Republican National Convention

[PhatMack19]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[westend1]

LOL.   Any discrepancies were cause by liberal bias. That's a bad piece of literature.

[Big girl]

On 7/20/2016 at 2:40 PM, baddog said:

Woman who took blame for Melania plagiarism scandal, Meredith McIver, is a registered democrat since 1996. Well, if that don't beat all !!!!!!!!

Actually, she is a good woman who is heartbroken over this mess. Trump would not let her resign saying that everyone makes mistakes.

Why did Mrs Trump#3 say she wrote it on the Today Show

[Big girl]

On 7/21/2016 at 4:02 PM, tvc184 said:

Actually you said, "They couldn't get a president elected. They are falling apart" in response to winning Congress. 

I never saw a time frame, however....... 

I only presented facts. I supposed when Reagan and G H W Bush won 3 elections back to back, for 12 years the Democrats were falling apart?

Want Congress thrown in? From 1933 to 1995 only two congresses (4 years) had the Republicans controlling it completely. During that 62 year time frame, the Democrats held the entire Congress for 54 years and 4 years of shared control. During those 54 years of complete Democratic control of Congress, The Republicans won the presidency 9 times. Taking out FDR during WWII, the Democrats have won 5. Even with FDR included, they tied. 

Let's see, 54 years in control but wouldn't win the White House for 36 years. Yep, the Democrats were falling apart. 

Your rationale, like always, is nonsensical. 

Maybe you should have read the entire board before responding

[Big girl]

On 7/21/2016 at 11:33 AM, baddog said:

....as opposed to your in depth analyses?

Big Girl, if the FBI wanted to see all the data on your computer (seize your hard drive), would they find anything illegal?

Let's say you answer no, which I would expect ......Then there would be no need for you to delete anything, right? In fact, if there is nothing illegal in your data, then saving it proves your innocence. See how that works? Why can't you see that in Hillary's case? Are you just stubborn or don't care?

They didn't find anything illegal

[Big girl]

On 7/21/2016 at 11:48 AM, baddog said:

I've deleted emails too but they weren't classified, sensitive, top secret....things that could put everyone's life in jeopardy or tip our hand to the enemy. That's right, the enemy. There really are people out there that want you and me dead. It's not just in the movies.

I read that the email were not marked classified at the time. Only in retrospect

[Big girl]

On 7/21/2016 at 0:22 PM, LumRaiderFan said:

Your first time to watch a convention, apparently.

I'm sure we won't hear a peep from you when the Dems bash Trump next week.

Hopefully I won't hear people chanting like 8 year olds "Lock him up", "Lock him up"

[baddog]

8 minutes ago, Big girl said:

They didn't find anything illegal

Good answer without answering.

[baddog]

7 minutes ago, Big girl said:

I read that the email were not marked classified at the time. Only in retrospect

Only some emails upgraded. Do you even listen or just hear what you want to hear?

[BS Wildcats]

16 minutes ago, baddog said:

Only some emails upgraded. Do you even listen or just hear what you want to hear?

Facts usually get right in her way.

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, Big girl said:

Hopefully I won't hear people chanting like 8 year olds "Lock him up", "Lock him up"

Sort of like the "Yes we can, Yes we can" chant that the Democrat congressmen are so fond of.

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, Big girl said:

They didn't find anything illegal

Wow. Your comprehension skills are sorely lacking. Comey straight out said she committed illegal acts. This was reported by everyone. Have you ever heard of the term "tunnel vision".

[baddog]

14 minutes ago, Englebert said:

Wow. Your comprehension skills are sorely lacking. Comey straight out said she committed illegal acts. This was reported by everyone. Have you ever heard of the term "tunnel vision".

She doesnt even have to duck. It clears her head by a mile.

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, Big girl said:

I read that the email were not marked classified at the time. Only in retrospect

Soros called. Says he wants his money back. Says he's already wasted too much money on incompetence.

[westend1]

28 minutes ago, Englebert said:

Wow. Your comprehension skills are sorely lacking. Comey straight out said she committed illegal acts. This was reported by everyone. Have you ever heard of the term "tunnel vision".

I missed it.  Show me where he said she committed "illegal acts".   It's 'straight out".  Right?

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, westend1 said:

I missed it.  Show me where he said she committed "illegal acts".   It's 'straight out".  Right?

They've been posted in this forum. They've been shown on every news outlet in America. A Republican super Pac is running a commercial showing them daily. If you haven't seen them, I don't know what to tell you. A simple google search should give you all the info. And yes, Right! It is "straight out." I find it extraordinarily incomprehensible that anyone has not seen Comey's testimony, especially the answers to Trey Gowdy's questions. This is almost akin to me saying 1 + 1 = 2 and you asking me to prove it.

[LumRaiderFan]

3 hours ago, Big girl said:

Hopefully I won't hear people chanting like 8 year olds "Lock him up", "Lock him up"

You will probably hear "Pigs in a blanket".

[PhatMack19]

2 hours ago, westend1 said:

I missed it.  Show me where he said she committed "illegal acts".   It's 'straight out".  Right?

If you get pulled over for driving 65mph in a 50, but the cop is in a good mood and only gives you a warning, does that mean you really weren't breaking the law?

[westend1]

12 hours ago, PhatMack19 said:

If you get pulled over for driving 65mph in a 50, but the cop is in a good mood and only gives you a warning, does that mean you really weren't breaking the law?

Thats not what the Bush appointee said.  He said she was careless but it didn't rise to the level of a crime.  Therefore, not illegal.  If he had said, "it was a crime, but I am letting her off", then your analogy would be accurate.   I guess people hear what they want to hear.

[nappyroots]

12 minutes ago, westend1 said:

Thats not what the Bush appointee said.  He said she was careless but it didn't rise to the level of a crime.  Therefore, not illegal.  If he had said, "it was a crime, but I am letting her off", then your analogy would be accurate.   I guess people hear what they want to hear.

definately

[PhatMack19]

2 hours ago, westend1 said:

Thats not what the Bush appointee said.  He said she was careless but it didn't rise to the level of a crime.  Therefore, not illegal.  If he had said, "it was a crime, but I am letting her off", then your analogy would be accurate.   I guess people hear what they want to hear.

I didn't figure you would bother clicking the link, so I posted the whole transcript.  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

 

Gowdy: Good morning, Director Comey. Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private e-mail, was that true?

Comey: Our investigation found that there was classified information sent. 

Gowdy: It was not true? 

Comey: That's what I said. 

Gowdy: OK. Well, I'm looking for a shorter answer so you and I are not here quite as long. Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her e-mails sent or received. Was that true? 

Comey: That's not true. There were a small number of portion markings on I think three of the documents. 

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said "I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material." That is true? 

Comey: There was classified information emailed. 

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton used one device, was that true? 

Comey: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State. 

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said all work related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true? 

Comey: No. We found work related email, thousands, that were not returned. 

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said neither she or anyone else deleted work related emails from her personal account. 

Comey: That's a harder one to answer. We found traces of work related emails in — on devices or in space. Whether they were deleted or when a server was changed out something happened to them, there's no doubt that the work related emails that were removed electronically from the email system. 

Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive. Did her lawyers read the email content individually? 

Comey: No. 

Gowdy: Well, in the interest of time and because I have a plane to catch tomorrow afternoon, I'm not going to go through any more of the false statements but I am going to ask you to put on your old hat. Faults exculpatory statements are used for what? 

Comey: Well, either for a substantive prosecution or evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution. 

Gowdy: Exactly. Intent and consciousness of guilt, right? 

Comey: That is right? 

Alex Wong | Getty Images

U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy

Gowdy: Consciousness of guilt and intent? In your old job you would prove intent as you referenced by showing the jury evidence of a complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the public record and you would be arguing in addition to concealment the destruction that you and i just talked about or certainly the failure to preserve. 

You would argue all of that under the heading of content. You would also — intent. You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme when it started, when it ended and the number of emails whether 

They were originally classified or of classified under the heading of intent. You would also, probably, under common scheme or plan, argue the burn bags of daily calendar entries or the missing daily calendar entries as a common scheme or plan to conceal. 

Two days ago, Director, you said a reasonable person in her position should have known a private email was no place to send and receive classified information. You're right. An average person does know not to do that. 

This is no average person. This is a former First Lady, a former United States senator, and a former Secretary of State that the president now contends is the most competent, qualified person to be president since Jefferson. He didn't say that in '08 but says it now. 

She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, kept the private emails for almost two years and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private email account. 

So you have a rogue email system set up before she took the oath of office, thousands of what we now know to be classified emails, some of which were classified at the time. One of her more frequent email comrades was hacked and you don't know whether or not she was. 

And this scheme took place over a long period of time and resulted in the destruction of public records and yet you say there is insufficient evidence of intent. You say she was extremely careless, but not intentionally so. 

You and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do defendants announce 'On this date I intend to break this criminal code section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this date.' 

It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial evidence or if you're Congress and you realize how difficult it is prove, specific intent, you will form lathe a statute that allows for gross negligence. 

My time is out but this is really important. You mentioned there's no precedent for criminal prosecution. My fear is there still isn't. There's nothing to keep a future Secretary of State or President from this exact same email scheme or their staff. 

And my real fear is this, what the chairman touched upon, this double track justice system that is rightly or wrongly perceived in this country. That if you are a private in the Army and email yourself classified information you will be kicked out. But if you are Hillary Clinton, and you seek a promotion to Commander in Chief, you will not be. So what I hope you can do today is help the average person, the reasonable person you made reference to, the reasonable person understand why she appears to be treated differently than the rest of us would be. With that I would yield back.

[westend1]

I get that Repubs would like to see her prosecuted for something, but a Republican appointed law enforcement officer determined that her acts weren't criminal.   Gowdy can grandstand all he wants, but it doesn't change anything, except maybe some will vote for him in some future election.

 

[stevenash]

20 hours ago, Big girl said:

Hopefully I won't hear people chanting like 8 year olds "Lock him up", "Lock him up"

Funny about those chants.  I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut you have no problem with " What do we want? Dead Cops.  When do want it- Now"  or, of course " Hands up, don't shoot"

[nappyroots]

2 hours ago, stevenash said:

Funny about those chants.  I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut you have no problem with " What do we want? Dead Cops.  When do want it- Now"  or, of course " Hands up, don't shoot"

Nothing happening now that hasn't happened before

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

would you guys complain about something like this..NO

BLM is a minority of a minority

[nappyroots]

as much as i dislike Ted Cruz, i respect the fact that he stood his ground at the convention. can also add all three Bushes to that list