"something you are" if you can remove it with a knife, it isn't something you are. Also, once your biometric fingerprint (of any sort) is compromised, it's difficult to get the CA to issue you a new one.
I remember hearing a story about cops who pull people over only if they don't break any laws. They figured those were the ones who were up to something. hugely illegal, but apparently they got away with it.
I should also say that the email server was a stupid idea. But I say this mainly because of the records act--basically public officials are required to maintain records. The stuff about classified emails would have been equally problematic if it was on a State Department computer.
I should say, as I've been able to cobble together based on related cases, IANAL and I've never seen an actual clear statement of what could be prosecuted. But I asked a former prosecutor who had prosecuted under these laws, and she said that it was laughable that Clinton broke the law.
And you're going to have to get over Clinton, she isn't going to hold elected office again. she isn't your foil anymore.
But, fine. debate questions being leaked, that's CNN's problem, they shouldn't have let that out. It's not clear Clinton knew that was the case or why she would care.
DNC rigged the primaries--big fucking deal. People got fired and I'd expect a lot more transparency next time. If I don't get it I'll be pissed.
Classified email, you have no idea what you're talking about. It's long and involved, but, the vast majority of it was classified after the fact. The law is mostly about intent and even the FBI director who sabotaged Clinton's election didn't see that there was anything worth prosecuting her over.
I delete emails too, like when they are no longer relevant. And I think the FBI directory was pretty clear that this is what was going on. Again, this is the judgement of an advisory, not a friend.
Deflection? Trump won the most electors (even if he lost the popular vote by about 2,700,000 votes). Clinton will never run for office again and is irrelevant.
The Clintons stole nothing from the White House, and I'm sure you know that and the whole back story so I'm not going to repeat it here.
you can see the earnings breakdown at Forbes which indicates that it was all declared on their taxes.
Corruption requires a "this is for that" exchange where "this" or "that" is a government service. I have seen no indication that there was any actual evidence of any such behavior.
Jeff Sessions (the attorney general nominee) is a career political hack. Even Republicans refused to confirm him to the federal bench. I'm confused, is Trump draining or trying to fill up the swamp?
Slashdot Mirror
Presumably you send an irate email to amazon every time you see "free shipping" as well.
These countries define their citizenship to be the elite, not everyone who lives in the country for an extended time or is born there.
Can you explain to me why they shouldn't they move the jobs abroad?
You say that now, but when an insurance company denies a covered expense let's see what you take is on taking someone to court.
What do you see in the medical sector?
Not sure if you know this, but there is only one rich country where you have to pay for medical care.
units aren't a detail--they are essential.
"something you are" if you can remove it with a knife, it isn't something you are. Also, once your biometric fingerprint (of any sort) is compromised, it's difficult to get the CA to issue you a new one.
I remember hearing a story about cops who pull people over only if they don't break any laws. They figured those were the ones who were up to something. hugely illegal, but apparently they got away with it.
I should also say that the email server was a stupid idea. But I say this mainly because of the records act--basically public officials are required to maintain records. The stuff about classified emails would have been equally problematic if it was on a State Department computer.
The law is mostly about intent.
I should say, as I've been able to cobble together based on related cases, IANAL and I've never seen an actual clear statement of what could be prosecuted. But I asked a former prosecutor who had prosecuted under these laws, and she said that it was laughable that Clinton broke the law.
And you're going to have to get over Clinton, she isn't going to hold elected office again. she isn't your foil anymore.
But, fine. debate questions being leaked, that's CNN's problem, they shouldn't have let that out. It's not clear Clinton knew that was the case or why she would care.
DNC rigged the primaries--big fucking deal. People got fired and I'd expect a lot more transparency next time. If I don't get it I'll be pissed.
Classified email, you have no idea what you're talking about. It's long and involved, but, the vast majority of it was classified after the fact. The law is mostly about intent and even the FBI director who sabotaged Clinton's election didn't see that there was anything worth prosecuting her over.
I delete emails too, like when they are no longer relevant. And I think the FBI directory was pretty clear that this is what was going on. Again, this is the judgement of an advisory, not a friend.
Ah, well, she was agreeing with Republicans like Lincoln and Trump, and, frankly anyone who known negotiations 101.
Are you denying that this is Trump's very clearly stated position?
Deflection? Trump won the most electors (even if he lost the popular vote by about 2,700,000 votes). Clinton will never run for office again and is irrelevant.
Hey, how is that swamp draining going? Trump is nominating someone who leaked classified information and wasn't prosecuted by the FBI, considered someone for secretary of state who was convicted of sharing classified information and Trump is lauding the Philippines leader who compares himself to Hitler and who has death squads that kill people on suspicion of having committed a crime. Why is Trump doing this? There is no knowable reason except, I don't know, maybe that it will allow Trump to have a business deal go through in the Philippines. Swamp drained yet?
Are we talking about Trump here? He says that quite often--he says it is a negotiating technique.
So long as you are comfortable in your own skin.
I'm confused, is this text from a Trump speech?
The Clintons stole nothing from the White House, and I'm sure you know that and the whole back story so I'm not going to repeat it here.
you can see the earnings breakdown at Forbes which indicates that it was all declared on their taxes.
Corruption requires a "this is for that" exchange where "this" or "that" is a government service. I have seen no indication that there was any actual evidence of any such behavior.
Don't forget the potential Secretary of State nominee who had to tell his parole officer that he was considering a new job (no joke).
Interesting that you think Clinton is corrupt. What makes you think that?
Jeff Sessions (the attorney general nominee) is a career political hack. Even Republicans refused to confirm him to the federal bench. I'm confused, is Trump draining or trying to fill up the swamp?
He campaigned against Wall Street bankers running things and then nominates a Wall Street banker to run things. How's that swamp draining going?
How do you know if you are looking at a consumer or commercial one?