• Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Explain this to me like I'm a second-grader

Last edited:
Interesting how the Post chose the word "exonerate" for its headline. In no way was Hillary "exonerated." Comey took her to the woodshed and then said -- for reasons only the bribers and extortionists can know -- that she wouldn't be charged.
 
Also from the poll: 31 percent of Democrats (and 63 percent of independents) said the e-mail issue makes them worry about how Clinton might handle her responsibilities if she's elected president. So did 44 percent of liberals, 36 percent of non-white Americans and 56 percent of those under age 40.
 
Interesting how the Post chose the word "exonerate" for its headline. In no way was Hillary "exonerated." Comey took her to the woodshed and then said -- for reasons only the bribers and extortionists can know -- that she wouldn't be charged.

I think she was definitely "exonerated" of a crime. This isn't like a rape case where there's not enough evidence to proceed. There was evidence in spades here, and he didn't think it rose to the level of criminality. "Exonerated" is the right word.
 
Funny how anyone else wouldn't have being "exonerated" available to them under the exact same circumstances.
 
I just thought this was a very enlightening discussion and wanted to relive it.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top