(11-01-2016, 12:31 AM)Mav link Wrote:The investigation won't be finalised before the election.

(11-01-2016, 01:01 AM)Bear link Wrote:Happy to wager that Hillary will not go to jail.

Trump may have her executed, but she won't go to jail.

(11-07-2016, 01:14 AM)Baggers link Wrote:FBI just cleared Clinton of any wrong doing. Trump crying orange tears. 8 yellow nits, dead, fell from his head... one was holding his last remaining brain cell.

Quote:  One inquiry is into Clinton’s decision as President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State to use a private server for her official emails, rather than her State Department’s secure one.

Clinton claims she did this for convenience, so she could use just one mobile phone for both work and private emails. 
FBI director James Comey blew up Clinton’s excuse in July. He said his agents found Clinton had used “multiple devices”.

In fact Clinton, notoriously secretive, clearly used her private server to evade scrutiny of what she was sending and receiving.

Indeed, once she was found out she ordered 33,000 of her emails to be deleted — an order carried out only after Congress issued a subpoena demanding they be handed over for investigation.

Clinton claims she destroyed only her private emails and handed over all work ones.

But is she telling the truth?

The FBI has since accidentally found 350,000 Clinton emails backed up on the computer of Anthony Weiner, a former congressman and notorious sexter it was investigating for sending lewd texts to a 15-year-old girl. Weiner is married to Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin.

That forced Comey to say he was reopening the inquiry into Clinton’s email scandal, which he’d controversially closed in July after concluding that while Clinton had been reckless it was unlikely she had broken the rules deliberately.

But already Comey has exposed Clinton’s chronic lying.

Clinton had claimed that none of the emails on her private server were marked confidential.

Comey said there were two.

Clinton had claimed “I never sent or received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received’’.

False again. Comey said 110 emails in 52 of Clinton’s email chains contained information classified at the time. Eight chains contained top secret information.

Then there’s the second FBI inquiry, into the Clinton Foundation, a charity run by Clinton and husband Bill, the former president.

The FBI is questioning witnesses over claims that donors to the Clinton’s foundation were rewarded with government favours and access to Clinton as Secretary of State.

Leaked emails about this alleged “pay to play” scheme already show State Department officials who were co-ordinating the Haiti relief effort helping what one marked down as “friends of Bill”, while brushing off non-donors.

More seriously, the evidence shows Bill Clinton’s speaking fees rocketing up to $500,000 or even more when his wife was made Secretary of State.

Some of that cash came from Clinton Foundation donors.

Some donors, from businessmen to Middle Eastern nations, even got government contracts or permission for arms deals.

More “pay to play”? Were the Clintons using Hillary’s government job to make Bill rich?

Indeed, the Clintons, who left the White House claiming to be “dead broke”, have earned $180 million while Hillary worked for Obama and in the three years since.

Hillary Clinton strongly denies any wrongdoing, but polls now show many Americans think her even more dishonest than Trump.

No wonder. Consider other lies Clinton has told.

She claimed she’d been named after Sir Edmund Hillary, when in fact Clinton was already six when the beekeeper conquered Mt Everest.


At one campaign event, Clinton claimed all her grandparents were immigrants: “I think if we were to just go around this room, there are a lot of immigrant stories. All my grandparents, you know, came over here.”

In fact, just one grandparent was an immigrant.

Clinton claimed she tried to join the Marines in 1975, when in fact she was a rising legal star.

In the 2008 campaign, Clinton claimed she dodged sniper fire in a visit to Bosnia during the war there and had to run “with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base”.

But video of her arrival showed no shooting, no running, and a calm welcoming ceremony at the airport.

The lies got worse.

Clinton as Secretary of State falsely suggested that an al Qaeda-linked assault on the US consulate in Benghazi on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks was instead just a violent protest against an anti-Muslim YouTube clip.

Relatives of some of the four Americans killed claimed she’d also lied to them privately, telling them the YouTube clip was to blame,

It seems Clinton did not want to publicly admit — soon before Obama’s re-election campaign — that America had again suffered a terrorist attack and that Obama would not react.

So, still surprised Clinton could lose tomorrow, even against Trump?

This does not prove Clinton would be a worse president.

After all, Trump, also a liar, has zero experience of government, a hot head and dangerously inconsistent foreign policy positions. For instance, he wants America to intervene even less in foreign wars, yet warns that Iranian sailors who are rude to US warships would be “shot out of the water”. Mixed signals like that can create wars.

But Clinton’s lies suggest she is a risk, too. Who can really know what kind of president she’d be?

Before this campaign, for instance, she claimed that the Trans-Pacific Partnership — a big trade deal including Australia — was the “gold standard in trade agreements”.

But in the election campaign, under pressure from Senator Bernie Sanders on the Left and Trump on the Right, she lied and said she’d never said that.

She’s now against the deal, too, even though leaked emails show she privately reassured bankers in a paid speech she wanted “open trade with open borders”.

But you’re right: with two liars in the race, what’s to choose between either? Talk policy instead.

So, which one wants even more government spending, higher taxes, weaker borders, and more of the inflammatory identity politics that will weaken the US?

Which will foster the insider cronyism that has made Washington politics contemptible to so many voters?

Which wants more of the go-along-to-get-along internationalism that’s already created the dangerous vacuum now being filled by China and Russia, increasingly belligerent authoritarian superpowers?

That’s Clinton each time.

So maybe Trump is not just the more honest choice but the safer, after all.