The Goat Pen

Not the same. Richard Nixon's crimes were exponentially more (at least based on what we know). What we actually know about the Clintons, Bushes, Obama and Reagan doesn't compare to a person that authorized multiple break-ins of his opponents, illegal wiretaps of people that disagreed with him, etc.

Not even close to being the same although the shit Hillary is being accused of sounds like the shit Trump has done most of his adult life.

This is expected: Ryan: GOP will hold hearings on Clinton probe

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnb7Kz

It's silly saying that the Democratic nominee shouldn't get intelligence briefings

and of course: Ex-KKK leader David Duke is totally jazzed about that controversial Trump tweet

http://theweek.com/speedreads/634163/da ... -not-badge

doesn't change that Hillary deserves to be in jail and was bailed out while Obama was president.

Saint wrote:Not even close to being the same although the shit Hillary is being accused of sounds like the shit Trump has done most of his adult life.

I'm sure Trump has done more than his fair share of below board deals to enable him to get wealthier but you think Trump mishandled classified documents allowing hackers to get them?

you and I would be in serious trouble if we did that

Hillary has long forgot whatever principles she stood on - she doesn't think its a conflict of interest to get paid millions by Wall St to give 40 minute behind closed door speeches, to burn documents, to lie to the FBI and to congress - its nothing to her, its how its done

She's past corrupt - Corrupt would imply you know you crossed a line. Hillary doesn't recognize there is a line anymore.

She's basically a republican now...

she's been a republican for quite some time. She's a war hawk to boot

There is only two options with Clinton:

1. She was doing it on purpose and lied about it

or

2. She was stupid and didn't know what she was doing


Either way, the should be enough for the common person to make an informed decision on whether or not she should be president.

Actually, with regard to #1, I expect nothing less of political leaders. Machiavelli covered all of this centuries ago...

BigRedMan wrote:There is only two options with Clinton:

1. She was doing it on purpose and lied about it

or

2. She was stupid and didn't know what she was doing


Either way, the should be enough for the common person to make an informed decision on whether or not she should be president.

I think its worse than that. I think she honestly believes she is above the law, just a casualness to it. She's like the Warden in Shawshank, except she knows shes so high up the police will never bang on her door with a warrant.

I would love someone to pose that question to her to see how she would handle it.

I will give Obama props on his restaurant choice with his visit yesterday. The bacon covered jalapenos are unbelievable despite the colon damage.

http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/ne ... becue.html

eCat wrote:doesn't change that Hillary deserves to be in jail and was bailed out while Obama was president.

Jail? I wouldn't say she deserves jail time. That's just me, though.

Hillary could REALLY shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not face any consequences. Blame it on Trump. No one with a role in government is going to grease the skids for a Trump White House waltz.

she needs to be indicted first

the punishment is really irrelevant after that.

I think her punishment should be having to do anal with Trump

I'd watch that and I know Rat would too

I think this chick is a moron, but I think she's always been honest (even if wrong). Ailes is from the same cloth as O'Reilly. He did it.

http://nyti.ms/29kGEPB

The first rule of macking is knowing how to pick your hoes. I've known Macks and you, Mr. Ailes, are no Mack. I could see she wouldn't be down for any shenanigans from a mile away. Ainsley Earhardt and Megyn Kelly, maybe. This chick and the Hasselbeck broad? Wouldn't try it.

Bklyn wrote:I think this chick is a moron, but I think she's always been honest (even if wrong). Ailes is from the same cloth as O'Reilly. He did it.

http://nyti.ms/29kGEPB

The first rule of macking is knowing how to pick your hoes. I've known Macks and you, Mr. Ailes, are no Mack. I could see she wouldn't be down for any shenanigans from a mile away. Ainsley Earhardt and Megyn Kelly, maybe. This chick and the Hasselbeck broad? Wouldn't try it.

I was just about to post it.

I wouldn't be suprised to see Megyn Kelly join the lawsuit. I bet she is bitter as hell with Fox right now...but I also bet she is no stranger to the casting couch desk

BigRedMan wrote:There is only two options with Clinton:

1. She was doing it on purpose and lied about it

or

2. She was stupid and didn't know what she was doing


Either way, the should be enough for the common person to make an informed decision on whether or not she should be president.

Good Lord no. The 'common person' is still only being given two alternatives; that hasn't changed one iota. The informed decision is which of the flawed candidates fills the position, period. Polls suggest "should be" doesn't apply to either.

It's kinda like the joke about the 2 hikers who run across the grizzly bear. The hildebeast only has to outrun the orange orangutan, or vice versa. Neither has to be a track star.