General Discussion

pengu

(462 posts)

51. I find these sorts of posts from higher ups telling

Reply to Skinner (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:42 AM

May 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I am so mad at Terry McAuliffe right now I could spit [View all] Joe the Revelator May 2016 OP

Maybe we should wait SickOfTheOnePct May 2016 #1

One thread dumping on McAuliffe wasn't enough? (nt) Skinner May 2016 #2

No it wasn't skinner. Its your board, you want to delete it, you delete it. However... Joe the Revelator May 2016 #6

Skinner. The whiff of corruption has long emanated from McAuliffe cali May 2016 #13

No, no, time to shut down discussion! Seriously Skinner, to make a comment like that, you should Joe the Revelator May 2016 #15

Guilty until proven innocent. joshcryer May 2016 #25

We need to start holding the politically powerful accountable. leveymg May 2016 #29

Um, no. You go to jail when there's a case. joshcryer May 2016 #31

Um, no, if you or I did what HRC did we'd have been indicted in 2015 leveymg May 2016 #34

Nope, we would've been fired. joshcryer May 2016 #40

Federal Records Act has no teeth. Sec 793 is a 10 year felony. leveymg May 2016 #44

If they didn't hit Petraeus with it... joshcryer May 2016 #45

Petraeus was charged w/793e but pled down to 1924 a misdemeanor. leveymg May 2016 #49

It is pathetic that Petraeus STOLE records from a prior job and gave them to a possible agent Rex May 2016 #67

His paramour was a commissioned officer who had a security clearance. leveymg May 2016 #68

Any links to Florida? Baitball Blogger May 2016 #61

LOL--I have to laugh at the people who will want to convict "some" people ahead of trial, MADem May 2016 #14

Didn't Bernie carpet bag up to Vermont? I seem to recall something pnwmom May 2016 #19

LOL! MADem May 2016 #20

Difference is, Bernie hasn't violated criminal laws. leveymg May 2016 #30

LOL. Yeah, I know you love to prosecute her. But you've never succeeded. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #37

In all likelihood, she'll be pardoned as an unindicted co-conspirator, anyway. leveymg May 2016 #38

What's the point of a grand jury when leveymg has already pronounced her guilt? n/t pnwmom May 2016 #39

Read Paul's Timeline, and come back and explain how she didn't violate federal law. leveymg May 2016 #41

Numerous non-partisan legal analysts, including professors of law and a former pnwmom May 2016 #42

None of them have applied the known facts to a Sec. 793e and f analysis. leveymg May 2016 #43

They will never prosecute her for that because there has a never been a comparable pnwmom May 2016 #46

Sec 793 was invoked in the CIA IG referral in Deutch and Petraeus leveymg May 2016 #48

Neither of those cases is comparable. Politico, Media Matters, and MSM have explained why. pnwmom May 2016 #52

Both of those are written by Clinton partisans and are incomplete and misleading accounts of leveymg May 2016 #54

And none of this very long and impressive post specifically addresses Hillary's case. Nice try. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #57

The CRS study is the official history of such national security prosecutions. leveymg May 2016 #58

You keep mistaking length with relevance. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #59

Do you want to try to explain why the history of Espionage Act prosecutions isn't relevant? leveymg May 2016 #60

I find these sorts of posts from higher ups telling pengu May 2016 #51

So do I. Marr May 2016 #65

Was surprised he was elected, elleng May 2016 #3

That's because the Repubs HAD to nominate The Cooch underpants May 2016 #11

Those are the kind of people that this type of scandal enboldens Joe the Revelator May 2016 #16

As you know they played with putting him on the state Supreme Court underpants May 2016 #55

I agree. Raine1967 May 2016 #32

What did I miss? madinmaryland May 2016 #4

Link Joe the Revelator May 2016 #7

I heard this was about one donor radical noodle May 2016 #5

I remember one of our clients was Global Crossing, it is so sad what happened to that company Rex May 2016 #8

Perhaps this line got lost in the story... brooklynite May 2016 #9

I don't see why that would make it better...this is the money shot Joe the Revelator May 2016 #10

If he's not a target, there won't be any MADem May 2016 #22

Ssh. people don't want to hear that stuff. Raine1967 May 2016 #33

I wish the Justice Dept would come down here and investigate our governor, Asa Hutchinson. LiberalArkie May 2016 #12

To the folks that elected him this won't matter. ileus May 2016 #17

He barely beat the worst GOP candidate in a generation...because he lost the Warner/Kaine coalition Joe the Revelator May 2016 #18

But he won, and our numbers will grow stronger every year. ileus May 2016 #50

That's pretty sad n/t SickOfTheOnePct May 2016 #53

All three are shitty ConservaDems. Odin2005 May 2016 #21

+1 AtomicKitten May 2016 #47

How many threads have you started on this already anigbrowl May 2016 #23

2. They aren't hard to find. Joe the Revelator May 2016 #24

Doesn't seem like a big deal to me metroins May 2016 #26

It's certainly discouraging! Tal Vez May 2016 #27

:) Joe the Revelator May 2016 #28

Virginia has definitely been a battleground state for a long time. Xyzse May 2016 #35

Tell that to the 200,000 people who now get to vote: Raine1967 May 2016 #36

What makes you so sure that Terry isn't running for office again? leveymg May 2016 #62

Virginia law states that a governor cannot run for office for back to back terms. Raine1967 May 2016 #63

I know that! But, there's the Senate and, I suspect, he was on the short list for Vice President. leveymg May 2016 #64

My point was that he's not running for Governor. Raine1967 May 2016 #66

Me too lagomorph777 May 2016 #56