2016 Postmortem

TM99

(8,352 posts)

19. Hey as long as it is found 'legal'

Thu May 5, 2016, 08:10 PM

May 2016

or 'not enough evidence to prosecute' oh well. She is 'innocent until proven guilty'.

This is the same shit we all heard through out the GW Bush years. It was craven then, and it is craven now.

Appropriate professional behavior and doing the ethical thing no longer count. That is political purity don't you know and not 'pragmatic'.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

112 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Well It's Official: Hillary Has Been Exonerated for Everything She Ever Said or Done! [View all] Chasstev365 May 2016 OP

Exorhated? The Velveteen Ocelot May 2016 #1

Good so now we can move on to something important like beating doc03 May 2016 #2

We have to let people vote still. TimPlo May 2016 #39

To do what? Vote for the TPP? Nahhh I'll pass Jack Bone May 2016 #77

LIke the Congress we had in 2006 and 2008 that never passed a public option, EFCA, merrily May 2016 #81

Welcome to Democratic Underground where the GOP works daily to Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #3

Seriously! nt nolawarlock May 2016 #22

She's going to get us GOP money. 840high May 2016 #64

I see these newcomers constantly pushing Republican talking points doc03 May 2016 #4

I have voted Democratic in every election since 1980, thank you very much! Chasstev365 May 2016 #7

Why in the hell are you carrying water for Republicans then. doc03 May 2016 #9

Why are you shilling for a Republican candidate? pdsimdars May 2016 #17

That graphic is misleading right out of the gate. nolawarlock May 2016 #23

That's some abusive Hill Bro tag line you've got there, nolawarlock. senz May 2016 #48

+1 Nailed it. merrily May 2016 #59

You mean Stockholm Willy? nolawarlock May 2016 #63

Thanks for proving senz's point. merrily May 2016 #84

All I'm proving is that racism is alive and well with the defense of WillyT on this site. nt nolawarlock May 2016 #88

But you are not posting to WillyT, are you? Nor can you. You posted to senz. merrily May 2016 #89

... who in turn was defending people like (and including) WillyT. nt nolawarlock May 2016 #90

I call bs. Kindly quote the language in the post of senz to which you replied that defended WillyT. merrily May 2016 #91

Post #86. nolawarlock May 2016 #92

Nice try. Post 86 is not the post to which your Post 63 replied and we're discussing your Reply 63. merrily May 2016 #93

I'm not just discussing post #63. nolawarlock May 2016 #94

You know 63 comes before 86 right? merrily May 2016 #95

Yes, I do. nolawarlock May 2016 #96

Except for acknowledging that you were wrong in Reply 63, Reply 96 is a convoluted rationalization. merrily May 2016 #97

As I just explained above ... nolawarlock May 2016 #100

did you get tired? nolawarlock May 2016 #103

Poster, please. You're not the only poster on the board right now. Get over yourself. merrily May 2016 #105

Games? nolawarlock May 2016 #106

And it probably also bears mentioning ... nolawarlock May 2016 #98

Don't get it twisted. The only discussions I've had with you related to your Reply 63. merrily May 2016 #99

On the contrary, nolawarlock May 2016 #101

Luckily for me, most who read at DU can follow a conversation and a subthread and can recognize your merrily May 2016 #102

You don't need to waste your time on someone like that, merrily. senz May 2016 #107

Hey! I can enjoy exposing someone like that for what he or she is. merrily May 2016 #109

Well, I'm glad you enjoy it. senz May 2016 #111

Well, to a point. And I did learn about another new DU poster with a lot of hides already, so merrily May 2016 #112

No, not that nice man. Another nice man named L0oniX. senz May 2016 #86

Are you saying that WillyT is a nice racist? nolawarlock May 2016 #87

Racist? I never ever saw any sign of racism in WillyT. senz May 2016 #104

Have a lovely day. nolawarlock May 2016 #108

This message was self-deleted by its author merrily May 2016 #57

I've been voting straight Democratic since the 1960s senz May 2016 #15

Who does TRUMP remind you of? calguy May 2016 #27

Somebody Bernie can beat -- easily. senz May 2016 #41

On the internet... Databuser May 2016 #55

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan nt BootinUp May 2016 #5

OK-Sniper Fire catnhatnh May 2016 #20

I understand why you think you proved something, but it really BootinUp May 2016 #25

Yeah, it says catnhatnh can remember her lies. senz May 2016 #49

Accepting for arguments sake that it was a bald face lie BootinUp May 2016 #54

Bernie has never "fleeced" anyone, because he's not interested in money senz May 2016 #110

So what's it say? TM99 May 2016 #53

When someone can look at one confusing case and draw a ridiculously BootinUp May 2016 #56

There was no fucking confusion about that sniper fire lie. TM99 May 2016 #58

Her record in public life, the obvious trust BootinUp May 2016 #61

Massive logical fallacy. merrily May 2016 #65

No all that says is TM99 May 2016 #72

I am referring to people she has formed a relationship with BootinUp May 2016 #74

Now, it's even more of a fallacy. merrily May 2016 #79

You go on relying on the bits and pieces you BootinUp May 2016 #82

Um, no. That's another or your fallacies. Her life on the record is exactly what I do rely upon. merrily May 2016 #83

This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #80

+1 merrily May 2016 #66

Poster, please. Nothing about being handed flowers by a child on arrival is confusing. merrily May 2016 #60

Nah - she lied. Period. 840high May 2016 #67

Due to Trump and the possibly of Ted Cruz as Attorney General, I will vote for Hillary no matter wh Chasstev365 May 2016 #6

If you're REALLY worried, then you'd be supporting the candidate who performs better against them pdsimdars May 2016 #18

They've been making the same baseless, unconvincing arguments for a year. merrily May 2016 #68

yes but Rosa Luxemburg May 2016 #69

So, because of all this wasted time and effort and money, finding NO wrong, you are pissed at who? seabeyond May 2016 #8

No "intent to mishandle" found. Unfortunately, there are other factors. pat_k May 2016 #24

You mean there's STILL A CHANCE????? COLGATE4 May 2016 #26

Unfortunately, yes. Not much of one, but "not insignificant." (nt) pat_k May 2016 #28

Why don't you get how desperately unethical this sounds? seabeyond May 2016 #34

If "unethical" tell it to the law professor quoted in Rolling Stone. pat_k May 2016 #42

You didn't see the movie? COLGATE4 May 2016 #46

No. Found the scene when I googled "still a chance" tho. pat_k May 2016 #47

Seriously? Like a dog diggin for a bone, a repug clawing away at Benghazi. Pathetic. seabeyond May 2016 #33

I don't consider Rolling Stone a repub rag. pat_k May 2016 #43

Not again... is the rightwing forum over at Free Republic offline? nt procon May 2016 #10

WHOOO HOOOO, GOOD NEWS!!!!! Grassy Knoll May 2016 #11

The skies have opened, Mike__M May 2016 #12

Jury results ---> Petrushka May 2016 #13

Good grief. 99Forever May 2016 #14

This is truly a joke. It's the Bernie supporters who have no objectivity. politicaljunkie41910 May 2016 #16

Hey as long as it is found 'legal' TM99 May 2016 #19

"Hillary Clinton-Avoiding Indictment since 1978" catnhatnh May 2016 #21

You forgot to mention how she COLGATE4 May 2016 #31

You know how I judge a Clinton scandal? catnhatnh May 2016 #40

Believing in the principle that, in order to convict a person COLGATE4 May 2016 #29

Be a good German TM99 May 2016 #32

Now THAT's funny. Calling the principle of innocence COLGATE4 May 2016 #36

You appear to be well educated TM99 May 2016 #38

I hope your don't hurt too much COLGATE4 May 2016 #44

That should be a hide. seabeyond May 2016 #37

And we were right. ucrdem May 2016 #30

ok Joob May 2016 #35

Yep. Your disapproval is going to really mean a lot to her COLGATE4 May 2016 #45

Like I said, Incompetence. Joob May 2016 #50

People like you have been predicting her 'downfall' for the past COLGATE4 May 2016 #71

Didn't realize so many young voters, a whole generation, saw her as corrupted 30 years ago. Joob May 2016 #73

Actually, most young people then as now were smart enough to COLGATE4 May 2016 #75

What RW bull shit are you referring too? Joob May 2016 #76

She is the most investigated woman in history... scscholar May 2016 #51

Don't you wonder why? Why do the Clintons 840high May 2016 #70

Am agreeing with you over here. bjo59 May 2016 #52

Clinton's defense has morphed to: She broke the law, but she didn't understand that law. (nt) w4rma May 2016 #62

Oh, stop making stuff up. You sound silly. riversedge May 2016 #78

Her main problem is all of that pesky saying and doing things. ContinentalOp May 2016 #85