Skip to main content

until after the November election.  Of course, at that time he will have lots of free time, since he, like the rest of us, will be awaiting the inauguration of Hillary Clinton.

"Thanks to an absurd legal ruling, Donald Trump won’t have to answer to charges of defrauding people of tens of thousands of dollars until after the election. A federal judge decided it would be unfair to make him testify while he’s running for office – presumably because it could give people the impression that he’s a conniving huckster who fleeces gullible rubes in order to line his pockets. Heaven forbid."

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...-after-the-election/

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

"Matthew Desmond" and his liberal "news" site AddictingInfo.Org blatantly violated journalistic ethics by running a story they knew wasn't accurate.  Does the left really need our own Andrew Breitbart?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/7/1/990532/-

As it happens, this site is one I've dealt with before - addictinginfo.org, run by a guy who calls himself "Matthew Desmond."  I first ran across Matthew when he was relentlessly comment-spamming one of his groups on Facebook.  For a while, it seemed like you could not find a single entry on any liberal-interest Facebook wall that didn't include spam from Matthew Desmond. 

 x 100

 

Last edited by budsfarm

The Trump U civil liability case has been around since 2010.  I siuspect that a few more months will make little difference. 

When one reads Condie's link, the article also states the FBI found no evidence that Hillary committed a crime concerning the emails and server quoting CNN.  However, when one drills down thru the links one finds no such actual claim by CNN, especially from any FBI source, named or unnamed.  In fact, one CNN article states Hillary should be quite concerned.

During my career, I used to spent time reading thru reams of paper to detect fraud. I learned to spot what is called weasel wording -- wording so confusing as to give one impression, but meaning another.  However,  the linked articles appear to be a weasel writing the article.

Condie needs to be more careful of his sources. 

 

direstraits posted:

Further search shows there may be a source for an indirect CNN claim -- a State Department source, not DoJ or FBI.   So, not a credible direct source.

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn...email-investigation/

____

Hope (for a Clinton indictment) springs eternal in the human breast, sometimes buttressed by claims of alleged forensic auditing experience, but I am putting some confidence in the CNN item. That source does not get careless with items of this significance.  So keep telling yourself that they are gonna get her, but don't bet the farm on it, or even a couple of chickens.

Contendahh posted:
direstraits posted:

Further search shows there may be a source for an indirect CNN claim -- a State Department source, not DoJ or FBI.   So, not a credible direct source.

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn...email-investigation/

____

Hope (for a Clinton indictment) springs eternal in the human breast, sometimes buttressed by claims of alleged forensic auditing experience, but I am putting some confidence in the CNN item. That source does not get careless with items of this significance.  So keep telling yourself that they are gonna get her, but don't bet the farm on it, or even a couple of chickens.

If, you refer to the CNN referenced in your thread, then, you are your confidence in an non-existent thing.  If, you are putting your confidence in my cited source -- it was CNN discounting that the FBI had dismissed any criminal charges.  Confidence men would love Condie -- pick him clean like a blackberry patch.

direstraits posted:
Contendahh posted:
direstraits posted:

Further search shows there may be a source for an indirect CNN claim -- a State Department source, not DoJ or FBI.   So, not a credible direct source.

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn...email-investigation/

____

Hope (for a Clinton indictment) springs eternal in the human breast, sometimes buttressed by claims of alleged forensic auditing experience, but I am putting some confidence in the CNN item. That source does not get careless with items of this significance.  So keep telling yourself that they are gonna get her, but don't bet the farm on it, or even a couple of chickens.

If, you refer to the CNN referenced in your thread, then, you are your confidence in an non-existent thing.  If, you are putting your confidence in my cited source -- it was CNN discounting that the FBI had dismissed any criminal charges.  Confidence men would love Condie -- pick him clean like a blackberry patch.

___

I will just let your beloved source speak for itself:

"For all those Hillary Clinton opponents who have been hoping against hope that the likely Democratic presidential nominee will be indicted as a result of the FBI review of Hillary’s email server, CNN has some bad news. According to CNN correspondent Pamela Brown, the FBI is close to wrapping up the “investigation,” and thus far have found “no criminal wrongdoing”.

*  * * 

"If you look at the reporting that has later been debunked, like the 147 FBI agents that were working on the case who turned out to be 12 guys and maybe some interns, the sourcing is always a thinly-veiled attribution that translates to Republican leaks. This is different. A news editor would be hard-pressed to allow a reporter to describe Republican lawmakers and aids as “US officials.”

What that means is that this is likely an agency leak, likely from the State Department, which does carry its own baggage, but which is heaps more credible than a leak from Trey Gowdy."

Just how long will you go on defending your indefensible take on this matter? 

A conservative would've already walked the green mile.
But, above the law mobumer has given the beast a pass
and told the FBI to stand down. He started the trash talk
for the pos long ago besides, he's still working on the way
to over stay his illegal visit to s***house. IMO he can't let
his destruction of America be over turned at this point.
 
The Webster Hubbell escort will indeed take the election
with soros in control of the voting machines..........
 
This entire cult is the filthiest unlawful thugs of white/
Christian hating non/unAmericans that the gullible,
selfish, wide eyed and simple bottom feeders to ever
infect the once proud House of Freedom.  
Contendahh posted:
direstraits posted:
Contendahh posted:
direstraits posted:

Further search shows there may be a source for an indirect CNN claim -- a State Department source, not DoJ or FBI.   So, not a credible direct source.

 

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn...email-investigation/

____

Hope (for a Clinton indictment) springs eternal in the human breast, sometimes buttressed by claims of alleged forensic auditing experience, but I am putting some confidence in the CNN item. That source does not get careless with items of this significance.  So keep telling yourself that they are gonna get her, but don't bet the farm on it, or even a couple of chickens.

If, you refer to the CNN referenced in your thread, then, you are your confidence in an non-existent thing.  If, you are putting your confidence in my cited source -- it was CNN discounting that the FBI had dismissed any criminal charges.  Confidence men would love Condie -- pick him clean like a blackberry patch.

___

I will just let your beloved source speak for itself:

"For all those Hillary Clinton opponents who have been hoping against hope that the likely Democratic presidential nominee will be indicted as a result of the FBI review of Hillary’s email server, CNN has some bad news. According to CNN correspondent Pamela Brown, the FBI is close to wrapping up the “investigation,” and thus far have found “no criminal wrongdoing”.

*  * * 

"If you look at the reporting that has later been debunked, like the 147 FBI agents that were working on the case who turned out to be 12 guys and maybe some interns, the sourcing is always a thinly-veiled attribution that translates to Republican leaks. This is different. A news editor would be hard-pressed to allow a reporter to describe Republican lawmakers and aids as “US officials.”

What that means is that this is likely an agency leak, likely from the State Department, which does carry its own baggage, but which is heaps more credible than a leak from Trey Gowdy."

The fact the leak is from the State Department is what is important!  Which makes the entire information about nothing to see here, extremely suspect.  That Condie didn't comprehend this is the rub and indicative of his condition.

Just how long will you go on defending your indefensible take on this matter? 

Now, as to the 12 agents and a couple of interns. statement.  The investigation grew from not just the email and sever to the Clinton Foundation.  The first involves over 3,000 emails to review, dozens of persons to interview, the hard disk of the server to download and investigate for hacking and coverups of hacking.  The Clinton Foundation investigation would require forensic accountants to look for fraud, trace funds contributed and distributed. 

One person was offered and, supposedly given amnesty for his testimony.  True amnesty requires a grand jury and a judicial ruling.  The hacker, Guccifer, was brought to the US from a Bulgarian prison, with a promise of a shorter sentence for his testimony.  in short, if only 12 agents and a couple of interns are the only persons involved, then there is a whole new scandal -- cover up of the investigation of a crime. 

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×