Richard Hanna Becomes First Republican Congressman To Say He’ll Vote For Hillary Clinton

a reply to: MotherMayEye

what a pickle

there are so many levels of lying liars, who can know the truth

rats in a maze

god help us

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: shooterbrody

I see so Trump isn't a criminal because his crime isn't as serious. Gotcha. Glad you cleared up that inconsistency in your Trump rhetoric. Gotta keep your craziness straight.

I never said he isn't a criminal.
But you are right his crime is less serious than allowing your countries secrets to be unsecured. Also there is no video available of Trump lying to congress; multiple lies on multiple occasions. Ask Roger Clemons how lying to congress goes for non Clintons.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

Don't you think it is troubling that not even Trump's own party wants to support him?

Not when you look at Hillary's side. Seems like there is more defection on that side with Bernie voters. I'd guess it's better than 30% of the Dems don't want anything to do with her. Don't you find that troubling?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Arizonaguy

Not guilty is not guilty. It means that you couldn't be proven guilty. End of story. OJ Simpson, Casey Anthony, John Gotti you can have whatever opinion about their real guilt, but at the end of the day they were NOT GUILTY. Their guilt couldn't be proven. They had their day in court and won. That is the end of their story.

We don't proclaim guilt based on public opinion in this country. Though the Republicans seem to be trying their damnedest to change that.

You are daft.
She was never declared not guilty.
Comey decided not to prosecute.....HUGE difference.

You guys sure are doing a good job of deflecting from the topic of the OP.

Gotta make this about Hillary, right? It's become some sort of weird obsession people have in which no conversation is complete without a stab at Hillary.

The FBI did not recommend indictment. Get over it. Quit acting like jaded teenage girls and let it go.

a reply to: introvert

Isnt the op about hillary? Someone voting for hillary i think?

While the fbi did not recommend to indict:

there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received.

But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences.

Yeah let it go
FBI says they have evidence but let it go

I will tell you what you quit bringing up candidate subjects that have to do with judgement,honesty,and credibility and I will stop replying with email info.

a reply to: introvert

The FBI did not recommend indictment. Get over it. Quit acting like jaded teenage girls and let it go.

Nice gloss over there, don't forget to mention he did, in fact, tell us all on national TV that she flat out broke the law and was extremely careless. If elected what else would she be extremely careless about??? As much as you'd like the issue to just disappear into some liberal skeleton storage closet, it's not. This will follow her right into November and beyond.
Get used to it.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Guess I was right. Obsessed like a jaded teenage girl.

Carry on...

originally posted by: Nucleardoom
a reply to: introvert

The FBI did not recommend indictment. Get over it. Quit acting like jaded teenage girls and let it go.

Nice gloss over there, don't forget to mention he did, in fact, tell us all on national TV that she flat out broke the law and was extremely careless. If elected what else would she be extremely careless about??? As much as you'd like the issue to just disappear into some liberal skeleton storage closet, it's not. This will follow her right into November and beyond.
Get used to it.

We already knew it would be a subject drawn-out for some time. Just like when she was cleared of any wrongdoing in the Benghazi hearings. Yet, the uninformed keep bringing it up.

Did you also hear the part where Comey says that cases such as her's are usually handled internally and it would have been improper to charge her, because 80% of cases like this are never taken to court...unless they purposefully intended to commit a crime?

Make sure you digest and understand everything before forming an opinion. Cherry-picking leads to ignorance.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: shooterbrody

Guess I was right. Obsessed like a jaded teenage girl.

Carry on...

No, it's strictly an accountability issue. One that you wish could disappear, but wont.

You think she's presidential, while most of us see it like it is: an EXTREMELY CARELESS and RECKLESS polished turd.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: shooterbrody

Guess I was right. Obsessed like a jaded teenage girl.

Carry on...

As usual nothing of substance from you when the subject is not to your liking.

a reply to: introvert

Did you also hear the part where Comey says that cases such as her's are usually handled internally and it would have been improper to charge her, because 80% of cases like this are never taken to court...unless they purposefully intended to commit a crime?

Handled internally means some sort of punishment or limiting of security clearances should have occurred.

Did anything happen to her as a result of her actions other than a public slap on the wrist?

Do you think classified info should be passed around like a note in a fourth grade classroom?

That's why people are angry, she broke the law and nothing was done internally or otherwise.

Considering the stakes involved that is just wrong on any level.

a reply to: Nucleardoom

I think she has the career record and the skill set to be able to do the job of president, yes. As far as accountability, she should be held responsible for her actions, but it appears her actions do not warrant any action being taken against her.

I know that is not what you want to hear, but your fantasies do not change fact.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: shooterbrody

Guess I was right. Obsessed like a jaded teenage girl.

Carry on...

As usual nothing of substance from you when the subject is not to your liking.

What's to add? We've been over those issues many times and you just can't get past the idea that none of what she did warrants prosecution.

I get it. You're obsessed.

It's a waste of my time to try and educate a brick wall.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Nucleardoom

I think she has the career record and the skill set to be able to do the job of president, yes. As far as accountability, she should be held responsible for her actions, but it appears her actions do not warrant any action being taken against her.

I know that is not what you want to hear, but your fantasies do not change fact.

She may be qualified, by traditional standards, but most working Americans are sick of Hillary's brand of career politicians running this country. Trump is the only alternative, so he'll get a shot at it next.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Nucleardoom

I think she has the career record and the skill set to be able to do the job of president, yes. As far as accountability, she should be held responsible for her actions, but it appears her actions do not warrant any action being taken against her.

I know that is not what you want to hear, but your fantasies do not change fact.

What the real fantasy here is any of us commoners breaking the law like that and expecting nothing to come of it.

Now that's a fantasy. You don't see the double standard being implemented here? If this were Trump I guarantee you would.

a reply to: Nucleardoom

Handled internally means some sort of punishment or limiting of security clearances should have occurred.

Correct. She no longer works for the State Department. So what can they do?

Did anything happen to her as a result of her actions other than a public slap on the wrist?

No. She no longer works for the SD. What can they do?

Do you think classified info should be passed around like a note in a fourth grade classroom?

Not a good comparison.

That's why people are angry, she broke the law and nothing was done internally or otherwise.

People are angry because they are ignorant of past cases and how things are handled in cases like this. Why do we have to keep going over that continuously?

a reply to: carewemust

She may be qualified, by traditional standards, but most working Americans are sick of Hillary's brand of career politicians running this country.

That is a logical fallacy. Appeal to the majority. You do not know what most working Americans think.

Trump is the only alternative, so he'll get a shot at it next.

It's beginning to look like that may not be the case.

a reply to: Nucleardoom

What the real fantasy here is any of us commoners breaking the law like that and expecting nothing to come of it. Now that's a fantasy. You don't see the double standard being implemented here? If this were Trump I guarantee you would.

No. A double standard would have been to indict her. 80% of cases like this never see a court room and are handled internally, unless intent to commit a crime can be found.

Didn't you listen to Comey's speech or testimony?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: shooterbrody

Guess I was right. Obsessed like a jaded teenage girl.

Carry on...

As usual nothing of substance from you when the subject is not to your liking.

What's to add? We've been over those issues many times and you just can't get past the idea that none of what she did warrants prosecution.

I get it. You're obsessed.

It's a waste of my time to try and educate a brick wall.

It is a thread about a gop congressman voting for hillary with reasons to vote for hillary.
The FBI director himself said there is evidence she broke the law.
When asked about reasons to vote for someone, breaking the law is not high on my list.
You choose to back those who treat national security carelessly, that is your choice.
If that is what your "education" consists of you can keep it.