Houshphandzadeh wrote:why does it matter whether this one study is any good or not?

the machines can be manipulated. people have plenty of cause to manipulate them. in more and more cases, there isn't even a paper record so we'd know for sure if they have been manipulated.

it's a foregone conclusion that it will happen or already has happened regardless of some smoking gun

mozartpc27 wrote:I think he signed the pledge because he doesn't really want to be President, and does not expect to win the Republican nomination. Because he has polled so well, there would have been a significant call on him to run 3rd party - a waste of his time, perhaps, but a potentially enormous waste of his money. Now he can say, "Sorry, signed the pledge" and avoid a third party candidacy fiasco very easily.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:why does it matter whether this one study is any good or not?

the machines can be manipulated. people have plenty of cause to manipulate them. in more and more cases, there isn't even a paper record so we'd know for sure if they have been manipulated.

it's a foregone conclusion that it will happen or already has happened regardless of some smoking gun

TomatoPie wrote:I don't agree with him on anything, but I respect that he is authentic.

Doll Is Mine wrote:Let her rot in jail.

She's been married four times. She cheated on her first husband and got pregnant. She then divorced him and married another dude who adopted her kid from the guy she was cheating with. She then divorced husband #2 and married the guy she was cheating with while her former husband was legally his kid's father.

She then divorced the guy she was cheating with and re-married husband #2.

lethal wrote:Has anyone mentioned that the judge in this Davis case in Kentucky is Jim Bunning's son?

Bucky wrote:no

Phan In Phlorida wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Staffer who worked on Clinton’s private e-mail server faces subpoena

A former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private e-mail server tried this week to fend off a subpoena to testify before Congress, saying he would assert his constitutional right not to answer questions to avoid incriminating himself.

The move by Bryan Pagliano, who had worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009, came in a Monday letter from his lawyer to the House panel investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Bryan Pagliano, who also worked as the IT director on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, will not testify in order to avoid unsubstantiated attacks from Republicans, who have been frequently accusing Clinton of criminality for using a personal email server while serving as Secretary of State.

Considering there has so far been no evidence of criminal conduct, the memo asserted, it made sense for Pagliano to avoid risking erroneous coverage of his testimony.

“It is understandable that attorneys for Mr. Pagliano have advised him to assert his constitutional right not to testify given the onslaught of reckless accusations of criminal conduct that continue to be made by many Republicans — including several running for President — without evidence to support their claims,” read the letter, sent on Wednesday to the House committee investigating the 2012 Benghazi attack. The memo cited a letter received on Monday from Pagliano’s attorneys.

That letter also cited the current FBI investigation into Clinton’s email as a reason for Pagliano to plead the Fifth. The FBI is investigating Clinton’s use of a personal email server while serving as Secretary of State, specifically whether the use of that server jeopardized national security information.

The FBI investigation is not criminal and does not accuse Clinton of wrongdoing. No accusations of criminality have been made from the Justice Department, State Department, or FBI.

Despite this, the political environment has indeed been fraught with questionable attacks. The memo itself pointed to several “reckless accusations” by Republican candidates for president, including Donald Trump (“The fact is, what she’s done is criminal”), Mike Huckabee (“This is about her violation of the law”), and Scott Walker (“A complete and thorough criminal investigation is the only way to get to the bottom of this serious matter”).

Bucky wrote:sometimes you're abbott, sometime you're costello

jerseyhoya wrote:One female Democrat in jail, one to go

mozartpc27 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:One female Democrat in jail, one to go

In the spirit of civility inspired by this post, I hope Scott Walker falls face first into a woodchipper.

drsmooth wrote:the beauty of that shot is that it works in so many contexts

Soren wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:Let her rot in jail.

She's been married four times. She cheated on her first husband and got pregnant. She then divorced him and married another dude who adopted her kid from the guy she was cheating with. She then divorced husband #2 and married the guy she was cheating with while her former husband was legally his kid's father.

She then divorced the guy she was cheating with and re-married husband #2.

If a man is found lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel.