I noted on CNN tonight in very small print that it has been determined that Hillary Clinton's personal server where all her Benghazi emails were supposed to be has been wiped clean and all of that information is irrecoverable. Must have been an electrical storm or something. Hmmm, does that make me MISTRUSTFUL?...Geo

Naw- they just took a page from the "tRICKY dICK" PLAYBOOK REGARDING WaterGate- 18.5 minutes lost because Dickie's Secretary Fubared the tape recorder- Right!

Yes Foxy, and Libtards are still whining about that 18.5 minutes. Why, Lefty Stevie, aka SKB, was just here crying about it about a week ago.

But they will all remain silent about Hillary and thousands of hours of deleted data that was illegally possessed in the first place. Since she is a Democrat anti-gunner, some here like King Brown will no doubt rise up to defend and support her. Others here who are American citizens will vote for her knowing that she is a threat to our gun rights.

It is an old trick. Recycled often. Reagan did the same thing during Iran-Contra. Don't you know by know foxie....corruption only counts if you have a D after your name. Anyone affiliated with the GOP gets a pass. Notice the uproar over resignation of Aaron Shock. I'm guessing this mess might cost old Hillary the nomination. More proof of a mainstream media conspiracy.

You must really be hit'n that bong...

The entire corrupt Obama administration has been getting a pass.

Hey Foxie, see how Lefty Stevie is ignoring me? No Conservative here has denied wrongdoing on the part of Nixon during Watergate, but plenty of our Libtards have risen up to defend Clinton, Obama, etc. Perhaps SKB will show us where Reagan, who he also cried about last week, erased or deleted information pertaining to Iran-Contra. The Iran-Contra investigation found some guilt, but never on Reagan's part. I asked Stevie to show us last week but he just slunk away as usual. That's how these frauds all work. Drop a turd and then leave the room.

SKB pretends to be such a staunch Conservative who intends to vote Republican just as soon as he can, but actions speak louder than words. SKB most likely already has his Hillary in '16 Bumper sticker and yard sign. Another so-called gun guy who can be counted on to support the anti-gun Democrat every time!

King told us yesterday that there are other reasons besides the 2nd Amendment, such as the economy, that caused people to support Obama. Well Obama sure fixed that one. All he did was to continue along the path of stimulus that Bush started. It worked a little, but probably would have gone almost as well all on its' own. Everything else is sure fubared. All Hope and Change got us was a screwed up Middle East and foreign policy failures, more expensive health care, general inflation, more illegal immigration, and gay marriage. A lot of these guys must like the idea of gay marriage, because they sure can't point to any other success stories.

Might be why they can't vote republican...because most Republicans are against gay marriage and the legalization of drugs.

I suspect he'll be back to honor the world with another sweet girl turd shortly...

The koolaide couldn't be that good, could it? Your gal tested the water and supposedly raked in just under a billion in foreign 'donations' before closing bids on the services of her massive corporate machine. Well positioned wouldn't you say. Do you think little aaron would have a shot at lawn boy for one of hill's smaller mansions?

Ahh Craig you prove my point for me, thank you. Nice to see your Rose colored glasses you picked up on the 'bay are still working so well for you.

Kool-Aid ehh? Looks like you have the market cornered on that stuff. Easy enough to slide lil Aaron a pass and blame the old bag Hill instead. Nice to see you are still loyal to party above all else. We certainly would not want to see a good old boy held accountable for his actions now would we? Best we sweep that under the rug and move along. Nothing to see here.....

You're right, you win. I'm guessing this mess will cost lil aaron the nomination. But, they worked. My rose colored glasses made me feel her pain of victimhood. Sweep anything you want away, for me, I don't think you convinced me that her nomination is in much trouble.

You decide any accountability for the good ole boy, and I promise, I'll come back and support you. I'm going to have to count on you to continue demonizing him, because the story just doesn't get the traction that you're hoping. Then, can we 'discuss' real questions about possible future president's?

So is corruption only an issue if you are seeking the Presidential nomination? Just wondering.

You seem to be able to pick and choose which types of corruption you find offensive, or maybe I should say who's corruption. Myself I find it bothersome on either side of the isle.

Onto the real questions.....

Section by section, nope, corruption is a problem, to me, top to bottom. Interesting, so hill-n-her nonprofit/state dept./pres aspirations are indeed corruption? Bold, but not a real question?

When I'm picking and choosing, I'm not thinking offensive or bothersome. What does that mean, I can't tell what's 'bothersome' anyway? You pick and choose not to question one side of the aisle.

Disappointing, I thought you were raising 'real questions' about lil aaron. He 'paid back' some 40k and triggered a Republican House audit of spending practices. I understand what 'discuss' means, sorry about that koolaide thing, it should've been rose colored glasses, but is there any desire to explain where things get 'offensive'?

So we are playing the word game today? OK, I'm in. What do you like Craig? We will take offensive and bothersome off the table. Troubling? Disturbing?

Corruption is a problem for you Top to Bottom? How About Left to Right?

I explained where I find corruption to be a problem, throughout the political spectrum.

When this subject was first raised I hardly came to the old bags defense and said she will likely be put to a good grilling by both houses of congress. If they find something, then so be it. I would hardly be surprised. Your accusation that I'm only willing to question one side of the aisle is just plain false. I noticed Senator Robert Mendez(D) NJ is currently in some pretty hot water. As I mentioned earlier, you will such behavior on both sides of the aisle. A "problem" in your words, "offensive" in mine.

Okay, I like the word degrees, as in, I not so sure that a lib can have rose colored glasses. Maybe, but not around these parts.

I think I know where the corruption is, it's easy to find. That second snipit is my indigestion. There's no indication of the likelihood of a good grilling, but more importantly, will it matter? Let's say she's impeached, from what, I don't know, but is that a consequence?

I've also shared my 'notices'. I notice she had a 'new beginnings' pep talk where she joked about the destroyed email records, and said she was going to have a 'new beginning' with the press. Two days later, through her supporters, she told the 'press' which words were not to be used around her.

But, oh well, so be it.

So if I understand you correctly neither Watergate or Iran-Contra rose to the degree of a problem and your highly honed corruption detector really only needs to be pointed to left, because that is the only source of corruption. As for the rose colored glasses comment I am at a bit of a loss as what exactly you were implying. Would you like liberals to just join you in your less than factually correct remembrance of both Reagan and Nixon?

Well it looks like the old bag has an appointment with congress on May the first.

http://news.yahoo.com/us-panel-asks-clinton-testify-may-1-emails-163955973.html

Let the chips fall where they may.....

Looks like Lefty Stevie is the one who is being less than factual in recollections about Nixon and Reagan. No one here has denied troubling misdeeds in either Watergate or Iran-Contra. However, Nixon had all the time in the world to destroy all of his tapes before the Court ruled they were a matter of public record. There must have been a lot of really bad shit in that 18.5 minutes that was erased to reach the same level as Hillary wiping her server of the entire content of her tenure as Secretary of State. The chips fell after the Iran-Contra investigation, but they didn't fall upon Reagan.

There are tons of unanswered questions about Benghazi, her Middle East negotiations, and her foreign donors. Considering that Lefty Stevie, aka SKB only rises up to defend Liberals and to criticize Conservatives, it is very apparent that he will be supporting the anti-gun "old bag" just as he supported Obama.

I can't really say that I was commenting about either Watergate or Iran-Contra, but I was referring to your preferences on who to pick on. Just for conversation, you'll get mileage out of that Reagan thing forever, and Nixon paid dearly, but how about choosing the clinton impeachment for your example. His consequences, rock star status?

On that glasses thing, no big deal, libs have perfect clarity, right?

I'll try to leave heroes and legends out of things in the future for you Craig. The Clinton impeachment speaks for itself doesn't it? He is the only President to have been impeached and was dis-barred over it. Funny thing is, all the average person cares about is how he ran the country. Not something I'm going to loose a bunch of sleep over myself. Maybe Fox news could run a special and try to change the American public's view of him. Rock Star status? Well he certainly had the approval rating of one after the failed impeachment attempt, 73%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_image_of_Bill_Clinton

As too perfect clarity, you have certainly shown yours. All problems come from one direction correct? And we all know which way that is.

Fun playing word games with you Craig

craigd, Lefty Stevie is still pretending to ignore me, but I don't think he will ever accept that most of Bill Clinton's U.S economic success was simply from not doing a lot to disturb the strong foundation laid by Reagan.

We still have 43% who think Obama is doing a good job. If ever there was something to show that public approval and actual competence are not the same... this is it.

We all know SKB isn't going to "loose" any sleep over Clinton. SKB has shown us that he really likes and supports those anti-2nd Amendment Democrats, no matter what they do to us. Does that make Lefty Stevie a "loser" or a "looser"?

Maybe now we're getting some where. Funny thing is, all the average person would care about Nixon or Reagan is...how they ran the country. Ooops, not so. Maybe not, but you do remember how desperately the average person was running away from the carter economy. Does any average person care about Iran-contra now except someone who's anti Reagan for ideological reason?

How about this, since you're belittling Fox News, there wouldn't be a whole lot of view changing that they could do for you, is there? Maybe, ask yourself if you don't have the rose colored glasses on when you sit down in front of the tube. Maybe your favorites are only there to 'change the American public view', more opinion comedy than news, eh? I am glad that you don't feel Fox is there to change the public's view, please don't try to change them.

If I can dig up some poll that says both Nixon and Reagan had times of very high approval ratings, will you drop the iran/watergate mantra and complement the effectiveness of their policy. Or, I'd understand if you wouldn't feel like it. Regardless of your fierce independence, you are saying that you stand polar opposite to your stereotype of me. Sure it's word games, but you seem to say, all problems come from one direction, and it's not from your direction, right.

"Fierce independence"? That's an awfully nice way to describe a so-called gun guy who consistently supports and defends anti-gun Democrat politicians. And especially one who makes a living working on guns. When you speak of Stevie's direction craigd, it would appear that is pretty far Left.

No more comments about your heroes and legends Craig, I promised.

We began talking about corruption and the current Hillary scandal. I believe you mentioned how she will get special treatment in the MSM. That prompted my Fox comment which seems to have stung very deeply. No chance of me challenging old Rupert, he has way more bucks than I do. My uncle knew him very well in the 1980's. He had only good things to say about Rupert. Me, I tend to get my news from a variety a tainted sources, none of which are on the Television. I do not get TV reception where I live so have to read or listen to the radio. Old fashioned, I know. I tend to read my news from the BBC, the AFP and an assortment of other news outlets.

I am hardly saying I am polar opposite from you Craig, apparently you can not read. What I have said multiple times, and for some reason you seem to need to twist, is that both parties are loaded with corruption and each has its problems. It is much a problem with Robert Mendez as it is with Aaron Shock. I said from the beginning Hillary would end up testifying in front of congress over this and you somehow construe that as a defense of her? What kind of logic is that? I would think we would have much common ground in actuality but the premise that one party is somehow free of graft and corruption while the other is relatively saintly is not one I'm buying into. In that respect I remain firmly and fiercely independent, thank you for noticing. Once again....the problems come from both parties, both directions. Twist away......

I know I can't read very well, thanks for bringing it up. So, and I've done this with King, I take out my ruler and measure screen inches of bash R's and screen inches of D bashing, and go figure it just doesn't add up to, 'they both do it'. You'd think one leg was a whole foot shorter than the other.

When it comes to great restoration projects, heck, you're one of my heroes. I think you read a bit too much into amount of tingle I get up my leg when I hear Reagan's name.

In a relative way, I've never said the R's are immune or that they walk on water, did I. I have said and firmly feel that the R's just don't have the cajones to be as corrupt as the D's. Maybe it's because of, ta dah, media watch dogs. How else would we find out that an Il. congressman may, yuk yuk, have misspent 40k. You do know that those same 'media watchdogs' will sit on the sidelines heaping praise on a retiring harry reid. You know, the same reid that entered the senate with very modest means, and will retire an extremely wealthy influence peddler. Where did he find the time after all he was serving his country.

I brought up your reading comprehension because you have twisted what I said about Hillary several times in this thread. The interpretation you have of what I said was simply incorrect.

I do not feel that talking about political history and the scandals that occurred is bashing. Are you simply bashing when you talk about Hillary and her cleaned up server? I do not think you are, I could be wrong. It seems to me that you are legitimately concerned that corruption and a cover up may have occurred. The common thread that started the comparisons between today's events and those under past administrations is the destruction of documentation. Hindering Federal investigations and destroying documentation is something I think is unethical and corrupt no matter who does it.

You might be surprised about my actual feelings about Reagan as well. He did a pretty darn good job through some rocky times both domestically and internationally. A long way from the failed Presidencies of recent times. I hardly agreed with all of his policies, but then again, I can say the same thing about ever single President I have lived under. Overall I think he did very well.

As far as the R's being victims of the MSM, I have a hard time with that, especially with Fox News being the highest rated news program in the country. That would make them very much a part of the MSM in my mind and they clearly support the R's. Seems like there is plenty of watchdogs on both sides of the aisle in our highly connected, information at your finger tips world. I'm not going to defend old Harry, why would I? But I do not see the Ill. congressman as a victim either. Maybe he should not have mis-spent those funds and then posted the pictures on insta-gram.

I may have done some twisting, but I thought way back in the beginning, I had the opinion that hill would not be either held responsible or meaningfully questioned about her actions as sec-o-state, didn't mention her dem political activism. Then, something started getting twisted about heroes.

The interesting thing I thought about the twisting, was that the only impeachment ever was excused, very quickly, because of popularity polls. Maybe it is not legitimate to be concerned about corruption, only popularity? Bringing up history is not bashing, but isn't history a subjective record of the past, certainly open to other points of view. More to my point, I felt you were bashing R's because our history lesson was hand selected from only one side of the aisle. One sided repetition is likely intentional for an agenda.

If you ever have a chance to watch some Fox, every now and then they'll mention that they carefully time left and right wing responses, and try to split things evenly. I'm not a religious viewer, but my spin on it, they do not 'clearly support the R's'. But, I do notice it strikes a nerve with libs when the policy and tactics of each side are directly compared.

Quickly back to hill, Fox and the MSM. You mentioned hill will be grilled and let the chips fall where they may. I have repeatedly said in twisting ways, not good enough. My prediction, she doesn't show. Her first choice will be a carefully selected MSM campaign, she'll sit down for prepackaged 'interviews'. Do you suppose Fox will be on that A-list, a coequal, or will they be kicked off the campaign reporter pool like they were kicked off when bo was campaigning.

hill cut her last book signing tour short when she started getting more and more unscripted questions about her actions. If you're a fan of history and you're content with letting the chips fall, then this person would be a-okay as our next pres. She did the tour as sec-o-state for resume building, well that and to solicit compensation for influence. How about that for not too quick.

Funny how a liberal idiOt will keep dog paddling in the cesspool they created all the while telling themselves how great they smell...

You smell like pure D chit boy.