Oh Hillary, "You've got Jail."

Try again cupcake....you haven't addressed any links I have up.

All politics is Partisan except when it is bi partisan. Even Partisans can report the news.

The MS media has already shown you this. So really you will have to drop all that one dimensional thinking.

 

It is rather amusing when the people that want Hillary hung at dawn or burned at the stake, seem do not mind that we were lied into an unpaid for war that killed and maimed thousands and put the country in debt, by a political crime family. Even more amusing is that some of these people are Trump supporters that never say a word about his calling the Bush's out on the Iraq debacle.

 

give it up!

I wasn't justifying, I was asking why u all have such a stark double standard when it comes to people in ur party as opposed to those of another party, and why u have no shame about that !

"what's good for the goose, is good for the gander", u know!

I can tell u r smart enough to know, what u r saying is NOT the point

my question was:
"I'm just asking
...as passionately as u want Hillary to be investigated and eventually charged
....why wouldn't want just as passionately, a criminal investigation to determine whether any crimes were committed by the then president, with his preemptive strike on Iraq, a country who hadn't threatened us in any way, and the execution of the resulting war?"

r u going to b the one who is brave enough to answer honestly?

 

just because u can't hold up ur side of the debate, is no reason to blame it on MY intelligence or how many dimension I can contemplate at one time.

believe me! THAT is NOT the problem here!

Maybe it's time for YOU to re-evaluate ur intellectual capacity to rationally consider ideas that r contrary to your own 😘

 

When you pick out a link and try to go for the gusto.....then we will see how your testing comes out. Until then trying to talk the talk won't help your case.

 

exactly!!!!!
...but no matter how many different ways I say what u just said
these guys don't seem to b able to understand it!

glad u did. thank u for ur post!

- - - Updated - - -

that made no sense at all!

 

It should have......even Simon of the Simple couldn't have missed that I already mentioned once that you haven't addressed any links I put up.

 

this is what I said regarding that, right after u posted it!:
"I did read ur links sweetie
... u really have to stop jumping to conclusions like this,
... do u think u r psychic or something
Iol

ur links proved nothing that I haven't acknowledged. I already said, twice, Bill Clinton was wrong about WMD in Iraq. So what? nothing about Bill Clinton has anything to do with whether Hillary or GW should b investigated for crimes against the state."

.. even simple Simon is smart enough to know when someone responds to his questions.
lol
...or did u not even bother to read my response before smacking me for it?

 

Again you didn't address any of my links....and none of them talk about Bill Clinton or Bush Jr.

 

I'm sorry MMC, I confused ur post, with the follow post
I apologize.
-----

usa
Posts: 13,555
Blog Entries: 1
My Latest Mood: Cynical
Default

and ur response makes u sound paranoid and judgemental
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...s/clinton.html

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=55205

Bill Clinton didn't waste any words on his claim of WMD in Iraq or his bombing of suspected sites in Iraq for more than four days. Judgmental you say? Oh, I forgot that was all about his impeachment and his one of his many affairs culminating with an intern.....not about the Iraq Liberation Act.
"A Nation Can Survive It's Fools, and Even the Ambitious, But it Can Not Survive Treason From Within"

 

your link went to an EDITORIAL, that means that it's someone's opinion.
"Opinions are like a**holes, everybody's got one"
lol
....the writers opinion holds no more weight than urs or mine.

we could spend all day hurling accusations at Hillary and GW, and all of them would b beside the point.

I have only made one point in my posts here, and asked one question. so far no one has responded to either.

the statement:
Hilary hasn't even been called to testify yet,
... don't you think it's premature to declare her guilty?

the question:
"I'm just asking
...as passionately as u want Hillary to be investigated and eventually charged
....why wouldn't want just as passionately, a criminal investigation to determine whether any crimes were committed by the then president, with his preemptive strike on Iraq, a country who hadn't threatened us in any way, and the execution of the resulting war?"

so MMC, r u going to be the one brave enough to answer it?

 

Weren't you trying to justify Hillary's actions by making claims about Bush someone who has not been in office in more than 7 years? "....why wouldn't want just as passionately, a criminal investigation to determine whether any crimes were committed by the then president, with his preemptive strike on Iraq, a country who hadn't threatened us in any way, and the execution of the resulting war?"
One could take into account at the same time Hillary's direct actions in the coups d'état and assassination of Gaddafi in Libya. An act prohibited by Federal law. Then not to mention Hillary's use of a 'Private Server' and emails. It shows by your juvenile responses that you are incapable of accepting the criminal illegalities of your ideological idols.

 

lame dodge !
(unladylike snort)

 

Reeks of more like an unladylike capitulation to the truth.... by claiming a lame dodge.

 

I have several links up in this thread.....any editorials would be due to something already reported by State, The IC, MS Media, and or overseas New Sources, etc etc. Also editorials do have to have some valid facts in them in order to give their editorial. So to OP-eds. Its knowing which are the facts and their opinions.

Anyone who gives up breaches of National Security, mishandles classified info, or did anything that Hillary has done. Needs to be charged, indicted, loss of Security clearances forever and removed from government.....Immediately!

Your correlation to anything about Bush and over Iraq. Has nothing to do with what Hillary own actions have caused her. Nor anything she has said out of her mouth.

 

BS!

i've been reading all the posts u have left in the last few days,
. and is easy to see that this is your standard response to anybody who calls you on your tactical dodges. It's certainly not because you're right, it's because you have these lame dodges down to a science. Let me clue you in, if you think all the rest of us haven't figured that out, you are severely underestimated our intelligence

- - - Updated - - -

you are absolutely wrong my friend, and everyone here with a brain is laughing at u
lol

 

Try again.....only Hillary is responsible for her own actions and what she says out of her mouth. That's on her for Lying and being dishonest.

The only ones laughing now are all those watching you use the Buuuuuuuuuuuuuush excuse. Although, it gets old fast, as another will come and take your place with not being in the knowing too.

 

once again, instead of talking about everything else but...,,
please address the following. I can't count how many times I've asked,
and u guys have refused to address it
....all u all have done is tried to diverting attention to other side issues.

...as I've asked many times before:
Hilary hasn't even been called to testify yet,
... don't you think it's premature to declare her guilty?

"I'm just asking
...as passionately as u want Hillary to be investigated and eventually charged
....why wouldn't want just as passionately, a criminal investigation to determine whether any crimes were committed by the then president, with his preemptive strike on Iraq, a country who hadn't threatened us in any way, and the execution of the resulting war?"

 

I will leave U to your delusions
lol
obviously, u have no intention of giving a fair evaluation to any point or logic, other than ur own

 

No one was talking about everything else. They were talking about what is know factually about Clinton and her Email/Server scandal.

Currently, anyone else that pulled what Hillary did. Would have been indicted.

No its not premature if one goes by the Law. Which all those laws have been repeatedly placed up in many many threads about Hillary. All due to another like you. Coming around and asking if things were premature.

Because there is no comparison to Bush and what you call a preemptive Strike on Iraq. Moreover.....would you then indict all the Demos that voted for the Iraq War.

Including the first preemptive strike on Hillary for her vote on taking out Saddam who her hubby screwed up with. Should we would look into that Revenge motive by Hillary against Saddam for making her hubby look like a fool before the entire planet?

 

You have to understand, brown font man MMC fashions himself as a very important "political operative" who thinks he, by posting on this internet forum, has the power to make the State Dept.and Hillary herself shake in their boots.

I'm not kidding. This is what he really believes. He has said so.

Insecurity drives people to some very strange places.

 

lol
still refusing to directly answer my questions
...I assume because u have no answer
so let me give u one

u bought into everything ur party has to say about her,
...plain and simple, u just hate her. it makes no difference to u that she has been investigated and harangued by the R's since she was First Lady of Ark. and has NEVER been charged with anything

with GW, u have faith and confidence in ANYTHING ur party chooses to do, and u follow them blindly
...and r proud of it

 

really
roflmbo!

that makes perfect sense!
as I said before, he seemed dillusuonal to me

 

He imagines his posts are soooo powerful that Hillary and the State Dept are literally being kept "depressed, worried and trembling" by what he writes here.

Delusional posts like that are hard to forget.

Maybe it's that gripping gimmick effect of the brown.

 

Then that should be reason again for you not supporting her since she was one of the most vocal and unequivocal supporters to that war. And that support was based on her OWN conversations with those SHE trusted in the military and intelligence agencies and her OWN knowledge from her husband's administration.

So who you supporting now?