Hillary Hates Taxes and other Hillaryous things

[Adam]

That about sums up the election

[Jason]

[Tank]

http://nypost.com/2016/07/12/fbi-agents-signed-nda-for-matters-involving-hillarys-emails/

[Jason]

17 minutes ago, Tank said:

http://nypost.com/2016/07/12/fbi-agents-signed-nda-for-matters-involving-hillarys-emails/

Well duh, if more truth got out it may hurt her campaign. There is no way in hell Lynch and Obama will hold her accountable.

[nate]

Is that even news?  Of course they had to sign a NDA.

[Tank]

2 hours ago, nate said:

Is that even news?  Of course they had to sign a NDA.

I thought it was newsworthy in that according to the article, it's not standard practice.

[arch stanton]

46 minutes ago, Tank said:

I thought it was newsworthy in that according to the article, it's not standard practice.

How often are they asked to investigate a presumptive nominee for president for work done at cabinet secretary level? 

[Jay]

She wasn't the presumptive nominee when the investigation started.

[arch stanton]

Not on paper

[Tank]

2 hours ago, arch stanton said:

How often are they asked to investigate a presumptive nominee for president for work done at cabinet secretary level? 

fortunately, not very often. i can see valid reasons for keeping things quiet, but i can also see how it adds another level to how much the rules just don't see to apply equally to her.

[arch stanton]

1 hour ago, Tank said:

fortunately, not very often. i can see valid reasons for keeping things quiet, but i can also see how it adds another level to how much the rules just don't see to apply equally to her.

You might be viewing this a little one-sided. Either side or anyone with any agenda could pretty easily manipulate or isolate bits of the investigation for their own purposes. There's no chance they let info this valuable be exploited by mere FBI agents.

[nate]

When do FBI Agents ever give details about investigations to the public?  Especially one that involves sensitive government data?

[Tank]

9 hours ago, arch stanton said:

You might be viewing this a little one-sided. Either side or anyone with any agenda could pretty easily manipulate or isolate bits of the investigation for their own purposes. There's no chance they let info this valuable be exploited by mere FBI agents.

no doubt i've got some bias here because i can't stand her or the way she does business, but then here's what nate posted:

5 hours ago, nate said:

When do FBI Agents ever give details about investigations to the public?  Especially one that involves sensitive government data?

that's a valid point, nate.

[fan_since79]

14 hours ago, Jay said:

She wasn't the presumptive nominee when the investigation started.

Her 602 Superdelegates beg to differ.

This was a rigged process from the start. Bernie has valid reasons to complain.

 

[red321]

2 hours ago, fan_since79 said:

Her 602 Superdelegates beg to differ.

This was a rigged process from the start. Bernie has valid reasons to complain.

 

laugh...no he doesn't. He lost the vote and pledged delegate count by a sizable margin.

Superdelegates go where the voters go...see Obama vs. Clinton 8 years ago.

Sanders actually received more pledged delegates percentage wise as compared to actual received votes...especially when you take into account registered Democrats.

Clinton has had decades of established relationships with Democrats. She worked as a party member, raised money for the party, helped others get elected. 

Sanders joined the party a year ago and had no previous commitment to building the party. I hope he stays in the party, I hope he works to grow the party...but he has no valid complaints.

 

[Jay]

19 hours ago, arch stanton said:

Not on paper

When people are wrong they should just acknowledge it and move on.

 

[Jay]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-gfk-poll-email-investigation-hurt-clintons-image-075954228--election.html

Poll: Email investigation has hurt Clinton's image

The poll found that 56 percent of Americans said they think the Democratic presidential candidate broke the law, including 39 percent who think she did so intentionally and 17 percent who think she did so unintentionally.

In addition, 36 percent think Clinton used bad judgment but did not do anything illegal. And only 6 percent think Clinton did nothing wrong at all.

-----

I didn't realize she had an image.

Anyway who are the 6 percent?

[arch stanton]

1 hour ago, Jay said:

When people are wrong they should just acknowledge it and move on.

 

At no time in the past 2 years has anyone not realistically presumed her to be the nominee. 

[NrM]

 

Hillary Clinton's TERRIBLE Pokemon Go Joke

This is Hillary Clinton trying to be "hip" with the kids by joking about "Pokemon Go" Trump had a HILARIOUS response HERE->http://bit.ly/29YKtvT

Posted by SubjectPolitics on Friday, July 15, 2016

 

[Tank]

2 hours ago, Jay said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-gfk-poll-email-investigation-hurt-clintons-image-075954228--election.html

Poll: Email investigation has hurt Clinton's image

The poll found that 56 percent of Americans said they think the Democratic presidential candidate broke the law, including 39 percent who think she did so intentionally and 17 percent who think she did so unintentionally.

In addition, 36 percent think Clinton used bad judgment but did not do anything illegal. And only 6 percent think Clinton did nothing wrong at all.

-----

I didn't realize she had an image.

Anyway who are the 6 percent?

The 6% are university SJWs.

[InsideThePark]

Nah, the SJWs are still with Bernie. They hate Hillary as much as anyone. The 6% are probably the deluded feminists.

[red321]

Her joke was definitely awful...though the campaign has done something pretty interesting...they've created....whatever the fuck it's called...kiosk...or location...and they setup shops to register people to vote, talk to folks about positions, hand out swag and literature. Guess it beats going door to door, or calling folks on the phone...have them come to you. If you can get them to take their eyes off the phone for a few minutes I guess it's a decent idea.

 

Though at some point ISIS will steal the idea...and it will become Benghazi II...pokemon boogaloo

[Jay]

3 hours ago, arch stanton said:

At no time in the past 2 years has anyone not realistically presumed her to be the nominee. 

Clinton didn't even announce her candidacy until April 2015.

Since you used the term, "presumptive nominee"... that term is used to describe a candidate who has acquired sufficient delegates, through the primary process, to become the nominee of his or her party.

[arch stanton]

7 minutes ago, Jay said:

Clinton didn't even announce her candidacy until April 2015.

Since you used the term, "presumptive nominee"... that term is used to describe a candidate who has acquired sufficient delegates, through the primary process, to become the nominee of his or her party.

I used presumptive because assumptive sounds like something one of my Filipino in-laws would say but for anyone not being obtuse she's been a foregone conclusion really since 2012. 

[Jay]

6 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

I used presumptive because assumptive sounds like something one of my Filipino in-laws would say but for anyone not being obtuse she's been a foregone conclusion really since 2012. 

so NDA's for the FBI agents then...?