The democratic/socialist/communist Debate

Discussion in 'Community Forum' started by EdLongshanks, Oct 13, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GWP

    GWP 6 pointer

    228
    10
    Feb 22, 2007
    State of Embarrassment
    I understand it's hard to admit you've been duped, but that's exactly what the Reps admitted last week. They have been saying one thing and doing something else. We all now know that they have nothing on her. Lets move along.
     
  2. Happy Camper

    Happy Camper 6 pointer

    167
    6
    Oct 26, 2013
    First of all, do you have actual evidence she committed a crime? If you do, you can get a warrent. If you take the opinion of the talking heads on Faux News, their lawyer scholers, then you really don't have any proof, just a biased opinion.

    I don't have a clue if the woman committed any crimes or not. If I just believe she did, then I have nothing. I can believe all day that pigs can fly, but until I see one take off, it's just a belief.

    Your assessment of her being "protected" holds about as much water as an onion sack. She has the entire right after her and looking to take her down. At the first hint of criminal behavior their machine has the money and backing to see her put away for a very long time. The Koch brothers alone hate her so much they would give all their billions to see her charged with any crime. No, your protection argument doesn't hold water, no matter what you want to believe.

    Emails, Benghazi, Faux News talking heads and opinions can't criminally charge her . If any ever do find any evidence on her she will go down faster than Santa Claus down a chimney as a gift for all Republicans.

    I could care less about the witch hunt, but if she did do something criminal, jail her! But I won't say she's a criminal with no proof,no charges, and try to hide behind the reason she isn't charged is because she is "protected".
     
  3. 120+

    120+ 12 pointer

    Any good info they have on her will be held until the time is right. They will not give it all away now and give her time to recover from it. The info on this or that will trickle out to continue to cast doubt on her credibility. Then, when the election ramps up and it's needed they will come at her with both barrels.

    Did I mention she's a bitch?
     
  4. EC

    EC 12 pointer

    9,887
    6,763
    Jul 13, 2003
    Louisville, KY.
    I can tell you one thing...if you gave the feds scrubbed servers, you'd be in jail right now for attempting to destroy evidence.
     
  5. Happy Camper

    Happy Camper 6 pointer

    167
    6
    Oct 26, 2013
    I don't know her, nor do I support her, so I cannot attest to her character, nor can I judge her solely on the heresay of those that do, mainly cable news and talk radio. I do not agree with your opinion that they are waiting to unleash both barrels. They want her out bad, and now. If they had anything now, she would already be toast. Just my opinion though.
     
  6. Happy Camper

    Happy Camper 6 pointer

    167
    6
    Oct 26, 2013
  7. EdLongshanks

    EdLongshanks 12 pointer

    15,190
    13,078
    Nov 16, 2013
    Northern Kentucky
  8. 120+

    120+ 12 pointer

    In my opinion, they will not release all they have now giving her ample time to refute. I think they will wait and try to tear her down when it counts. All they are doing now is giving some info to see if another Dim-ocrat can overtake her.

    Of course I could be completely wrong. I hate politics so I suck at it.
     
  9. corndogggy

    corndogggy 12 pointer

    6,875
    0
    Jul 20, 2005
    Without frantically searching Google, can anybody here name even one single high profile politician who went to jail for some shady stuff? And you really think that's proof that no shady stuff happens? That's not how this country operates. Over half of them would be rotting in prison for insider trading alone.
     
  10. Brown Dogs Matter

    Brown Dogs Matter 12 pointer

    2,360
    830
    Jun 7, 2004
    Louisville, KY.

    First, you haven't a clue.

    Second, you're spouting off sovereign citizen nonsense.

    Third, can you cite some case law concerning the modern application of "common law" as it relates to private persons making arrests?

    Fourth, please advise the statutes that allow local law enforcement to make arrests for federal crimes.

    Fifth, see #1.
     
  11. Happy Camper

    Happy Camper 6 pointer

    167
    6
    Oct 26, 2013
    Thank you Mr. Correctional Officer for straightening me out. Something tells me I'm not the only clueless one, see #1.
     
  12. Happy Camper

    Happy Camper 6 pointer

    167
    6
    Oct 26, 2013
    I don't think I inferred on any post that shady stuff doesn't go on.....did I?
     
  13. EdLongshanks

    EdLongshanks 12 pointer

    15,190
    13,078
    Nov 16, 2013
    Northern Kentucky
    You explicitly stated that the lack of an indictment is a result of no criminal activity or evidence of criminal activity.
     
  14. Happy Camper

    Happy Camper 6 pointer

    167
    6
    Oct 26, 2013
    Go ahead and chase your own tail around the room on that one Ed. I said show some evidence and charge her. I also stated later that it was my opinion that if they had anything on her they would show the cards now. I explicitly stated a suggestion to charge her or shut up about it, and I explicitly voiced an opinion of what I thought. Try spinning and playing word games with others, that dog don't hunt with me.
     
  15. EC

    EC 12 pointer

    9,887
    6,763
    Jul 13, 2003
    Louisville, KY.
    You think there's a difference? Bush said Clinton was a brother from another mother. But please...you rely on wikipedia? I could modify it to say aliens had dinner with him.

    You'd be in jail had you done it. For the privileged class, the laws don't apply.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page