This corruption should be of concern:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...a-probes-justice-department-double-standards/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...a-probes-justice-department-double-standards/
Regardless Of Political Affiliation
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Regardless of political affiliation this should infuriate everyone.
https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/05/20/collusion-against-trump-timeline/
https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/05/20/collusion-against-trump-timeline/
Always amazing how upset everyone is over the Clinton email scandal, but not the Bush email scandal. How can you have an article about disparate treatment of the email scandal and not discuss the conservatives' email scandal that set the precedent for this one?
What amazes me is your willingness to place your party loyalty over the well being of the country, over your own well being. This level of corruption is one small step away from tyranny, a police state. And yet you defend it because it happens under the watchful eye of your party. This should supersede any party affiliation. You should be howling from the rooftops, joining all citizens who cherish liberty. It amazes me that you don’t.
I would lower your expectations for sys.
Why are you deflecting by bringing up Bush? This thing was settled 9 years ago, when most of the emails were found. What's sad is that Clinton was too stupid and corrupt to learn from the previous White House's stupidity.
Hmm, the Logan Act.
So does this mean that John Kerry should be prosecuted foe meeting with Iran to hold together Obama's treaty?
As you post from the National Review and a wingnut. Your last 400 consecutive posts have been from right wing/libertarian rags and I'm the partisan. I didn't defend Hillary. Is it fair to say that your'e defending Bush's ENTIRE WHITE HOUSE email system that ran THROUGH A PRIVATE SERVER at the RNC? And then DISAPPEARED? That's not a threat to all that stuff -- only when Hillary does.
It amazes me that your continual passive aggression continues. You're the most entrenched partisan on the board, and you call now for the well being of the country.
your tacking is silly
engaging in any discourse surrounding your gaslighting only serves your purpose
Trump is the lawfully elected president of the united states
consequently your team decided on
a nuclear course of action to stem the will of the people
and now it’s game on
make no mistake when your team put mueller in the game there’s no more managing the optic for the sake of our country
this clinton hegemonic assault on democracy
will lead to anything but russian collusion
it will be vindication for patriots that believe in the values our forefathers spilled their blood for
we aren’t tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists anymore
and we get to thank cank instigating for the makeover
What does Bush have to do with this? Most of those emails were recovered and the Obama White House closed the matter. Quit DEFLECTING.
Dude, do you ever stop and think about the nonsense you post? Bitch slapping the narrative that dribbles out of your partisan sippy cup is way too easy these days. You don't even present a decent challenge. It's actually kind of sad.
King Whataboutery, I'll let Politifact slap you around this morning for starters. After watching you Bambi on Ice this link, maybe we can compare the Bush email thing to Hillary's emails being found on the unsecured laptop of a convicted pedophile...
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...ia-reaction-george-w-bushs-email-controversy/
Rather than attack the messenger (National Review and Sharyl Attkison) you would be better served to analyze the message. This is not so much about the Clinton e-mail scandal (although that is bad enough), but rather the completely corrupt manner in which it has been handled by our government watchdogs. It astounds me that you can't smell the stench. It astounds me that you can pardon it in such a blithe manner, absolving it of evil since people on the other team have done it too.
I am relatively new to this board, had not discovered it until well past Bush's administration. I have posted several times on this board my disgust with Bush and his "had to kill capitalism in order to save it" policies. I doubt there is another person on this board who has been as critical of Trump as I have been (my criticisms of him have regarded substantial misgivings, such as his economic policies and his handing over foreign policy to the war mongering neocons, as opposed to the Russia, Russia mantra you continually harp upon). It is ludicrous for you to accuse me of defending anything related to Bush (or Trump). Your accusations may be relevant to some others on this board, but they are totally inappropriate as regard me.
The handling of the Hillary scandal should be deeply troubling to all Americans. Should Trump stack the DOJ and FBI with his partisans and spy on the Democrats? Of course not! But your intentional deflection is setting up just such a scenario. Do you not agree that Trump is just clever enough, just wicked enough to assume if the Democrats can do it so can he? Would that not concern you? It should! If he turns the tables on your team and spies on it you have no one to blame but yourself. You have been repeatedly warned. But you choose to dismiss the warnings because they come from "wingnuts."
One last thing: I proudly accept I am the most entrenched partisan on this board, partisan in defense of liberty.
Ponca Dan, I admire your attempt at genuine communication with syskatine. You show great patience. I hope you had kids.
The problem with syskatine is that he's just a tube fed Democrat. It isn't about policy. It isn't about personal values. It isn't about right and wrong. For him, the Party is the top of the hierchy. Every thought regarding anything remotely political comes from the Party. If the Party started shilling for ownership of machine guns by certified crazy people today, he'd be parroting it tomorrow.
He's been conditioned to respond to anything related to Hillary's emails with "WELL, BUSH!" The fact that your discussion is actually about the DOJ handling of Hillary's email "matter" and not the email "matter" itself is foreign to him. He doesn't have any talking points to address it so he defaults to the last available information.
He wasn't always like this. Trump's election literally fried whatever smidgen of independent thought he had left.
He was always like this. His only response to criticism of Obama for 8 years, was to bring up Bush.
Also you would probably get better responses if you would post your personal conclusions with links to factual evidence instead 5000 word opinion pieces that presume what you are concluding.
syskatine was debunking the reality that the FBI's
Gotcha. I'm only speaking to my experiences with him in my early board days, but I'm definitely not an old timer by any means.
Sharyl Attkison's timeline was factually inaccurate? At what point does she veer off?
What personal conclusion have I failed to make? I am disgusted by the corruption within the highest levels of our government. Have I not made that perfectly clear?
No. No one has the time to read every link to 5000 word opinion pieces and debunk all the inaccuracies. Which was my point, you get weak responses about your sources and Bush when all you do is link to opinion pieces.
That's a fair enough argument. But I doubt I'll change my tactic. Some people will read them and some won't. I post links I find interesting, links I have read in full, links I find enlightening. Others may do with those links what they like.
Hmmm. Quite a statement.
No one has the time to read 5,000 word opinion pieces and debunk all the inaccuracies? How exactly does someone without the time to read the opinion pieces know that there are inaccuracies? So syskatine is just flinging shit out there for the sake of flinging shit out there? And that's Ponca Dan's fault?
Well, your sources are simply parroting the Biff narrative. The election was 18 months ago and cons are still whining about Hillary. Know why? 1. Its a distraction from the daily corruption, and 2. You'll dance to it. My point, I thought, was entirely fair. Guess the abuses that mirror Hillary's don't count.
Just Biff's refusal to release his taxes and lying about whether he would should have torpedo'd his candidacy with any american interested in clean government.
I'll follow suit dan, and only discuss Obama and Hillary stuff thats bad - not Trump, not Bush. So when may I expect Hillary to be charged? What's the holdup?
How many people tied to the "investigation" have been fired.
I'll answer for you. There have been seven, two DOJ, five Feds. Why?
Facts. Give me a cite to facts. Im not chasing your wingnut fantasies and alternative facts. Wasted too much time trying to figure out the "facts" that have been plainly disproven on here many times.
I'll call this pearl clutching over the FBI as a biiig castle of piss and wind to get the heat off Biff. Haven't dug in, I just know the deception and corruption of your team.
Here's a person Sys should follow. Taxing Cow farts.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollyw...ng-cow-farts-a-fantastic-thing-for-the-world/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollyw...ng-cow-farts-a-fantastic-thing-for-the-world/
What is factually incorrect in either of those links, especially SA’s timeline. I would be curious to know where they have gone off the rails.
What does Trump’s tax report have to do with this topic? What abuse in this scandal has Hillary experienced? If the links are factually correct it seems she has been treated with kid gloves.
I made it all the way to March 4, 2015 before I found an obvious inaccuracy.
Posting opinion pieces stroking your beard and saying that you find it disgusting is not going to draw thoughtful responses.
Knowingly uninformed poster. Noted.
Plenty of facts out there.
What other issues afflict you in addition to ignorance?
Lol. Good one, pilt.
