Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

pdsimdars

(6,007 posts)
43. So the FBI are "consipracy kooks" now? Sounds like they're not the ones who have gone off
Sat Apr 30, 2016, 02:07 PM
Apr 2016

the rails

Awww CorkySt.Clair Apr 2016 #1
And still just might. NWCorona Apr 2016 #3
Thanks for that. CorkySt.Clair Apr 2016 #5
It didn't work out to well for that guy nt NWCorona Apr 2016 #33
I would not be surprised if they take their time. Baobab Apr 2016 #83
Post removed Post removed Apr 2016 #6
"Poor Jane"???? As opposed to multi-millionaire Hillary. imagine2015 Apr 2016 #10
Well, we do not know, their refusal to actually release their tax records synergie Apr 2016 #27
I know. And so do you. But fling more mud if that's the best you can do. imagine2015 Apr 2016 #78
You don't know and neither do I, because it's simple fact that they have not been transparent synergie Apr 2016 #84
Nice whisle right there nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #109
It's more millionaire Jane v multimillionaire Hillary. nt COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #35
Jane is a millionaire? News to me. Hillary is a multi-milionarie x at least 150. If Jane silvershadow Apr 2016 #76
Anything about their finances woudl be news to us all, since Bernie and Jane refuse to release their synergie Apr 2016 #85
transcripts? nt silvershadow Apr 2016 #86
Sure, why not have all the candiates release their paid speech transcripts? synergie Apr 2016 #94
They have. Except one. nt silvershadow Apr 2016 #96
That's kooky! I never knew the IRA and the Sandanista's paid for Sanders' speeches! Wow! floppyboo May 2016 #115
Jane and Bernie are more than well off. And I believe COLGATE4 May 2016 #99
Upper middle class nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #110
Its pathetic...this is all the dead enders have to cling to workinclasszero Apr 2016 #18
All to cling to? I'm clinging to hearing from Hillary about her transcripts, breaking up big banks ViseGrip Apr 2016 #21
Ok I'll play workinclasszero Apr 2016 #25
Post removed Post removed Apr 2016 #30
Actually, I'd be more worried about Bernie getting us COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #37
Riiight, because Sanders is such a war hawk notadmblnd Apr 2016 #41
If you think anybody is in a position to make that area a 'garden of Eden' COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #48
And may your god help us all from blood thirsty, power hungry would be leaders notadmblnd Apr 2016 #71
Didn't I just read this post at Free Republic? The language COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #73
I wouldn't know. I don't frequent the site notadmblnd Apr 2016 #75
Then you have someone at FR that thinks almost COLGATE4 May 2016 #100
Facepalm nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #111
I heard that Jane wanted to be "the next Abigail Fillmore" Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #19
Really? I would have picked a different Abigail. Beacool Apr 2016 #87
She might be thinking of the wrong Fillmore. Buzz Clik Apr 2016 #91
LOL!!! Beacool Apr 2016 #92
The problem is nobody knows what the FBI has uncovered if anything. NWCorona Apr 2016 #2
You missed the CSPAN report, not reported anywhere else yet. It's really ViseGrip Apr 2016 #22
I am guessing this is another of those anonymous posts put up on span that has nothing synergie Apr 2016 #28
I meant other than what's currently known NWCorona Apr 2016 #34
Youtube has lots of stuff, do a search on youtube for the clinton email scandal pdsimdars Apr 2016 #40
Wow. Now we have a new meme: It's ESPIONAGE!!!! COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #38
Damn right wing Andy823 Apr 2016 #50
I can't wait! nt COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #54
She's right...even if the results are complete exoneration. Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #4
I doubt that there will ever be complete exoneration tularetom Apr 2016 #8
Lets separate official exoneration from exoneration by conspiracy kooks. nt BootinUp Apr 2016 #14
So the FBI are "consipracy kooks" now? Sounds like they're not the ones who have gone off pdsimdars Apr 2016 #43
you missed my meaning completely, which was exactly the opposite. nt BootinUp Apr 2016 #55
Jane WTH is yours and Bernie's personal financial disclosure??? workinclasszero Apr 2016 #7
Right. The Sander's are hiding millions received from their Wall Street benefactors! imagine2015 Apr 2016 #13
"Get the lead out"? That is NOT what she said. People should look at the video. George II Apr 2016 #9
Everybody knows she did nothing wrong Skink Apr 2016 #11
lol Hiraeth Apr 2016 #31
The ultimate killer argument: "Everybody knows". COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #39
Pathetic. seabeyond Apr 2016 #12
Get it done. Nothing to hide. Right? imagine2015 Apr 2016 #15
It has been done many times and the rw and now Sanders is making sure it will never be done. seabeyond Apr 2016 #20
how is discussing it on Faux News network "not politicizing it" ? BootinUp Apr 2016 #16
I emailed them that they shoud bring it up more. It is a HUGE factor for the Democrats pdsimdars Apr 2016 #45
You mean like the President did? Bob41213 May 2016 #102
I usually try not to get candidates' spouses into these things, but I really don't like her. Zynx Apr 2016 #17
Of course she is honest felix_numinous Apr 2016 #23
There appear to be some serious questions about monies COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #42
Of course, pdsimdars Apr 2016 #47
My goodness, Jane Sanders has the political acumen of an empty paper bag Tarc Apr 2016 #24
"Regurgitating Bernie talking points" BuddhaGirl Apr 2016 #57
Hillary needs a teleprompter at her small meetings. Bernie and Jane don't at their big meetings. imagine2015 May 2016 #103
Perhaps because their dictionary has nothing but "YUUUGE" and "BANK" Tarc May 2016 #117
I don't think they extradited Gruccifer for grins and giggles Kalidurga Apr 2016 #26
And he got Sid's emails to and from Hillary and there was classified info in them pdsimdars Apr 2016 #49
All righty then ClintonEmail.com Kalidurga Apr 2016 #58
what we don't want is our Democratic nominee to be indicted Rosa Luxemburg Apr 2016 #29
I believe the sander's should stop alienating democrats now... dubyadiprecession Apr 2016 #32
At least in my thinking, this thread isn't about party unity but the FBI investigation pdsimdars Apr 2016 #59
Better now than 3 months from now. Or, if elected, one year from now. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #36
Even better than 'not indicted at all', right? COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #44
I doubt she will be. But, if the law calls for it, don't you think she should be? Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #51
If she is it's because the law called for it. What I think COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #53
Then why bother thinking at all? Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #62
Ask a silly question - get a silly answer. COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #70
I was asking you for your opinion. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #72
My opinion, like yours, is totally irrelevant. COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #74
Still no opinion on whether she should be indicted if found to be in violation? Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2016 #77
An indictiment COLGATE4 May 2016 #98
She's got a point and I'm puzzled why Hillary supporters aren't verklempt. Vinca Apr 2016 #46
They are discovering more and more. They thought it would be tied up in January. Now they pdsimdars Apr 2016 #60
Yes look how quickly the White Water investigation wrapped up Buzz cook May 2016 #106
What's your point? Vinca May 2016 #107
That you are Buzz cook May 2016 #112
Or I might prefer reality. Vinca May 2016 #114
Perhaps this may be the first time the Clinton Shuffle doesn't work. libdem4life Apr 2016 #52
Some Republicans have already talked about it. With the emails that have come out, pdsimdars Apr 2016 #63
Yes, the high/low point takeaway from that "amazing performance" was.... libdem4life Apr 2016 #66
I think the email controversy is complete bullshit, but it would be nice to get it out of the way killbotfactory Apr 2016 #56
Yea, except they have 2 emails of her explaining to someone on her staff pdsimdars Apr 2016 #64
Our government officials are largely clueless when it comes to tech issues. killbotfactory Apr 2016 #67
Again, you base it on what you "think" rather than what happened,. pdsimdars Apr 2016 #80
They also have emails between her 840high Apr 2016 #68
It should not matter whether Hillary concerns herself with the minutiae of IT policy or not. -none Apr 2016 #69
And they are required by law to report it if they see any misuse of classified information. pdsimdars Apr 2016 #81
Reality and the law says yes. But it depends on who is abusing things. -none Apr 2016 #93
Isn't Ms. Sanders being investigated for irregularities RandySF Apr 2016 #61
They can start investigating Jane next, hopefully they will get the lead out and Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #65
No imagine2015 Apr 2016 #79
Interesting fact I heard today pdsimdars Apr 2016 #82
If I had been attacked for years and years. Demsrule86 Apr 2016 #89
Really? Punkingal Apr 2016 #97
Jane figured out that an indictment would be the only way that her husband could get the nomination. Beacool Apr 2016 #88
Jane needs to stop doing interviews Yavin4 Apr 2016 #90
"Jane needs to stop doing interviews This is not helping his cause." Is that a sexist comment? imagine2015 May 2016 #104
Is Jane on the ballot somewhere? brooklynite May 2016 #116
Oh, the gloat will be FANTASTIC alcibiades_mystery Apr 2016 #95
damn that rule of law AgerolanAmerican May 2016 #101
Seems to me HRC supporters would be inclined to agree with Jane Sanders on this matter. Get it done 2banon May 2016 #105
Where are the tax returns, Jane? Why the foot dragging? Hekate May 2016 #108
This thread feeds into the ugliness and hatefulness of anti-Bernie commenters. senz May 2016 #113
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Jane Sanders to FBI: Ge...»Reply #43