• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

8 News Daily Poll: Should Hillary Clinton be criminally prosecuted?

Fine, keep posting harassing messages, and I will continue to report them.

lol are you sure you are supporting the right candidate? You are beginning to sound like trump.
Especially since you have no facts to back up your claims and when I point that out you call call that harassment!
 
this shows how LOW of IQ's that voters supporting hillary has... america has its lowest IQ's voting ever in history and dropping to a record each and ever day....... just shows how bad hillarys voters are

It would be an interesting study... compare average IQ's of Hillary vs Trump supporters.
 
lol are you sure you are supporting the right candidate? You are beginning to sound like trump.
Especially since you have no facts to back up your claims and when I point that out you call call that harassment!

The problem isn't the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem.
 
The problem isn't the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem.

I like how you are taking this so seriously. My attitude is that this poll is a joke and you haven't given me any reason whatsoever to think otherwise.
 
I like how you are taking this so seriously. My attitude is that this poll is a joke and you haven't given me any reason whatsoever to think otherwise.

Then why do you keep replying to my posts?
 
Then why do you keep replying to my posts?

If you really have a problem with me personally posting on this thread, you wouldn't reply to my posts. At this point its just funny and entertaining :)
 
If you really have a problem with me personally posting on this thread, you wouldn't reply to my posts. At this point its just funny and entertaining :)

Then I think you need to start posting on this thread, if you must, without replying to my posts.
 
this shows how LOW of IQ's that voters supporting hillary has... america has its lowest IQ's voting ever in history and dropping to a record each and ever day....... just shows how bad hillarys voters are

Smarter than ever?

Over the past 100 years, Americans' mean IQ has been on a slow but steady climb. Between 1900 and 2012, it rose nearly 30 points, which means that the average person of 2012 had a higher IQ than 95 percent of the population had in 1900.

Political scientist James Flynn, PhD, of the University of Otago in New Zealand, first discovered those astonishing IQ gains nearly 30 years ago. Since then, the steady rise in IQ scores in the United States and throughout the developed world has been dubbed the "Flynn effect.'

When people had conservative values en mass... American voters were of lower IQ.... the wisdom of widespread public education has fixed this... I have spoken.
 
Then I think you need to start posting on this thread, if you must, without replying to my posts.

It's pretty unanimous on this thread that the poll you posted is meaningless, and three people liked my first post telling you that it is. Yet you still continue to reply to my posts even when you have been proven wrong! I guess you can't let it go yourself so you want me to stop, I'm having way too much fun here.
 
It's pretty unanimous on this thread that the poll you posted is meaningless, and three people liked my first post telling you that it is. Yet you still continue to reply to my posts even when you have been proven wrong! I guess you can't let it go yourself so you want me to stop, I'm having way too much fun here.

I keep badgering you over the head because your arrogant, and your first response to me in this thread was this snide immaturity:

lol I was never on the bernie bandwagon, so you're going to have to be more specific rather than just throwing out baseless accusations.

Unless you mean that I was saying Bernie had no chance. Then, yes I was right. Bernie had no chance!!! He lost, or do you still not believe that???

We have already established 99.9% of this post was utterly irrelevant to the thread, and was a response to my original post (which wasn't meant to be taken seriously in the first place) and an attempt to do nothing more than get a rouse out of me, and that is the only thing you have accomplished in this thread, and is why I will continue to report your posts until you either leave or stop replying to my posts.

And on top of that you do not represent the majority, so stop playing that logical fallacy. You've really reached kind of a ceiling here dude, there's nothing else you can say to me.
 
Its an online poll. It's meaningless.
 
I keep badgering you over the head because your arrogant, and your first response to me in this thread was this snide immaturity:



We have already established 99.9% of this post was utterly irrelevant to the thread, and was a response to my original post (which wasn't meant to be taken seriously in the first place) and an attempt to do nothing more than get a rouse out of me, and that is the only thing you have accomplished in this thread, and is why I will continue to report your posts until you either leave or stop replying to my posts.

And on top of that you do not represent the majority, so stop playing that logical fallacy. You've really reached kind of a ceiling here dude, there's nothing else you can say to me.

Uh yes I do represent the majority of posters on this thread.

Just look at my actual first post why don't you. Stop making things up!

It's an online poll!!!! Don't you know they don't mean anything???

This poll just reinforces that idea that online polling isn't reality.
 
Uh yes I do represent the majority of posters on this thread.

Wrong, YOU REPRESENT YOURSELF.

Just look at my actual first post why don't you. Stop making things up!

That was your first RESPONSE would you actually READ my posts YOU are the one making **** up.

lol I was never on the bernie bandwagon, so you're going to have to be more specific rather than just throwing out baseless accusations.

Unless you mean that I was saying Bernie had no chance. Then, yes I was right. Bernie had no chance!!! He lost, or do you still not believe that???

This is your first RESPONSE after I initiated the conversation (regretfully) by responding to your first post.
 
Last edited:
Its an online poll. It's meaningless.

You are welcome to that view point, I disagree and think that 30,000 people is far from a meaningless metric. Please do not catch the contagion of ModerateGOP's aura of arrogance about your views.
 
Wrong, YOU REPRESENT YOURSELF.

That was your first RESPONSE would you actually READ my posts YOU are the one making **** up.

This is your first RESPONSE after I initiated the conversation (regretfully) by responding to your first post.

lol and your response made no sense! You are grasping at straws here. I am not going to get into a who quoted what thing with you, but just know I was responding to your first post when I said it wasn't an accurate poll and you still don't seem to realize this. So yes that does count as a response. I don't really care if you don't think it is, since you still believe online polling holds any truth. This is too funny. Keep flailing dude. It's fun to watch :)
 
lol and your response made no sense! You are grasping at straws here. I am not going to get into a who quoted what thing with you, but just know I was responding to your first post when I said it wasn't an accurate poll and you still don't seem to realize this. So yes that does count as a response. I don't really care if you don't think it is, since you still believe online polling holds any truth. This is too funny. Keep flailing dude. It's fun to watch :)

Reported for harassment, which you have openly admitted to multiple times (included in this post in bold).
 
You are welcome to that view point, I disagree and think that 30,000 people is far from a meaningless metric. Please do not catch the contagion of ModerateGOP's aura of arrogance about your views.

Are you serious? Any poll that is online is self selected. Thus you will get a majority of respondents that are passionate in their views. For example, Republicans that see an online poll asking whether Hillary should be prosecuted will vote in droves for it. The average joe just ignores it.
 
Reported for harassment, which you have openly admitted to multiple times (included in this post in bold).

you can't back up anything you say with facts so you report me for pointing this out. That's the very definition of flailing! OK Dude. Thanks for telling me though. I'll let you know if any of your crying-to-the-mods-because-you-can't-debate worked.
 
Are you serious? Any poll that is online is self selected. Thus you will get a majority of respondents that are passionate in their views. For example, Republicans that see an online poll asking whether Hillary should be prosecuted will vote in droves for it. The average joe just ignores it.

or they have fun with it and spam the hell out of it!!! This is what I think usually happens.
Yet Abbazorkzog thinks that 30,000 is actually a real number of people voting
 
Ok. So you're saying no one was convicted under 793(f). Show us the prosecutions so we can compare.

No, I did not say that. I said that, contrary to Mr. Comey's misleading claim, several persons have been prosecuted under 793(f) in U.S. courts. He offered no good reason why Mrs. Clinton should not be prosecuted under that statute, after having acknowledged, in effect, that she did everything needed to violate it.

This is a fix, and it has happened before. As I have described in more detail in other posts, something similar happened in 1945 in the Amerasia scandal. There, the Attorney General and other senior Truman administration officials rigged the grand jury proceedings to assure that a State Dept. foreign service officer who had been caught passing secret military documents about U.S. plans in China to a Communist editor connected to foreign agents was no-billed. This officer was at the edges of several interconnected rings in a vast espionage network operated by Moscow, whose dimensions the FBI was only just starting to realize.

Mr. Hoover knew the details of what this man had done, and he was shocked that his superiors covered up for him. A vigorous prosecution that included the people he was involved with would have exposed quite a few of the federal officials involved in this network, some of whom we now know were outright Soviet agents. Because no such prosecution was carried out, they were given about five more years to influence U.S. policy in China against Chiang Kai-Shek's Nationalists and in favor of Mao Tse-Tung's Reds. And during those five years, thanks in part to their help, China became Communist.
 
Last edited:
you can't back up anything you say with facts so you report me for pointing this out. That's the very definition of flailing! OK Dude. Thanks for telling me though. I'll let you know if any of your crying-to-the-mods-because-you-can't-debate worked.

At this point you're not even attacking my argument, you're just relentlessly attacking me and admitting you're having fun. That is literally the textbook definition of a psychopath. Reported.
 
Are you serious? Any poll that is online is self selected. Thus you will get a majority of respondents that are passionate in their views. For example, Republicans that see an online poll asking whether Hillary should be prosecuted will vote in droves for it. The average joe just ignores it.

I think you're over-analyzing. I was just starting this thread to highlight this particular poll. I wasn't ever saying it was 100% accurate, I was just trying to spark a casual debate about it.
 
I think you're over-analyzing. I was just starting this thread to highlight this particular poll. I wasn't ever saying it was 100% accurate, I was just trying to spark a casual debate about it.

There is nothing accurate at all about it. You can load the poll with simple scripts. Its a meaningless poll. Let me let you in on a little secret. The vast majority of Republicans are going to think that Hillary should be indicted this is because:

A. They hate the Clintons and believe they are corrupt.

B. They have a terrible candidate and Hillary being indicted is their only chance of not losing come November.


The vast majority of Democrats do not believe that Hillary should be indicted this is because:

A. They believe that the Clinton's have been the victims of Republican witchhunts for 2 decades now and she hasn't done anything that her predecessors haven't done.

B. They recognize that the next president will appoint 3 SCOTUS justices, thus if you care about progressive causes at all, you would be a ****ing idiot not to vote for her come November.
 
There is nothing accurate at all about it. You can load the poll with simple scripts. Its a meaningless poll. Let me let you in on a little secret. The vast majority of Republicans are going to think that Hillary should be indicted this is because:

A. They hate the Clintons and believe they are corrupt.

B. They have a terrible candidate and Hillary being indicted is their only chance of not losing come November.


The vast majority of Democrats do not believe that Hillary should be indicted this is because:

A. They believe that the Clinton's have been the victims of Republican witchhunts for 2 decades now and she hasn't done anything that her predecessors haven't done.

B. They recognize that the next president will appoint 3 SCOTUS justices, thus if you care about progressive causes at all, you would be a ****ing idiot not to vote for her come November.

Uhhhhhhh, Independents? Libertarians? Greens? (In total about 45% of the country)?
You and Moderate GOP really haven't thought about this at all it would seem.

There is nothing accurate at all about it.

I highly doubt that. I'll accept that it may be more inaccurate than I realize, but jumping all the way over the gas giants and the asteroid belt to assert such extremes isn't a very intelligent tactic to attempt to sway me with.
 
Last edited:
That is not relevant to the question whether violations of section 793(f) have been prosecuted. Mr. Comey's claim that they have not is misleading, and I believe he meant it to be.



Whether a person charged with violating a statute is convicted is not relevant to whether the evidence was strong enough to justify prosecuting him.

What the **** ?

You're claiming that convictions have nothing to do with evidence ?

You cannot possibly be serious.
 
Back
Top Bottom