I didn't paraphrase anything. I pasted the article and highlighted the first part in red. here's the exact quote from delay which was also in the article. "I have friends that are in the FBI and they tell me they're ready to indict," DeLay said Monday on "The Steve Malzberg Show." Maybe you should work on your own reading comprehension before criticizing others. Why you choose to go after Newsmax instead of the actual person who gave the quote is puzzling. DeLay is just another scumbag politician who could very well be making shit up. Newsmax just reported what he said.
You still don't get it, and I'm not surprised. Maybe you shouldn't be recklessly cutting and pasting and highlighting if you don't understand what you're posting. Newsmax is what you quoted. They claim to have quoted DeLay and interpreted his statements dubiously, if he was correctly quoted at all. Are we to assume that Tom DeLay does not understand the FBI lacks the authority to indict? Or is it more likely you don't? Is it possible the "they" he used referred to other than the FBI, like maybe the Justice Department? Or do you just blindly follow a line you agree with, even if it cannot be true? Only if you don't know what you're talking about. Now you do.
It is clear why NSN was spreading this rumor. First of all he thinks rumors he agrees with are facts. Second he is so afraid of HRC as a candidate on the merits he thinks this phony email story is enough to end her candidacy. Or hopes and prays it is. I can't believe he is so dumb as to think that source and story are persuasive to anyone who does not share his starting point. Why it is persuasive to him is just an example of wishful thinking on his part.
Liberal MO. Ignore big picture. Nitpick something pointless (in this case the wording of one sentence). Yawn.
Right, 74, why let pesky things like FACTS get in the way of a good rant? Get back to me when, and if, someone gets indicted, especially if the FBI does it - when the rule of law is changed to suit political rants that would be news.
Where have I said that what Delay said is a fact? You are really getting far out on a limb now. You're also a liar. I will give you, I certainly do NOT want HRC as POTUS. Again, the FBI investigation is as real as it gets, no matter how much you want to bury your head in the sand. The fact is, Hillary was found with highly classified material on an unsecured server. Now, shouldn't she go to jail if she broke the law?
Did you say the story YOU quoted and brought into this forum was a rumor? A second hand hearsay source of an obvious partisan does not rise to a fact. It is not a lie what I said. An FBI investigation is not the same as an indictment. You are obviously hoping and praying that HRC is indicted and her campaign is derailed. You are virtually salivating over the prospect. Funny, for some reason that reminds me of how gung ho you were on the whole Planned Parenthood story that has turned out to be a travesty of a story based on nothing. I tried to warn you about Planned Parenthood. You wouldn't listen. You're not listening now. Whether classified material is on someone's server in itself does not mean that person committed a crime, let alone will go to jail, and it certainly does not mean if that person is a female that she is a smelly bitch. I personally hope this election will be about a competition of ideas, with the ones that a majority of Americans think, not propangandized by billionaire agenda driven hijackers of our country's discourse but on the merits, is best for our country. The country we share. Sure, some people should be disqualified for appropriate reasons from such a contest. But HRC has been the target of GOP attacks for nearly 25 years, and she's still standing. I don't assume that she's about to go down now, or because some right wing website says so.
Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison. Our founding fathers were particularly concerned with the character of our presidents for good reason. Hilary has none.
Given your other posts here, I am quite shocked to see you get personal and not stay on the merits of policy differences. Are you really a second handle for someone making fun of your type? I don't think I could do any better if I was inclined to do that. You are a laughable stereotype. I am no huge fan of hers. But people calling her names like bitch do so for behavior that in a man they might even admire. It's obvious.
Not in the slightest. I am not the one who posted a link to an article with a blatantly false headline. I am not the one who highlighted the falsehood in red. This is not something that is simply incorrect, it is something that is not possible under our rule of law. There are only two reasons to do that: 1) An attempt to deceive 2) Ignorance Which is it?
