Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Please explain this newest e-mail controversy / Weiner / Huma thing"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous]This whole thing is reminding me more and more of the Salem witch trials. Mass hysteria over nothing.[/quote] This exactly. I can understand this from the Trumpsters, but I don't understand it from the others. [/quote] Tell this to the mother of the young officer serving time in jail for taking a selfie on a submarine and told his superiors immediately. She, as secretary of state, violated security protocol standard for everyone in that department, except for HRC. This isn't difficult to get why so many people are pissed at this, she is not the exception and I am disappointed that you spend so much time trying to defend her dishonesty. [/quote] You want to re-litigate everything from the past several years. That has been investigated by numerous Congressional committees and the FBI. No charges were pressed. You can be pissed off as much as you want, but facts are facts. I've never defended Clinton's use of a private server. It was a stupid thing to do. But, those responsible for investigations found no reason to charge her. The issue we are discussing here is not the past -- as much as you prefer to do that -- but the current situation. Given that we know nothing about the newly-discovered emails, why are so many people jumping to conclusions? [/quote] She violated national security standards, period. You can sugar coat it anyway you want but there is no getting around that, I mean Jesus, she put the nuclear code info out at the debate. This woman is a loose cannon and can and should be judged based on her past experiences. Now, based on what she has come to show us in her recent past, she is more likely to try another coverup and we are now expected to give her a benefit of the doubt after her numerous cover ups and lies. No, no … she does not get anyone's benefit of the doubt any longer. She is the boy who cried wolf, it's never her, but somehow it always circles back to her lies. The world is sick of covering her ass, which is what you are doing.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics