IOW: Fox News Commentator “Raises Questions” About Democrat
That seems like not the ability to do illegal things in each case - “it isn’t illegal when the President does it” - but rather the ability to decide what is legal and what isn’t, though. The Attorney General still couldn’t go out and sell potassium permanganate without removing it from the list, or the President releasing classified material without first declassifying it… I think?
You got one right.
A former judge raised legal questions about whether Hillary signed a form OF-109 when she left office. He also mentioned that the signing of a similar form was the basis of the governments prosecution of Petraeus.
I think the email “scandal” is going to backfire on the Republicans, particularly the more they invest in its scandalousness. It was an legal method at the time, albeit not a best practice. I wouldn’t be very surprised if Mrs. Clinton has been expecting this ever since Bush’s lost 5 million White House emails. I suspect, in the immortal words of Admiral Ackbar: “It’s a trap!”
Seems pretty clear to me.
I love that Republicans are trying to make this about Benghazi. Handed an actual, honest-to-goodness scandal and they are going to turn it into something Hillary can laugh off.
Can we use your Christie approach and call him Fox News Napolitano? Because that’s far more reflective of his role here.
As Fox pays him to do - to make insinuations without the bother of backing them up or even telling the truth.
As if anyone cares about that. :rolleyes:
He’s being intentionally misleading - lying - about that, and you’re swallowing it whole. Petraeus has plea-bargained to something trivial, as trivial as the thing he’s blasting Clinton for, rather than embarrass both the government and himself with a trial over giving classified information to his mistress. That’s the basis of the criminal investigation, as you might know if you ever changed the channel.
Of course it does.
How many types of forms does the GSA Forms Library list on their website?
I see Top Forms, GSA Forms, Standard Forms, Optional Forms, Other Forms, and Obsolete/Inactive Forms.
But questions still remain. Was Hillary required to sign a form OF-109 when she left office? Did Hillary actually fill out a form OF-109?
And if you really expect* that* to bring down her candidacy, well then … 
(post shortened)
Hahahaha. You can try to use any approach you think will work. Whether you can carry it off or not is another matter. Who is this “we” that you’re referring to? Who are you claiming to represent?
And what is this obsession you seem to have with Christie? This thread is about, Hilary Clinton and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Personal E-mail Account. Christie was investigated by at least three committees and there is no evidence that Christie was involved in Bridgegate.
It appears that you’re tired of other people talking about Hillary and are hoping to hijack this thread?
And the Congressional investigation continues in spite of your BEST efforts. 
I guess when you’ve spent so much time and energy digging into a gigantic pile of horseshit, it’s hard to admit that there really isn’t a pony under there.
Wrong again. I am entirely in *favor *of the Republican “investigations” into HRC continuing, right up until the election. I am also entirely in favor of the likes of Fox News Napolitano continuing to “raise questions”.
What effect do *you *think they’re having? 
And I’m entirely in favor of Hillary hiding her emails away right up until the election. She can run on a platform of transparency.
Do you really think this sort of issue would hurt her? I don’t think it would/will.
Right, **Magiver **and **doorhinge **were seriously considering voting for her before this. 
“Wrong again”? Really? Are you saying that the Congressional investigation is NOT continuing? Seriously?
Only the independents are in play for the 2016 election. Hillary’s behavior might cause more than a few to stay home. Then again, Obama might campaign for Hillary and he’s been pretty much the kiss of death when he attempts to get other Democrats elected.
The smartest women in the world? no way.
I appreciate your serious, snark free answer.
No. That’s not what he’s saying, as a cursory reading of the part you quoted (you know, the part right after “wrong again”) shows.