HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Obama's Endorsement Under...

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:35 PM

 

Obama's Endorsement Undercuts Clinton FBI investigation.

Yesterday Josh Ernest admitted the FBI is conducting a "criminal investigation" regarding Clinton's emails. You can find it on C-Span.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/fox-news-obama-hillary-clinton-fbi-224143

154 replies, 6260 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 154 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama's Endorsement Undercuts Clinton FBI investigation. (Original post)
floriduck Jun 2016 OP
leftofcool Jun 2016 #1
yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #36
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #2
floriduck Jun 2016 #3
brooklynite Jun 2016 #6
floriduck Jun 2016 #7
GaYellowDawg Jun 2016 #93
Lucinda Jun 2016 #85
Samantha Jun 2016 #88
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #91
Kentonio Jun 2016 #99
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #101
Kentonio Jun 2016 #105
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #107
Kentonio Jun 2016 #119
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #130
Kentonio Jun 2016 #135
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #136
Kentonio Jun 2016 #149
okasha Jun 2016 #145
Samantha Jun 2016 #144
saidsimplesimon Jun 2016 #103
notadmblnd Jun 2016 #108
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #109
notadmblnd Jun 2016 #110
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #112
notadmblnd Jun 2016 #117
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #120
notadmblnd Jun 2016 #125
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #127
still_one Jun 2016 #151
bravenak Jun 2016 #113
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #114
bravenak Jun 2016 #115
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #116
bravenak Jun 2016 #118
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #121
bravenak Jun 2016 #122
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #124
bravenak Jun 2016 #128
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #131
bravenak Jun 2016 #132
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #133
bravenak Jun 2016 #134
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #137
MineralMan Jun 2016 #4
floriduck Jun 2016 #8
MineralMan Jun 2016 #12
floriduck Jun 2016 #16
MineralMan Jun 2016 #19
floriduck Jun 2016 #26
emulatorloo Jun 2016 #40
floriduck Jun 2016 #42
mythology Jun 2016 #86
charlyvi Jun 2016 #69
MineralMan Jun 2016 #74
scscholar Jun 2016 #78
apcalc Jun 2016 #111
tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #17
MineralMan Jun 2016 #20
DUgosh Jun 2016 #28
yodermon Jun 2016 #35
MineralMan Jun 2016 #39
yodermon Jun 2016 #82
MineralMan Jun 2016 #83
NWCorona Jun 2016 #87
Kentonio Jun 2016 #104
vdogg Jun 2016 #5
floriduck Jun 2016 #9
onenote Jun 2016 #98
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #10
pinebox Jun 2016 #11
TwilightZone Jun 2016 #22
pinebox Jun 2016 #31
floriduck Jun 2016 #23
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #25
floriduck Jun 2016 #27
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #29
floriduck Jun 2016 #44
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #47
justiceischeap Jun 2016 #52
840high Jun 2016 #37
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #46
840high Jun 2016 #50
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #54
Maru Kitteh Jun 2016 #61
840high Jun 2016 #72
TheBlackAdder Jun 2016 #43
840high Jun 2016 #102
libdem4life Jun 2016 #97
Hav Jun 2016 #13
floriduck Jun 2016 #24
bigtree Jun 2016 #38
libdem4life Jun 2016 #48
bigtree Jun 2016 #53
libdem4life Jun 2016 #59
Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #73
libdem4life Jun 2016 #94
Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #95
bigtree Jun 2016 #77
libdem4life Jun 2016 #96
tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #14
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #21
tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #57
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #60
tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #65
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #68
tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #71
libdem4life Jun 2016 #49
LoverOfLiberty Jun 2016 #15
TwilightZone Jun 2016 #18
geek tragedy Jun 2016 #30
floriduck Jun 2016 #32
Lord Magus Jun 2016 #33
onenote Jun 2016 #92
Skwmom Jun 2016 #34
yourpaljoey Jun 2016 #45
libdem4life Jun 2016 #56
yourpaljoey Jun 2016 #58
Skink Jun 2016 #66
libdem4life Jun 2016 #70
jamese777 Jun 2016 #81
gordianot Jun 2016 #153
randome Jun 2016 #51
libdem4life Jun 2016 #63
TheBlackAdder Jun 2016 #41
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #62
libdem4life Jun 2016 #67
TwilightZone Jun 2016 #75
Dem2 Jun 2016 #76
Lil Missy Jun 2016 #55
onenote Jun 2016 #64
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #79
libdem4life Jun 2016 #100
senz Jun 2016 #138
floriduck Jun 2016 #141
libdem4life Jun 2016 #147
libdem4life Jun 2016 #146
jamese777 Jun 2016 #80
Ferd Berfel Jun 2016 #90
jamese777 Jun 2016 #129
Ferd Berfel Jun 2016 #150
Ferd Berfel Jun 2016 #84
jamese777 Jun 2016 #89
senz Jun 2016 #140
jamese777 Jun 2016 #142
senz Jun 2016 #143
MFM008 Jun 2016 #106
DemocratSinceBirth Jun 2016 #123
senz Jun 2016 #139
libdem4life Jun 2016 #148
libodem Jun 2016 #126
stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #152
Todays_Illusion Jun 2016 #154

Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:39 PM

1. Ben Gawzi lather rinse repeat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #1)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:21 PM

36. I wouldn't go that far

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:40 PM

2. You cropped the title and I don't believe it was for lack of space




SMH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:43 PM

3. Sorry. I used "investigation" instead of "probe". My mistake for being human. Doesn't change the

 

article one little iota.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #3)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:46 PM

6. And, you left out the small bit about this being a GOP quote, not one of those newsy facts...

Could have happened to anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #6)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:49 PM

7. Chew on that part.

 

Earnest also told Rosen that “the president when discussing this issue in each stage has reiterated his commitment to this principle, that any criminal investigation should be conducted independent of any sort of political interference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #3)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:09 PM

93. PROBE?!? That changes everything!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:03 PM

85. Wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:18 PM

88. Comey in a televised address said it was an "investigation"

We don't do security reviews, he mentioned, we do investigations. That word is even in our name: Federal Bureau of Investigation. (paraphrasing what he said since I do not have exact quote)

Sam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Samantha (Reply #88)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:33 PM

91. Well

Comey in a televised address said it was an "investigation"



What does that have to do with my noting the omission of GOP from the title?





I will answer my own question. Nothing.


Now that we got that housekeeping out of the way.

We don't do security reviews, he mentioned, we do investigations. That word is even in our name: Federal Bureau of Investigation. (paraphrasing what he said since I do not have exact quote)


As I have said, ad infinitum and ad nauseam, I will defer to the legal opinion of the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department:


Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans


and not that of random internet posters with axes to grind.

DSB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #91)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:50 PM

99. So let me get this right, you felt the need to point out the GOP quote

 

Yet have no problem referencing the opinion of the vice presidential pick of the Libertarian party?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #99)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:54 PM

101. I cited the opinion of the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #101)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:58 PM

105. No, you cited the opinion of the current vice Presidential pick of the Libertarian party.

 

Or are you going to try and pretend that isn't true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #105)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:01 PM

107. It is of no moment unless you think the two are mutually exclusive.

BTW, I have a serious question. What grade for transparency do you give me? Do I get an A for refusing to camouflage my contempt for those pushing this story?

Trump is pushing it right now. I'm watching Hardball.

Thank you in advance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #107)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:15 PM

119. Oh I see, you only have a problem with people using right wing opinion pieces

 

When those opinions happen to run contrary to your own opinions. If they back up your own argument, then they're completely fine.

I understand completely now. As for a grade for transparency, given your complete unwillingness to admit you just quoted a right wing source, your grade is rather low.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #119)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:34 PM

130. You go with John Cornyn. I will go with William Weld.

There will be no indictment. The sadness that brings you and your cohorts brings me much glee... I can only compare it to a sexual high.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #130)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:47 PM

135. Well that's both bizarre and deely unpleasant.

 

I can only hope you find something in your life that gives you genuine happiness rather than gaining pleasure through others hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #135)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:51 PM

136. I only gain pleasure from the misfortune of others when their pleasure is derived from the ...

I only gain pleasure from the misfortune of others when their pleasure is derived from the misfortune of others , i.e. when those they want to see fall don't.

If the righteous weren't rewarded and the unrighteous weren't punished the moral universe would not be in order.


Call it a kind of karma.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #136)

Sat Jun 11, 2016, 06:05 AM

149. There is no justification for ever revelling in others pain.

 

Even if those people were the worst people in the world, it's still a bad sign to enjoy their suffering because it means you have that capacity inside you. Glad they don't achieve what they set out to achieve sure, and sad that they wanted something negative, but there's never an excuse for taking pleasure in pain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #101)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 09:56 PM

145. Dear Ones,

I saw the Indictment Fairy yesterday, in Lady Cottingley's Pressed Fairy Book.. The remains were terribly mangled.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #91)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 09:44 PM

144. If you have a genuine interest in this subject, look up "criminal negligence" in the penal code(eom)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Samantha (Reply #88)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:56 PM

103. Good catch Sam, thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:02 PM

108. This isn't LBN.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #108)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:04 PM

109. Did I say it was?

This is a banner day for me...All my nemeses are in one thread... I am going for a walk soon...I would literally rather get hit by a car and not return than capitulate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #109)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:06 PM

110. You were complaining about the title. The only place the title is required to be exact is LBN

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #110)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:09 PM

112. I was complaining about the deception.

If you find such unsavory tactics appropriate there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion...

Again, this is great...All my nemeses in one place...I feel like the Christians of yore who were fed to the lions but in this instance the Christian is winning.


I'm bearing this crucible for our nominee and I can't feel better about what I am doing.



Hills, I'm doing this for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #112)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:14 PM

117. No deception. Poster provided a link

Not his responsibility to see to it that people click on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #117)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:16 PM

120. Since you are part of the same cohort your witness is tainted by bias.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #120)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:25 PM

125. You can't claim no bias either

but there's nothing hidden and that is a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #125)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:28 PM

127. I readily admit my bias but I am not the one who deceptively edited a title...

I know many times the writer of an article doesn't write the headline but the seminal poster still misrepresented somebody elses work product.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #127)

Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:24 AM

151. Kick & Rec!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #2)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:09 PM

113. Damn

 

Sad to see GOP talking points used on this site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #113)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:10 PM

114. Sister, when all you have is animus toward our nominee the whole world looks like an indictment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #114)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:12 PM

115. The GOP has been howling and begging to find something to stop her with for years

 

Cannot wait until we get rid of gop plants and rightwing talking points.
I have literally been reading about her impending indictment since 1994.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #115)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:14 PM

116. They hate her because they ain't her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #116)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:15 PM

118. This must be killing them on the inside

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #118)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:17 PM

121. Success is the best revenge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #121)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:20 PM

122. I cannot wait until Obama helps her resettle into the whitehouse

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #122)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:24 PM

124. And since he's living in DC I hope they have weekly lunches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #124)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:31 PM

128. We really live in interesting times!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #128)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:36 PM

131. I am on my third book about the Obamas and the Clintons.

They genuinely like each other, even after their bitter contest. I don't think the man has a vengeful bone in his body. He is almost too good for this world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #131)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:38 PM

132. Seems like they made up rather QUICKLY after the last primary

 

How one loses shows their mettle. That's why I had no prob voting for her regardless of the last contest and the water under the bridge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #132)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:42 PM

133. I believe that is why African Americans were so quick to re-embrace her and Bill.

Even though the contest was acrimonious when it was over she did everything she did to see he was elected, even dressing down her own supporters , some of whom refused to come along...

It's like family...We fight, but at the end of the day we're still family.


BTW, did you see Bill's eulogy at the GOAT's funeral...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #133)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:47 PM

134. I missed it, I was out, but I set a recording

 

I plan on watching late tonight

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bravenak (Reply #134)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:54 PM

137. He got a send off like a head of state. It was only fitting.

I am a believer so I believe I will finally get to meet him on the other side along with the martyred Kennedy brothers, Brother Malcolm, Dr, King, and Abraham Lincoln...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:44 PM

4. There's not going to be an indictment nor a recommendation for one.

There never was. That was a Republican pipe dream that sent secondary smoke to some on the left.

There still won't be either. It has nothing to do with Obama's endorsement. If there were any real chance that Hillary Clinton would be indicted, she wouldn't have been a candidate. We are all just guessing about the investigation. The right is pushing the idea that she'll be indicted.

Guess what? The Administration knows the reality of that. It has always know the reality of that. It's all just a warmed over Benghazi situation. Lots of smoke, but no fire.

Get over it. It's not happening. It was never going to happen. It's all just wishful thinking by people who dislike Hillary Clinton for whatever reason.

This country is not going to indict and prosecute a Secretary of State for actions taken while serving in that capacity. It simply will not happen. It never has and never will. Nothing of the sort would ever be allowed, I guarantee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:51 PM

8. That's not for you or me to decide. But we now have confirmation it is a criminal investigation.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #8)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:55 PM

12. Of course it's not. It's not for "former FBI" people

or "sources close to the investigation" to decide, either.

But, there's still not going to be any indictment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #12)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:58 PM

16. Reminds me of the song Wishin' and Hopin' by Dusty Springfield. Those were the days.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #16)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:02 PM

19. Well, "thinkin' and prayin'" for an indictment also reminds me

of that song. You go right on with that. I don't care, and it won't make any difference.

I'm basing my assessment on history, actually. If indictments were likely for such cabinet officers, we'd already have seen some. I can think of several examples from other administrations where they should have been. They weren't. We don't issue criminal indictments for cabinet officers who are acting in their positions. We simply don't. It's a precedent nobody wants to set.

That's why no indictment will be issued, nor even considered seriously. Do think about it, OK? Use your sense of history and your knowledge of the past.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #19)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:08 PM

26. I said you can think what you want. Have at it as it means zero.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #26)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:23 PM

40. Applies to you as well

FBI isn't leaking, so there's nothing but speculation until the report is released.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emulatorloo (Reply #40)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:25 PM

42. Exactly. I'm not the one in denial.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #42)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:07 PM

86. More accurately

 

You don't perceive yourself as in denial. Which is kind of prerequisite for being in denial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #19)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:55 PM

69. It's a noble effort Mineral Man

But it won't work. They clutch at the straws they have, not the straws they wish they had. They will be waiting on an indictment well into Hillary's second term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to charlyvi (Reply #69)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:58 PM

74. Well, they're welcome to their bitter hopes, I guess.

I'm going to be busy, soon, working to defeat Trump and elect our first woman President. By November, I'll be 71 years old. It will do my old heart good to have helped elect both a black man and a woman as Democratic Presidents. Yes, it will.

Others can cry all the bitter tears they can muster. As David Byrne sang, "I ain't got time for that now..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #8)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:09 PM

78. It wasn't confirmation. He probably misspoke

 

I'll believe it when I see it in writing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #8)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:08 PM

111. No , we do not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:58 PM

17. I admire you MineralMan

you have more patience for this than I do. Bravo for trying to insert some facts into this nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #17)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:02 PM

20. Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:12 PM

28. Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:21 PM

35. "If the Secretary does it, it's not a crime"

load & clear MM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yodermon (Reply #35)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:23 PM

39. Please do not imply that I used the words you quoted.

They appear nowhere in my post. To imply that they did is dishonest.

Thank you for your cooperation in not putting words in my mouth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #39)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:33 PM

82. I wasn't quoting you. I was paraphrasing another famous quote

which i'm sure you're aware of. Here is your quote:

"This country is not going to indict and prosecute a Secretary of State for actions taken while serving in that capacity"

.. even if those actions are found to be criminal?

Because if she gets a pass just by virtue of being SoS, then yeah, it's frost/nixon 2.0, and there is one set of laws for those in power and another set of laws for the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yodermon (Reply #82)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:35 PM

83. Use your own words. Don't distort mine. Thanks.

I'll appreciate it if you do the right thing. If you don't, then I'll keep pointing it out. Do not fake quotes from other DUers. If they didn't say it, don't act as though they did. I choose my words carefully. I recommend that as a normal practice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:14 PM

87. It's never a good thing to talk in absolutes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #4)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:57 PM

104. Nonsense, Nixon ran (and won) while Watergate was still under investigation.

 

The idea that someone running proves nothing is wrong is completely flawed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:45 PM

5. Taking our talking points directly from the RNC now are we?

The Republican National Committee jumped on Earnest’s remarks, taking advantage of his use of the word “criminal” to issue a press release characterizing the press secretary’s remark as a "major break" from Clinton’s description of the investigation as a “security inquiry.”
"The White House's admission that the FBI is investigating Hillary Clinton's email server as a 'criminal' matter shreds her dishonest claim that it is a routine 'security inquiry,'" RNC spokesman Michael Short said in the statement.


But Earnest seemed to be describing the White House's practices in general terms, not characterizing the case as a "criminal" investigation. Asked to clarify, the White House noted that Earnest has previously said that he had "not talked to anybody at the Department of Justice with knowledge about this situation" -- meaning that he would have no way of knowing whether the investigation was indeed criminal.


Guess you guys have decided to abandon all pretense. "Fuck it, let's go for broke"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vdogg (Reply #5)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:53 PM

9. It's all interpretation. You spin your way and I'll quote what was said by the Press Secretary.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #9)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:45 PM

98. Funny how you, Fox News and the repubs have the same "interpretation"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vdogg (Reply #5)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:53 PM

10. It is sad to see self proclaimed progressives carrying water for the right wing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:54 PM

11. This isn't RW

 

The FBI only looks at criminal activity, not civil. That's a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinebox (Reply #11)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:02 PM

22. John Cornyn and Fox News are right wing.

This isn't complicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightZone (Reply #22)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:14 PM

31. The FBI however isn't a RW org

 

and we hear this on a daily basis from many how the FBI investigation is a RW witch hunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:02 PM

23. Well if you do the crime, you should do the time. That's an honorable position to take rather than

 

"I want her so I'll just close my eyes, ears, and thought processes and hope it all goes away." Well nine or so months later, it hasn't gone away. But her supporters don't want to hear facts or use logic. They just blindly stopped considering the possibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #23)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:07 PM

25. I will defer to the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department

If you don't mind I will defer to the legal opinion of the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department and not a random internet poster with an axe to grind:


But then there was a moment where former Governor Weld shattered Republican dreams and Donald Trump's talking points about Hillary Clinton's email.

Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans



Now, about that water:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #25)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:11 PM

27. Then you are at odds with Mineral Man. He said he'd not believe any former investigator.

 

So he's calling you and your drivel out. Work it out with him. I'm busy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #27)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:13 PM

29. Weld is the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department

The FBI investigates...The Justice Department prosecutes...Two different entities. Glad to be able to point that out for you.

You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #29)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:28 PM

44. But if an indictment is recommended and the DOJ declines, shit will hit the fan.

 

Glad to be able to point THAT out to you. Then the Democratic Party will look like ridiculous crooks. Now you don't want THAT do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #44)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:34 PM

47. Asked and answered...

If you believe you know the relevant law better than the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department:


But then there was a moment where former Governor Weld shattered Republican dreams and Donald Trump's talking points about Hillary Clinton's email.

Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans


there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

About that water:







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #44)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:38 PM

52. And so the shit hits the fan?

The only people that'll actually give a shit are people hoping and praying for Clinton to get indicted. That would be the majority, if not all, Republicans, some Independents (which are actually Repubs) and some Sanders' supporters.

You know what else? The majority of the people that voted and helped Clinton win the Democratic Primary... they were aware of this matter (and anything else anyone wants to trot out).

You know what happens when you continually vilify someone? No one with a lick of sense believes the boy who cried wolf when the wolf has been found innocent time and again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:21 PM

37. FBI is not rw. We want the

 

truth - either way it falls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #37)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:32 PM

46. Please see Post 25. Thank you in advance.

You and your cohorts should know by now you will never get the best of the indomitable DemocratSinceBirth. He would literally rather die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #46)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:36 PM

50. I trust Comey.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #50)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:39 PM

54. I trust the wisdom of the former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department:

But then there was a moment where former Governor Weld shattered Republican dreams and Donald Trump's talking points about Hillary Clinton's email.

Weld changed the topic they were discussing and brought up the whole Hillary email hoo-ha, telling Chuck Todd it is going nowhere. When pressed by Todd on why he thought so, Weld replied, "I'm speaking as a former director of the criminal division of the Justice Department. There's no criminal intent, and with no criminal intent there's no indictment."

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/libertarian-vp-candidate-blows-republicans




I would literally rather have a cap busted in my ear than to ever give into to you and your lil cohorts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #37)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:47 PM

61. no ya don't

pretending otherwise is daft.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maru Kitteh (Reply #61)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:57 PM

72. That tells me a lot about you.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:27 PM

43. I see it every time Dems support TPP, Fracking KXL, Wall Street, Payday Lenders, Prisons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #43)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:55 PM

102. .+1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #10)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:40 PM

97. I disagree. It's sad to see Democrats shilling for someone who refuses

 

to come clean. She could in one moment clear everything up...if it were above board. Good lord, she's got the entire Democratic Party elite, PBO included, now "carrying water for her". That doesn't change one thing...just shows the depth she is willing to go to having "supporters" shill for her.

And don't give me the VRWC BS ... She is a Democrat. We are Democrats. These are her actions. She made decisions. And a good half of us think they suck.

The problem is that now they really have some red meat. So howl away. You'll have plenty of time and opportunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vdogg (Reply #5)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:56 PM

13. Credit where credit is due

Let's be fair and name the source: "Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) disagreed with Earnest's assessment, posting on Twitter that Obama's endorsement does constitute a conflict of interest. Cornyn said a special counsel is needed to properly investigate Clinton's email use."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hav (Reply #13)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:06 PM

24. I have no issue with Obama's endorsement, nor Elizabeth Warren's, Joe Biden's or Nancy Pelosi's.

 

My point is the FBI IS treating this as a criminal investigation. Not like a security review that Clinton and her supporters said for months. They were wrong then and her supporters who deny a possible indictment might be wrong again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #24)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:22 PM

38. you wrote the title as if she was a definite target of the inquiry instead of a witness

...something which has not been established.

Also, an investigation of criminality is not proof that criminality occurred - something that Sanders and his supporters have been asserting for months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #38)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:34 PM

48. Talk about lather, rinse and repeat. The FBI just runs around

 

playing the foil to the Clinton Shuffle. No, that's the Democrats doing that. Pontificating with super duper hubris on the future...nice work if you can get it.

"Sander's Supporters" are not deaf and dumb (as in refusing to talk). That would be the 5th Ammendment guy and we'll see about the aides. But hey, nothing to see here.

When it's over...cleared up...she's exhonerated (which she's far from at this time), then we talk and I'll likely vote for her. Until then, it's just so much jibberish and Corporate Dem PC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #48)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:39 PM

53. the emails have zero to do with corporatism

...I get that it's just a way to take her down politically, but you can't credibly throw in every disagreement you have with her into the rumor mill and expect to be taken seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #53)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:46 PM

59. Yeah, right. Talk to the FBI. I think you might rethink your definitions.

 

It's the "you can't touch me" that qualifies. And no, I have no desire to "take her down". Save your hyperbole. She's doing that herself. I pray she is cleared, post haste, frankly. It's making the Party look like an extention of the Clinton Shuffle....Bill's bull horn notwithstanding.

I guess now the FBI is just a rumor mill. That silly Comey...thinks he's something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #59)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:58 PM

73. It continues.

I'd love to read one HRC supporter express even the slightest bit of hesitation or concern around this pending investigation. They all seem to be star struck.

What concerns me even more, if there is a recommendation for indictment a lot of her supporters still won't care and then we will be truly hosed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Juicy_Bellows (Reply #73)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:15 PM

94. That's why I pray for a speedy conclusion. However, it seems there is

 

not the cooperation needed by the parties to enable that. And one can only believe...at least a non-cult person...that there is a lot to hide.

Truth be told, her supporters will just parrot whatever she says. This type of blind adoration skips the frontal cortex of the brain. I do feel for the real Democratic leaders and how they've been pressured into joining the Clinton Shuffle. Any form of cover is gone. All the while she's asking for Republican funds. Now the only defense is "RW Talking Points" or "Not Trump". Sad.

It's either pure incompetence and ignorance, or extreme hubris and political privilege.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #94)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:19 PM

95. There is a mountain to hide, of that I have no doubt.

I think the latter part is the truest part -

"It's either pure incompetence and ignorance, or extreme hubris and political privilege."

I hope we live to see this house of cards (pun, somewhat intended) come crumbling down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #59)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:08 PM

77. the FBI hasn't declared anyone the target of a criminal inquiry

...much less indicated any crime has been committed.

So, yeah, talk to the FBI, don't blame Clinton for others using the inquiry as a political cudgel.

from Fiscal Times:

...legal experts have told the Associated Press that it “appears unlikely Clinton would be formally charged with committing a crime” for using her private email server throughout her four years at the State Department, in contravention of revised rules regulating highly sensitive email transmissions. That’s because the relatively few federal laws governing the handling of classified materials were written primarily to cover spies and leakers. What’s more, prosecutors would have to prove intent to violate the law and expose classified material to hacking, which would be a stretch at best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #77)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:32 PM

96. More parsing words. Under Investigation. Period. The end.

 

They don't usually "declare" anything or state a crime has been or has not been committed until the "investigation" is concluded. We are not elementary school children here.

This is a very balanced article, IMO, probably because it's really Yahoo.finance.news. Surprised you linked to it. It definitely shows the difficulty she has created in a number of federal departments...semantics aside...and the difficulty of Obama's position and the difficulty of political appointees like Loretta Lynch. Probably because it's really Yahoo News.

It's not going away anytime soon. That's for sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:56 PM

14. OMG

How long is this shit going to last?

I think the President might know a bit more than you on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #14)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:02 PM

21. "How long is this shit going to last? "

Hopefully not after the 15th....


BTW, I lived on Blair Stone Road when I was doing post grad- work at FSU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #21)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:43 PM

57. FSU Alum here as well!



I lived there for about 15 years in the Killearn area. Awesome to see another former TLH resident!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #57)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:47 PM

60. Down the street from Governor's Square Mall...

Did you ever have Tom Dye as a professor? Monte Palmer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #60)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:52 PM

65. Unfortunately, I didn't...

I spent most of my time in Biology and Chemistry...lived at Dirac. So sad that the Koch Bros essentially took over the COSS though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #65)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:54 PM

68. Government...I wasn't smart enough for the "hard" sciences.

SIGH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #68)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:56 PM

71. Me neither...

hence having to live at Dirac, LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #14)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:36 PM

49. He said he didn't. I saw the interview...he was pissed at even being asked.

 

You know how he clenches his jaw...that's how it was expressed. No influence or knowledge...that's what he said. Maybe you know better?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:57 PM

15. Not a chance an idictment is coming

Obama, Biden and Warren are smarter than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:01 PM

18. "GOP: Obama endorsement undercuts Clinton FBI probe" - nice editing job.

John Cornyn and Fox News.

Quite the sources ya got there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:14 PM

30. 5 days until the John Cornyn/Fox News 'progressives' enhance

 

DU by leaving

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #30)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:17 PM

32. We're not leaving. We like to know what our primary opponents are up to. I'll read and not post.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #32)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:20 PM

33. If you use their talking points as your own, are they really your opponents? -nt-

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #32)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:49 PM

92. The primaries are over

(Except for DC which isn't going to be a good night for you). As for what your primary opponents will be doing--we will be working to defeat Donald Trump in the GE.

What will you be doing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:20 PM

34. I don't get it. With all the talk about his caring about his legacy this is one huge puzzlement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #34)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:31 PM

45. Very much so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yourpaljoey (Reply #45)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:42 PM

56. He's over a barrel. He's cast in with the "there they go again and we

 

have to cover them" crowd. Remember, first she goaded Allbright and Steinham into well-named cover, now it's gone all the way up to the President. That's freaking power. Perhaps just extreme hubris so far over that there is no way back, perhaps.

And still the investigation into Her Server and Her Emails and Her Actions with the FBI keeps going. Oh I forgot, the VRWC secretly runs the FBI. Otherwise, it would be over. Right.

And apparently it was the Benghazi Hearings that the secret server came up. I don't think even PBO can keep the lid on this. It's a long way to January...when he returns to civilian life. I learned to really like him and it really pisses me off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #56)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:44 PM

58. Good points

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #56)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:53 PM

66. Even Dems cover stuff up

I want to know who is gonna pardon who for which crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skink (Reply #66)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:55 PM

70. Interesting point.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skink (Reply #66)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:30 PM

81. Pardon Me!

There is a legal concept known as "the presumption of innocence." You'd be surprised at how often individuals who are indicted for crimes are found to be Not Guilty by a jury of their peers.
Since there hasn't been a criminal referral to DOJ, an indictment, a trial or a conviction, no pardon is needed.
You're about a year and a half premature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #81)

Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:37 AM

153. Nixon got a sweet pardon and only had a Congressional investigation.

He resigned before impeachment and got a pardon before an investigation. Ford proved just about anything is possible when it comes to pardons. How many underlings from the Nixon administration got real jail time? The pardon fairy when it shows up is much more powerful than the indictment fairy ask several Governors sitting in jail today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #34)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:37 PM

51. 1. It isn't Obama talking about his legacy.

 

2. Maybe you're wrong about the investigation being something to worry about.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #51)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:51 PM

63. It most definitely is about his legacy. She's been a thorn in his side

 

forever...and now this? It's not going away, until it goes away.

But his endorsement never goes away, either. Nor do all the other Establishment Democrats. Anyone who thinks all these lifetime politicos are having a Hillary Nomionation Party behind the scenes aren't paying attention. JMHO,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:24 PM

41. Jury Results

On Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:13 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Obama's Endorsement Undercuts Clinton FBI investigation.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512171788

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This person explicitly adopted the GOP spin on this for their thread tittle--the article notes the GOP is claiming Obama's endorsement undercuts the investigation, and all the OP did is edit out the fact that it was the GOP saying it. This is Republican troll.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:18 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Jesus Horatio Christ: How many of these "HURTFUL" suppressions of speech are going on today? KNOCK IT THE FUCK OFF! Grow the fuck up or visit the RomperRoom site where your FeeFees won't get hurt!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Spend your energy posting your thoughts in response instead of trying to hide it. Better to know what's out there.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: DU is not the place for adopting GOP talking points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #41)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:50 PM

62. Juror #1 fancies himself a tough guy.

I kind of find his lil diatribe risible.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #62)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:54 PM

67. I noticed the last few words of Juror 1...didn't really read it until it was

 

pointed out. Interesting reply.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #41)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:59 PM

75. Juror #1 needs to be removed from jury duty

That's a pretty good example of how not to be a juror.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightZone (Reply #75)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:08 PM

76. Agreed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:40 PM

55. Nothing in that article (Fox News Source???) indicates any such thing. Wishful thinking on your part

We know you're VERY, VERY disappointed, but she's not going to be indicted. This is not a criminal investigation and there was no crime. It's not going to happen, even if you hold your breath and turn blue in the face.

Most importantly - BERNIE LOST.

HILLARY GOT MORE VOTES = MORE PEOPLE VOTED FOR HILLARY THAN VOTED FOR BERNIE

HILLARY IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE

OBAMA ENDORSED HER

BIDEN ENDORSED HER

ELIZABETH WARREN ENDORSED HER

MOVE ON!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:52 PM

64. You might have noted that you're repeating the FOX News/Repub spin

I guess that because you subscribe to that spin.

Which is interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:10 PM

79. There are six things the Lord hates,

There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #79)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 05:53 PM

100. OMG...Quoting the Bible for Hillary. That's a new one.

 

Geez, I was about to misread the post through those first few...seemed pretty relevant, in a manner of speaking. Had to do a double take.

But that last one...that just whacked all the DUers that are not in the Clinton Bubble. There are a lot of us here she doesn't fool one bit.

Now, back to the post...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #100)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:01 PM

138. Did you notice that every single one of those describes Hillary?

 

Kind of funny that a Hill fan is using it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to senz (Reply #138)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:33 PM

141. My thought exactly.

 

But I'm done with these fools. They aren't interested in how Clinton is viewed by so many. She doesn't want or need our votes. That's been made clear by her followers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Reply #141)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 11:21 PM

147. Um, yeah, she does. And it's not those in the Bubble on this board.

 

Long, long time until November.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to senz (Reply #138)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 11:19 PM

146. I tried hard to avoid it...it was so obvious...thus, the double take.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:11 PM

80. Is there anyone naive enough...

to believe that a Democratic Attorney General (Loretta Lynch) appointed by Barack Obama and a Democratic U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia (Channing Phillips) appointed by Barack Obama are going to indict the Democratic Party's nominee between now and November?
Even Judge Curiel in San Diego, who Donald Trump has attacked, has postponed the Trump University trial until after the election (November 28th).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #80)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:30 PM

90. Agree, but wait till the Reich gets its hands on this shit

wait till they can like the 'foundation' some how.

We are facing a 4 year non-stop clusterfuck of: Hearings, Subpoenas, grand juries, special prosecutors, impeachment attempts,

and endless media circus


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #90)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:33 PM

129. That Goes On in Every Administration

Bill Clinton was even impeached and tried. It didn't stop him from completing two terms in office with the highest job approval rating of any two term president in the modern era.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #129)

Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:17 AM

150. Wrong, It's exclating

It's been a neocon tag-team match

Wild BIll set the stage for what followed.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 03:51 PM

84. The oligarchy WILL protect it's investment

regardless of the damage it does

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #84)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 04:19 PM

89. The Most Exclusive Club in the Political Oligarchy

is the United States Senate, only 100 members allowed. Bernard Sanders is a member in good standing and he participates in the 46 member Democratic Caucus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #89)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:08 PM

140. The oligarchs either have or serve great wealth.

 

Bernie is not and has never been in that club.

Hill and Bill are firmly in it, both having and serving great wealth. It's their love. It's their life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to senz (Reply #140)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:43 PM

142. Wow

You mean Bernie doesn't accept the $174,000 a year salary plus fringe benefits which bring total compensation up to about $250,000 per year; he isn't ranking member on the Budget Committee and he doesn't caucus with the other Senate Dems?
ANYONE in the United States Senate is in a very exclusive club, only 100 members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #142)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 08:00 PM

143. Your idol makes as much in ONE HOUR as you claim Bernie makes in a YEAR.

 

You padded his income from $174,000/year to $250,000.

Bernie has served the people, and not the oligarchs, his entire career. He gets paid the going rate for a Senator and he doesn't take all the perks and bribes that so many others do. He's not on the take.

He doesn't live like a king/queen like your idol does. Bill and Hill are sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars and that's not counting their very questionable "Foundation" which has even more money.

Your idol lives for money. She gives favors for money. She is owned by Wall Street. She is obscenely rich.

Your hypocrisy is contemptible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:00 PM

106. I find it hard to believe

a lawyer such as Barack Obama would risk everything with such an endorsement for HRC
if he wasn't sure she would be cleared of wrong doing. I find that mind boggling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MFM008 (Reply #106)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:21 PM

123. William of Ockham would heartily agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MFM008 (Reply #106)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 07:04 PM

139. He's not risking much. If she's indicted he can just say

 

he acted in good faith. It's not his fault what she does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to senz (Reply #139)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 11:27 PM

148. Yes. He's made it very clear he "knows nothing about it."

 

Definite denial of plausibility, if needed. He's no fool. But she has haunted him for 8 years, that's for sure. She got filthy rich and he's going to be an ex-president making a great living...but no wealth and grifter cash. I grew to respect him tremendously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Fri Jun 10, 2016, 06:26 PM

126. SO WHAT?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:34 AM

152. tick tock..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to floriduck (Original post)

Sat Jun 11, 2016, 10:50 AM

154. I don't think that kind of right wing opinion belongs here, that HC gets off because of the Obama

Administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread