• 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?

FluffyNinja said:
Okay great. So you're pretty confident that he's never once lied since he's been involved in politics? Or....is it likely that he probably has, but he never got caught....or no one cared because up until his recent run for president virtually no one outside of national political circles even knew who he was?
Click to expand...

Can you find any person who has never lied?
 
ModerateGOP said:
lol I was never on the bernie bandwagon,
Click to expand...

I figured that out many, many months ago.

so you're going to have to be more specific
Click to expand...

Done

rather than just throwing out baseless accusations.
Click to expand...

Baiting reported.

Unless you mean that I was saying Bernie had no chance
Click to expand...

Math.

Then, yes
Click to expand...

Thank you for confirming my argument. Math doesn't lie. So stop contradicting yourself, tuck your tail between your legs and GTFO.
 
Last edited:
I despise Clinton (and Trump).

But I could care less if 100% want her prosecuted.

Virtually no one (if any one) who answered that poll has seen ALL of the evidence against her.

And until they do - what they think about the case means NOTHING.


The American legal system is NOT based on public opinion...thank goodness.

The FBI says no charges should be laid...and that is good enough for me.

The ignorant masses can cry about it all they want - she ain't getting charged with this.


If you hate her so much, then do not vote for her in November.

But bitching about something that cannot be changed is pointless.

But the ignorant masses frequently precipitate in pointless political endeavors - so this is no surprise.
 
reinoe said:
While I understand your sentiment, the problem is that Hillary is actually incompetent. She's incompetent in a gross fashion. And Reupublican primary voters are no more ignorant than anyone else. There's a genuine frustration with the status quo in this country. If Hilary had to contend with 17 candidates then she definitely wouldn't have won and it's likely Sanders would be the Dem nominee.
Click to expand...

The status quo for Republicans is that their leaders have failed to deliver on what was promised for election cycle after election cycle after election cycle. In the absence of any real leadership, some rank and file have glommed onto any alternative.

Trump's ideology is no more coherent the the GOP's status quo. The packaging and advertising are different...New and Improved...but the product inside the box is still broken.
 
The Vincer said:
Except I thought Tricky Dick waited until he was pres before engaging in criminal activity?
Click to expand...

That is not quite clear. It was that that zapped him, but the probability that he had been corrupt was relatively high long before he was President. And Watergate was already simmering, when he was reelected, I think.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
I
Math.

Thank you for confirming my argument. Math doesn't lie. So stop contradicting yourself, tuck your tail between your legs and GTFO.
Click to expand...

So you are reporting me for not being for Bernie Sanders either lolz. That's a new one but feel free to cry to the mods if you want.


#Nevertrump; #NeverHillary; Everyone Sucks 2016; FU 2016 - sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FluffyNinja said:
Find a politician who doesn't lie and you'll likely no longer be an atheist.
Click to expand...

If their mouths are moving, they are lying. Few are as proud of it or as consistent about it as she is.
 
d0gbreath said:
The stupid liberals did not put Trump up as their front runner.
Click to expand...

He won that position fair and square, that's how a democratic election works. Or didn't that occur to you?
 
ModerateGOP said:
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.
Click to expand...

Beat me to it.

Didn't think anyone still took online polls seriously.

I guess some people do.

Funny.
 
Cephus said:
He won that position fair and square, that's how a democratic election works. Or didn't that occur to you?
Click to expand...

I didn't say that it wasn't fair and square. You called liberals stupid. I was throwing that back on you because y'all nominated Trump fair and square.
 
Cephus said:
Um... the election is in November. Nobody has voted for anyone yet.
Click to expand...

Yes of course no one voted for him as the nominee, what was I thinking.
 
d0gbreath said:
I didn't say that it wasn't fair and square. You called liberals stupid. I was throwing that back on you because y'all nominated Trump fair and square.
Click to expand...

Yes I did. I did not call Republicans smart, did I? Please quote where I said that.
 
Cephus said:
He won that position fair and square, that's how a democratic election works. Or didn't that occur to you?
Click to expand...

And he did so on a fraction of the budget, and drew in millions that don't typically vote in primaries.

Meanwhile the smear campaign against him is probably in the 10s of millions so far, and likely to be close to half a billion by the time its done.

I could tolerate more of the things said against trump if they were fact based and not just the chants of "racist, fascist, XENOPHOBE". The democrats are at least right to be afraid of trump, even if the polls show he's behind, remember, the polls, the odds, and the media were all against brexit. (Thats not to say that I'm a trump fanboy, and I don't really have a dog in the fight... but my god, hilary clinton is a scary prospect)
 
joG said:
The Democrats don't want BS to be their candidate and the Administration doesn't want to cross the President at this point.
Click to expand...

If by "the Administration" you mean the Attorney General or the FBI Director, neither of them can cross the President and still hold their positions. They are both members of the Executive Branch and therefore responsible to him. One thing Mr. Comey might have done is lay out the strong case against Mrs. Clinton as he did--but then, instead of claiming she should not be prosecuted, say he was resigning, because in spite of his conclusion that she should be prosecuted, his superiors had made clear to him they would not follow through on any recommendation to prosecute her he might make. And I strongly suspect that's what he was told.

If Comey had recommended Clinton be prosecuted for violating section 793[f]--which he in effect acknowledged she did--nothing was to prevent Justice Dept. prosecutors, at the direction of Ms. Lynch, from fixing the thing anyway. One way they might have done that was to convene a grand jury to provide the illusion they were taking action, but then present that grand jury only such incomplete and diluted evidence of her guilt, and do it as if they were defending her instead of prosecuting her, as to guarantee she would be no-billed. And Comey would have been made to look like a relatively minor official who had tried on his own, by misusing the law, to determine the outcome of a presidential election.
 
Last edited:
Paperview said:
Chaffetz: Did Hillary Clinton break the law?

Comey: My judgment is that she did not.
Click to expand...

And my judgment is that that answer was less than honest. He had just acknowledged a number of actions by her which together more than qualified as a violation of section 793(f). It's as if Comey had related how a Mr. Jones had leaped out from behind a shrub in front of a pedestrian one evening, pointed a loaded gun at his head, threatened to kill him if he did not turn over his wallet, any other cash in his pockets, and his expensive wristwatch, and when the victim produced those items, had grabbed them and run away; but had then said that in his judgment, Jones had not broken any law.
 
matchlight said:
And my judgment is that that answer was less than honest.
Click to expand...
well, your judgement doesn't amount to diddlysquat.
He had just acknowledged a number of actions by her which together more than qualified as a violation of section 793(f).
Click to expand...
No. and not one person in 100 years was ever convicted of that statute for gross negligence ...or to put it in his words:

"No reasonable prosecutor would bring the second case in 100 years focused on gross negligence," Comey said.

"I know the Department of Justice, I know no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case. I know a lot of my former friends are out there saying they would. I wonder where they were in the last 40 years, because I'd like to see the cases they brought on gross negligence. Nobody would, nobody did."

Did the other FBI agents who were working on the case agree with him? Yes, unanimously. I trust their judgement. Not yours.

It's as if Comey had related how a Mr. Jones had leaped out from behind a shrub in front of a pedestrian one evening, pointed a loaded gun at his head, threatened to kill him if he did not turn over his wallet, any other cash in his pockets, and his expensive wristwatch, and when the victim produced those items, had grabbed them and run away; but had then said that in his judgment, Jones had not broken any law.
Click to expand...
conservatives really suck at metaphors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom