Donald: IMPRISON HILLARY!!!!!1111!!

[Sid 6,755]

47 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

“The fact that they even allow her to participate in this race is a disgrace to the United States, it’s a disgrace to our nation.”

 

first time i've agreed with something he's said 

 

[Himeros26 1,688]

He kind of has a point

Our eligibility system is incredibly broad and ... Lackluster? I don't even know. 

[brendablethyn 536]

Next 5 months:

Hillary: "Donald is crazy"

Donald: "Hillary should be in jail"

Repeat x50

[MJHolland 12,725]

1 hour ago, LebaneseDude said:

Not that what you're saying is remotely true.

Their private emails servers were never under investigation. Your delusion is too much to handle some days. 

[FATCAT 60,888]

1 hour ago, Didymus said:

"The fact that they even allow her to participate in this race is a disgrace to the United States, it’s a disgrace to our nation."

lol this is what I've been thinking as well

Even if she proves to be innocent, how the hell is someone being investigated by the FBI even eligible.

It's America, you're innocent until proven guilty. BUT there's no qualification that says you can't run from a prison cell. There's only three qualification:

Over 35

Born in the US

Lived in the US for 14 years

I think she should be able to run, but I don't think she should stay in if she's recommended for indictment. Not because she can't, but because we need a nominee that will actually be able to beat Trump.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

38 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

Their private emails servers were never under investigation. Your delusion is too much to handle some days. 

Why weren't they though? I wonder why the media never made a big deal out of it.

Oh yes. They're not a Clinton.

Nah you're just being biased as always. Those were violations of Freedom of Information Act, which is basically half the case you're presenting. Or are you implying that those deleted emails could not have had any incriminating evidence themselves?  

[MJHolland 12,725]

32 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Why weren't they though? I wonder why the media never made a big deal out of it.

Oh yes. They're not a Clinton.

Nah you're just being biased as always. Those were violations of Freedom of Information Act, which is basically half the case you're presenting. Or are you implying that those deleted emails could not have had any incriminating evidence themselves?  

No one in the Bush administration had a private email server and none of the emails deleted her pending investigations. But when you have to bring up the actions of an incompetent warmongering  Republican president a decade ago in order to defend your candidate, it's pretty awk 

I assure you, I'm the least biased person on this site. I'm entirely an independent. You're the only one that's biased. What Hillary did was clearly a crime, and her actions make her entirely corrupt. 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

6 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

No one in the Bush administration had a private email server and none of the emails deleted her pending investigations. But when you have to bring up the actions of an incompetent warmongering  Republican president a decade ago in order to defend your candidate, it's pretty awk 

I assure you, I'm the least biased person on this site. I'm entirely an independent. You're the only one that's biased. What Hillary did was clearly a crime, and her actions make her entirely corrupt. 

Once again I bring up the question. Why were they not under investigation? They broke the Freedom of Information Act because those were not personal e-mails, unless you believe Bush/Cheney had 20 million personal emails. 

I can also bring up Mitt Romney who deleted all his emails after his candidacy. What about those? Why was he not investigated?

What about many State employees who have failed to turn up their own documents after their tenures?

Funny enough, Hillary is the only one who has ever turned anything in these cases. That says A LOT regarding both her motives and cooperation in this matter. 

I can continue to bring up cases. It's true that Hillary is the one who has a private server, but that's where it ends. You can't bring up the Freedom of Information Act as justification for any indictment when it's not consistently prosecuted for. That was your entire argument. 

What she did was not a crime, and every single report out there says that. That you persist to think it's a crime implies that you're either biased or a simpleton. I choose to believe you're the former, so I'll leave it at that. You being an independent does not excuse anything.

[MJHolland 12,725]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

Once again I bring up the question. Why were they not under investigation? They broke the Freedom of Information Act because those were not personal e-mails.

I can also bring up Mitt Romney who deleted all his emails after his candidacy. What about those? Why was he not investigated?

What she did was not a crime, and every single report out there says that. That you persist to think it's a crime implies that you're either biased or a simpleton. I choose to believe you're the former, so I'll leave it at that. You being an independent does not excuse anything.

Mitt Romney was under investigation??! Really?

It's not a crime to delete emails in and of itself. Are you slow on the draw today? It's illegal to destroy evidence, and that is exactly what Hillary Clinton did! She knew there would be an investigation because she KNEW her private email server was illegal and not secure! We even have emails from her and her staff admitting they knew it wasn't secure for 3 months! She knew all the emails on the server were going to be investigated and she destroyed HALF of that evidence! Does it not even peak your interest what was on HALF of her server? She says private emails with her husband, her husband says otherwise.

Give me a break dude. The crime is tampering with evidence, not clearing out your inbox. If you can't see that, I hope you seek the help you need. 

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

6 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

It's illegal to destroy evidence, and that is exactly what Hillary Clinton did! She knew there would be an investigation because she KNEW her private email server was illegal and not secure! We even have emails from her and her staff admitting they knew it wasn't secure for 3 months! She knew all the emails on the server were going to be investigated and she destroyed HALF of that evidence! Does it not even peak your interest what was on HALF of her server? She says private emails with her husband, her husband says otherwise.

This is what bugs me as well and everyone who cares about the email thing. 

It's easy to forget about it and it might not even be as bad as it's being made out to be but it is concerning and should not be ignored.

 

[Azor Ahai 18,861]

That moment when you have to pick between an entitled corporate pig and a corrupted pawn of the system for your president

Btw what he says makes sense. But I'm sure he should be in jail aswell for so many scandals we don't know off.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

24 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

Mitt Romney was under investigation??! Really?

It's not a crime to delete emails in and of itself. Are you slow on the draw today? It's illegal to destroy evidence, and that is exactly what Hillary Clinton did! She knew there would be an investigation because she KNEW her private email server was illegal and not secure! We even have emails from her and her staff admitting they knew it wasn't secure for 3 months! She knew all the emails on the server were going to be investigated and she destroyed HALF of that evidence! Does it not even peak your interest what was on HALF of her server? She says private emails with her husband, her husband says otherwise.

Give me a break dude. The crime is tampering with evidence, not clearing out your inbox. If you can't see that, I hope you seek the help you need. 

Why was he not under investigation? It appears you're nitpicking when it's fine to bypass laws and only wish to press them when they benefit you.

It's not illegal to withhold or destroy e-mails considered personal. They are not under jurisdiction. That's what Hillary claimed they are. You choose to believe they weren't despite having no reason to otherwise. That's called bias.

She knew there would be an investigation because she's Hillary Clinton. Her position all but demands it. She knows this will get blown out of proportion because she's Hillary Clinton. She knew the media will dig into every single word because she's Hillary Clinton.

You continue to cite outright wrong facts such as the server being illegal.

From The Hill

Hillary Clinton's exclusive use of a personal email account to conduct official business as secretary of State caused seems to have stayed within the law, experts say.

“What she did was not technically illegal,” said Patrice McDermott, a former National Archives staffer and the head of the Open The Government coalition, a transparency group.

There was no prohibition on using a non-State.gov account for official business as long as it was preserved,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said on Tuesday.

“Like secretaries of State before her, she used her own email account when engaging with any department officials,” spokesman Nick Merrill said in a statement. “For government business, she emailed them on their department accounts, with every expectation they would be retained.”

------

You continue to say that it was breached when you fail to present any facts of that. There is literally NONE and even the State Department's IG report says this, with one exception that has no merit.

-----

She's literally the only one in these investigations who has ever turned up her e-mails. That she did so proves that she is COOPERATING and should actually provide context that she has nothing to hide.

From NPR

The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."

In Clinton's case, she says she turned over some 30,000 relevant emails, totaling 55,000 pages, and wants those all made public. "I took the unprecedented step of asking that the State Department make all my work-related emails public for everyone to see," Clinton said at her news conference on the emails last month. (Gawker Media and The Associated Press have announced they are suing to have a Clinton spokesman's and Clinton's emails released.)

From Politifact:

While the memo encouraged staffers to avoid using personal email accounts, it fell short of prohibiting their use

-----

Why are you even trying to use her husband here? Why would Bill be the recipient of all her personal emails?

Why are you choosing to believe the worst case scenario? You're biased.

You. Are. Biased.

Enough. I'm not debating people with an irrational animus.

[MJHolland 12,725]

3 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Why was he not under investigation? It appears you're nitpicking when it's fine to bypass laws and only wish to press them when they benefit you.

It's not illegal to withhold or destroy e-mails considered personal. They are not under jurisdiction. That's what Hillary claimed they are. You choose to believe they weren't despite having no reason to otherwise. That's called bias.

She knew there would be an investigation because she's Hillary Clinton. She knows this will get blown out of proportion because she's Hillary Clinton. She knew the media will dig into every single word because she's Hillary Clinton.

You continue to cite outright wrong facts such as the server being illegal.

From The Hill

Hillary Clinton's exclusive use of a personal email account to conduct official business as secretary of State caused seems to have stayed within the law, experts say.

“What she did was not technically illegal,” said Patrice McDermott, a former National Archives staffer and the head of the Open The Government coalition, a transparency group.

There was no prohibition on using a non-State.gov account for official business as long as it was preserved,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said on Tuesday.

“Like secretaries of State before her, she used her own email account when engaging with any department officials,” spokesman Nick Merrill said in a statement. “For government business, she emailed them on their department accounts, with every expectation they would be retained.”

------

You continue to say that it was breached when you fail to present any facts of that. There is literally NONE and even the State Department's IG report says this, with one exception that has no merit.

-----

She's literally the only one in these investigations who has ever turned up her e-mails. That she did so proves that she is COOPERATING and should actually provide context that she has nothing to hide.

From NPR

The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."

In Clinton's case, she says she turned over some 30,000 relevant emails, totaling 55,000 pages, and wants those all made public. "I took the unprecedented step of asking that the State Department make all my work-related emails public for everyone to see," Clinton said at her news conference on the emails last month. (Gawker Media and The Associated Press have announced they are suing to have a Clinton spokesman's and Clinton's emails released.)

From Politifact:

While the memo encouraged staffers to avoid using personal email accounts, it fell short of prohibiting their use

-----

Why are you even trying to use her husband here? Why would Bill be the recipient of all her personal emails?

Why are you choosing to believe the worst case scenario? You're biased.

You. Are. Biased.

Enough. I'm not debating people with an irrational animus.

Laughing like SH*T. You say I'm nitpicking?! Buddy, the fact of the matter is, is that she DESTROYED evidence! I do not know why Bush wasn't under investigation. He should have been. But he wasn't. Hillary is, and she destroyed half the damn evidence. She doesn't just get to decide in a private room by herself what is considered personal. That's tampering with evidence. And hell, if she houses these personal emails in the same physical server as her work emails with classified information and names on it of agents in the field, then damn right they're under jurisdiction! 

Buddy, you're slowing becoming a laughingstock on this site because of your blind allegiance to Hillary's absolute corrupt behavior. And trust me, I use the word "becoming" to spare your feelings. Open your eyes. She has been in the wrong every step of the way.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, MJHolland said:

Laughing like SH*T. You say I'm nitpicking?! Buddy, the fact of the matter is, is that she DESTROYED evidence! I do not know why Bush wasn't under investigation. He should have been. But he wasn't. Hillary is, and she destroyed half the damn evidence. She doesn't just get to decide in a private room by herself what is considered personal. That's tampering with evidence. And hell, if she houses these personal emails in the same physical server as her work emails with classified information and names on it of agents in the field, then damn right they're under jurisdiction! 

Why am I even speaking with you about this? You may believe what you want to believe. The experts and even the FBI investigators themselves have said otherwise, so  

Irrational animus is a powerful force  

[MJHolland 12,725]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

Why am I even speaking with you about this? You may believe what you want to believe. The experts and even the FBI investigators themselves have said otherwise, so  

Well we will see what the Obama FBI has to say when they do or do not indict her. If they don't, it'll be an outrage.

When the police search your house, you can't just tell them "oh don't go in my private study, that's personal". No. YOU do not get to decide what's up for investigation when the police are searching your home. Hillary does not get to decide what the FBI is allowed to investigate either. She. Is. Corrupt.

She just doesn't get to decide herself that the FBI agents are not allowed to investigate half her server. The overwhelming majority of Americans agree with me, not you.