Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
From link. ...."The White House says it is following both the law and tradition in deciding which events are official, and thus paid for by taxpayers."
All I can say is the law and tradition is a lot like the law and tradition to which Hillary was not convicted for the same things that a normal citizen would have been convicted for.
All I can say is the law and tradition is a lot like the law and tradition to which Hillary was not convicted for the same things that a normal citizen would have been convicted for.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/06/sorry-mark-cuban-hillary-clinton-unquestionably-guilty/The reason that she was not charged, lack of mens rea, isn't selective - any citizen wouldn't be face a trial if the prosecutors did not think they could show a "guilty mind" in relation to their actions on a charge like this.
As for your talk of being her being "convicted", I hope that should you ever have to face a trial yourself, you have jurors who take "innocent until proven guilty" rather more seriously than you do.
We've been critical of Clinton's handling of certain issues in the past. But unlike Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton has experience in actual governance, a record of service and a willingness to delve into real policy.
Resume vs. resume, judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest.
We have no interest in a Republican nominee for whom all principles are negotiable, nor in a Republican Party that is willing to trade away principle for pursuit of electoral victory.
Trump doesn't reflect Republican ideals of the past; we are certain he shouldn't reflect the GOP of the future.
Donald Trump is not qualified to serve as president and does not deserve your vote.
The truth of the matter is no one deserves a vote this election.Today, because of Donald Trump, the Dallas Morning News endorsed Hillary Clinton -- the first time they've endorsed a Democrat in 75 years.
http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/e...ommend-hillary-clinton-for-u.s.-president.ece
And, with the most recent Texas polls showing a dead heat, there's a very real possibility that Trump might be the first Republican in decades to lose Texas.
Let that sink in: Donald Trump, a "Republican," might lose Texas.
Why the quotes around Republican? Ask them:
http://beta.dallasnews.com/opinion/...ublican?_ga=1.154251640.1997348550.1470775380
The truth of the matter is no one deserves a vote this election.
Asked about cyber-security threats, for example, the GOP candidate replied:
“[Y]ou know cyber is becoming so big today. It’s becoming something that a number of years ago, short number of years ago, wasn’t even a word. And now the cyber is so big. And you know you look at what they’re doing with the Internet, how they’re taking and recruiting people through the Internet. And part of it is the psychology because so many people think they’re winning.”
Trump, who apparently has no idea what cyber security refers to, then transitioned to talking about a CNN poll that showed him narrowly leading among likely voters.
Seriously you'd think that running as he is as the security candidate he'd at least know the absolute fundamental basics of a security issue, right?And today: Donald swings at softball questions... and whiffs.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trump-inadvertently-proves-clinton-right-national-security
And remember, boys and girls -- this from the man who 1: claims to already have a plan, and 2: claims to know more about ISIS than the generals.
Maga Mouth is a mega idiot. Nothing new there.
Comey recommended loss of security access. Yes she was negligent and her black outs, that she is admitting to, disqualifies her.Meh.
There are many such opinions pieces online. Mr Payne's take is that "she was obviously guilty! Liar liar pants on fire! Just look, lies!", etc. based entirely on his own opinion of what he's seen and heard.
There's also this one guy, James Comey, who has reviewed all the evidence, published and unpublished, and is actually responsible for making the decision on whether a crime was committed.
The opinions above don't agree.
The opinion of one is actually relevant, and determines whether there will be a trial or not; the opinion of the other is just another voice howling in the cry of the mob.
Can you guess which is which?
That simply isn't true. What is the offence she should have been convicted of, and, if you are referring to the email nonsense, why did that offence not attract the necessity of proving mens rea. Or are you accusing the director of the FBI of corruption in a public office, and if so, what is your evidence?From link. ...."The White House says it is following both the law and tradition in deciding which events are official, and thus paid for by taxpayers."
All I can say is the law and tradition is a lot like the law and tradition to which Hillary was not convicted for the same things that a normal citizen would have been convicted for.
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?