Quote:Its a right of the accused to defend him/herself against their accusers. If you want to accuse come forward.


It's a staple of our justice system.

 

Who the hacker is has to be far more important to you than the content they've exposed.  I get it.  You can't actually respond to the content because that would further expose the fact that you're supporting the most corrupt plutocrat who is only interested in enriching the Clinton bottom line.  Give a large donation to the family slush fund, get access to Hillary and Bill.  You have no choice but to put the hackers on trial for daring to expose this corruption.  

 

What exactly would the accused possibly gain there other than a distraction from the facts?  They're not denying the accuracy of the content other than one weak effort by her buffoon running mate, Tim Kaine.  The insight into what her sycophantic inner circle really think about her is pretty revealing, as is the information about the machinations involved in making the Clinton's wealthy.  It fully exposes the pay for play mindset they enjoy, but hey, let's go after the hackers.  

 

 

Quote:From what I've heard, sophomoric sexual innuendos do nothing towards proving a point.


The Clintons are often cannon fodder on The Morning Joe, so your claim that their take on the recent Clinton email revelations is a sign of liberal media finally reporting on the truth misses the mark.

 

Are the Clinton's normally cannon fodder for the NYT?  How about PBS?  Both have been forced to address this stuff.  The leftist media has made every effort to downplay and dismiss this stuff up to this point.  There are plenty of studies that have been done showing just how slanted the reporting has been.  To suggest otherwise is laughable.  

 

BTW, the NY Times has admitted that they've got an anti-Trump bias in their reporting.  

---