Oh please, do we need to dig up and list the number of Daily Mail article’s you’ve posted on this message board?
I read serious news sites too. Daily Mail is for silly and off beat stories only. News can be and should be silly & fun too. I will never let any of you ruin that for me.
Reuters (primarily) and Yahoo became my defaults after CNN ruined their site with that butt ugly, space wasting tablet interface. I refuse to visit CNN anymore. I read the free sections of the NY Times, LA Times and W Post. I’ve been a news junkie for years.
I hope everyone is right. That there’s nothing to worry about. There won’t be any classified document inquiry. I hope so.
What’s interesting about this story is how Clinton actually rushed to talk to reporters this time, an indication of just how damaging this story could get. The other interesting thing is the vintage Clintonian language: see, it’s not HILLARY who is under investigation, it’s her email account! Okay then.
This may be just the break the Trump, Bush, Walker, Carson, Rubio, Paul, Huckabee, Cruz, Christie, Perry, Kasich, Fiorina, Santorum, Jindal, Graham, and Pataki campaigns have been looking for!
It would be better to get a DOJ investigation and get it over with. If she’s done nothing wrong that’s the best course of action. Otherwise this thing could haunt her all the way into the White House.
But she’ll probably just put her head down and bull her way through. Hoping it goes away. Exactly what Bill did with Whitewater. Whitewater was very old news in Arkansas. A few local columnists stirred it up a little. Never hurt him here. But geez, it was a different political stage when he got elected President. It grew into a monster.
And why, exactly, do you think this is not the break Jim Gilmore has been waiting for?!
It’s the primary campaign. It’s the break Sanders is looking for.
NYT apology for getting this so wrong and dealing with their fuck up so poorly posted about in the “Forked” thread. Linked for convenience.
Darn. There’s no pony after all.
Will this stop the shit-diggers? Fearless prediction: not for a second. They won’t even acknowledge that bump in the road.
I find it funny that Clinton supporters would really like the media to stop looking for wrongdoing.
That isn’t quite what we wish the media would stop doing. Now think harder.
One post! Damn, I’m good.
Heh. One of the Fox News commentators made essentially this point, that most of Hillary’s wounds are self-inflicted, because she tends to respond to problems in just about the worst way possible. She’s her own worst enemy.
I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop: for an investigation into the Clinton family charity, and where all that money goes to [del]buy influence[/del] help somebody-or-other. That’ll be a fun circus to watch.
Why bother? There will be new stuff we don’t know about coming out every month or so. No need to revive old stuff.
No need to revive old stuff when it’s so easy to invent new stuff, you mean? Well, that’s true, but hardly something to defend.
In this cycle, it’s been all the NY Times. Take it up with them. Last I checked, the GOP didn’t run the Times.
Others are certainly doing that.
No, but for some reason their editorial management has a hair across their butts about her.
Happens when you don’t talk to the media much and when you do you lie to them.
Clinton hasn’t learned what Obama learned early on: you can lie to the public, but the liberal media has to be in on the lie. The media doesn’t mind trying to put one over on us rubes, but they don’t like to be treated like rubes themselves.
Nothing stops you, does it?
Excuse me?? Please illuminate the point-to-point process where HRC’s “reluctance to talk to the media” leads to, at best, an egregious lack of journalistic integrity and editorial oversight.
While I’m on the subject:
Please provide a cite where ANYONE supporting HRC has expressed anything remotely of this nature.
:smack: