Hilarys emails

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

There’s a lot of new info, just no evidence to back any of it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and what qualifies as “evidence” to you, depends entirely, on whose ox is getting gored.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

and what qualifies as “evidence” to you, depends entirely, on whose ox is getting gored.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I see a lot of oxen with indictments and guilty pleas ... and none are email oxen

again once again you display them as some how the same

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I see a lot of oxen with indictments and guilty pleas ... and none are email oxen

again once again you display them as some how the same

See here's the thing. When someone makes an accusation against a conservative, to Spence, that's sufficient evidence of wrongdoing. Hos threshold of what qualifies as evidence, is a bit different, when the subject is a democrat.

As to the lack of indictments, MAYBE (no way of knowing) some of that has to do with the fact that the senior FBI agent on that case, made it very clear that he was going to help Hilary beat Trump. Then there's that hilarious private meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lunch on the private jet, and Hilary's announcement days after her being cleared, that if she won, she'd consider keeping Lynch on as AG. Now, I never went to law school, but I do know what a quid pro quo is, and so do you.