MSNBC telling lies for Hillary again.... tisk tisk tisk.

  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Aug 12, 2015 9:32 PM GMT
    Just saw it on their "lean forward" show that....
    "Hillary turns over her private email server to DOJ"
    and
    "Hillary says she will cooperate with investigation"

    WRONG.
    What Hillary did was comply with an order from a federal judge 'under the penalty of perjury'by the deadline today.

    The term, "turns over" implies she did something voluntarily. She made it clear from the very beginning she was not going to voluntarily "turn over" her private server or all of her emails. The only way to perceive her turning over her email server as a voluntary act if you can perceive Hillary voluntarily going to jail for not doing having complied with the order from Judge Emmet Sullivan.
  • jock_1

    Posts: 1492

    Aug 12, 2015 10:59 PM GMT
    Her brick wall is now crumbling. She is in big trouble and now she has lost all her control. The Democratic left has left her and doesn't trust her. She changes positions daily to try to try to move more left on her positions. She can't be trusted. Now we have 2 parties that are being torn apart. This is going to be very interesting. Bernie socialist Sanders is now the Donald of the Democrats.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14385

    Aug 12, 2015 11:40 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    bobbobbob saidJust saw it on their "lean forward" show that....
    "Hillary turns over her private email server to DOJ"
    and
    "Hillary says she will cooperate with investigation"

    WRONG.
    What Hillary did was comply with an order from a federal judge 'under the penalty of perjury'by the deadline today.

    The term, "turns over" implies she did something voluntarily. She made it clear from the very beginning she was not going to voluntarily "turn over" her private server or all of her emails. The only way to perceive her turning over her email server as a voluntary act if you can perceive Hillary voluntarily going to jail for not doing having complied with the order from Judge Emmet Sullivan.


    There has been an outstanding subpoena for that server for months. Hillary has ignored the subpoena.
    Wouldn't that be considered obstruction of justiceicon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 11:46 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    southbeach1500 said
    bobbobbob saidJust saw it on their "lean forward" show that....
    "Hillary turns over her private email server to DOJ"
    and
    "Hillary says she will cooperate with investigation"

    WRONG.
    What Hillary did was comply with an order from a federal judge 'under the penalty of perjury'by the deadline today.

    The term, "turns over" implies she did something voluntarily. She made it clear from the very beginning she was not going to voluntarily "turn over" her private server or all of her emails. The only way to perceive her turning over her email server as a voluntary act if you can perceive Hillary voluntarily going to jail for not doing having complied with the order from Judge Emmet Sullivan.


    There has been an outstanding subpoena for that server for months. Hillary has ignored the subpoena.
    Wouldn't that be considered obstruction of justiceicon_question.gif


    Contempt
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Aug 12, 2015 11:55 PM GMT
    If you're talking about the order from July 31, there was no request to turn over the server.

    "Judicial Watch announced today that U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the U.S. State Department to request that Hillary Clinton and her top aides confirm, under penalty of perjury, that they have produced all government records in their possession, return any other government records immediately, and describe their use of Hillary Clinton’s email server to conduct government business."

    It seems they were only seeking the email records that were on the server, and not the server itself. So, yes, she turned it over voluntarily.

    Further, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it Hillary's contention that she turned over all of the data to the State Department? And if that's true, isn't it the State Department that is dragging their feet turning over the information to the court?
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Aug 13, 2015 12:22 AM GMT
    As I said in the other thread, the subpoena only requests the documents, not the hardware. The claim in the OP that MSNBC lied when they implied that Hillary turned over the server voluntarily is false.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Aug 13, 2015 3:15 AM GMT

    Now we know there's at least one gay guy who's going to support her even after she strangles a puppy on tv with her own claws.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Aug 13, 2015 7:04 PM GMT
    Now we know at least two guys who have a strained relationship with the truth.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Aug 14, 2015 12:19 AM GMT


    Don't even try that bitch.

    I can go back and pull up enough cases of you spewing mantra and bullshit to write a book if you mattered that much. As things are, you don't matter. All you are is one more desperate progressive socialist who can't back up one single thing you say you believe in with facts or evidence... but you still want to act like your way is the only way...

    Go back and play with people who will bobble their heads and baa like sheep when you start in on your "let's rob the evil rich people" bullshit...
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Aug 14, 2015 1:01 AM GMT
    You're right. In the vast scheme of things, I don't matter. But don't get on your high horse just yet. Neither do you. We're just a couple of blowhards on an Internet forum. The web has millions of them.

    And it's true that I have posted information that proved to be incorrect, and every time it has been brought to my attention I've copped to it and apologized for and corrected the error. You, on the other hand, don't have the balls to make such an admission, as you should in this thread. Your usual MO is to simply turn tail and run, laying low for a few days. Just as I predicted last time.

    As far as the goals of the progressive movement, there is a solid historical foundation on which it stands, unlike the conservative movement, which is standing on the rubble you've been making since Reagan. And as you can see from the turnouts at the Sanders rallies, more and more voters are seeing the failure of the current brand of conservatism.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Aug 14, 2015 2:26 AM GMT


    Physiqueflex saidYou're right. In the vast scheme of things, I don't matter. But don't get on your high horse just yet. Neither do you. We're just a couple of blowhards on an Internet forum. The web has millions of them.

    And it's true that I have posted information that proved to be incorrect, and every time it has been brought to my attention I've copped to it and apologized for and corrected the error.

    LOL!! you know as well as I do that's Horseshit, Cowshit and Rat-Piss.


    Physiqueflex saidYou, on the other hand, don't have the balls to make such an admission, as you should in this thread. Your usual MO is to simply turn tail and run, laying low for a few days. Just as I predicted last time. [/quote] That's your warped perception. Do you realize you and all your neurotic sisters in RJ, do the same thing and think you have won a victory? We laugh at your dumb asses about it. Every damn one of you will make a world issue about the proper use of one fucking word or any other bit of minutiae and COMPLETELY LOSE SIGHT OF THE BIG PICTURE... and the battles you cannot win based on reality... NOPE your lame asses have to grovel over grammar in order to think you've been right about something. It doesn't matter what you're right about... anything is better than nothing to someone obsessed with being right like you and all your RJ sisters are.

    Physiqueflex said As far as the goals of the progressive movement, there is a solid historical foundation on which it stands, unlike the conservative movement, which is standing on the rubble you've been making since Reagan. And as you can see from the turnouts at the Sanders rallies, more and more voters are seeing the failure of the current brand of conservatism. [/quote] Oh yeah.. That wonderful solid historical foundation of progressivism... which is includes eugenics for over 30 years imposed on poor whites blacks and people progressives called too dumb to fuck... Then there's prohibition of alcohol that progressives took over from womens temperance movement to make their own path in national politics... nevermind that it was such a disasterous experiment the people who pushed it should have been executed for what they did to the United States.... Do we need to go over the long list of Progressivism's failures and massive unforeseen consequences again?