The stink just oozes off of them.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/emai...or-staffer-state-department/story?id=38989504
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/emai...or-staffer-state-department/story?id=38989504
Hillar-ious.
- Thread starter Mntneer
- Start date
All the more reason to vote Trump. Yes, it does stink because our government has gotten rotten. If Hillary gets in, all investigations will cease. Trump needs to be required to pledge to hire and fund an investigation to pursue to the investigation is complete and charges brought against all who are using our government as their toy. Enough. I say enough.
It is hilarious watching the libs here defend this clown. If anyone other than a democrat had done this stuff the very same people would would be bashing and mocking them 24/7.
Sounds like we have our fall guy. Wonder how much his net worth is going to increase in the next decade?
Make a list. And don't include Benghazi. We've spent millions of dollars with absolutely nothing to show for it.
I seriously doubt it "pales in comparison" to arms to Iran or singling out a hit on Saddam Hussein under the guise of WMD.
If anyone at my level had done this, it would be bye-bye job. That said, if this weren't related to the investigation I wouldn't be surprised -- you wouldn't believe how slapdash and haphazard management of e-mail servers is around here. Plus, our e-mail servers were hacked in the fall of 2014 and a lot of stuff was wiped out during the rebuild.
Last edited:
You do remember Saddam threatening to kill George H.W. Bush, right? It's only human nature to go after someone that threatens your dad. Then coincidentally we went to war with a nation because we thought they had WMDs but never found any. And we had troops specifically hunt Saddam down. We've never done that before with the exception of Hitler.
It can't really be proven but there is a lot of evidence to support the claim. It's totally different than the birther claim.
That is sorta true, but very misleading. Was US the only country that believed Saddam had WMD? The correct answer would be, all but those who had an economic interest in Iraq thought the WMDs were in place. Was prior Administration of Bill Clinton in agreement with the analysis? YES! Was US intel committee in agreement of the existence? YES! Was vast majority of US citizens in favor of removing Saddam? YES!
Now, is it your desire to deflect from today to rehash Iraq War?
You realize that Hiliary made a speech about Iran having WMD and must be removed? Obama voted present. We know which of the two actually has balls!
I'm not attempting to defend Hillary in this thread. My involvement started when someone made the claim that the corruption of the last 8 years is far worse than anything else in history. I then challenged that poster to make a list, which he hasn't done, and reminded everyone of the corruption of previous Republican Administrations, which were arguably the most corrupt in history.
I didn't say it is far worse I said that what has come before it almost pales by comparison.
You want a list:
ACA
Fast & Furious
IRS
Bengazi aftermath
Disappearing Emails
Handling of FOIA's
Seizing phone records of Journalists
The VA
The past 8 years have been anything but "Transparent"
The most corrupt ever? Each admin has it's own Benghazi, Iran contra, Bay of Pigs, Vietnam. I would ask you to qualify your criteria. Since you say that Bush lied, he didn't but he was at the helm when the intelligence community came up snake eyes. What about Johnson continuing to escalate the Vietnam war where many more died there? What about JFK completely swallowing his testicles and leaving all those people to die in the Bay of Pigs? Nixon had Watergate, Carter was just plain inept. FDR started us down the socialistic road with his non economic policies and eventually the only thing that got the economy going was wW2. It seems that every admin has problems, is one more corrupt than the other, maybe, but only varying degrees.