User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 2:12:02 AM EDT
[#1]
I continue to wait for this "perp walk" and continue to believe that I was smarter than those of you who predicted it back a billion pages ago. She will get off scott free.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 2:27:22 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I continue to wait for this "perp walk" and continue to believe that I was smarter than those of you who predicted it back a billion pages ago. She will get off scott free. Of course she will. She always does... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 2:44:13 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Of course she will. She always does... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I continue to wait for this "perp walk" and continue to believe that I was smarter than those of you who predicted it back a billion pages ago. She will get off scott free. Of course she will. She always does... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 8:25:23 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FIY. Contractors most certainly can conduct"official" business with the gov using their contractor-owned servers. And I'm not entirely certainthe gov employee restriction is not just "policy" vice law. Now, in Clinton's case, she most certainly could have had a SCIF with JWICS and SIPR terminals installed in her house at taxpayer expense if she asked for it. I'd bet WHCA installed a STE as a matter of course for Cabinet members. She had to deliberately try to do what she did. ETA - and I heard GEN Hayden (former DIRNSA/DCI) on the radio this evening say that he would lose all respect for a lot of foreign intelligence agencies if they had not sucked her personal server dry. The vast majority of contractors conduct their official business on servers provided by the hiring organization. If a contract company is operating their own systems, particularly in the case of Classified, those systems must meet the same configuration and physical security standards as the Government systems and are subject to inspection for compliance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 8:29:58 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You could both very well be right, but it has already gone a lot further than I expected it to go, and it appears to be picking up some steam. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I continue to wait for this "perp walk" and continue to believe that I was smarter than those of you who predicted it back a billion pages ago. She will get off scott free. Of course she will. She always does... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 8:48:29 AM EDT
[#6]
If you play your cards right, her pals will hang her out to dry.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 9:00:13 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You could both very well be right, but it has already gone a lot further than I expected it to go, and it appears to be picking up some steam. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I continue to wait for this "perp walk" and continue to believe that I was smarter than those of you who predicted it back a billion pages ago. She will get off scott free. Of course she will. She always does... According to who? The media reports? Government officials? They're gonna continue to "let it pick up steam" , until the correct time when the AG will come out and proclaim everything is good, after a hundred million dollar investigation , she's totally innocent of all charges. It's a scam . It always has been. Repubs get to "look tough" on Dems , while Dems claim they police their own. It's a complete joke, the gov is a joke, laws only apply to little people |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 9:05:05 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I give this zero chance of happening. Hillary is untouchable because she is one of the elected elite. This. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 9:09:47 AM EDT
[#9]
Any updates on when this DOJ will indict her?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 9:24:26 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any updates on when this DOJ will indict her? I'm guessing that IF (and that's a big IF) it's going to happen, it will be after she's gotten enough Delegates to 'win' the Primary by a fairly comfortable margin. At that point, She'll be indicted, and as part of a 'plea' (probably already arranged*****), Biden will step in as her successor with her 'transferring' those Delegates to Biden...that allows the Dem establishment to keep control of who they run instead of having to stick with Sanders. ((******If I had to guess the details of the Plea, it's that she continue to run as I mentioned above...they'll withhold prosecution until she's the clear winner. She'll get a Pardon from Barry so she'll be able to claim that it was the 'Vast Right Wing Conspiracy' going after poor Hillary who's not very Tech Savvy and didn't realize it could be a problem. A top Aide may fall on their sword for her. Hillary will still get millions in speaking fees, Obama and the Dems get to choose the successor rather than actually listening to the public.....)) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 10:06:27 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would not be surprised if our current AG when confronted with enough evidence to indict will pass on it. I would not be surprised if the WH grants a pardon in the spirit allowing the first viable female presidential candidate to run. Should that happen, we will cease to be a nation of laws, and should Hillary be elected she will rightfully believe herself to be beyond the reach of the law, set apart from the citizenry. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Other than these limitations, the President's power seems plenary and quite flexible. Pardons can be granted at any time after a crime has been committed: before federal criminal charges are brought, after conviction and sentencing, or any time in between.
They can even be granted after the full sentence has been served, solely to restore the pardonee's civil rights. The President can give amnesty to a vast group of federal offenders, or he can pardon a single offender for a broad, unspecified range of crimes.' I wonder if a pardon for future acts that haven't even been committed yet would be kosher. There's essentially no limit to the President's power to pardon. I would not be surprised if our current AG when confronted with enough evidence to indict will pass on it. I would not be surprised if the WH grants a pardon in the spirit allowing the first viable female presidential candidate to run. Should that happen, we will cease to be a nation of laws, and should Hillary be elected she will rightfully believe herself to be beyond the reach of the law, set apart from the citizenry. Every Hillary supporter I know does not care that she broke the law, admits there is a double standard, and is OK with that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 10:31:03 AM EDT
[#12]
I read on the internet (so you know its true) that the 22 top secret emails were reclassified after the fact (cnn maybe). I don't know whats going to happen, either Hillary will be president or Donald will be. Either way a democrat will be in office. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 10:36:51 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read on the internet (so you know its true) that the 22 top secret emails were reclassified after the fact (cnn maybe). I don't know whats going to happen, either Hillary will be president or Donald will be. Either way a democrat will be in office. That's a common, although incorrect, understanding of what happened. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 10:43:46 AM EDT
[#14]
Wow! 43 pages so far for a non event. That pos will never ever get her just dues for anything. There will never be any justice metered out to her and most of the protected class. A few minions will be made to answer for her traitorous behavior but not her nor any big shots. A sad status report for a former "greatest country in the world" now being turned into a third world shithole, albeit slowly.
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:04:53 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow! 43 pages so far for a non event. That pos will never ever get her just dues for anything. There will never be any justice metered out to her and most of the protected class. A few minions will be made to answer for her traitorous behavior but not her nor any big shots. A sad status report for a former "greatest country in the world" now being turned into a third world shithole, albeit slowly. Actually, at least 2/3 of the 43 pages is people saying nothing will happen over and over and over again. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:09:26 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, at least 2/3 of the 43 pages is people saying nothing will happen over and over and over again. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wow! 43 pages so far for a non event. That pos will never ever get her just dues for anything. There will never be any justice metered out to her and most of the protected class. A few minions will be made to answer for her traitorous behavior but not her nor any big shots. A sad status report for a former "greatest country in the world" now being turned into a third world shithole, albeit slowly. Actually, at least 2/3 of the 43 pages is people saying nothing will happen over and over and over again. Thanks for helping make my point. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:10:20 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Can a sitting President send an unofficial email? Doesn't matter if he sent his from .gov, it's archived. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:20:46 AM EDT
[#18]
I remain both sceptic all, and hopeful that Hillary will be perp walked. However, the realist in me does not believe it will ever happen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:21:22 AM EDT
[#19]
I remain both sceptical, and hopeful that Hillary will be perp walked. However, the realist in me does not believe it will ever happen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:25:30 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read on the internet (so you know its true) that the 22 top secret emails were reclassified after the fact (cnn maybe). I don't know whats going to happen, either Hillary will be president or Donald will be. Either way a democrat will be in office. The majority of the classified emails were classified retroactively, after review. So, when Dem activists say it's a tempest in a teapot, they have a plausible, factual reason. However, the emails that were classified when they went into and out of FHRC's unsecured system were significant enough for felony conviction and damage to US sources and methods. So when people who believe in rule of law and national security say she's guilty as hell and should be in jail, they have a plausible, factual reason. One of those points of view depends on the selective application of reality and ignoring inconvenient facts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:29:06 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryThere's essentially no limit to the President's power to pardon.
I would not be surprised if our current AG when confronted with enough evidence to indict will pass on it. I would not be surprised if the WH grants a pardon in the spirit allowing the first viable female presidential candidate to run. Should that happen, we will cease to be a nation of laws, and should Hillary be elected she will rightfully believe herself to be beyond the reach of the law, set apart from the citizenry. Every Hillary supporter I know does not care that she broke the law, admits there is a double standard, and is OK with that. “Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” Benjamin Franklin |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:31:52 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
According to who? The media reports? Government officials? They're gonna continue to "let it pick up steam" , until the correct time when the AG will come out and proclaim everything is good, after a hundred million dollar investigation , she's totally innocent of all charges. It's a scam . It always has been. Repubs get to "look tough" on Dems , while Dems claim they police their own. It's a complete joke, the gov is a joke, laws only apply to little people Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I continue to wait for this "perp walk" and continue to believe that I was smarter than those of you who predicted it back a billion pages ago. She will get off scott free. Of course she will. She always does... According to who? The media reports? Government officials? They're gonna continue to "let it pick up steam" , until the correct time when the AG will come out and proclaim everything is good, after a hundred million dollar investigation , she's totally innocent of all charges. It's a scam . It always has been. Repubs get to "look tough" on Dems , while Dems claim they police their own. It's a complete joke, the gov is a joke, laws only apply to little people BINGO..........this government is illegitimate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 11:36:07 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The majority of the classified emails were classified retroactively, after review. So, when Dem activists say it's a tempest in a teapot, they have a plausible, factual reason. However, the emails that were classified when they went into and out of FHRC's unsecured system were significant enough for felony conviction and damage to US sources and methods. So when people who believe in rule of law and national security say she's guilty as hell and should be in jail, they have a plausible, factual reason. One of those points of view depends on the selective application of reality and ignoring inconvenient facts. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I read on the internet (so you know its true) that the 22 top secret emails were reclassified after the fact (cnn maybe). I don't know whats going to happen, either Hillary will be president or Donald will be. Either way a democrat will be in office. The majority of the classified emails were classified retroactively, after review. So, when Dem activists say it's a tempest in a teapot, they have a plausible, factual reason. However, the emails that were classified when they went into and out of FHRC's unsecured system were significant enough for felony conviction and damage to US sources and methods. So when people who believe in rule of law and national security say she's guilty as hell and should be in jail, they have a plausible, factual reason. One of those points of view depends on the selective application of reality and ignoring inconvenient facts. her communications were supposed to be on a government server, all transmissions were supposed to be the property of the US Government, plain and simple she broke her oath, she broke the law. She, she does not, did not get to pick and choose what was government property. She was not to use the office as a fund acquisition site for her campaign, read that the Clinton Initiative. She is a criminal plain and simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 3:01:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: her communications were supposed to be on a government server, all transmissions were supposed to be the property of the US Government, plain and simple she broke her oath, she broke the law. She, she does not, did not get to pick and choose what was government property. She was not to use the office as a fund acquisition site for her campaign, read that the Clinton Initiative. She is a criminal plain and simple. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I read on the internet (so you know its true) that the 22 top secret emails were reclassified after the fact (cnn maybe). I don't know whats going to happen, either Hillary will be president or Donald will be. Either way a democrat will be in office. The majority of the classified emails were classified retroactively, after review. So, when Dem activists say it's a tempest in a teapot, they have a plausible, factual reason. However, the emails that were classified when they went into and out of FHRC's unsecured system were significant enough for felony conviction and damage to US sources and methods. So when people who believe in rule of law and national security say she's guilty as hell and should be in jail, they have a plausible, factual reason. One of those points of view depends on the selective application of reality and ignoring inconvenient facts. her communications were supposed to be on a government server, all transmissions were supposed to be the property of the US Government, plain and simple she broke her oath, she broke the law. She, she does not, did not get to pick and choose what was government property. She was not to use the office as a fund acquisition site for her campaign, read that the Clinton Initiative. She is a criminal plain and simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 5:51:14 PM EDT
[#25]
Well i hope the appropriate agencies are taking precautions assuming the worst possible breach has taken place.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:20:00 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well i hope the appropriate agencies are taking precautions assuming the worst possible breach has taken place. You mean like closing the barn door? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:20:45 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well i hope the appropriate agencies are taking precautions assuming the worst possible breach has taken place. appointees are probably looking for ways to blame the rinos for defunding them........... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:25:17 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. He has claimed executive privilege to avoid releasing the emails between them. At the very least it is clear he sent emails to her private account. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:27:09 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
then we no longer have a republic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Page 43 and she is still walking free. I think she is truly above the law. then we no longer have a republic. Yes we do! It's a BANANA REPUBLIC. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:28:28 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He claimed privilege on 6 emails, none of which contained classified info. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not sure he can give pre-emptive pardons. He absolutely could. How do you think Nixon's pardon happened? Exactly. But why would he? What makes everyone so sure she "has something" on him? She's not the evil mastermind she's being made out to be. She's just a stupid narcissistic crook. He has the power to send her to prison. Granting her pardon would be his legacy, just like Nixon was to Ford. Even worse, because Nixon had at least been dethroned before he was pardoned, and that was over political games, not national security and lives. No chance he fears her so much that he would let her be his legacy. Besides, he want's Bill's gig. She might not have something specific on him but he's knee deep in this email thing as well and nobody is talking about it. There's no possible way that he, as President, could not have known what was going on and that it was illegal. He's complicit as hell in this and if she goes to trial it will all come out. He claimed privilege on 6 emails, none of which contained classified info. That's what they claim. Were they independtly reviewed by someone other than State? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:31:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Who says they didn't contain classified info? Was it reviewed by someone other than State? Also, there is plenty of communications that are not classified that could be damaging to Obama. What if Obama was using HIS private email server? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 6:48:51 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who says they didn't contain classified info? Was it reviewed by someone other than State? Also, there is plenty of communications that are not classified that could be damaging to Obama. What if Obama was using HIS private email server? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Who says they didn't contain classified info? Was it reviewed by someone other than State? Also, there is plenty of communications that are not classified that could be damaging to Obama. What if Obama was using HIS private email server? Secondly, even without any classified records there still is the issue of official records. By emailing with her on official business to her private server "the most tech-savvy president ever" should have known that they were violating record keeping laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 7:22:09 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Secondly, even without any classified records there still is the issue of official records. By emailing with her on official business to her private server "the most tech-savvy president ever" should have known that they were violating record keeping laws. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He sent emails to her private server. If they didn't contain classified information, who cares? Who says they didn't contain classified info? Was it reviewed by someone other than State? Also, there is plenty of communications that are not classified that could be damaging to Obama. What if Obama was using HIS private email server? Secondly, even without any classified records there still is the issue of official records. By emailing with her on official business to her private server "the most tech-savvy president ever" should have known that they were violating record keeping laws. They said six emails. Not much of a crime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 7:24:15 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They said six emails. Not much of a crime. Quote HistoryQuoted:
They said six emails. Not much of a crime. Any custodian of a public record who "willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys (any record) shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States." Just a small felony with a lifetime prohibition on public office.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 7:36:23 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just a small felony with a lifetime prohibition on public office. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They said six emails. Not much of a crime. Any custodian of a public record who "willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys (any record) shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States." Just a small felony with a lifetime prohibition on public office. I guess you are assuming that he used a private server, also. Because if he used the official .gov server like a good government employee, there would be a record of the emails on his end, both coming and going. Therefore, he is not guilty of the charge you quoted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 7:44:49 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any updates on when this DOJ will indict her? If you are just shitting in the thread and have nothing substantial to add you are free to start your own thread on any subject you wish. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 7:47:32 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read on the internet (so you know its true) that the 22 top secret emails were reclassified after the fact (cnn maybe). I don't know whats going to happen, either Hillary will be president or Donald will be. Either way a democrat will be in office. There are plenty of political threads you can post your hatred for Trump in. This thread is about the Clinton email scandal exclusively. Take your shit to one of the Trump threads and keep that crap out of this thread. You are just trying to get the thread locked and trashed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2016 8:58:41 PM EDT
[#38]
Attorney General Loretta Lynch will appear on Fox News Special Report with Brett Baier on Monday at 6:00 pm. Harris Faulkner of Fox News is reporting that Lynch will appear in an attempt to reassure the American people that the Justice Department is taking the investigation seriously.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 9:08:31 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Attorney General Loretta Lynch will appear on Fox News Special Report with Brett Baier on Monday at 6:00 pm. Harris Faulkner of Fox News is reporting that Lynch will appear in an attempt to reassure the American people that the Justice Department is taking the investigation seriously.
That's much better than this administration's previous use of 1. the tactical ignore or 2. insulting the people heading the investigation. Let's see, Dear Leader hates the Clintons, loves socialism (ala Bernie), and might want to legitimize Lynch as a "fair and balanced" AG (further putting the GOP under the gun for a nomination to the SC). I could see them actually moving on Clinton... Hell, they are even going through their nemesis channel! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 9:14:04 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you are just shitting in the thread and have nothing substantial to add you are free to start your own thread on any subject you wish. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Any updates on when this DOJ will indict her? If you are just shitting in the thread and have nothing substantial to add you are free to start your own thread on any subject you wish. Ok.....ok, I'll say something serious................ A couple of weeks ago I saw a taped speech of Lynch's where Holder was being given an award for his contributions to the Movement. In that speech what I saw of Lynch is she is a rabid liberal, who deep down inside does NOT like America and is racist to her core. She gave me the impression that in her heart of hearts she most likely considers white males who own semi auto rifles to be more of an enemy to America than radical Islam. NOW THAT IS WHY I AM VERY SKEPTICAL that she and/or Obama will EVER indict Hillary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 9:24:25 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok.....ok, I'll say something serious................ A couple of weeks ago I saw a taped speech of Lynch's where Holder was being given an award for his contributions to the Movement. In that speech what I saw of Lynch is she is a rabid liberal, who deep down inside does NOT like America and is racist to her core. She gave me the impression that in her heart of hearts she most likely considers white males who own semi auto rifles to be more of an enemy to America than radical Islam. NOW THAT IS WHY I AM VERY SKEPTICAL that she and/or Obama will EVER indict Hillary. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Any updates on when this DOJ will indict her? If you are just shitting in the thread and have nothing substantial to add you are free to start your own thread on any subject you wish. Ok.....ok, I'll say something serious................ A couple of weeks ago I saw a taped speech of Lynch's where Holder was being given an award for his contributions to the Movement. In that speech what I saw of Lynch is she is a rabid liberal, who deep down inside does NOT like America and is racist to her core. She gave me the impression that in her heart of hearts she most likely considers white males who own semi auto rifles to be more of an enemy to America than radical Islam. NOW THAT IS WHY I AM VERY SKEPTICAL that she and/or Obama will EVER indict Hillary. your not allowed to be skeptical of her indictment in here. didnt you know? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 9:29:08 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
........................ your not allowed to be skeptical of her indictment in here. didnt you know? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 11:28:08 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok.....ok, I'll say something serious................ A couple of weeks ago I saw a taped speech of Lynch's where Holder was being given an award for his contributions to the Movement. In that speech what I saw of Lynch is she is a rabid liberal, who deep down inside does NOT like America and is racist to her core. She gave me the impression that in her heart of hearts she most likely considers white males who own semi auto rifles to be more of an enemy to America than radical Islam. NOW THAT IS WHY I AM VERY SKEPTICAL that she and/or Obama will EVER indict Hillary. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Any updates on when this DOJ will indict her? If you are just shitting in the thread and have nothing substantial to add you are free to start your own thread on any subject you wish. Ok.....ok, I'll say something serious................ A couple of weeks ago I saw a taped speech of Lynch's where Holder was being given an award for his contributions to the Movement. In that speech what I saw of Lynch is she is a rabid liberal, who deep down inside does NOT like America and is racist to her core. She gave me the impression that in her heart of hearts she most likely considers white males who own semi auto rifles to be more of an enemy to America than radical Islam. NOW THAT IS WHY I AM VERY SKEPTICAL that she and/or Obama will EVER indict Hillary. black pres and 2 black attorney generals in a row, naw theres no movement . I get why people are skeptical, the clintons have got away with everything maybe people don't want to jinx a conviction by being optimistic, that or the fix is in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 11:49:01 AM EDT
[#44]
Senior Clinton aide maintained top secret clearance amid email probe, letters show
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/29/senior-clinton-aide-maintained-top-secret-clearance-amid-email-probe-letters-show.html?intcmp=hpbt3 A senior Hillary Clinton aide has maintained her top secret security clearance despite sending information now deemed classified to the Clinton Foundation and to then-Secretary of State Clinton's private unsecured email account, according to congressional letters obtained by Fox News. Current and former intelligence officials say it is standard practice to suspend a clearance pending the outcome of an investigation. Yet in the case of Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff at the State Department, two letters indicate this practice is not being followed -- even as the Clinton email system remains the subject of an FBI investigation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 1:00:05 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's much better than this administration's previous use of 1. the tactical ignore or 2. insulting the people heading the investigation. Let's see, Dear Leader hates the Clintons, loves socialism (ala Bernie), and might want to legitimize Lynch as a "fair and balanced" AG (further putting the GOP under the gun for a nomination to the SC). I could see them actually moving on Clinton... Hell, they are even going through their nemesis channel! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Attorney General Loretta Lynch will appear on Fox News Special Report with Brett Baier on Monday at 6:00 pm. Harris Faulkner of Fox News is reporting that Lynch will appear in an attempt to reassure the American people that the Justice Department is taking the investigation seriously.
That's much better than this administration's previous use of 1. the tactical ignore or 2. insulting the people heading the investigation. Let's see, Dear Leader hates the Clintons, loves socialism (ala Bernie), and might want to legitimize Lynch as a "fair and balanced" AG (further putting the GOP under the gun for a nomination to the SC). I could see them actually moving on Clinton... Hell, they are even going through their nemesis channel! This is the part right before the "there's no there there". They will give the impression they take the allegations seriously. Then...nothing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 7:37:43 PM EDT
[#46]
Lynch was just on FOX, did not answer one question, just a stonewall, only little heads roll. Hillary is walking
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 7:49:16 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They said six emails. Not much of a crime. I heard "fewer than 2 dozen" However, the quantity of emails isn't the crime. The content is key, and the administration wants to keep them under wraps. Edited to add: few emails between SoS and POTUS would suggest a rather dysfunctional administration, unless they typically communicated in other ways. But Clinton used lots of emails. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 7:51:35 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lynch was just on FOX, did not answer one question, just a stonewall, only little heads roll. Hillary is walking Perhaps but I want as much of this to get out there as possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 7:53:23 PM EDT
[#49]
DOJ is "taking it seriously" alright.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/29/2016 8:02:32 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Attorney General Loretta Lynch will appear on Fox News Special Report with Brett Baier on Monday at 6:00 pm. Harris Faulkner of Fox News is reporting that Lynch will appear in an attempt to reassure the American people that the Justice Department is taking the investigation seriously. Ummmm yeah! We are living in a 1st world banana republic! I have no faith that justice will be served! |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
