Wrong again.
You have a case? Go ahead and make it.
Actually, mr. face palmer, it is you that doesn't have a case. Other than to be a chinese stooge that is.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wrong again.
You have a case? Go ahead and make it.
all that is required by law is a reckless handling. They should have been prosecuted by the obama admin was corrupt and the fix was inSpillage like that is a problem, but is a fairly common problem. Criminal prosecutions were always taken up for intentional cases of leaking.
There was no suspicion that Clinton aide had emails on this laptop for reason other than to conduct her work.
Don't forget, she lied under oath about those emails.'Clinton was wrong when she said she never sent or received classified information over the server. "Our investigation found ... 110 [emails with then-classified information] that she either received or sent," he said.'
Comey clearly states there were 110 counts of Hillary Clinton ILLEGALLY having in her possession, having ILLEGALLY sent or received classified information...
- These crimes are covered under 'ESPIONAGE'
Later Comey, whose job is to soley investigate and report, goes outside his lane, usurping the power of the DOJ & US AG, to declare HE does not think having at least 110 undeniable pieces of evidrnce of Hilkary's crimes is enough to successfully convict Hillary Clinton and thus refuses to recommend her for indicyment ... AGAIN NOT HIS JOB.
The main reason he gave for not doing so is that she was TOO STUPID TO KNOW THE WAS BREAKING THE LAW.
-- Ignorance of the law is NOT a legitimate defense
"She never believed these emails were classified"
Even if she did notice the markings, "I think it's possible — possible — that she didn't understand what a C meant when she saw it in the body of the e-mail like that,"
** AMAZING - Comey is basing his non-relevant recommendation not to Indicy based on a proven paetisan ASSUMPTION that she was too stupid to realize what she was doing?! WTF?!
![]()
What FBI Director James Comey Really Said About Hillary Clinton Email Probe
A comprehensive summary of what James Comey told lawmakers about the case.abcnews.go.com
Thats not how DOJ views enforcement of this law and among fairly common malpractices there has NEVER been a case brought without a context of intentional leaking.all that is required by law is a reckless handling. They should have been prosecuted by the obama admin was corrupt and the fix was in
Thats not how DOJ views enforcement of this law and among fairly common malpractices there has NEVER been a case brought without a context of intentional leaking.
Clinton would be prosecuted like no one ever before was prosecuted. It would be selective and inconsistent with prior DOJ practice..
Can't forget it if it's not true.Don't forget, she lied under oath about those emails.
False deflection, Bannon is far from being the only one that has been prosecuted for refusing to comply with subpoena.Liberal privilege.....but they drop it all to pop Bannon for a misdemeanor.....![]()
Lame.Actually, mr. face palmer, it is you that doesn't have a case. Other than to be a chinese stooge that is.
Came out in testimony.Can't forget it if it's not true.
Waiting to see how the subpoena game will work if the house goes red.False deflection, Bannon is far from being the only one that has been prosecuted for refusing to comply with subpoena.
Quote it.Came out in testimony.
You can look.Quote it.
I think we’ve seen foreshadowing. Former AG Holder was not prosecuted.Waiting to see how the subpoena game will work if the house goes red.
but not inconsistent wit the lawThats not how DOJ views enforcement of this law and among fairly common malpractices there has NEVER been a case brought without a context of intentional leaking.
Clinton would be prosecuted like no one ever before was prosecuted. It would be selective and inconsistent with prior DOJ practice..
Biden sold millions of barrels of oil from our Strategic Reserve to China. when he promised to release it so Americans could pay less for fuel.Is that legal? Because I don't recall any charges, or serious investigations, only your baseless bullshit.
I also don't recall any overly friendly rhetoric or policy from this administration, it's been status quo from days of Trump's admin.
DURRRR
Nonsense. Biden CAN'T sell to anyone specific. Reserves BY LAW get sold to whatever company puts in the highest bid.Biden sold millions of barrels of oil from our Strategic Reserve to China. when he promised to release it so Americans could pay less for fuel.
Who is he working for? Not Americans.
Nonsense. Biden CAN'T sell to anyone specific. Reserves BY LAW get sold to whatever company puts in the highest bid.
Moron, do you understand plain English? WHOEVER PUTS IN THE HIGHEST BID GETS THE OIL.Amazing then how the strategic reserve oil landed in the lap of a Chinese company doing business with hunter, you fucking feckless clod.
Fact check: It was less than 1 million barrels. There is less than a billion barrels in the whole SPR at 727 million barrels.Biden sold millions of barrels of oil from our Strategic Reserve to China. when he promised to release it so Americans could pay less for fuel.
Who is he working for? Not Americans.