2016 Postmortem

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)

42. Then you chose your party

Tue May 31, 2016, 04:28 PM

May 2016

good to know

Can I have the same level of contempt for you I have for partisan Republcians? There, I said it, you are not that different from them. But I do feel sorry for you, This will not be easy. Though when all is said and done, you might be one of the few Republcians who actually admired voting for Nixon... I found one, rare breed that this was, in 2003 in Hawaii. That took brass balls, even that many years after Watergate.

For the record, I do not fall in love with politicians, I cover them, they are slimey little creatures, I look at their policies. And of course, who gave money to whom... it is quite revealing. Local democrat getting moneys from a local REPUBLICAN PAC... hmmm lovely. What favors is he promising already? Then there is the mayor in the pocket of the local developer mafia, who might indirectly benefit over construction projects, YOU DIG.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

54 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Enough of this 'rules' vs. 'legal requirements'!!! [View all] floppyboo May 2016 OP

it's like how they said Honduras was a coup but not a MILITARY coup MisterP May 2016 #1

And Brazil and Venezuela aren't economic coups either floppyboo May 2016 #4

Here's the whole quote annavictorious May 2016 #52

Being "slow to manage effectively the legal requirments" is not breaking the law. YouDig May 2016 #2

What "red tape" rule are you referring to? Press Virginia May 2016 #3

That she should have kept paper copies instead of electronic copies of her emails. YouDig May 2016 #5

She could have used the SMART system. Saved them Press Virginia May 2016 #6

Tsk tsk. She still saved them, but yeah she broke some little rule. YouDig May 2016 #7

The rule is in place because of a law Press Virginia May 2016 #9

That is not a little rule nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #11

The goal of the rule is preserving documents, and the documents were preserved. YouDig May 2016 #14

Under legal jeopardy two years after nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #18

Here's what's going to happen. The FBI will come back and say that she technically YouDig May 2016 #21

You realize there are folks doing hard time nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #22

No criminal intent. No classified material, except retroactively. There's nothing. YouDig May 2016 #23

Mens rea is not necessary in national Intel cases nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #24

Explained by a pro, huh? That sounds very credible to me. YouDig May 2016 #25

Yup a lawyer who specializes in these cases nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #29

So when the FBI doesn't recommend any charges, you can ask him to help you out with YouDig May 2016 #30

Frankly we will be surprised nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #33

Yes, a lot of Berners will be surprised. Happens a lot, Berners being surprised. YouDig May 2016 #34

Except that I am an American not a Berner nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #37

You can be both an American and a Berner. YouDig May 2016 #38

Sweet one for all you know I could be voting for her nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #40

Your vote is indeed your business. There we agree. YouDig May 2016 #41

Then you chose your party nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #42

You can have as much contempt for me as you want. That is your choice too. YouDig May 2016 #43

Two right wing conservative parties nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #44

No, just one. The Republicans. Yeah, the Dems are more right than their counterparts in Europe, YouDig May 2016 #45

Political science is not your strong point either I see... the DNC is now a RW party nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #47

Pretty strong, I'd say actually. YouDig May 2016 #49

So you are a fan of hte one we all make fun off? If you are what you say, nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #54

Better ask Bush II and Cheney about theirs too. tonyt53 May 2016 #26

In 2006 people were up in arms over that too nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #32

Wrote to Senator Leahy myself. Aerows May 2016 #48

and it took a lawsuit for her to comply with that "little rule" Press Virginia May 2016 #50

Hmm that is because she purposely avoided nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #8

Not purposely, she just didn't know. Didn't read all the minor technical red tape rules. YouDig May 2016 #10

That is not what the report says. nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #12

All 100 pages? I've read enough excerpts and analyses from others who have. YouDig May 2016 #13

Yes all of it. Include footnotes nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #15

No thanks. Others who know what they are talking about already have. Plenty of other YouDig May 2016 #16

Continue to live in the bunker nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #17

It is minor or the FBI would have at least gone to the trouble of talking to her scscholar May 2016 #19

They intend to interview her nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #20

So you're saying she is not very smart? notadmblnd May 2016 #27

Not very tach-savvy. Also had more important things to do than red tape. YouDig May 2016 #28

Smart woman like her- can't figure it out? Or she just refuses to? notadmblnd May 2016 #35

This is not the ballpark you are looking for. Aerows May 2016 #46

here it does mean more procedural, civil things treestar May 2016 #31

Good explanation. COLGATE4 May 2016 #36

It's true Dem2 May 2016 #39

thanks floppyboo May 2016 #53

Zzzzzmog Hillary drove 47 in a 45 !!!!!! Lol@hds uponit7771 May 2016 #51