quote:
Disturbing? I think the word you are looking for is illegal. She was not supposed to delete any e-mails. All e-mails were supposed to be surrendered.

Well I used disturbing because it transcends legality.

quote:
It depends. Why don't we wait and see exactly what is in the e-mails, then we can decide.

Well we saw what was in the emails that were directly referenced in the story. Maybe more exist, but we do have access to these initial emails.

quote:
If there was anything big in those e-mails, do you honestly believe the NYTimes would have hesitated to publish them?

They were set to release them today. But Jr. released then instead. It's exactly as described in the stories. It shows collusion (not illegal) and shows that they are lying about it all.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by DawgsLife

Member since Jun 2013

59009 posts

Posted on 7/11/17 at 5:29 pm to buckeye_vol

quote:
Well I used disturbing because it transcends legality.

If you say so. When it comes to a Presidential candidate disturbing is passing out in the street. Horrific is intentionally breaking the law and then covering it up to avoid prosecution.

quote:
Well we saw what was in the emails that were directly referenced in the story. Maybe more exist, but we do have access to these initial emails.

And there was nothing in the e-mail referenced. Nothing illegal, anyway.

quote:
They were set to release them today. But Jr. released then instead. It's exactly as described in the stories. It shows collusion (not illegal) and shows that they are lying about it all.

Maybe there is more to the story, but what I read certainly did not show collusion. It showed he met with somebody to get incriminating information on Hillary. We also know that Hillary met with somebody to get information on Bernie. Or, at the very least, had a staff member meet with someone, which essentially is what Jr. was. A staff member, He isn't even in a position with the administration.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Ace Midnight

Between sanity and madness

Member since Dec 2006

89765 posts

Posted on 7/11/17 at 8:10 pm to buckeye_vol

quote:
It shows collusion

Meh. It shows contact with a Russian - who may or may not have been in contact with the Russian authorities. It shows hints and *winkwink* stuff. Collusion? I guess I'm just not seeing the evidence. Does it show that Jr. is politically unsophisticated? Sure. If anything, it's naivete and earnestness.

I'll wait to see if there is objective evidence of collusion and even then: