Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/8/16 12:24 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 12:03:26 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 7/8/16 7:55 AM, Tim wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2016 at 2:28:12 AM UTC-5, Boating All Out wrote:
Couldn't lay a glove on him.
"No evidence warranting prosecution."
And he wouldn't even go so far as to say Hilary couldn't join the FBI due
to previous "careless" handling of classified material.
Not that makes any difference, seeing that Hilary doesn't want that job.
Pretty much trashed the Republican calls for prosecution, and gave the
house a schooling on the law.
Of course the Hilary witch-hunt will continue, because that's what
Republicans do.
Now, the question is to vote for Hilary, or Trump.
It's a no-brainer, but that's assuming a brain is present.
Well, I'm throwing down my cards.
Hilary 2016!

She might need your help. Look at "latest polls"

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/...vorable-rating


D'uh. That's not a preference poll.

No it is a "chart that combines the latest opinion polls into
trendlines and is updated whenever a new poll is released".

It is clear that the consensus of favorable to unfavorable crossed in
February.
I bet Trump's charts are similar.

Put the dice back in the cup, Shake it again!


I'm interested in the match-up polls. The "favorable-unfavorable" polls
are a different animal.




Why?
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Wrote in message:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 12:30:49 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 7/8/16 12:24 PM, wrote:

D'uh. That's not a preference poll.

No it is a "chart that combines the latest opinion polls into
trendlines and is updated whenever a new poll is released".

It is clear that the consensus of favorable to unfavorable crossed in
February.
I bet Trump's charts are similar.

Put the dice back in the cup, Shake it again!


I'm interested in the match-up polls. The "favorable-unfavorable" polls
are a different animal.


Anything that makes Hillary look good huh?

You really are binary. You only see 2 choices.


Luddite is not just another pretty face. He and we have
Krausebergs number.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Tim Wrote in message:

11:03 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
D'uh. That's not a preference poll.
....

To you, if it said Trump on it then it would be.

Face it Harry, she ain't doing to great at the moment..


Too great Tim. No she ain't. And that gives us hope.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

justan wrote:
Califbill Wrote in message:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/16 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 12:05:20 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:


I'm sorry, but what crimes has Mrs. Clinton been charged with or
convicted of? Answer: none. Your boy Trump is a lot closer to the bar of
criminal justice.

They reran the whole hearing last night. I watched Comey explain his
position. The thing that was consistent was that he stood by his
assessment that Hillary was "extremely careless" with national secrets
and that someone in her position should know better about what she was
sending and receiving.
When asked about presumptive penalties he stayed with "administrative
sanctions" and when questioned about them he said that included loss
of security clearance and being fired or moved to a position that does
not involve sensitive information.
OK by me.
If they want to make her secretary of HSS or Education, I am fine with
it but president is not a good fit for a careless person, whether that
is Hillary or Trump.

It was interesting to hear what the democrat members were saying. They
either tried to pivot to the police shootings or said some variation
of "what difference does it make"?

He did answer the direct question "did you ever think this was a witch
hunt" by saying no. He also said the only reason he took this up was
because of a direct request by the IG. The FBI does not respond to
things they see on TV.



I'm sorry...what crimes did Mrs. Clinton been charged with or convicted of?




What crime did they Al Capone on?



Tax evasion. So why didn't Harry get similar treatment? Fair is fair.

Because he did not evade billions in taxes, and was a minor criminal, just
associated with the big shots.

On 7/8/16 5:54 PM, justan wrote:
Tim Wrote in message:
11:05 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I'm sorry, but what crimes has Mrs. Clinton been charged with or
convicted of? Answer: none. Your boy Trump is a lot closer to the bar of
criminal justice.
...

"My boy Trump". Hardly. Where on earth do you come up with that presumptive crap anyhow?


He's full of it.


So, FlaJim, are you enjoying your status as:

"...just a sniveling little coward, sitting in his basement slinging
**** and hoping nobody will ever figure out who he is."

Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/8/16 5:54 PM, justan wrote:
Tim Wrote in message:
11:05 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I'm sorry, but what crimes has Mrs. Clinton been charged with or
convicted of? Answer: none. Your boy Trump is a lot closer to the bar of
criminal justice.
...

"My boy Trump". Hardly. Where on earth do you come up with that presumptive crap anyhow?


He's full of it.


So, FlaJim, are you enjoying your status as:

"...just a sniveling little coward, sitting in his basement slinging
**** and hoping nobody will ever figure out who he is."


I really don't give a crap about your perceptions. But I do
appreciate the fact that you are seriously bothered by my little
jabs.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 7/8/16 9:02 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/8/16 5:54 PM, justan wrote:
Tim Wrote in message:
11:05 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I'm sorry, but what crimes has Mrs. Clinton been charged with or
convicted of? Answer: none. Your boy Trump is a lot closer to the bar of
criminal justice.
...

"My boy Trump". Hardly. Where on earth do you come up with that presumptive crap anyhow?


He's full of it.


So, FlaJim, are you enjoying your status as:

"...just a sniveling little coward, sitting in his basement slinging
**** and hoping nobody will ever figure out who he is."


I really don't give a crap about your perceptions.
But I do
appreciate the fact that you are seriously bothered by my little
jabs.



Nothing about you bothers me. You're just a sniveling little coward,
sitting in his basement or wherever, slinging **** and hoping no one
will publish your real name here.

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/16 9:02 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/8/16 5:54 PM, justan wrote:
Tim Wrote in message:
11:05 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text -
I'm sorry, but what crimes has Mrs. Clinton been charged with or
convicted of? Answer: none. Your boy Trump is a lot closer to the bar of
criminal justice.
...

"My boy Trump". Hardly. Where on earth do you come up with that
presumptive crap anyhow?


He's full of it.


So, FlaJim, are you enjoying your status as:

"...just a sniveling little coward, sitting in his basement slinging
**** and hoping nobody will ever figure out who he is."


I really don't give a crap about your perceptions.
But I do
appreciate the fact that you are seriously bothered by my little
jabs.



Nothing about you bothers me. You're just a sniveling little coward,
sitting in his basement or wherever, slinging **** and hoping no one
will publish your real name here.


Pretty much a reflection of yourself.

Boating All Out wrote:
Couldn't lay a glove on him.
"No evidence warranting prosecution."
And he wouldn't even go so far as to say Hilary couldn't join the FBI due
to previous "careless" handling of classified material.
Not that makes any difference, seeing that Hilary doesn't want that job.
Pretty much trashed the Republican calls for prosecution, and gave the
house a schooling on the law.
Of course the Hilary witch-hunt will continue, because that's what
Republicans do.
Now, the question is to vote for Hilary, or Trump.
It's a no-brainer, but that's assuming a brain is present.
Well, I'm throwing down my cards.
Hilary 2016!


Relax, Kevin.

Alex Wrote in message:
Boating All Out wrote:
Couldn't lay a glove on him.
"No evidence warranting prosecution."
And he wouldn't even go so far as to say Hilary couldn't join the FBI due
to previous "careless" handling of classified material.
Not that makes any difference, seeing that Hilary doesn't want that job.
Pretty much trashed the Republican calls for prosecution, and gave the
house a schooling on the law.
Of course the Hilary witch-hunt will continue, because that's what
Republicans do.
Now, the question is to vote for Hilary, or Trump.
It's a no-brainer, but that's assuming a brain is present.
Well, I'm throwing down my cards.
Hilary 2016!


Relax, Kevin.


In a political world of corruption, I'm amazed at how few of the
pols are prosecuted and convicted. There seems to be a double
standard even though the FBofI guy denies it. He's a bought
man.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/