Do U agree w/ Jindal RE Trump: narcissist, egomaniac?
- Thread starter republicanchick
- Start date
republicanchick
New member
Rand Paul tells us that Trump believes in loose eminent domain regulations.. In other words, the government should be able to take YOUR property if it "needs" it...
.
http://www.foxnews.com/shows/the-kelly-file.html?intcmp=hpft
+
.
http://www.foxnews.com/shows/the-kelly-file.html?intcmp=hpft
+
republicanchick
New member
Caledvwlch
New member
Just inverse that and you know how we feel about conservative talk radio.
republicanchick
New member
this is just typical lib loony tunes
and besides, I don't respond to posts in which the very first sentence is... well, there are so many words I could use here... but
DUMB works for now
___
republicanchick
New member
oh BOO HOO
u don't like conservative radio!!!!!!!!
You say that like I am supposed to CARE
just shows the usual lib arrogance and blindness and... etc..
__
Caledvwlch
New member
And you don't listen to anything "liebarrels" say. How is that different?
republicanchick
New member
Reality (and the Bible) say not to have anything to do with the unfruitful works of darkness
and
"Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers"
It's bad enough I have to live on the same planet...
+++
You do have the option of other planets.
Caledvwlch
New member
Liberals, I presume?
I'm still reading.
I thought this exhortation was in the context of marriage. And I agree. I wouldn't marry a practitioner of religion.
Especially for polar bears and California forests.
Caledvwlch
New member
And likely unwilling to spend tax money on getting to Mars.
Then again, what did Mars ever do to us ...?
Caledvwlch
New member
Yeah good point. Sorry Red Planet.
Provocative language is typical of people of your ilk. Jesus was pro God, and God is love. You figure it out if you can. The ONLY people Jesus spoke negatively against were the religious self righteous of His day. He took a thief to Paradise with Him.
You don't seem to be able to separate your political ideologue from your purported Christian values.
Well I did try....and apparently you are just as inculcated as any cult member is.
:loser:
Here's the law, as I find it:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798
| Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information— |
So, in order to be a crime, the disclosure must be "knowing" and "willing". That's actually hard to prove in even a simple case. So, unless there's some other law that you think applies, it's not nearly as easy as you seem to think. You can't prosecute these crimes without a fair amount of information, and if the information is missing it's classified cover sheet, you have to figure out why before you can assign liability. And you must establish who actually did the crime before you can charge anyone.
Where are you getting that? It's illegal to destroy an official record, but I don't think an unauthorized copy of a classified record would count. It's illegal to destroy evidence under certain circumstances, but it's unclear if that applies here.
That actually hasn't been established. There was such information on the server, but it isn't clear that it was in her possession, either physically or in terms of control. Someone using her server had possession of such information, but it isn't yet clear who from what's been released so far.
There's a lot of dispute about that, currently. Only time will tell, I think. I think it's fair to say that Clinton hopes that it was wiped, but that may not be true, and she likely didn't oversee it herself. I wouldn't be too surprised if a fair amount of the information can be recovered.
I would describe the actions as criminal, because that's a comment on the law rather than the people accused of breaking it. But generally, I wouldn't call him a criminal until that is a fact on the record. I don't think it's honest to do so.
How about a closer and more relevant example? Take Rick Perry. I might refer to him as an indicted felon, because that's a true statement properly qualified. He is under indictment on a felony charge. I wouldn't call him a felon, unqualified, unless he's actually convicted, because I think that's misleading at best. He's entitled to the benefit of the doubt and due process.
You're getting ahead of yourself on both the facts and the law. You may be right, you may be wrong, but you can't rush the investigation if you want it to have any legitimacy at all. The fact that you're here now, demanding a particular outcome on a nakedly partisan justification, and you think you're coming across as fair and objective?
For comparison, when David Petraeus was accused of passing classified information to Paula Broadwell, he resigned within a few months of the beginning of the investigation. But it took three years for him to actually be sentenced to probation, despite the fact that he actually copped to the crime. That was last April. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-sentenced-in-leak-investigation.html) Clinton still maintains her innocence. It takes time, and we're only a few months into the investigation of Clinton's email server. Even if she confessed, today, to a felony, she wouldn't be in jail yet, or likely even in front of a judge, because due process is fairly slow, especially in a complex and technical case like this one.
Why do conservatives label Pope Francis "a socialist"?
Because he is demonstrating the teachings of Jesus?
Why do posters pile on to Meshak when she lists the overwhelming number of anti-poverty statements from Jesus in the Bible?
Why did Karl Marx and Fredrerich Engels frequently mention biblical communism ("hold all things in common") and the great biblical moral narrative to provide for the immigrant, the stranger, the widow, the oprphan and the poor?
Obviously it is because right wing Christians in the U.S. believe the GOP represents God and the DNP represents satan.
republicanchick
New member
and I am just SO sure you would say the same thing if it were... oh, I don't know... President Walker who did what Clinton did... yes, indeed, i will bet...
But more importantly, there is this
Those who hold office of Secretary of State are presumed to know that some of the information they deal with is classified or top secret
gee... Whoda thunk it?
and if the Sec of State doesn't know for sure if it is classified or top secret...
It can be assumed that the Sec will ASSUME that it is... you know... just to be on the... SAFE side... You know... to protect the USA...
Moron City
By the way, love how Ed Henry is pursuing this!!!!!!!!!!!!
___