I'm liking this Guccifer guy...

13

Comments

  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,839

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    Gern, this is ridiculous. Stop being a Hillary apologist and wake up. She is NOT on your side, no matter how much you think she is.
  • CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
  • Stickman12Stickman12 Posts: 503
    edited October 2016




    Watch this and tell me that she did not lie to congress under oath.

    "Marked" classified....she was referring to the classified emails coming through the secure system. None of those emails were on her server....NONE

    listen at 2:00

    I can't say that she lied under oath. The FBI did not say that she lied under oath....why should I listen to you and believe that she lied under oath?

    Lying under oath and making statements that could be considered inaccurate is not considered perjury.
    You are definitely out there brother. Catch you on the flipside
    I have the FBI and justice Dept on my side....you've got Sean Hannity and Godfather
    Never mentioned Hannity or The Godfather. The department of justice (Lynch) said she was accepting the FBI teams decision before they even made a decision. Never been done before but hey why not. The FBI director clearly stated that emails were sent or received did in fact contain classified material at the time they were sent or received on her private server. The facts are not influenced by politics. The results are.
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,839

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    hmmm....makes you wonder why so much time, energy and money was wasted. It's almost like some sort of political theater was going on....I hope the people aren't so easily misled
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,411




    Watch this and tell me that she did not lie to congress under oath.

    "Marked" classified....she was referring to the classified emails coming through the secure system. None of those emails were on her server....NONE

    listen at 2:00

    I can't say that she lied under oath. The FBI did not say that she lied under oath....why should I listen to you and believe that she lied under oath?

    Lying under oath and making statements that could be considered inaccurate is not considered perjury.
    You are definitely out there brother. Catch you on the flipside
    I have the FBI and justice Dept on my side....you've got Sean Hannity and Godfather
    Never mentioned Hannity or The Godfather. The department of justice (Lynch) said she was accepting the FBI teams decision before they even made a decision. Never been done before but hey why not. The FBI director clearly stated that emails were sent or received did in fact contain classified material at the time they were sent or received on her private server. The facts are not influenced by politics. The results are.
    She said she would accept it regardless of what it was. Quit spinning Hannity. Change your username to Hannity right now.
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,411
    Free said:

    Gern, this is ridiculous. Stop being a Hillary apologist and wake up. She is NOT on your side, no matter how much you think she is.

    You lost all credibility a long time ago. Go back to bed.
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,705

    I know you guys are intelligent. Look it up. It's not hard to find. One of the "dorky" things i do is watch congress oversight committee hearings.

    Interesting tactic. Make something up or repeat misinformation, and the place the onus on others to prove that you're wrong.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562

    Free said:

    Gern, this is ridiculous. Stop being a Hillary apologist and wake up. She is NOT on your side, no matter how much you think she is.

    You lost all credibility a long time ago. Go back to bed.
    Take a look at yourself, man.
  • JimmyVJimmyV Boston's MetroWestPosts: 10,895
    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • PJ_Soul said:

    I know you guys are intelligent. Look it up. It's not hard to find. One of the "dorky" things i do is watch congress oversight committee hearings.

    Interesting tactic. Make something up or repeat misinformation, and the place the onus on others to prove that you're wrong.
    Ok prove I'm wrong. If I say the sun is hot do I have to prove that to you.
  • JimmyV said:

    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.

    Accepting the recommendations before it was even proposed when that has never been done before is what is suspicious when that statement has not been made before



  • Watch this and tell me that she did not lie to congress under oath.

    "Marked" classified....she was referring to the classified emails coming through the secure system. None of those emails were on her server....NONE

    listen at 2:00

    I can't say that she lied under oath. The FBI did not say that she lied under oath....why should I listen to you and believe that she lied under oath?

    Lying under oath and making statements that could be considered inaccurate is not considered perjury.
    You are definitely out there brother. Catch you on the flipside
    I have the FBI and justice Dept on my side....you've got Sean Hannity and Godfather
    Never mentioned Hannity or The Godfather. The department of justice (Lynch) said she was accepting the FBI teams decision before they even made a decision. Never been done before but hey why not. The FBI director clearly stated that emails were sent or received did in fact contain classified material at the time they were sent or received on her private server. The facts are not influenced by politics. The results are.
    She said she would accept it regardless of what it was. Quit spinning Hannity. Change your username to Hannity right now.
    Didn't spin anything. Your the one on the merry go round
  • JimmyVJimmyV Boston's MetroWestPosts: 10,895

    JimmyV said:

    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.

    Accepting the recommendations before it was even proposed when that has never been done before is what is suspicious when that statement has not been made before
    So the AG should have brought charges even though the FBI did not recommend them? I don't think the statement matters so much as the action in this case.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,411
    JimmyV said:

    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.

    Exactly....if the FBI said they had something to prosecute and she declined there would be something to consider.

    Tin foil hat bullshit
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • JimmyV said:

    JimmyV said:

    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.

    Accepting the recommendations before it was even proposed when that has never been done before is what is suspicious when that statement has not been made before
    So the AG should have brought charges even though the FBI did not recommend them? I don't think the statement matters so much as the action in this case.
    Not at all but at least review them and make a decision. Don't blindly say that the recommendations will be accepted when the investigation is not completed. People have been prosecuted and convicted for less serious offensives concerning classified information.
  • JimmyV said:

    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.

    Exactly....if the FBI said they had something to prosecute and she declined there would be something to consider.

    Tin foil hat bullshit
    Attorney general, FBI director, head of the state dept, all appointed by Obama. All in the same bed. Truth hurts. But your right, I'll take my tin foil hat off and join your flock that is being directed by shepherd Clinton.
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,839

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,705
    edited October 2016

    PJ_Soul said:

    I know you guys are intelligent. Look it up. It's not hard to find. One of the "dorky" things i do is watch congress oversight committee hearings.

    Interesting tactic. Make something up or repeat misinformation, and the place the onus on others to prove that you're wrong.
    Ok prove I'm wrong. If I say the sun is hot do I have to prove that to you.
    No, because everyone already knows the sun is hot.... Are you saying that Hillary lying to Congress is common knowledge?
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    Agreed.
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 5,698
    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    It can be challenging keeping up with the Trump rape allegations, but I think this is the one with a pending civil suit.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,705
    edited October 2016

    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    It can be challenging keeping up with the Trump rape allegations, but I think this is the one with a pending civil suit.
    Wasn't the civil suit withdrawn because the plaintive doesn't have the money to move ahead with it? Or is this a new one?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    Using deflection moves to escape answering for Hillary doesn't really work.
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,839
    Free said:

    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    Using deflection moves to escape answering for Hillary doesn't really work.
    pretty sure Hillary answered for Hillary when she spent all that time testifying.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,839
    PJ_Soul said:

    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    It can be challenging keeping up with the Trump rape allegations, but I think this is the one with a pending civil suit.
    Wasn't the civil suit withdrawn because the plaintive doesn't have the money to move ahead with it? Or is this a new one?
    I believe the original filing was withdrawn because it was filed in the wrong jurisdiction. Technical issue, and filed properly now. I'm no attorney though, I just play one on the internets.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,736
    CM189191 said:

    Free said:

    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    Using deflection moves to escape answering for Hillary doesn't really work.
    pretty sure Hillary answered for Hillary when she spent all that time testifying.
    What difference does it make?

    Hey, isn't the FBI Director's brother on the Admin team?
  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    CM189191 said:

    Free said:

    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    Using deflection moves to escape answering for Hillary doesn't really work.
    pretty sure Hillary answered for Hillary when she spent all that time testifying.
    Yeah. And the need to constantly use Trump as a reason for supporting her and not her policies, character, history? (Not just directed at you, CM, but all).
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 3,811
    Looks like the segue for blaming President Obama for everything bad that has ever happened to Hillary Clinton being blamed has already happened.

    :dizzy:
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,411

    JimmyV said:

    If you want to be suspicious of the tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, I'm not going to argue that it didn't/doesn't smell a little funny. But the Attorney General announcing she will abide by an FBI recommendation is not suspicious at all. I would be more concerned if it went the other way with an AG expressing doubts about an FBI investigation of a political ally. Seems like Lynch headed that off by saying she would abide either way.

    Exactly....if the FBI said they had something to prosecute and she declined there would be something to consider.

    Tin foil hat bullshit
    Attorney general, FBI director, head of the state dept, all appointed by Obama. All in the same bed. Truth hurts. But your right, I'll take my tin foil hat off and join your flock that is being directed by shepherd Clinton.
    wrong....Comey was appointed by Bush. Buy a clue
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 2,839
    Free said:

    CM189191 said:

    Free said:

    CM189191 said:

    CM189191 said:

    She has lied to the American people and she has lied under oath. Same can be said for her husband. Yeah she is trustworthy.

    Is this true?! Someone should look into this immediately! Perhaps Congress can order some sort of extensive investigation....
    Is it true...yes. Looked into?....yes, but the requirements that need to be fulfilled to get a conviction for perjury is impossible no matter who it is, what they say, what they do, regaurdless of party affiliation.
    You know what should be looked into? Trump being accused of raping a 13 year old.

    Two witnesses are now joined by a third, “Joan Doe,” who said in court documents that:
    “In the 1994-95 school year, I was told by the plaintiff in Jane Doe v. Trump and Epstein (1:16-cv-04642, SDNY) that the plaintiff was subject to sexual contact by the Defendants at parties in New York City during the summer of 1994.

    When Epstein was asked if he had ever “socialized” with Donald Trump with underage girls, Epstein plead the Fifth.
    Q. Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?
    A: Though I’d like to answer that question, at least today I’m going to have to assert my Fifth, Sixth, and 14th Amendment rights, sir.

    Sounds pretty damning to me....
    Using deflection moves to escape answering for Hillary doesn't really work.
    pretty sure Hillary answered for Hillary when she spent all that time testifying.
    Yeah. And the need to constantly use Trump as a reason for supporting her and not her policies, character, history? (Not just directed at you, CM, but all).
    I mean where do you want to start? Hillary stands head & shoulders above all the other candidates in each of those departments: policies, character & history
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
Sign In or Register to comment.