Hillary Emails/Private Server (THREADS MERGED)

[TheBlueVue 177]

Hillary's problems are just getting started and I have an endless supply of popcorn in the cupboard.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/reporter-doj-fbi-super-pissed-off-at-obama-white-house-over-clinton-investigation-video/

[AURaptor 1,128]

More FOX news noise. Nothing to see here.

[TheBlueVue 177]

More FOX news noise. Nothing to see here.

Except I would put catherine herridge's reporting ahead of just about everyone else's in america when it comes to the FBI and the DoJ and this investigation because she is making legitimate effort while the MSM just reports the Clinton campaigns talking points.

[AURaptor 1,128]

The more competent and fact based a reporter is, the less the Left are willing to listen. CH might as well be Sharyl Attkisson, who the Left try to paint as some delusional , far right-wing conspiracy lunatic.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Can't help but notice how some here ignore the obvious, Hillary's impending indictment, and her undeniable lies, and just carry on as if it's just another election.

I will say this. We've been down this road before with Bill and Hillary. Many times we've thought this is the end of them. Yet they still have a knack for evading trouble and sticking around. I'm not convinced she will be indicted. Now this is all great campaign material for the eventual Republican nominee.

NOT when the issue was espionage and compromising the security of the country. This is a far different set of issues. This is not just cattle futures, or file gate, lying about sex in the Oval Office or any number of other unsavory or unethical scams run by the Clintons.

You've got to have a U.S. attorney willing to bring the indictment. Is there one that will? Does Bill have something that would cause fhe administration to hold off and not do anything. The FBI can't bring charges on their own.

If the DOJ doesn't bring charges and she is ultimately elected POTUS, then the House could appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate her......aka Ken Starr. She is going to go down this time one way or another.

[cooltigger21 0]

Can't help but notice how some here ignore the obvious, Hillary's impending indictment, and her undeniable lies, and just carry on as if it's just another election.

I will say this. We've been down this road before with Bill and Hillary. Many times we've thought this is the end of them. Yet they still have a knack for evading trouble and sticking around. I'm not convinced she will be indicted. Now this is all great campaign material for the eventual Republican nominee.

NOT when the issue was espionage and compromising the security of the country. This is a far different set of issues. This is not just cattle futures, or file gate, lying about sex in the Oval Office or any number of other unsavory or unethical scams run by the Clintons.

You've got to have a U.S. attorney willing to bring the indictment. Is there one that will? Does Bill have something that would cause fhe administration to hold off and not do anything. The FBI can't bring charges on their own.

Can tge house do that? I wasn't aware that they could. I was under the impression that the DOJ had to do it. Either way counting on that bunch of weenies to actually do anything is a risky proposition. They would likely cower in fear at the criticism from. The Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media.

If the DOJ doesn't bring charges and she is ultimately elected POTUS, then the House could appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate her......aka Ken Starr. She is going to go down this time one way or another.

[TexasTiger 13,054]

Ahhhhhhhhhh! We are all going to die! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh! Socialism! It's everywhere!

Ah yes, the snowplow. A device so complex, so sophisticated, so cutting-edge, that only government can put it to good use.

I think you miss the point.

No, I get it. "Snowplows are good to have when it snows. Government has snowplows. Therefore, let me apply a poor understanding of the meaning of the word 'socialism' to make someone feel hypocritical, and fool them into thinking if you don't want something done by government, you must not want it done at all."

No, I get it quite well. I just find it a little tedious.

Thanks for confirming you don't get it. Most hardcore libertarians advocate for a system that's never existed anywhere and they don't understand why that is.

[AURaptor 1,128]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

[TheBlueVue 177]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

[AURaptor 1,128]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

Tex =

Life of Julia

[TexasTiger 13,054]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

[AURaptor 1,128]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

So, because public roads exist, and fire / police are paid for by taxes, we must ALSO allow the govt to dictate to us how much soda we drink, what our thermostat should be set at, which doctors we're allowed to see, how many guns ( if any ) we can own, etc...\

TexasTiger's position is Reductio ad absurdum. We have roads, therefore big, intrusive govt is good.

[TexasTiger 13,054]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

So, because public roads exist, and fire / police are paid for by taxes, we must ALSO allow the govt to dictate to us how much soda we drink, what our thermostat should be set at, which doctors we're allowed to see, how many guns ( if any ) we can own, etc...\

TexasTiger's position is Reductio ad absurdum. We have roads, therefore big, intrusive govt is good.

youre incapable of discerning another's argument because you lack the most basic analytical skills. I guess that's why you only argue against these views you ascribe to others.

[AURaptor 1,128]

Actually, I'm all too capable, and it leaves you with nothing to say but insults.

[TheBlueVue 177]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

Do you not know? Just aheads up..the govt doesn't pay for damned thing except with money they confiscate from citizens. Here's how it all works when the govt is involved..spend 10 times more than it actually costs regardless the job, then have public service union workers strike for more money and better benefits. Rinse and repeat.....other people's money is a helluva drug! Just because the govt is doing these things doesn't mean they're doing them efficiently or with the same sense of urgency as it relates to containing costs as private sector companies do.

[TexasTiger 13,054]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

Do you not know? Just aheads up..the govt doesn't pay for damned thing except with money they confiscate from citizens. Here's how it all works when the govt is involved..spend 10 times more than it actually costs regardless the job, then have public service union workers strike for more money and better benefits. Rinse and repeat.....other people's money is a helluva drug! Just because the govt is doing these things doesn't mean they're doing them efficiently or with the same sense of urgency as it relates to containing costs as private sector companies do.

You don't know. Ok. All you did was complain about the current system-- anyone can do that. What do you propose that's better? Once we eliminate taxes, what you call confiscation, then what? Contribute something for once. Dazzle us with your brilliance.

[AURaptor 1,128]

Eliminate taxes ...

More absurdity

[TexasTiger 13,054]

Eliminate taxes ...

More absurdity

See Blue, even Raptor thinks your crazy and that's like a frog calling you ugly.

[TheBlueVue 177]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

Do you not know? Just aheads up..the govt doesn't pay for damned thing except with money they confiscate from citizens. Here's how it all works when the govt is involved..spend 10 times more than it actually costs regardless the job, then have public service union workers strike for more money and better benefits. Rinse and repeat.....other people's money is a helluva drug! Just because the govt is doing these things doesn't mean they're doing them efficiently or with the same sense of urgency as it relates to containing costs as private sector companies do.

You don't know. Ok. All you did was complain about the current system. What do you propose that's better? Once we eliminate taxes, what you call confiscation, then what? Contribute something for once. Dazzle us with your brilliance.

There is no then what? i simply get a bit weary having to listen how our society could not get along without the federal govt. The govt's role has expanded so far beyond what its role was originally envisioned the question that I'm preoccupied with is..... where does it ever stop? I'm fine with local govts providing services to local citizens. What Im not fine with is the incessant expansion of federal intrusion into things they should leave to states. Clearing the roads with snow plows is not a good example but the same MO applies to local govts as well, just on a smaller scale.

Im sorry I dont believe that the govt is the best solution to every problem large and small. I'd much prefer they stick to public safety, national security, carrying the mail and securing our borders most of which they don't do a very good job of.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Eliminate taxes ...

More absurdity

See Blue, even Raptor thinks your crazy and that's like a frog calling you ugly.

He may think Im crazy, Ive certainly been accused of worse things especially in this forum but you could really help me out by directing me to the post where I advocated eliminating taxes...would ya please?

[TexasTiger 13,054]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

Do you not know? Just aheads up..the govt doesn't pay for damned thing except with money they confiscate from citizens. Here's how it all works when the govt is involved..spend 10 times more than it actually costs regardless the job, then have public service union workers strike for more money and better benefits. Rinse and repeat.....other people's money is a helluva drug! Just because the govt is doing these things doesn't mean they're doing them efficiently or with the same sense of urgency as it relates to containing costs as private sector companies do.

You don't know. Ok. All you did was complain about the current system. What do you propose that's better? Once we eliminate taxes, what you call confiscation, then what? Contribute something for once. Dazzle us with your brilliance.

There is no then what? i simply get a bit weary having to listen how our society could not get along without the federal govt. The govt's role has expanded so far beyond what its role was originally envisioned the question that I'm preoccupied with is..... where does it ever stop? I'm fine with local govts providing services to local citizens. What Im not fine with is the incessant expansion of federal intrusion into things they should leave to states. Clearing the roads with snow plows is not a good example but the same MO applies to local govts as well, just on a smaller scale.

Im sorry I dont believe that the govt is the best solution to every problem large and small. I'd much prefer they stick to public safety, national security, carrying the mail and securing our borders most of which they don't do a very good job of.

List some of the actual intrusions you object to.

[TexasTiger 13,054]

Eliminate taxes ...

More absurdity

See Blue, even Raptor thinks your crazy and that's like a frog calling you ugly.

He may think Im crazy, Ive certainly been accused of worse things especially in this forum but you could really help me out by directing me to the post where I advocated eliminating taxes...would ya please?

You said the gubment only gets funds from confiscating it from citizens-- there was a clear implication you thought that was wrong.

[TheBlueVue 177]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

Do you not know? Just aheads up..the govt doesn't pay for damned thing except with money they confiscate from citizens. Here's how it all works when the govt is involved..spend 10 times more than it actually costs regardless the job, then have public service union workers strike for more money and better benefits. Rinse and repeat.....other people's money is a helluva drug! Just because the govt is doing these things doesn't mean they're doing them efficiently or with the same sense of urgency as it relates to containing costs as private sector companies do.

You don't know. Ok. All you did was complain about the current system. What do you propose that's better? Once we eliminate taxes, what you call confiscation, then what? Contribute something for once. Dazzle us with your brilliance.

There is no then what? i simply get a bit weary having to listen how our society could not get along without the federal govt. The govt's role has expanded so far beyond what its role was originally envisioned the question that I'm preoccupied with is..... where does it ever stop? I'm fine with local govts providing services to local citizens. What Im not fine with is the incessant expansion of federal intrusion into things they should leave to states. Clearing the roads with snow plows is not a good example but the same MO applies to local govts as well, just on a smaller scale.

Im sorry I dont believe that the govt is the best solution to every problem large and small. I'd much prefer they stick to public safety, national security, carrying the mail and securing our borders most of which they don't do a very good job of.

List some of the actual intrusions you object to.

Making schools serve certain lunches or cut off their funding. Common core. Un-elected judges engaging in judicial activism and making laws on whims rather than sticking to the Constitution. No child left behind may be the worst piece of legislation ever enacted and yes I know it was a Geo Bush initiative..its still awful because it encourages teacher fraud and grade fixing. Requiring citizens to buy health insurance or fining them $695 if they dont. I mean seriously Tex, there is an awful lot they do they needn't bother. Bloomberg outlawing sugary drinks in NYC...the list is virtually endless and it seems to grow each year. The use of administrative law to enact regulatory requirements that costs the private sector billions of dollars to be compliant.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Eliminate taxes ...

More absurdity

See Blue, even Raptor thinks your crazy and that's like a frog calling you ugly.

He may think Im crazy, Ive certainly been accused of worse things especially in this forum but you could really help me out by directing me to the post where I advocated eliminating taxes...would ya please?

You said the gubment only gets funds from confiscating it from citizens-- there was a clear implication you thought that was wrong.

Thats your interpretation. I believe confiscation is an accurate term especially when you have corporate inversions happening at an alarming rate whereby companies are leaving this country in droves to avoid the confiscatory corporate tax rates which happen to be the HIGHEST in the world.

[TexasTiger 13,054]

No we don't

We just don't need s nanny state running our lives

Evidently, Tex has never seen a govt program that wasn't better than the private sector which requires enormous delusion. He'll have to pardon me if, unlike him, govt sponsored programs and govt employees do not spring immediately to my mind when contemplating competence, efficiency or effectiveness.

So in your ideal world, do public roads exist? If so, please explain to me who pays for roads, how exactly that works, and who removes the snow and how that works.

Do you not know? Just aheads up..the govt doesn't pay for damned thing except with money they confiscate from citizens. Here's how it all works when the govt is involved..spend 10 times more than it actually costs regardless the job, then have public service union workers strike for more money and better benefits. Rinse and repeat.....other people's money is a helluva drug! Just because the govt is doing these things doesn't mean they're doing them efficiently or with the same sense of urgency as it relates to containing costs as private sector companies do.

You don't know. Ok. All you did was complain about the current system. What do you propose that's better? Once we eliminate taxes, what you call confiscation, then what? Contribute something for once. Dazzle us with your brilliance.

There is no then what? i simply get a bit weary having to listen how our society could not get along without the federal govt. The govt's role has expanded so far beyond what its role was originally envisioned the question that I'm preoccupied with is..... where does it ever stop? I'm fine with local govts providing services to local citizens. What Im not fine with is the incessant expansion of federal intrusion into things they should leave to states. Clearing the roads with snow plows is not a good example but the same MO applies to local govts as well, just on a smaller scale.

Im sorry I dont believe that the govt is the best solution to every problem large and small. I'd much prefer they stick to public safety, national security, carrying the mail and securing our borders most of which they don't do a very good job of.

List some of the actual intrusions you object to.

Making schools serve certain lunches or cut off their funding. Common core. Un-elected judges engaging in judicial activism and making laws on whims rather than sticking to the Constitution. No child left behind may be the worst piece of legislation ever enacted and yes I know it was a Geo Bush initiative..its still awful because it encourages teacher fraud and grade fixing. Requiring citizens to buy health insurance or fining them $695 if they dont. I mean seriously Tex, there is an awful lot they do they needn't bother. Bloomberg outlawing sugary drinks in NYC...the list is virtually endless and it seems to grow each year. The use of administrative law to enact regulatory requirements that costs the private sector billions of dollars to be compliant.

Most of the education regulations you mention a state can refuse-- if they comply they get funds. Bloomberg is local, not Federal.