Voting

[DEVOREFLYER]

Here’s the real deal John. My bet is you will not take the time to watch nor would I expect you to read the book “Clinton Cash” that has been out many months before the film and on the best seller list for some time.

But this I can tell you for a fact. If as much as a sentence in the book or a single minute of the movie was not truthful the Clintons would have sued for defamation and won.

After 17 years as a litigation consultant and court approved expert witness it would be a slam dunk to prove if anything was false. Trust me the author knows this and more importantly so does the publisher as he would also be named in the suit.
In a defamation suit the plaintiffs (the Clintons) would have to prove the claims made were false and the burden of proof is shifted to them and not the defendant as in other civil trials. While damages are often difficult to prove there is an exception. In a libel action, unless the plaintiff is a public official or public figure, the plaintiff does not need to prove financial damages. The common law has made a policy determination that the publication of defamatory statements in a transmittable, affixed form that is capable of widespread and simple dissemination will certainly cause damage and therefore damage to one's reputation or character is enough for a court to impose damages.

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Title V, Rules 25-37:
• Rule 26. Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
• Rule 27. Depositions to Perpetuate Testimony
• Rule 28. Persons Before Whom Depositions May Be Taken
• Rule 29. Stipulations About Discovery Procedure
• Rule 30. Depositions by Oral Examination
• Rule 31. Depositions by Written Questions
• Rule 32. Using Depositions in Court Proceedings
• Rule 33. Interrogatories to Parties
• Rule 34. Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes
• Rule 35. Physical and Mental Examinations
• Rule 36. Requests for Admission
• Rule 37. Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions

The Clinton's (although Bill lost his license due to committing perjury) are both lawyers and know they would be found out and proven to be the frauds and the crooks they are.

Ladies and gentlemen of the court I rest my case.

[John Harper]

My friend, we only have two choices. Anger, bitterness, and looking backward never solved a thing. At least we both care. And care enough to vote. Our most important civic duty!

If you have a case against Hillary, take it to court or find someone that will. Lot's of folks have tried. Either she's good, or you're all fools chasing fool's gold. I'll take the latter. Habeus Corpus, bring the charges, or go home. I was originally persuaded by the "ancient aliens" theory as a kid after reading Van Danikens books in the 1970's. We all grow up. I still style my hair like the guy on History Channel, so cool. Better than a mullet.

As a Democrat, I naturally have many "deceased, but still voting" or "illiterate" proletariat relatives living with me that have given me their (fraudulent) absentee ballots and (defrauded) SS checks! Vote early, vote often! I have about twenty absentee ballots coming to my address alone. Issa is going down! It's a huge Democrat conspiracy! We're all doing it.

John

[pcuser]

My friend, we only have two choices. Anger and bitterness never solved a thing.

At least we care enough. And care enough to vote. Our most important civic duty!

As a Democrat, I naturally have many "deceased" or "illiterate" relatives that have given me their proxy votes (and SS checks). Vote early, vote often! I have about twenty absentee ballots coming to my address alone. Issa is going down! It's a huge Democrat conspiracy!!!!

John

Same here...

[DEVOREFLYER]

I would love to take them to court but you obviously don't know how the legal system works or how costly it is.

First one must have "Standing" which is a verifiable loss or harm. It cant be something in the future but must have already occurred, future harm if egregious enough could only get the action stayed and the evidence would have to be overwhelming a very high bar to attain.

The very smallest of civil claims can cost a minimum of $40,000 before getting to trial. And lawyers can't take the case on contingency and no lawyer could afford to take the case pro bono.

Oh an I guess I won the bet and you didn't watch the film. "Eyes wide shut" eh. And I would further bet your the kind of guy that when a life threatening diagnosis made by you doctor doesn't seek a second opinion either.

And for what it's worth the investigative reporter/author found and resourced all of the info about the Clinton Foundation from publicly available sources. I am sure the the Clinton followers are just as capable in uncovering such on the Trump Foundation, I wonder why they haven't. Only two answers possible are one there is nothing to be found incriminating or they are to stupid to find anything, my guess is the first. The DNC certainly has enough money to hire the best to find the dirt don't they.

Trump has been in the public eye for well over 30+ years and in the digital age everything is recorded history and isn't hard to find if you know how to do it. I was doing legal research before the internet it's just easier now and the pay is better. Every candidate does opposition research on their opponent and if Trumps 16 opponents had found anything they certainly would have used it against him in the primary. Are you telling the Bush machine with it contacts and money and Bush being the presumptive nominee couldn't find anything. Well I guess they couldn't or they would certainly would have used it as there was no love for Trump by Bush.

In my lifetime every elected President was a professional politician/lawyer except four. A General, a peanut farmer, an actor. And maybe five if you count a community organizer as he had no authored legislation in either the state or US Senate and voted present most of the time. Seeing as how the US Government is really the largest business in the world and certainly the largest employer in the US I think a President might just be a good fit. History has showen that the the vast majority of politicians haven't exactly done a very good job.

[John Harper]

Same here...

I just rented some P.O. Boxes in my voting district. How many dead relatives can I stuff in there? Thank goodness for ancestry.com. And absentee ballots!!!!

John

[John Harper]

I would love to take them to court but you obviously don't know how the legal system works or how costly it is.

First one must have "Standing" which is a verifiable loss or harm. It cant be something in the future but must have already occurred, future harm if egregious enough could only get the action stayed and the evidence would have to be overwhelming a very high bar to attain.

The very smallest of civil claims can cost a minimum of $40,000 before getting to trial. And lawyers can't take the case on contingency and no lawyer could afford to take the case pro bono.

You take me for a fool? I know exactly what "standing" is and why you don't have it. I thought you would show a little respect, as I've shown you. Showing off for the gang?

I've never sued, been sued, or been arrested. Legal system costs are obviously something you are more familiar with.

Please don't talk down to me. You will never have the right. Who the hell are you? You are pretty presumptuous about other's backgrounds. You'd be surprised.

If you can't convince me in a few words, why watch a movie. I got better things to do.

John

[DEVOREFLYER]

This was your quote "If you have a case against Hillary, take it to court or find someone that will. Lot's of folks have tried. Either she's good, or you're all fools chasing fool's gold. I'll take the latter. Habeus Corpus, bring the charges, or go home. I was originally persuaded by the "ancient aliens" theory as a kid after reading Van Danikens books in the 1970's. We all grow up. I still style my hair like the guy on History Channel, so cool. Better than a mullet."

Who's playing games you or me, you brought the above up and I responded. I have always been open to an opposing opinion and then by nature looked for fact as was required in my vocation. To often in life that which is presented as fact turns out to be false or fiction. Facts always outweighs opinion and the most credible witness even. Facts are facts and are unchangeable regardless how bad we want them to be otherwise. Life is like a ballgame, you win some, you lose some and you get a few rain outs.

Like I said "Eyes Wide Closed". I always look both ways before crossing the street and much the same can be said in my life I don't take something for fact just because one side said it.

And while you were a kid in the 1970's I was a 30 something adult with a family to support. I also grew up before the advent of taking mind altering drugs and unicorns and rainbows became popular. Totally different perspective on life between us and the world I would guess.

[etucker1959]

I would love to take them to court but you obviously don't know how the legal system works or how costly it is.

First one must have "Standing" which is a verifiable loss or harm. It cant be something in the future but must have already occurred, future harm if egregious enough could only get the action stayed and the evidence would have to be overwhelming a very high bar to attain.

The very smallest of civil claims can cost a minimum of $40,000 before getting to trial. And lawyers can't take the case on contingency and no lawyer could afford to take the case pro bono.

Oh an I guess I won the bet and you didn't watch the film. "Eyes wide shut" eh. And I would further bet your the kind of guy that when a life threatening diagnosis made by you doctor doesn't seek a second opinion either.

And for what it's worth the investigative reporter/author found and resourced all of the info about the Clinton Foundation from publicly available sources. I am sure the the Clinton followers are just as capable in uncovering such on the Trump Foundation, I wonder why they haven't. Only two answers possible are one there is nothing to be found incriminating or they are to stupid to find anything, my guess is the first. The DNC certainly has enough money to hire the best to find the dirt don't they.

Trump has been in the public eye for well over 30+ years and in the digital age everything is recorded history and isn't hard to find if you know how to do it. I was doing legal research before the internet it's just easier now and the pay is better. Every candidate does opposition research on their opponent and if Trumps 16 opponents had found anything they certainly would have used it against him in the primary. Are you telling the Bush machine with it contacts and money and Bush being the presumptive nominee couldn't find anything. Well I guess they couldn't or they would certainly would have used it as there was no love for Trump by Bush.

In my lifetime every elected President was a professional politician/lawyer except four. A General, a peanut farmer, an actor. And maybe five if you count a community organizer as he had no authored legislation in either the state or US Senate and voted present most of the time. Seeing as how the US Government is really the largest business in the world and certainly the largest employer in the US I think a President might just be a good fit. History has showen that the the vast majority of politicians haven't exactly done a very good job.

You and John were having such a good time I didn't want to butt in!!!!! However, your first statement of this comment made me fall out of my chair. Then I couldn't stop laughing!!!!! You mention how costly the legal system can be. With all the Billionaire Republicans out there financing their favorite candidates. If their was a ghost of a chance to take the Clinton's to court to prove ANY wrong doings they committed. The lack of MONEY could never be used as an excuse for not taking them to court. It's too easy for some deep pocketed individual to form some shill organization and sue the crap out of the Clinton's!!!!!

[DockRat]

DR
The economy. Trump has ZERO track record and you can't just build stuff and not pay for it and file bankruptcy when POTUS. I'll take four more years of still being employed vs. the risk of a WW3 because a spoiled brat felt insulted in a tweet. He has no self control at all and knows nothing. Everything he says is a lie or he changes his mind. He's said absolutely nothing about how he's going to "Make America Great Again". Ask any black person when exactly was America great for them. We aren't even close solving those issues. We elected a black president and the first thing the republicans did was say that their only concern was to make sure he doesn't get re-elected. They couldn't even do that right. Don't get me wrong. I cannot stand Hillary either, but as a person with a rational thinking brain, there's no way I can believe that Trump as the most powerful man in world is a good idea. It's terrifying to tell you the truth.
So far as the Supreme Court. I have a major problem with religion in politics. Period. We don't need a theocracy. (American Taliban)
Loud mouth and rolling dice is absolute insanity in these times. Our entire planet is set to go off like a roman candle and he will be a gasoline covered flare in a fireworks factory.
This is not the time to be rolling dice with our planet and our kids future.

Your funny Brent, Zero track record ? He had had upwards of 500 companies, and a few failed. Pretty much normal for a businessman who has many pans in the fryer.
He is a bit of a wild card but look at the other option, Hillary . Where is her track record ?
Would you want Hillary bringing in Hundreds of thousand refugees ? What would she do for the economy.

Look at the last seven years, divided country, HUGE Debt, record aid getting dished out. Good thing you have a job because Uncle Sam needs more of your taxes.
Have you watched Clinton Cash ? Harper is scared to watch it, how about you?
Not a big Trump fan but the choice is pretty obvious if you have a job or assets.

"This is not the time to be rolling dice with our planet and our kids future"
A little paranoid ? Do you honestly the he wants to start WWIII ?

The country needs a businessman, he wants to go after all the crappy trade deals and slam these countries with some tariffs.

Why is Hillary hiding from the press, doesn't want a meltdown ?
Check out this Doctors idea about Hillary having Parkinsons, I think he is on to something.

[DockRat]

Does Hillary Have Parkinson's Disease ?
This Doctor explains the facts about her history on her video appearances that appear to be Parkinsons.
His explanation video was made before her 4 min coughing on tape from this last weekend.
Hillary says it is allergies, even though these spats have happened at different times of the year?