AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
Despite continued denials by Hillary Rodham Clinton that she did nothing improper regarding her e-mails, Judge Jeanine presents the true FACTS of the situation ...
The cold, hard FACTS about Hillary Rodham Clinton
- Thread starter AlwaysWrite
- Start date
9andaWiggle
Addicted Member
I don't like her one bit. But she seems to be teflon coated just like our current POTUS, and I will be shocked if she's not the next Pres.
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
... and if so, that will once again affirm my contention that the American voters are STUPID!
JLS
Member
Gentlemen....and I use the term loosely...Miss Hillary may have baggage...And the Reps keep pouring
more garbage about her...Why....Cause the Rep have shixxt heads running for president...
Now the Rep party will do whatever it has to to prevent Donnie Boy from running as a Rep...And Donnie Boy being a huge prixxck will indeed run as a Indy...
Case close...
Hillary wins...
more garbage about her...Why....Cause the Rep have shixxt heads running for president...
Now the Rep party will do whatever it has to to prevent Donnie Boy from running as a Rep...And Donnie Boy being a huge prixxck will indeed run as a Indy...
Case close...
Hillary wins...
JLS
Member
I seldom listen to the words that come out of her OVAL mouth...I like to turn the sound down and just look at her...what a woman...
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
JUDGE JEANINE appeared on Sean Hannity's show last night, and she expounds on the many reasons why Hillary is GUILTY, and just as importantly, HILLARY IS SUBJECT TO BLACKMAIL if she were to become president ...
bbfreeburn
Active Member
Just a minor point. Facts are neither for nor against someone. They are soulless. They may implicate someone, justify a position, or limit an argument, but they are at all times subject to the use of humans.
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
bbfreeburn
Active Member
Had deflection been my intent my post would have appeared first in this topic, just as soon as you posted it. I merely wish to correct your use of language. As someone once said, "English is a fine language. We should all learn to speak it."
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
Dear bbfreeburn:
First of all, in order to alleviate your ridiculous "concerns" ... I changed the word "against" to "about" in the thread's title.
However, I am far from someone who should be addressed regarding faulty use of the English language. Some newspaper managers and executives have referred to me as the best copy editor they've ever employed, and I was a newspaper copy editor -- along with many other newsroom duties -- for more than four decades. Further, I've written newspaper editorials, plus columns on such wide-ranging subjects as religion, travel, real estate, TV sports, music and arts, and my submitted copy was consistently as grammatically correct as could be expected.
Further, I have been praised by Examiner.com officials for publishing near-flawless columns, and keep in mind that my Examiner.com articles ARE NOT EDITED OR CORRECTED BY ANYONE. They appear exactly as I wrote them.
Thanks for affording me the opportunity to respond. Have a good day.
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
Dear bbfreeburn:
Really? Are you saying that a CASE can't be made against someone? Or how about CLAIMS or CRIMES against someone? Are you saying that FACTS can't be for or against a defendant in a court of law?
Whether or not you like Judge Jeanine or Hillary Clinton, the judge cited FACTS and SPECIFIC LAWS (by number) in her Opening Statement. Do you contest any of the FACTS brought forth by Judge Jeanine in her Opening Statement?
How about commenting on what Judge Jeanine said, rather than attempting to change the subject by making a weak attempt to demean or discredit me?
bbfreeburn
Active Member
Fact, in and of themselves, are nothing. Facts may be used, however, to make a case, to refute a case, to make a claim, to refute a claim or anything else that a presenter of fact may wish.
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
... and it's a FACT that you are choosing to ignore the FACTS (as presented by Judge Jeanine) while attempting to put the focus on ME. However, that's your option, and thanks for thinking about me. It's much appreciated.
Robadat
Member
Facts being as they may be cited by the Judge, there is a strong case that Hillary should be criminally charged in this case. However, whether or not that happens is entirely dependent on if the DoJ decides to prosecute her. While I believe she certainly should be charged with the crimes Judge Jeanine Pirro has laid out, I'll not be holding my breath waiting for her to be formally charged by the DoJ.
AlwaysWrite
Addicted Member
Dear Robadat:
In other words, what you seemingly imply is that she IS GUILTY, but she won't ever be FOUND guilty.