"Liars don't ask the e-mails be made public."
Why would she try to wipe out server?
It's FBI, not right wing conspirators which is investigating the case. Large number of mails where considered by FBI classified or top secret. Translation: not for the public. They are not and were never Hillary's property. It's not up to her to disclose them either. If you somehow had an access to those mails, please share with us. Or else, Hillary is bluffing.
I don't have clearance, did not sign agreement to keep secrets either. Bogus analogy. The place where HRC mails were stored was unsafe, thus, not supposed to be used for classified information.
Powell denies the allegation. Whether he did something wrong or not does not remove any wrongdoing from HRC. It's totally irrelevant.
How in the world 22 not marked as secret were classified as top secret today? How in the world Secretary of State can't recognize top secret email content? Criminal negligence.
Well, according to Democrats on this board, you are not indicted means clean, moral. Thus, HRC, even though exposing top secrets to the whole world, endless tail of lies is clean.
George Tenet, WMDs in Iraq - "slam dunk". W was never indicted, there is no credible theory of wrongdoing, yet called a criminal.
Moral relativism, hypocrisy, ends justifies the means. Did I fully describe a Democrat?
Although ID is very easy to obtain, I start feeling like a racist bringing my ID to voting station.
See? It's not insulting to my intelligence that your beloved government thinks I am incapable to get ID card. Does your beloved "government trusts me with my choice? May be it shouldn't?
That would be insulting if true.
How insulting is it telling us we can't be responsible for our own education, retirements, loans? Insulting to our intelligence to tell us we are nothing without Big Brother.
Sure 3+1 can be discriminatory comparing to 4+1. So, is to 1+3.
Now, lets go make math formula for what marriage is!!! Good luck.
You made traditional definition of marriage obsolete, and have no clue what it is now. It's something non-discriminatory!
Say it! You have no idea.
Now you want to justify decision of five activists from SCOTUS about matter which has no definition anymore.
Liberalism is mental disorder. That is he story.
Marriage is contract. Contract is not marriage.
I asked what is marriage. Can you read?
3+1 can be can be contract. Can it be marriage?
14th amendment does not apply to homosexual claim because their union is not marriage, or the five in SCOTUS redefined what marriage is. Either way those five in SCOTUS gave us another example of judicial activism.
It was Bush's tax cut for the rich! Was it?
Concern is for deficit? Not a chance. You get confused. Bernie's tax increase is for another government boondoggle. Deficits are going to be even higher.
Concern about deficit? Tell us what a Democrat is willing to cut.
Don't bother. We know the answer.
Quotes from majority of 9 total!! Five of which apparently have no idea what equal protection under the law is, five of which who decide to give the whole nation the definition of marriage. Thanks not, to those five. Marriage came to us through thousands of years, never meant to be what five are pushing to our throats. Dare to ask your friends Muslims about meaning of marriage? Or your favorite Marxist Pope?
No Sleazeball, SCOTUS is not here to give us definitions. 14th amendment does not apply.
Cruz's position is 100% Constitutional.
Is $19T national debt not enough? Facing many trillions more soon if nothing is done. Getting rid of military is next because there isn't much else to cut if you ask a Democrat.
So, what's instead? Live within your means. Or else, we have no country.
Obamacare is a disaster. That's all we know now. So, nominate Bernie, is going to "repeal" Obamacare. We must have Medicare for all, so raise taxes for everyone! Finally we are going to be fair and repeal the rest of Bush tax cuts. Tax, Tax, Tax to wazoo!
"death penalty being mandated for abortion in the ancient laws is found in Assyrian Law". "fines for causing a miscarriage "
How is that a proof that fetus is not "live human"?
What you bring here is a proof of the practice, not "human thought" as you put it. It's well known fact that abortion is nearly as old as human civilization. In some of those civilizations murder was acceptable too.
"Human thought" was never static. Humans learned that murder is not humane. But for some barbarians today murdering baby in the womb is.
Thanks not for usual meticulous Cut&Paste work.