Legal description of Hillary's felony.

[grasswire]

Explained in depth by DU member Leveymg in August.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251552653


A critical, important read for every Democrat.

[yourpaljoey]

1. thank you

[BreakfastClub]

2. Pure drivel. nt

[grasswire]

4. oh, you're a lawyer? nt

[msanthrope]

18. I am. It's drivel. nt

[grasswire]

28. specifically? nt

[FarPoint]

38. I am so over all this relentless trash talk.....

Hillary will be our Democratic Nominee....so, this is only exacerbating the effects by the right wing. I will continue to post proactive, Democratic discussion for the Democratic Party and our soon to be anointed Democratic Nominee, Hillary Clinton.

[revbones]

11. Yes, your comment certainly is. nt

[rateyes]

42. That is a very long read, and yet you replied

Within 2 minutes calling it "pure drivel." Remind me, if ever I need a lawyer not to hire you. I would prefer someone who actually investigates before making a judgment. You remind me of those book burners who want to burn them without ever having read them.

[grasswire]

48. I noticed that.

Also, that poster did not answer my request for specifics of her dismissal as drivel.

[rateyes]

49. That poster doesn't have specifics.

[DanTex]

3. LOL. I remember that delusional OP.

[JoePhilly]

64. + 1

[hrmjustin]

5. You remind me of those who refresh drudge and fox just waiting in joyful hope for

the indictment that is never coming.

[revbones]

12. Ignoring truth doesn't make it less true.

Whether she escapes indictment or not, there is plenty of guilt.

[randome]

6. The word 'desperate' is so overused on this site.

But this...
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[calguy]

7. Havn't you gotten it yet??

Hillary hate pieces have gotten you BSers nowhere. What makes you think you're going to get any traction this time around?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

22. Hillary hate pieces or puff pieces have no bearing on whether an indictment will be handed down.

It's all about whether or not the FBI recommends charges, and what the DOJ does with that possible recommendation.

[grasswire]

8. something new to me in that, leveymg

You wrote that Hillary responded to the Romanian hacker. Any more info on that?

[floriduck]

9. And if she's elected,

her first 100 days will be spent unsuccessfully fighting off impeachment proceedings. Where will all the "come together and support Hillary" get you?

[Hiraeth]

15. resulting in the gridlock that tptb want to continue indefinitely on our dime.

[PoliticAverse]

17. It's delusional to think there would be an impeachment proceeding in the first 100 days. n/t

[HooptieWagon]

36. True that...it will begin before she's even sworn in.

[MohRokTah]

10. BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[Electric Monk]

13. Welcome back? Your contributions (see above for a perfect example) were not missed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=313736&sub=trans

[UglyGreed]

14. Gives the place such a warm

and welcoming feeling doesn't it?????

[RobertEarl]

16. I don't like the idea of forced vacations

But when I see those type of posts, it makes me reconsider.

You have to wonder what people coming to DU for the first time think when they see such posts.

I guess the fact that DU is far less busy than it was is an indication of what newcomers think?

[PeaceNikki]

23. lol. Like "Here's why we should ignore SC vote"

Can you imagine what people coming to DU for the first time think when they see such posts?

For shame.

[RobertEarl]

30. They loved it, 63 recs!

Fact is that the voters of South Carolina IGNORED the election --- 87% didn't even bother to vote!

I see I still have space in your head. Sorry, not paying rent. You should maybe go after someone who cares what you think?

[PeaceNikki]

32. lol - "go after"

watchout!!

[RobertEarl]

33. Obama should pardon Hillary?

I wonder if Obama will support Bernie when he becomes the nominee?

[revbones]

51. No hiding brilliance eh? nt

[Electric Monk]

50. Flagged for review again already after two more hides today, ROTFL :) Time for another sockpuppet?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=313736&sub=trans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=298088
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=306317

[obamanut2012]

19. Except HRC hasn't been charged with a felony

It's like no one actually read and paid heed to Skinner's OP yesterday.

[revbones]

52. Yet... nt

[msanthrope]

20. What stage are we on? nt

[NCTraveler]

26. Ratfucking is a constant state. It doesn't go through stages.

It just moves to the next propaganda piece.

ohhhhh. You were talking about the aftermath of Tuesday. Yep.

[msanthrope]

29. "Keep fucking that chicken" was advice given on the linked thread.

I think it's good advice.

To the jury... I am merely quoting from the thread that the OP has suggested that we all read.

[thereismore]

27. You are in denial.

[Tarc]

21. Is there any particular reason that Sanders people create a new discussion...

just to point it to another discussion?

Wouldn't it help cut the SNR a bit to just bump the original discussion?

[Vinca]

24. They refuse to believe there is even the slightest chance of an indictment.

A foolish assumption in my opinion. If the FBI could clear her today, I'm sure they would given the national presidential campaign going on. But, apparently, they can't. Which isn't a good sign.

[NWCorona]

35. Agreed!

I fully realize that posting these links and stories about Hillary's emails will have no effect on her supporter's.

The fact that this investigation is still going and by all accounts has actually grown in size over the months should give pause. But apparently not.

[NCTraveler]

25. Thanks for the reminder about how long this BS has been pushed for.

That really makes it clear.

[Uncle Joe]

31. Watergate occurred prior to Nixon being reelected and lasted two years before he

was forced to resign.

The scandal led to the discovery of multiple abuses of power by the Nixon administration, articles of impeachment,[2] and the resignation of Nixon as President of the United States in August 1974. The scandal also resulted in the indictment of 69 people, with trials or pleas resulting in 25 being found guilty and incarcerated, many of whom were Nixon's top administration officials.[3]

The affair began with the arrest of five men for breaking and entering into the DNC headquarters at the Watergate complex on Saturday, June 17, 1972. The FBI investigated and discovered a connection between cash found on the burglars and a slush fund used by the Committee for the Re-Election of the President (CRP), the official organization of Nixon's campaign.[4][5] In July 1973, evidence mounted against the President's staff, including testimony provided by former staff members in an investigation conducted by the Senate Watergate Committee. The investigation revealed that President Nixon had a tape-recording system in his offices and that he had recorded many conversations.[6][7]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal

We don't know what will come of this investigation but it could drag out for some time.

[NCTraveler]

39. What an amazing stretch. Don't pull a muscle. nt.

[Uncle Joe]

41. Neither of us have a crystal ball. n/t

[revbones]

53. If Hillary wins, I can't wait for her supporters to

start making statements like "Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal." Since they excuse everything else.

[JonLeibowitz]

59. I am already anticipating the screeds defending her inevitable TPP reversal.

[BainsBane]

34. A felony is a legal convinction

for a crime of a certain magnitude. Hillary hasn't been indicted let alone convicted of anything, nor will she be.

What is clear is that you so resent the rights of American citizens to determine their nominees by popular vote that you will stoop to any dishonest and duplicitous tactic to override their votes and impose on them someone they have handily rejected as a nominee.

Not suprisingly, your candidate's campaign is likewise conspiring to overturn the results of a democratic election. Apparently Sanders objection to regime change displacing popular elections doesn't extend to his own country, anymore than supporters like you do.

Bernie Sanders’ campaign believes it can win the nomination by persuading delegates pledged to Hillary Clinton to defect.


Here are Devine’s comments in full, made in a briefing call that we were on this afternoon.

“My point is that a front-runner in a process like this needs to continue to win if you want to keep hold of delegates. The delegates we have on the Democratic side fall into two categories. Un-pledged delegates – who are free to vote for whoever they want – and pledged delegates, who usually and traditionally have voted for candidates for whom they have been elected, but who under our rules are not bound to do so. The standard of pledged delegates is the standard of fair reflection that is embodied in the rules of the delegate selection process and also in the call for the convention. So if a front-runner wants to keep those delegates in place I believe you need to continue to win. And if you don’t win, you know, you are then going to be under pressure from your own people and your own delegates. And I think the pressure is going to build in the weeks and months ahead, particularly if Bernie Sanders has the kind of winning streak that I believe he can get on.”

http://thetab.com/us/2016/03/16/bernies-campaign-thinks-can-get-hillarys-pledged-delegates-defect-2690

It's become clear that the goal of this campaign and some of its supporters is entirely the opposite of what they have been claiming all these months. Equality and democracy are the enemies. The goal is instead rule by a self-entitled minority, determined that they and no one else determine who leads the nation. I find those values and goals repugnant, and they are the furthest thing from leftist or progressive as possibly exists.

A google search or Clinton, FBI, and indictment turn up ONLY right wing sources: Fox, Breitbart, the Daily Caller, the Free Beacon, the Washington Times. That agenda is being pushed by Karl Rove, the Koch Brothers, and the Tea Party. Those are your allies.

[MaggieD]

44. Well said!!

[RiverLover]

63. Except that convinction isn't a word.

I'm sure its all brilliant though. Even though its ignoring the fact that the FBI is investigating, her IT guy gets immunity for testimony about her server, and the hacker that found emails she's deleted is being extradited to the US.

[MaggieD]

67. Bernie supporters sound desperate with this crap

[ismnotwasm]

45. Exactly.

VERY well said.

[Walk away]

46. BainsBane, what an incredible post!

This says it all. It explains why progressive politicians like Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown won't go near Bernie with a ten foot poll.
The Sanders campaign has, stolen valuable information from the Clinton campaign, threatened to sue the Democratic party, encouraged his followers to bully and stalk liberal politicians and generally run a nasty campaign. Someone should tell Bernie & Taddy Boy.... Democrats HATE you! They aren't going to go out of their way to help you out.

[revbones]

55. And many hate Hillary for her corruption and lies. nt

[Walk away]

61. Just like Bernie's stump speech, it never changes.

I haven't been around here for about a month but, apparently, there is nothing new or interesting coming from the Sanders' camp. Same old repuglican, whiney insults. No wonder he is losing so badly! The more people know him the less they like him!

[revbones]

66. Same old Hillary fan deflection and belief that anything negative about her is a right-wing lie nt

[seabeyond]

47. Sing it sister. I couldn't agree with you more. Nt.

[revbones]

54. You shouldn't give up your day job

Making predictions such as "nor will she be" probably won't pay very well if you get them wrong.

Also, deflecting such as you do here, doesn't cause the discussion to move away from the main point or elevate your status anywhere, so I'm confused as to its purpose.

[BainsBane]

56. The main point of the OP is a blatant falsehood

She has no felony conviction. Nor do you all even seem to even know what the word felony means. The person who constructed that argument obviously isn't a lawyer, and the OP ignores the FBI's official statements that Clinton did not engage in illegal activity, that the only documents on her server that were classified acquired that status after the fact. This from the same people who champion hacking and dumping of classified documents by Wikipedia, who insist Assange shouldn't be able to evade a legal arrest warrant for rape, and don't care that the candidate they support has been cited by the FEC for more illegal campaign donations than anyone in history.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/12/f-e-c-tells-sanders-campaign-that-some-donors-may-have-given-too-much/?_r=4 http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/988/201602110300034988/201602110300034988.pdf
And again. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/02/26/bernie-sanders-campaign-contributions/80999298/
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/26/feds-flag-bernie-sanders-campaign-contributions/80985898/

That you folks are promoting this theory shows you know that your candidate cannot and win the majority of votes or delegates, that his only hope for seizing power depends on a nullification of the votes of the majority.

The point is to expose a campaign strategy built around contempt for democracy and the will of the majority of the electorate.
The bitter enders can join forces with the right to their heart's content. All it does is expose themselves. What it shows is people whose singular goal is an irrational hatred toward the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee, whose hopes and dreams rest on imposing their will as a vocal and self-entitled minority over the democratic rights of Americans.

Pray away for your hail mary to install as the nominee a candidate overwhelmingly rejected by the voting public. Join with him in working to overturn the popular vote by poaching earned delegates in violation of DNC rules. You've got nothing else. He sure as hell can't win on his own merits.

[revbones]

57. Yet. She has no conviction yet.

Also, I've noticed you like to spout off a lot of obfuscation and falsehoods.

For example, a felony is not a conviction yet you say it is as if that's a fact. You throw an untruth around and make it the basis of your entire argument - but you really should be precise on your terminology, especially so in a legal context. A felony is a crime. It has nothing to do with a conviction.

felony: a crime, typically one involving violence, regarded as more serious than a misdemeanor, and usually punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or by death.

If you commit a murder, but avoid conviction then you still have committed a felony.

I'm glad you want to expose campaign strategies based "around contempt for democracy" but objectively that would mean you're anti-Hillary so I'm not sure how you'll contort yourself to resolve that issue.

I'm only hopeful that she gets what's coming to her regarding her corruption and crimes. Whether that will happen has yet to be determined. I lean toward her not suffering any consequences due to not innocence but further corruption in the system.

[Walk away]

62. We get it! The only way Bernie could ever be elected is if Hillary Clinton got arrested!

Bernie...partnering with Repuglicans to bring you lies and smears!!!! Maybe Sander's can get on Trump's ticket. I understand they are attracting similar voting blocs.

[revbones]

65. Sure. If that's what you take from this discussion.

But if that's the case I think it speaks less of you than anything else.

[ucrdem]

37. now this

[AzDar]

40. K & R

[EndElectoral]

43. Thanks for link. I'd not seen that.

[840high]

58. Thank you.

[Onlooker]

60. What's the legal description of Sanders abuse of campaign funds?

What the OP posted is disgraceful. Using right-wing arguments to try to injure Hillary is pathetic. Perhaps the Hillary campaign should respond to this kind of garbage by embracing articles like these that talk about Sanders possible abuse of campaign funds and corrupt land deals. I'm sure there's a legal description involving felonies that someone could make.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/sanders-and-wife-steered-campaign-nonprofit-money-to-family-and-friends/
http://www.wcax.com/story/30935632/group-calls-for-fraud-investigation-into-jane-sanders-land-deals
http://vtdigger.org/2015/09/13/jane-sanders-overstated-donation-amounts-in-loan-application-for-burlington-college/