- Joined
- Jan 10, 2015
- Messages
- 14,012
- Reaction score
- 3,439
- Location
- Southern Oregon
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Most continue to believe likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a lawbreaker, but half of all voters also say a felony indictment shouldn’t stop her campaign for the presidency.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 43% of Likely U.S. Voters think Clinton should immediately stop campaigning if she is charged with a felony in connection with her use of a private e-mail server while secretary of State. Fifty percent (50%), however, think she should continue running until a court determines her guilt or innocence.
Most continue to believe likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a lawbreaker, but half of all voters also say a felony indictment shouldn’t stop her campaign for the presidency.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 43% of Likely U.S. Voters think Clinton should immediately stop campaigning if she is charged with a felony in connection with her use of a private e-mail server while secretary of State. Fifty percent (50%), however, think she should continue running until a court determines her guilt or innocence.
50% Say Clinton Should Keep Running Even If Indicted - Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢
You wouldn't want BS running the country, would you? The best solution is she runs, beats Trump and is then removed from office and replaced by some nonentity.
Yes, it's called innocent until proven guilty. Maybe you've heard of it. It's in the Bill of Rights. As it turns out just because some right wing nut jobs charge her with being a witch that does not in fact mean she has done anything wrong, and until they can prove something in an actual court of law there is no rational reason to punish her for the fact that someone made bull**** accusations against her.
Republicans have been crying wolf about the Clinton's and Hillary specifically for so long that even if you found actual evidence that they did something wrong at this point nobody would believe you anyway or care.
You wouldn't want BS running the country, would you? The best solution is she runs, beats Trump and is then removed from office and replaced by some nonentity.
Yes, it's called innocent until proven guilty. Maybe you've heard of it. It's in the Bill of Rights. As it turns out just because some right wing nut jobs charge her with being a witch that does not in fact mean she has done anything wrong, and until they can prove something in an actual court of law there is no rational reason to punish her for the fact that someone made bull**** accusations against her.
Republicans have been crying wolf about the Clinton's and Hillary specifically for so long that even if you found actual evidence that they did something wrong at this point nobody would believe you anyway or care.
No shock to me.....it's Liberalism First...above all else!
If this were a Republican being investigated, you'd be going ape**** over it! Get real, Hillary is as dirty as they come....she has years of baggage in the lying and crime department.
I just hope they come up with an indictment and nail her scummy ass to the wall!
I say, Give Trump a Chance. Can't be any worse than what we have now...and most likely ...a lot better.
If this were a Republican being investigated, you'd be going ape**** over it! Get real, Hillary is as dirty as they come....she has years of baggage in the lying and crime department.
I just hope they come up with an indictment and nail her scummy ass to the wall!
I say, Give Trump a Chance. Can't be any worse than what we have now...and most likely ...a lot better.
Most continue to believe likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a lawbreaker, but half of all voters also say a felony indictment shouldn’t stop her campaign for the presidency.
If it were a republican being investigated there's actually a high likelihood that the accusations would be true. However I still would not advocate a Presidential candidate drop out just because someone charged them with some bull**** thing. There's a pretty decent chance that most republican candidates could be charged with some form of tax invasion, particularly Trump. I'm not advocating that they drop out unless something is proven. Hell even now there are lawsuits being filed against Trump for all manor of reasons.If this were a Republican being investigated, you'd be going ape**** over it!
Yeah, except if there actually was proof of any of this she would have been charged a long long time ago. If they have no problem charging a war hero like General Patraeus I can assure you they would have happily charged Clinton by now as well. The reality is that Republicans have been desperate to try and indict the Clinton's on something for two decades. The fact that they have zero evidence for their ridiculous claims is the only thing that has stopped them.Get real, Hillary is as dirty as they come....she has years of baggage in the lying and crime department.
I just hope they come up with an indictment and nail her scummy ass to the wall!
I say, Give Trump a Chance. Can't be any worse than what we have now...and most likely ...a lot better.
No shock to me.....it's Liberalism First...above all else!
First, unlike Republicans I have always opposed the Patriot Act and any attempts by the government to expand warrantless searches and unreasonable searches and seizures. However if you have legitimate probable cause to think someone is guilty of a crime to the point where they can be put on a no-fly list then it is only reasonable to prevent them from purchasing a gun until they can be cleared of wrong doing. That is not a violation of anyone's rights that is just common sense. It's fine to have a high bar for probable cause, but if it is met then temporary restrictions are necessary.I will be looking for you to castigate the Democrats who keep whining about the NRA opposing those on the "terrorist watch list" from having their constitutional rights suspended merely on a suspicion.
The GOP cried about Clinton being dishonest from 92 on. Turns out they were right when he was charged with perjury and paid a big settlement.
On top of this, there is a YUGE difference between 50% and 71%So you add the phrase SHOCK POLL, all in caps, to the start of your thread title, and then say it is no shock. Do you even think before you post?
Yes, it's called innocent until proven guilty. Maybe you've heard of it. It's in the Bill of Rights. As it turns out just because some right wing nut jobs charge her with being a witch that does not in fact mean she has done anything wrong, and until they can prove something in an actual court of law there is no rational reason to punish her for the fact that someone made bull**** accusations against her.
Republicans have been crying wolf about the Clinton's and Hillary specifically for so long that even if you found actual evidence that they did something wrong at this point nobody would believe you anyway or care.
Yet zero evidence to actually prove any of that is true. It's called a big lie. It's where you repeat a claim over and over and over and over again for so long that people just assume there's merit to it even though there is none. Save your breath until you actually have evidence to backup any of your bull****.The sheer idiocy of Democrats still willing to vote for Hillary after her long and torrid scandal ridden 30 year history of ethical lapses,
Except neither did any of the last 5 straight secretaries of state including a number of republicans. The reality is Republicans started investigating this Benghazi bull**** over two years ago knowing they'd be running against her in 2016, and desperate to come up with anything they could pin on her. After more than two years of digging the best thing they can come up with is that she wasn't quite as careful with her emails as they would like? That's it?Republicans are not crying wolf. The DOJ has stated she didn't follow protocol.
Not to mention it doesn't take a genius to know she violated NISP, as the information was obtained on an unsecure server. Right now they are investigating intent. I doubt she intended to do this. She's just a complete moron.
Except neither did any of the last 5 straight secretaries of state including a number of republicans. The reality is Republicans started investigating this Benghazi bull**** over two years ago knowing they'd be running against her in 2016, and desperate to come up with anything they could pin on her. After more than two years of digging the best thing they can come up with is that she wasn't quite as careful with her emails as they would like? That's it?
As someone who works for a government contractor that sometimes handles classified info I can tell you first hand that the government's policies on this stuff is ridiculous to the point of making your job next to impossible. The problem here is not Hillary Clinton(as was shown her republican predecessors were guilty of the same behavior). The problem is that government policy on information exchange is not effectively keeping up with rapidly changing technology.
Except neither did any of the last 5 straight secretaries of state including a number of republicans. The reality is Republicans started investigating this Benghazi bull**** over two years ago knowing they'd be running against her in 2016, and desperate to come up with anything they could pin on her. After more than two years of digging the best thing they can come up with is that she wasn't quite as careful with her emails as they would like? That's it?
As someone who works for a government contractor that sometimes handles classified info I can tell you first hand that the government's policies on this stuff is ridiculous to the point of making your job next to impossible. The problem here is not Hillary Clinton(as was shown her republican predecessors were guilty of the same behavior). The problem is that government policy on information exchange is not effectively keeping up with rapidly changing technology.
Except you have no evidence that she did anything that led to classified information actually being leaked. Not following best practices is very different than committing a crime.Guy, I work in a SCIF. We have briefings for a reason. So idiots like Hillary don't expose anything that could potentially be classified.
If you have evidence then Charge her. Get a conviction. Let's see it. The reality is you don't. After over two years of pointless investigations you have no proof she did anything above and beyond what the last 5 secretaries of states have openly admitted to doing themselves. Nothing.But we get it. She could shoot a puppy in the face in the middle of New Orleans and you'd ask for "more evidence". Useless debate.
The NISPOM is clear (you should know that since you claim to have knowledge of how NISP works).
A vast right-wing conspiracy? :lamoYet zero evidence to actually prove any of that is true. It's called a big lie.
It's where you repeat a claim over and over and over and over again for so long that people just assume there's merit to it even though there is none. Save your breath until you actually have evidence to backup any of your bull****.
Meanwhile you look the other way and ignore the reality that Donald Trump is an obvious demagogue who's filed for multiple bankruptcies and been involved in countless shady business deals that have left parters absolutely ****ed.
Video: Let's Count Hillary Clinton's Email Scandal Lies
- She set up the server to facilitate the "convenience" of using just one personal device. False.
- The private, unsecure server "was allowed by the State Department." False.
- Her emails sent to .gov accounts were all saved in the State Department system. False.
- She's been forthcoming and helpful in this routine review. False.
- Any email that "could be connected in any way" to her official duties was turned over. False.
- Her national security-compromising server was set up for Bill Clinton. False.
- She didn't email any classified material to anyone. False. "
- There is no classified material" on the server. Wildly, laughably false -- and yet she's doubling down, nervously laughing off questions about what she'd do if she's indicted.
Guccifer said, per a translator, that Clinton’s server was unprotected, and he had total access to the server that “was like an open orchid on the Internet, as many such servers are.”
Hacker Guccifer: Clinton's Server Unprotected, 'Like an Open Orchid' - Breitbart
And I love how you say this "Benghazi bull sh*@". Do you also say "That 9/11 bullsh*@"? What an un-American thing to say.
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?