maybe.

what we know for sure, is that when the russian hacked emails
were released, everyone on the left, and everyone in the media, said this hurt Hilary. that can only be true, if the voters didn’t like
what the emails revealed. in that case, the content of the emails
is more important than who released them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But you have posted numerous times almost the same thing about the speeches that you said above and that you wanted them released. So what was the big scandal with her not releasing speeches that she was paid for by private entities that hired her?

Would you release the completion factors that your employer paid you to develop?


And what was the question that turned the tide for Hillary? Did Trump receive any questions ahead of time?

If your opinion is that it is acceptable or even desirable to have foreign nations interfere in our elections you are not advocating for anything near rule of law.
Though it is hard to see how you do anyways, since you support the lawless Trump.
Trump thinks laws are good, but only as long as they work in his favor. If they aren't working for him, call Colludy and Joey Di.

can you answer my question possibly? did your side make a big deal that releasing these emails
hurt hilary, yes or no?

if i was applying for a chief actuary job, and my employer wanted to see transcripts of speeches i gave, unless there was proprietary intellectual property in there, i’d feel
like i had to divulge it. that’s actually a great question. So was
mine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you’re trying really hard not to answer my question, aren’t you?

if russia jacked the voting machines or spread lies, that’s interference. if they revealed truth that hilary his and that her pals in the media had no intent of uncovering, that’s more like whistleblowing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Funny you ask that in a post where you ignore questions.

What was the question(s) that threw the nomination to Hilary? and did Trump receive any questions?

Completion factors are proprietary.

This is the question many people would like to have answered.
No simple answer exists, Fivethirtyeight is pretty good at poll analysis and did look at it. They did not come to a clear-cut solution. The article is somewhat extensive with some data. Political geeks will argue over it for years.

How did Hillary Clinton blow a 7-percentage-point lead over Donald Trump in the final month of the campaign? Much of the post-election analysis has revolved around FBI Director James Comey’s letter to Congress on Oct. 28. Less attention was spent on the role that WikiLeaks played. Until, that is, news broke that the CIA thought Russia actively tried to help Trump win; figures connected to the Russian government allegedly hacked Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails, which then found their way to WikiLeaks. So what effect did WikiLeaks have on the election?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...llary-clinton/

It's illegal unlike whistleblowing.

She accepted help in rigging the election against Bernie. That is only if you believe Bernie. Also,only if you consider getting answers to questions before they are asked to be unethical. Did you consider that fair play?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

specifics please. So what was this question that threw the nomination to Hillary? I find it hard to believe that one question threw the nomination. And if Trump received similar help would that be unethical also?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bernie believes this to be the case,google it. And no,if Trump received help it is perfectly fine.

Why not answer my question?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you realize how hypocritical your statement is? Can you please provide a link where Bernie says Hillary being given one question ruined his chance to be the Democratic candidate. And your first statement was that Hillary accepted help not that Bernie said it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Complaining about the debate questions is trivial. Only thing the Clinton campaign did of substance was to arm twist the DNC on cash which was hardball but not illegal. Sanders wasn't going to get the nomination anyway. Clinton only lost because of her self inflicted email issues and Russian interference.

Right now I'm a lot more concerned about real corruption and dysfunction in this Administration that is an order of magnitude beyond what I've ever seen. As the impeachment subpoenas continue to come forth the circle of wagons is going to get really tight really fast. Did you see Miller, Jordan and McCarthy on Sunday? They are all clueless on how to respond other than spouting conspiracy theories. We have a lawless leader, it's time to fix that.

Of course it is. But that's what some of the people on the right have become here. It's not right to give her the question but the question they gave her was something any candidate would prepare for. Mountain out of a molehill.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Miller just looked bat#^&#^&#^&#^& crazy.... but don’t worry he has worked in government for 3 years and knows what a deep state operation looks like.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Flashback: Pompeo was asked last week by ABC whether he knew about the conversation between Trump and Zelensky. He demurred, saying he just got the report. We now know he took part in the call itself.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

NEW: Attorney General William Barr has held private meetings overseas with foreign intelligence officials, including in the U.K. and Italy, seeking their help in investigation of the Russia investigation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Whataboutism! Disrtraction! Fear! Corruption! Moscow Mitch might be distancing himself, maybe he sees the writing on the walls. Trump can’t quite understand why the crap he got away with in the private sector won’t work in Washington.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yep, scumminess runs through this Administration. Trump calls The Whistleblower a spy, the whistleblowers lawyers say he's afraid as he has been threatened by Trump, Trump then says he deserves to know who the Whistleblower is. Another indication he has no idea what the law is.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just in: Sebastian Gorka is traveling with @SecPompeo to Europe, @Abs_NBC reports. He was seen getting into a State Department van headed to Joint Base Andrews for departure
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Russia says Trump can't release phone calls without Kremlin permission nbcnews.com/politics/donal… via @nbcnews
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Conservatives pretended to be furious that Bill Clinton said hi to Loretta Lynch on a tarmac. Now imagine she'd traversed the globe trying to substantiate anti-Romney smears. That these are different abuses of the office doesn't make this proper or "reasonable."
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

paul, you dodged like a wuss, not me, read the posts. i
answered a bunch of your questions, then paused in the hope
you might show me the same courtesy.

i have no idea what the question was. Donna Brazile admits doing it, it’s not in dispute. i never said it cost bernie the nomination. but it’s very un democratic, as was the use of super delegates.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

paul, why does the left still
insist that the release of those emails hurt hilary in the election, if those emails revealed nothing of substance?

can’t have it both ways.

if the emails revealed nothing, then how did they hurt her?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I never once mentioned the emails in this thread so you're delusional thinking I have to answer any question you want to discuss . Trump was fed questions by Rodger Ailes but given the hypocrisy you demonstrate so often here it's not a big deal. And now I'll ask again since you dumped the question what did Hillary do that was unethical?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Again I never made one statement about the emails here. It's hilarious that you have no problem with Trump being helped by the Russians for some reason. Is it because of 3.7 and 28000 That anything Trump does is fine with you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

follow if you can...

Pete said russian hacking if emails
was bad

i said that if the emails harmed hilary, that means the emails
revealed things the voters didn’t like, in which case perhaps the content of the emails ( what she did) is as important as who released the emails

you then asked
about what the emails claimed she did. and you’re saying that they don’t contain anything important. if that’s true, then they didn’t hurt hilary.

i don’t think you have to answer anything. but if i
answer your questions and you won’t answer mine ( because the answer doesn’t serve your agenda), i’m gonna point that out. if you don’t like that, i suggest maybe you answer the question.

i don’t care about the emails. it’s just funny when liberals
claim the emails revealed
nothing substantial about hilary, and simultaneously claim they helped cause her defeat.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes I do.

I never said anything about one question ruining his chances,you did. I said Sanders believes the nomination was rigged. That is why he did not endorse her. She accepted help and that is an uneven playing field.

I will ask again because you seem chatty. Do you believe that was fair play?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the use of superdelegates was a joke, a way to
ensure she got the
nomination even if bernie was winning states, he could fall
further behind in the delegate count.

democrats ain’t big on democracy, unless they get what they want. we see that again and again and again.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Stamp your feet a little harder and complain why I'm not answering your question. I didn't ask anything about the emails. You're being delusional.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device