2016 Postmortem

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)

19. Then why is a judge appointed by Bill Clinton going forward with it? n/t

Reply to rbrnmw (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 23, 2016, 10:26 PM

Feb 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Federal Judge's Decision Makes Clinton's Candidacy Fraught With Problems Going Forward: [View all] KoKo Feb 2016 OP

Maybe the super delegates will come in handy after all. nt. Warren Stupidity Feb 2016 #1

So Who Is Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan? Is He a Fox News Right Winger? KoKo Feb 2016 #2

Doesn't seem like a Rightwinger. highprincipleswork Feb 2016 #9

This message was self-deleted by its author highprincipleswork Feb 2016 #12

Appointed By Pres. Bill Clinton .... Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #14

OMG, really? CharlotteVale Feb 2016 #23

Where is the much-vaunted political adroitness we are constantly told is her strength? Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #3

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Feb 2016 #4

That part says it all. rbrnmw Feb 2016 #5

That's what they used to say about classified materials on the server. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #7

Vote for me: I am not under criminal investigation nichomachus Feb 2016 #8

That is a pretty low bar. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #15

no the suit is by rbrnmw Feb 2016 #18

Then why is a judge appointed by Bill Clinton going forward with it? n/t Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #19

because it's his district rbrnmw Feb 2016 #21

Why did he order discovery to go forward? Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #22

see post 20 rbrnmw Feb 2016 #24

So a Clinton appointed Judge is moving forward with a witch hunt? Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #26

it was filed in his district rbrnmw Feb 2016 #27

I am aware of that. You don't seem to understand the argument. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #29

LOL! Joe the Revelator Feb 2016 #32

They won't answer your question. HooptieWagon Feb 2016 #28

I've got to try. Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #30

OK, but why then did a CLINTON APPOINTED judge agree with them? nt mhatrw Feb 2016 #33

And our party is too busy trying to shove her up our asses that they aren't paying attention. Cobalt Violet Feb 2016 #6

Because this is kabuki theater & the only way the top 0.1% can put a Repuke back in the Oval Office. mhatrw Feb 2016 #34

What bothers me most about this, is that it was a proactive gaffe. Gore1FL Feb 2016 #10

Maybe time to go to court to force Clinton to release paid speeches Arizona Roadrunner Feb 2016 #11

her paid speeches were as a private citizen, not a public employee magical thyme Feb 2016 #16

Be careful about "ignoring things". Not something I'd want on my plate, or my candidate's. highprincipleswork Feb 2016 #13

Sec. Clinton Doesn't Ignore Things ... Impedimentus Feb 2016 #17

This judge was just making a procedural ruling. Trust Buster Feb 2016 #20

thanks rbrnmw Feb 2016 #25

Look I don't think any DU'ers have any regard for Larry Klayman..... KoKo Feb 2016 #31

You are spot on about FOIA requests Impedimentus Feb 2016 #35

And the ruling was in Klayman's favor. mhatrw Feb 2016 #36

Apparently the State Department has been slow in its response Impedimentus Feb 2016 #37

Why has the state department been slow in its response? mhatrw Feb 2016 #38

Because it's a procedurally correct motion (nt) Recursion Feb 2016 #42

ANALYSIS: No, Hillary Clinton Did Not Commit a Crime ... at Least Based on What We Know Today Gothmog Feb 2016 #39

The attorney who wrote this is apparently not entirely familiar with the law concerning security ... Impedimentus Feb 2016 #41

You are wrong Gothmog Feb 2016 #45

I expect a higher standard than "legal." n/t Gore1FL Feb 2016 #43

There will be no indictment of Hillary Clinton due to the silly e-mail claims Gothmog Feb 2016 #44

Are you too Young to remember Nixon and Watergate? KoKo Feb 2016 #46

I worked on the George McGovern campaign as a volunteer Gothmog Feb 2016 #47

This is not good. blackspade Feb 2016 #40

kick n/t PonyUp Feb 2016 #48

Check out Reply 29 email chain RunInCircles Feb 2016 #49