- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,256
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The United States has reached a crossing the Rubicon moment: either Hillary Clinton is indicted for knowingly violating statutes regarding State Department security, or the rule of law and the Republic are dead. This is a binary moment: we either let Hillary evade the laws that were established to protect the security of the nation and confess there is no rule of law now for the Oligarchy, or the agencies tasked with defending the nation indict her.
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.
Discussion?
Article is here.
I doubt she will be indicted.
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.
Discussion?
Article is here.
Me as well, but there's still always that chance, if it happens soon, it could be Trump vs. Sanders as her standing among democrats will tank, and that will sure be interesting.
Light vs. Dark, the ultimate showdown.
Me as well, but there's still always that chance, if it happens soon, it could be Trump vs. Sanders as her standing among democrats will tank, and that will sure be interesting.
Light vs. Dark, the ultimate showdown.
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.
Discussion?
Article is here.
We all know in a week or two..............
The FBI well hold a press conference and say.........
WE could not find any evidence of wrong doing................... not that HRC is innocent................ but just they could not find any........
Case closed for the general public..........but to live on in RW circles for a couple of generations
Lol...
Yea, a elitist Politician not being held to the same standards as your average everyday American is exactly what the American people want right now. :roll:
She would almost be better off if she were indicted.
Too late. The rule of law and the republic died with Bush vs. Gore in 2000.
"Elitist" means best and brightest...............what's wrong with that?
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.
Discussion?
Article is here.
"Elitist" means best and brightest...............what's wrong with that?
Dan,first thing, its an "editorial" not an article and a WND "editorial" that. And did you notice that your WND “editorial” waxed poetically for 6 paragraphs before even mentioning Hillary. Now, why is “not indicted” means “she didn’t break the law” automatically ruled out? Methinks you’ve been reading too many conservative headlines. And of course your “editorial” requires you to “just know” she broke the law. it reminds me of your Glass Steagall posts. you had an a version of reality that just wasn't supported by the facts. the first we need to do is to find out what version of “reality” you believe. Are you a conservative who believes….
It was illegal to even have a private server
It’s a crime to have emails that weren’t classified when they were sent
She told an aid to strip off the “TOP SECRET” from email (this is the back up narrative for the above narrative)
The .gov server is secure. (this is key to believing the above back up narrative)
Deleting non work related emails is a crime
The only smart thing from conservatives with the email narratives is that you guys are getting your excuses ready ahead of time. No more fumbling for answers when your version of reality is shattered. No more cutting and running from threads anymore like you did with the facts about Glass Steagall. And just like your Glass Steagall posts, actual facts were simply ignored that contradicted your narrative.
Dan, until you hold the conservative media accountable for lying to you, they’re not going to stop
"Elite" means best and brightest.
"Elitist" means the belief that certain roles, responsibilities, rights and privileges should be reserved only for the best and brightest.
And in the strictest sense I don't really know that there's anything necessarially "wrong" with that, but neither am I sure that there's anything necessarially "right" with that.
I would think that it would be contingent upon what we define as "elite".
And I'm not sure that I'd consider a carpet-bagging felon who rose to power pretty much exclusively on the true greatness of her husband and the "cult of personality" to be "elite" to the degree that I'd want to reserve any roles, responsibilities, rights or privileges to her or those like her.
Nothing unless you're a hack who thinks the rule of law should only apply to the GOP and its supporters.
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.
Discussion?
Article is here.
I think the article's assertion that the rule of law and the Republic are "dead" if Hillary isn't indicted is a tad overblown.
1. The citizenry does not actually know for a fact whether or not Hillary is guilty; the FBI is the body with access to that information, and they are investigating.
2. Conscientious FBI agents could always leak the information, or allow it to fall into, say, Anonymous's hands.
3. Apparently, in an article I don't have a link to but saw in a couple of threads on DP, Hillary is only one of many SoS's that have done such things with classified information. She's the only one a fuss was made over.
4. It bears keeping in mind that the only way this even came up is through 7 bogus investigations into Benghazi, which multiple GOPers have since admitted were pure political theatre designed to smear her. So on this point, it's kind of like Bill's situation: He lied under oath, and that is a crime. But I simply cannot put out of my mind the fact that the only reason he was in a position to lie under oath is that the GOP spent something like 30 million bucks to investigate a blowjob; a politician cheating on a spouse is simply not the kind of thing that an official investigation should be about.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?