She must be telling the truth …show us the originals
LOL,
“She must be telling the truth … show us the originals”
_________________
Oh, man, good answer! You were in ahead of The Donald himself on that one. I expect we will definitely hear your very words later today. Because, well, great minds and all that.
It was merely a spontaneous event sparked by a youtube video. Nothing to see here, move along now. HaHaHa
Another lesson in “Parsing the Democrats”:
If the email server was hacked and internal documents were downloaded to an off-site location then, of course they were “tampered with”.
Only yesterday Brazile was fretting about the impact of the facts. Obviously they’ve gone the Planned Parenthood route and claimed manipulation (that doesn’t exist).
It drove me bonkers in the PP debate that the defense mounted was ‘The videos were taken out of context’ and NOBODY asked the obvious (and unanswerable question): ‘What context would have made these remarks acceptable?’ I so wanted to see Cecile Richards up a stump but of course the media took the coward’s way out.
The Dems are now using a similar tactic ie send a mouthpiece out who wasn’t involved in the particulars to claim it’s all a conspiracy. The people who wrote these e-mails are still in their positions and on the payroll. Why are they permitted to hide? Why aren’t they being questioned at the airport, at their cars, in Philadelphia, on the street, etc.?
[“She must be telling the truth … show us the originals”]
Yes!
Show us the originals!
Zactly. Use the Lib line. “Prove it”
“She must be telling the truth …show us the originals”
If so, do it this morning, so the world knows the DNC itself hasn’t tampered with them.
But I can hear the responses to that:
- “We require X months to scrub them and remove personal, non-business correspondence”
- “We require Y months to print them all”
X + Y = time to tamper and CYA
My first thought immediately. Show me the originals. Otherwise STFU.
Err... Hillary deleted them?