Latest Breaking News

PJMcK

(25,210 posts)

92. Longer than 20 years

Sat Jul 2, 2016, 10:21 PM

Jul 2016

Last edited Sat Jul 2, 2016, 11:05 PM - Edit history (1)

The partisan and corrosive attacks by Republicans on both Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton go back more than 25 to 30 years dating to Mr. Clinton's terms as Governor of Arkansas. The constant spewing of lies, spurious charges and garbage by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Jerry Falwell, Newt Gingrich and other Republican hypocrites has never provided the kill shot that they desperately hoped for. Gosh, is it possible that the Clintons aren't guilty of anything?

Those GOP losers hoped that they could destroy the Clintons with innuendo and insinuations and falsehoods. The great irony is that they impeached him for lying about sex but many of them, especially Speaker Gingrich, lost their gigs because they had their own skeletons in their closets. Of course, the Senate didn't convict him so he retained his office and President Clinton had terrific approval ratings when he left office. Was he perfect? Of course not. Neither are you or I. But he was better for our country than the alternatives and Secretary Clinton has the opportunity of the ages ahead of her. She'll get my vote.

Every time the Republicans have gone after the Clintons, (or the Obamas, for that matter), they have failed. How stupid are they?

Well, they're about to nominate Donald Trump for president.

They're stupid.

And Donald Trump is an idiot.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

262 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

CNN and MSNBC confirm Hillary Clinton will not face any charges in email inquiry [View all] Cryptoad Jul 2016 OP

Now where did I put my Happy Dance Shoes? Cryptoad Jul 2016 #1

Yep... Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #83

I think that's Courtney Cox dancing with The Boss! (n/t) PJMcK Jul 2016 #101

Yes.... Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #104

That's a cool gif, but ... Tortmaster Jul 2016 #112

. Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #117

Now that is THE CARLTON!!! MADem Jul 2016 #154

This, but how could someone face charges in a security review? scscholar Jul 2016 #102

Those were the words used by the Clinton campaign. former9thward Jul 2016 #152

It was ALWAYS an investigation. "Security review" doesnt exist. 7962 Jul 2016 #165

Yay! shenmue Jul 2016 #133

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #2

Meaning?????????? leftofcool Jul 2016 #4

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #5

That's a pretty serious charge that you're levelling against AG Lynch lapucelle Jul 2016 #10

The biggest clue, which we've had right in front of our faces all along, is that so many RW pnwmom Jul 2016 #75

Longer than 20 years PJMcK Jul 2016 #92

+1. n/t pnwmom Jul 2016 #96

And, this goes for her haters on the left, too, sadly: Surya Gayatri Jul 2016 #160

Seriously, unrelated! mountain grammy Jul 2016 #15

Please elaborate PJMcK Jul 2016 #11

Cue the conspiracy theories Mz Pip Jul 2016 #12

Suck it Trump! leftofcool Jul 2016 #3

It is simply not the place of the government to determine if she did wrong. AngryAmish Jul 2016 #6

Agreed philosslayer Jul 2016 #52

This, and Nick Merrill confirmed today that it wasn't an investigation (ntxt) scscholar Jul 2016 #129

You might want to look again what you wrote. Rilgin Jul 2016 #218

Who do you think should determine if law and policy were violated? TipTok Jul 2016 #231

I don't understand what this big ado is all about. You've had some 228 replies Cal33 Jul 2016 #234

No biggie!🖨🖨🖨🖨🖨🖨 AngryAmish Jul 2016 #240

so.... chillfactor Jul 2016 #7

Hate to break it to you but the odds are that the nonsense from both the right wing and cstanleytech Jul 2016 #14

They will see this as proof Hillary has the FBI in her pocket and cameras in their cereal boxes. Squinch Jul 2016 #19

I'll just quote Bernie himself... backscatter712 Jul 2016 #119

Of course, you're right to some extent PJMcK Jul 2016 #120

Yes! NastyRiffraff Jul 2016 #190

I'll bet you money that the loons keep harping on this despite this outcome. Squinch Jul 2016 #16

Oh definitely PatSeg Jul 2016 #30

It's a given. They live in a rut. Trump will likely now say this proves how corrupt the RKP5637 Jul 2016 #88

What else do those sorry, pathetic, hate-filled wingnuts have? MADem Jul 2016 #198

I think in the wider world, beyond Democrats, it is backfiring too. It took decades to get here, Squinch Jul 2016 #199

I think you're right in that observation. nt MADem Jul 2016 #207

There will be more coco77 Jul 2016 #202

Bill Maher calls these "zombie lies," because they keep shuffling about even tblue37 Jul 2016 #222

Perfect analogy! Squinch Jul 2016 #223

CNN has been reporting on it like nothing else is going on today. Boomerproud Jul 2016 #8

What took you so long? (wink, n/t) PJMcK Jul 2016 #13

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #192

I wonder if the FBI has to let subjects know whether they're targets lapucelle Jul 2016 #9

Your second paragraph is the key point PJMcK Jul 2016 #17

Funny you should mention the "corporately-owned news organizations" because Wisc Progressive Jul 2016 #25

It is anti-Clinton, and has been for decades. That he signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 still_one Jul 2016 #35

There is another possibility PJMcK Jul 2016 #39

FBI has stated very clearly all along Cryptoad Jul 2016 #31

Yeah, I'm with you, Cryptoad PJMcK Jul 2016 #45

This is confusing dragonfly301 Jul 2016 #22

Because they might have been investigating if he played any part. Hoyt Jul 2016 #33

Absolutely still_one Jul 2016 #40

Yup, of course that didnt stop some from jumping the gun to the conclusion cstanleytech Jul 2016 #63

Guccifer, a Romanian hacker, hacked into Sidney Blumenthal's AOL account, allegedly. amandabeech Jul 2016 #56

No one should rely on the allegations you repeat here as ANY kind of truth, pnwmom Jul 2016 #91

Suit yourself. n/t amandabeech Jul 2016 #100

Pagliano set up or helped set up Hillary's private e-mail server. amandabeech Jul 2016 #72

Pagliano wasn't granted total immunity creeksneakers2 Jul 2016 #139

Thank you for expressing this better than I did. n/t amandabeech Jul 2016 #180

Because he had a smart lawyer who wanted to make sure that nothing pnwmom Jul 2016 #89

CNN says they have "multiple law enforcement sources." n/t pnwmom Jul 2016 #86

CNN had no one but MFM008 Jul 2016 #156

If they're so dominated by R's, why would they falsely claim pnwmom Jul 2016 #159

I'm just saying what I saw MFM008 Jul 2016 #171

Why does the fact that they interviewed many R's tell you pnwmom Jul 2016 #172

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #18

Right on! (n/t) PJMcK Jul 2016 #46

I'm not seeing this story at any other links yet bucolic_frolic Jul 2016 #20

From CNN: yallerdawg Jul 2016 #21

I tuned in to that "other" network for a minute RussBLib Jul 2016 #23

I looked up at the TV at the gym and they had some "13 Hours of Horror in BENGHAZI" playing.... winstars Jul 2016 #98

I know it doesn't matter mercuryblues Jul 2016 #99

But now hasn't Bill Clinton put another damn conspiracy right in their hands doc03 Jul 2016 #24

They would just have found something else and or made up one. nt cstanleytech Jul 2016 #26

Bill Clinton is supposed to be a political genius why would he doc03 Jul 2016 #34

You could ask the same question over why he would risk his office to get a blowjob and cstanleytech Jul 2016 #42

Could be that the "connection" between bumping into Lynch in Phoenix and this long long... George II Jul 2016 #85

That sounds entirely possible. BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #161

He's old and he enjoys the game of politics a lot. Chemisse Jul 2016 #111

I actually think the opposite. liberalmuse Jul 2016 #122

Bingo. Heaven forfend if the Clintons fail to put up enough flags stopbush Jul 2016 #38

We don't need to make things up Politicalboi Jul 2016 #194

My comment would not apply to you Politicalboi unless of course you are one of the cstanleytech Jul 2016 #196

It was not a "meeting" - it was a chance encounter due to delay at the airport. MADem Jul 2016 #66

He could have just called her on the phone if he wanted to do something doc03 Jul 2016 #107

Well, since the FBI said there's nothing to Clinton's emails, Loretta Lynch doesn't even have to MADem Jul 2016 #153

Has the FBI actually said there's nothing wrong? Why not release the 22 emails they're holding? floriduck Jul 2016 #191

Someone inside the investigation has given the wave-off to CNN and the NBC franchises. MADem Jul 2016 #195

Thanks for the reply. The sooner the decision is announced, the better for all. floriduck Jul 2016 #203

re: "The target, though, all along, has been the hacker. " thesquanderer Jul 2016 #233

You'll have to ask them. MADem Jul 2016 #246

re "Taking a deal means the guilty party spills the beans" thesquanderer Jul 2016 #248

Every plea deal I've seen involves bean - spilling. MADem Jul 2016 #249

Many crimes involve no beans to spill. That doesn't mean they don't get plea deals. thesquanderer Jul 2016 #251

Well, my mind isn't changed on this matter. MADem Jul 2016 #259

Even from your perspective, i.e. assuming that Guccifer must be spilling beans, thesquanderer Jul 2016 #260

Here's the answer: thesquanderer Jul 2016 #262

If true, I hope all those who "indicted" Clinton months ago apologize. Hoyt Jul 2016 #27

I wouldnt hold your breath waiting for that to happen. nt cstanleytech Jul 2016 #32

I am not a Smurf still_one Jul 2016 #44

Don't hold your breathe, Hoyt PJMcK Jul 2016 #48

This message was self-deleted by its author Hoyt Jul 2016 #64

The cult of the Indictment Fairy self-deported themselves geek tragedy Jul 2016 #59

I know of some who its going to crush though because they were holding out hope cstanleytech Jul 2016 #67

Good. I hope those rooting for Clinton to be indicted geek tragedy Jul 2016 #76

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #108

Sadly, that's true PJMcK Jul 2016 #79

And if their wish came true, all her delegates would go to Joe Biden. pnwmom Jul 2016 #82

HA Goodman is still claiming on Twitter today that Clinton will be indicted. lapucelle Jul 2016 #206

From MSNBC phone interview: yallerdawg Jul 2016 #28

"NBC News/WSJ poll shows ... modestybl Jul 2016 #113

True, tRump just says what he thinks no matter how vile or ignorant or unaware of himself uponit7771 Jul 2016 #150

Well well well Hekate Jul 2016 #29

"The FBI had already publicly told the New York times that she was not even a target Iliyah Jul 2016 #36

What's the right going to do now that they don't have christx30 Jul 2016 #37

What she was doing in the grassy knoll still_one Jul 2016 #49

I Object... Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #58

objection sustained. You win still_one Jul 2016 #62

Wrong. She's the fiend who faked the moon landing. calimary Jul 2016 #84

you mean we didn't land on the moon? still_one Jul 2016 #90

The Right is so sad PJMcK Jul 2016 #50

That's quite a trifecta they've got going there, PJMcK! calimary Jul 2016 #131

We stand together, calimary. PJMcK Jul 2016 #136

Speaking of HAHA charlyvi Jul 2016 #197

I knew that months ago. Everybody knew that months ago. onehandle Jul 2016 #41

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #93

Except those that watch the news bhikkhu Jul 2016 #106

That was pretty much accepted by most objective people months ago. Just like the Benghazi fiasco. George II Jul 2016 #43

Now that his last way forward appears over, will Sanders do the right thing? Hoyt Jul 2016 #47

You think? n/t doc03 Jul 2016 #53

Such as? Matt_R Jul 2016 #219

No mention of this on CNN.com,MSNBC.com or Fox News .com only says she was doc03 Jul 2016 #51

David Brook Geronimoe Jul 2016 #54

Why because you don't like the OP? still_one Jul 2016 #57

No because no relable sources Geronimoe Jul 2016 #65

No, this is a RW lie. The WH never said that. n/t pnwmom Jul 2016 #69

Yes they did Geronimoe Jul 2016 #70

Post the link to anyone at the WH saying this. leftofcool Jul 2016 #74

No, you didn't. You can't provide a link because it never happened. n/t pnwmom Jul 2016 #77

I wouldnt be willing to wager on that. cstanleytech Jul 2016 #73

No one can prove a negative. But if it was said the poster should be able pnwmom Jul 2016 #80

No, the WH did not say that and the FBI has said numerous times HRC was not the target. leftofcool Jul 2016 #71

Hillary is not going to be indicted. geek tragedy Jul 2016 #81

if u had read the OP it provided a link Cryptoad Jul 2016 #109

You having a sad? nt geek tragedy Jul 2016 #61

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jul 2016 #94

Not propaganda! KalicoKitty Jul 2016 #141

For sure arikara Jul 2016 #146

The only people who thought otherwise were Trumpbots, Paulbots and right wing conspiracy theorists, MADem Jul 2016 #55

There were (or are) still DUers awaiting the Indictment Fairy. Maybe they will simmer down NOW? Hekate Jul 2016 #97

They're not living up to their agreement if that is the case. MADem Jul 2016 #155

Surprise surprise DrDan Jul 2016 #60

Hi itsrobert Jul 2016 #68

. Jester Messiah Jul 2016 #78

Daily News Bin Geronimoe Jul 2016 #87

That is not true. Did you even go to the link? still_one Jul 2016 #95

A unregistered GoDady promoting Hillary Geronimoe Jul 2016 #116

LOL,..... Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #126

no educated person could read that story NJCher Jul 2016 #134

*Ahem* NutmegYankee Jul 2016 #103

I found this from a previous post. floriduck Jul 2016 #193

Oh, OK.... Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #105

No, it isn't. You're confusing it with another site. At any rate the source is NBC. CNN has it, MADem Jul 2016 #157

Well, thank goodness sangfroid Jul 2016 #110

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #114

You do realize the FBI doesn't indict don't you? As far as your implied conspirisy still_one Jul 2016 #123

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #179

You're still wrong. okasha Jul 2016 #204

Well, this is a relief. PatrickforO Jul 2016 #115

Alleluia! lovuian Jul 2016 #118

It is going to be sad for some I am sure when the republicans lose the Senate still_one Jul 2016 #125

I can't wait for the day the Republicans lovuian Jul 2016 #210

The key issue has been intent from day one and FBI found no evidence of intent Gothmog Jul 2016 #121

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #124

Gee, you are going to be disappointed when the FBI officially doesn't find any criminal still_one Jul 2016 #127

"Funny that faux news is spewing the same garbage..." Surya Gayatri Jul 2016 #162

It sure seems that way still_one Jul 2016 #178

BWAAAAAAAAHAAAAA!!!111!! Grassy Knoll Jul 2016 #132

Another Republican attack on the Clinton�s amounts to nothing liberal N proud Jul 2016 #128

Yes! KingFlorez Jul 2016 #130

There is no such conclusion on MSNBC. This is fiction not LBN. KeepItReal Jul 2016 #135

I checked CNN's site, MSNBC's site, even Politico: Couldn't Find It Night Watchman Jul 2016 #137

Not quite creeksneakers2 Jul 2016 #142

The MSNBC was based on a Chuck Todd interview, and CNN was a tweet from a still_one Jul 2016 #143

"sources tell CNN the expectation is Clinton will not face charges." KeepItReal Jul 2016 #144

exactly - sounds like hearsay transatlantica Jul 2016 #158

Yeah, not LBN. Todd's statement may be LBN, the rest is opinion/commentary/interpretation thesquanderer Jul 2016 #221

Agreed Night Watchman Jul 2016 #225

WOO HOO!!! YESSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lunamagica Jul 2016 #138

Been saying that for months elmac Jul 2016 #140

Mahalo, Cryptotoad~ Cha Jul 2016 #145

The sooner we can put this totally behind her the better... jimlup Jul 2016 #147

"This information was obvious enough all along to anyone who followed the story accurately....." Tarheel_Dem Jul 2016 #148

This article is based upon rumor and misstatements.. k8conant Jul 2016 #149

Many broken hearts over this. JNelson6563 Jul 2016 #151

I hope that this means that any more BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #163

"Clinton replied by saying that he had no knowledge of such matters " patricia92243 Jul 2016 #164

For everyone living in the real world this was very obvious the outcome. youceyec Jul 2016 #166

K&R! stonecutter357 Jul 2016 #167

Think about it Jarqui Jul 2016 #168

No, the Fox News fantasies of an indictment were never accurate. geek tragedy Jul 2016 #174

Back up your claim Jarqui Jul 2016 #186

Lol, please promise to post your take when the announcement is made geek tragedy Jul 2016 #188

Thought so. All air - absolutely nothing behind it.nt Jarqui Jul 2016 #229

No, it's just that we've had to make the argument so much geek tragedy Jul 2016 #230

Were you a part of the FBI investigating and/or writing up the report? Jarqui Jul 2016 #232

LMAO. People who pimp the Fox News talking points geek tragedy Jul 2016 #235

BS Jarqui Jul 2016 #245

. geek tragedy Jul 2016 #247

It is against the criminal law to have classified material on your home computer Jarqui Jul 2016 #250

All of the amateur, know-nothing Internet prosecutors geek tragedy Jul 2016 #252

I don't follow Drudge or care what they have to say. Trump's weighing in on it: Jarqui Jul 2016 #253

Do you promise to comment once the decision is announced? nt geek tragedy Jul 2016 #254

Absolutely. I'm not the one saying "she's going to be indicted" or Jarqui Jul 2016 #258

. geek tragedy Jul 2016 #261

The people who set up and service her computer, amandabeech Jul 2016 #255

Of course she WONT be indicted. Doesnt mean she did nothing wrong. 7962 Jul 2016 #213

She displayed poor judgment, which is not a crime. geek tragedy Jul 2016 #217

"Poor judgement" regarding security will likely cost you your job 7962 Jul 2016 #224

K&R! stonecutter357 Jul 2016 #169

CNN? MSNBC? SmittynMo Jul 2016 #170

It's on the front page on CNN and MSNBC XemaSab Jul 2016 #173

There must be a solid source for this. I cant really see everybody starting to celebrate if there Jemmons Jul 2016 #220

Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #175

I see no other major media running with this, until I do, I will wait to hear Comey himself AntiBank Jul 2016 #176

LOL Evergreen Emerald Jul 2016 #182

glad to be of assistance AntiBank Jul 2016 #187

Hillary fasttense Jul 2016 #177

Another Nonsensegate CanonRay Jul 2016 #181

BENGHAZI!!!!11111 jpak Jul 2016 #183

Drink! Cryptoad Jul 2016 #189

Well of course not ismnotwasm Jul 2016 #184

nothing to see here citizen.... getagrip_already Jul 2016 #185

Good news! MynameisBlarney Jul 2016 #200

Bill will continue to be a problem.. coco77 Jul 2016 #201

He's not been a problem with me. upaloopa Jul 2016 #205

Maybe not for you.. coco77 Jul 2016 #208

I doubt it, hes kept mostly out of it since he left office and I have not seen anything cstanleytech Jul 2016 #211

They will bait him coco77 Jul 2016 #214

They can try but he generally has given them the middle finger on taking it in the past. nt cstanleytech Jul 2016 #215

I remember there was a case a few months ago when he barged into a Cal33 Jul 2016 #242

Yeah, he had a megaphone. amandabeech Jul 2016 #256

He's not a problem with me, either. lunamagica Jul 2016 #212

Stupid silly Repug idiots! Typical wolfie001 Jul 2016 #209

Many Dems have not bought into it coco77 Jul 2016 #216

I share the View of Many Posters Above Night Watchman Jul 2016 #226

CNN reported that they have sources.. DCBob Jul 2016 #239

Say Bye-Bye, Indictment Fairy! Vogon_Glory Jul 2016 #227

Todd's statement is not what the OP said it was. thesquanderer Jul 2016 #228

I think this was the main source.. which seems legit to me. DCBob Jul 2016 #238

And who are those sources? Are they from DOJ? FBI? Or from Hillary's campaign itself? thesquanderer Jul 2016 #241

"sources familiar with the investigation told CNN" DCBob Jul 2016 #244

re: "Hillary�s otherwise steady and controversy free campaign." This is a serious news source? thesquanderer Jul 2016 #236

Please read my reply #234 (about 1/4 of the way down from the top of this Cal33 Jul 2016 #237

Up next humbled_opinion Jul 2016 #243

Will they focus their resources on Jane Sanders now? tallahasseedem Jul 2016 #257