On a scale from 1-5 how would you rank them. 1 being Hills is the devil 5 being Hills is satan.