2016 Postmortem

SpareribSP

(325 posts)

52. People are just frustrated because it means there were obviously crimes committed here

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 02:21 PM

Jun 2016

but we probably won't learn about them until after the convention. If there were no crimes, why would he be given immunity and plead the fifth?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton IT aide to plead Fifth in email case [View all] Jester Messiah Jun 2016 OP

Have we just identified the fall guy? n/t Orsino Jun 2016 #1

Nope. He is not responsible for the CONTENT. IdaBriggs Jun 2016 #2

I saw a theory that Hillary was setting him up for that... Jester Messiah Jun 2016 #3

FBI wouldn't have given him immunity.... HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #4

Immunity and pleading the Fifth don't go together, either. n/t Orsino Jun 2016 #5

There's different types of immunity. HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #7

He plead the 5th in the civil case brought by Judicial Watch. Jester Messiah Jun 2016 #10

Civil case, not criminal nadinbrzezinski Jun 2016 #28

Using protections guaranteed to every citizen by the Constitution is not "shady" Tarc Jun 2016 #6

Yes. Even guilty parties have constitutional rights. HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #9

No, surely not. Jester Messiah Jun 2016 #11

Shady. Curious. Comical. Expected. It's all four. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2016 #13

It's funny to see Sanders supporters, the alleged champions of free speech and equality Tarc Jun 2016 #14

Not quite sure what this has to do with free speech and equality. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2016 #16

I am not surprised Tarc Jun 2016 #17

LOL I wouldn't expect you to be. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2016 #24

If Hillary has nothing to hide... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #18

If Bernie has nothing to hide Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #20

A tax return is EXTREMELY TRIVIAL... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #22

If it's trivial, then why the secrecy? Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #39

Nothing nefarious about it??? Herman4747 Jun 2016 #40

Listen to yourself Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #43

Well, then... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #48

What a ridiculous demand Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #54

CONSIDER YOUR ARGUMENT ANNIHILATED... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #55

Oh, TIFFANY said there's a tax return? Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #56

Evidently, you overlooked this link: Herman4747 Jun 2016 #61

Those are his 2014 tax returns. nt. Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #62

Not surprising, given that the article was from April. Herman4747 Jun 2016 #63

This, from an article published a day later... Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #64

Hillary could simply release all her speech transcripts & destroy... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #65

Actually I don't care about Bernie's taxes Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #66

And you shouldn't care about Bernie's taxes!! This we do agree upon. Herman4747 Jun 2016 #67

At what point do we go into a different realm? Nonhlanhla Jun 2016 #68

Thank you for proving my point Tarc Jun 2016 #25

Hillary has pretty much EVERYTHING to hide. Optimism Jun 2016 #53

I guess we've moved away from "Cooperating fully with the investigation." Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #26

As well they should Tarc Jun 2016 #27

Because goevrnment is only accountable to citizens when they pass a partisan litmus test. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #29

You are free to get in bed with Judicial Watch if you like Tarc Jun 2016 #30

I refuse to get in bed with the corrupt. And it's not JW you're kicking at, it's the OIG. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #32

Suit yourself Tarc Jun 2016 #34

You abandon facts as quickly as Hillary abandoned the law. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #36

Emailgate is a tempest in a teapot that will not deliver the nomination to Bernie Tarc Jun 2016 #41

The OIG begs to differ. Trump is riding an anti-establishment wave. A Hillary nomination Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #42

Obviously the Democratic voters feel differently Tarc Jun 2016 #44

As long as only Democrats are allowed to vote in November you should be safe. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #45

We'll have the vast majority of the Bernie voters too Tarc Jun 2016 #46

Arrogance, condescension, secretive, dismissive and untrustworthy Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #47

What's he hiding? Octafish Jun 2016 #8

It appears... HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #12

You're the confusing the JudicialWatch civil case w the FBI investigation emulatorloo Jun 2016 #51

After he invoked the 5th before congress and after immunity morningfog Jun 2016 #59

Please note: This relates to the CIVIL case, not the FBI's CRIMINAL investigation. Fawke Em Jun 2016 #15

We know he spoke to them pursuant to immunity. morningfog Jun 2016 #60

He may want to protect his immunity in the FBI investigation... TCJ70 Jun 2016 #19

Again? randome Jun 2016 #21

Fifth of what Bourbon? Skink Jun 2016 #23

self-proclaimed "progressives" throw the Fifth Amendment under the bus onenote Jun 2016 #31

It's not that we think Pagliano's immunity is unacceptable. lagomorph777 Jun 2016 #38

I'm responding to suggestions that his taking the Fifth in a civil case against the State Dept onenote Jun 2016 #49

"shady" is sort of a vague term, lagomorph777 Jun 2016 #50

People are just frustrated because it means there were obviously crimes committed here SpareribSP Jun 2016 #52

No it doesn't onenote Jun 2016 #57

You are right SpareribSP Jun 2016 #58

I expected that. Others will as well. Perhaps even HRC. EndElectoral Jun 2016 #33

If Hillary pleads the Fifth, that will be devastating. She's stated she would talk to anyone anytime BillZBubb Jun 2016 #37

Smart move by Pagliano's attorneys. He's got criminal immunity from the FBI. That's all he needs. BillZBubb Jun 2016 #35