UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
based on what?
the whole motto for this retarded slogan just got assfucked without lube.
give me the next scandal.
based on what?
'This' is clearly lying..that's the issue.oh, jesusfuck. are you still crying about this?
get a fucking hold of yourself and choose a new scandal.
If bypassing a government server is not intent I don't know what is..she made a definitive decision to do this.Hillary got off on intent. He kept saying intent needed to be found and there was none to be found. That has always been the job of the tryer of fact, the jury. In any other crime like this when one is investigated and found to have been in violation of the law, they would be indited and tried before a jury.
I smell shit.
ROFL..right?Russia released the emails that two different espionage agencies stole from her compromised server.
Yet the FBI didn't find anything.
And we're supposed to think there's no corruption in government.
The arrogance of power is breathtaking sometimes.
A match made in the hell of American political apathy- or misplaced rage, makes no difference in the final outcome.Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump....
I agree with you, I hope that was clear as it was intended to be my point. The FBI presser gentleman kept saying lack of intent, that was his primary focus for a reason to not recommend prosecution. But more importantly, it shouldn't matter, the determination of what is or isn't intent is a matter for the jury to decide. It always has been.If bypassing a government server is not intent I don't know what is..she made a definitive decision to do this.
and "no reasonable prosecutor" would try to bring the case in front of a jury. if you're gonna cite what the guy had to say, you can't just pick and choose.I agree with you, I hope that was clear as it was intended to be my point. The FBI presser gentleman kept saying lack of intent, that was his primary focus for a reason to not recommend prosecution. But more importantly, it shouldn't matter, the determination of what is or isn't intent is a matter for the jury to decide. It always has been.
Dude wtf are you talking about? If an individual named Samantha Gibson was a high level government employee who had the same circumstances as the individual named Hillary Clinton, would law enforcement give her the presumption of innocence? That is something law enforcement doesn't do when ordinary or even less prominent people do something potentially illegal, both have to rely upon juries.and "no reasonable prosecutor" would try to bring the case in front of a jury. if you're gonna cite what the guy had to say, you can't just pick and choose.
well, you can pick and choose but that only exposes you for the hypocrite you are.
subway.
yet here we are, no charges brought, no indictment, nothing.Dude wtf are you talking about? If an individual named Samantha Gibson was a high level government employee who had the same circumstances as the individual named Hillary Clinton, would law enforcement give her the presumption of innocence? That is something law enforcement doesn't do when ordinary or even less prominent people do something potentially illegal, both have to rely upon juries.
And there would be an army of attorneys willing to make a name by prosecuting Hillary Clinton.
It's like you can't read. Have you read it? Does it sound like a glowing exoneration to you? He said what was done was a felony, intentionally treating highly classified documents so recklessly, except Hillary was just negligent. Bullshit.yet here we are, no charges brought, no indictment, nothing.
your illustrious law career ended when you started stealing from your parents to feed your heroin habit.
maybe someone should bring a lawsuit or try her then, eh?It's like you can't read. Have you read it? Does it sound like a glowing exoneration to you? He said what was done was a felony
Ask Vince Foster how that worked out.maybe someone should bring a lawsuit or try her then, eh?
Just listen at the end he basically says if anyone else where to do what she did they would suffer consequences. So just because she is Shitlary Clinton she is getting off scot free, does seam a lil fucked up.
Ahhh losing the discussion lets just say something retarded and move along.
How in the fuck was this fake? Nothing came from it because of this astoundingly corrupt government we have.
Still going to claim a criminal act in spite of the fact the FBI found no evidence of one. Hanging onto this scandal like all the others. As if an accusation is the same as a trial and guilty verdict.Russia released the emails that two different espionage agencies stole from her compromised server.
Yet the FBI didn't find anything.
And we're supposed to think there's no corruption in government.
The arrogance of power is breathtaking sometimes.
I don't think you'll maintain a lot of credibility by attempting to deny that she broke the law.Still going to claim a criminal act in spite of the fact the FBI found no evidence of one. Hanging onto this scandal like all the others. As if an accusation is the same as a trial and guilty verdict.
Look, I don't make shit up. I don't know what happened with those emails. I do know that Sanders isn't running for prez and that the FBI didn't find evidence of criminal act. You can make up whatever you like. I'll continue to stick to the side where reality can be found.I don't think you'll maintain a lot of credibility by attempting to deny that she broke the law.
I'm using it as an example of selective enforcement.
BTW, State is still investigating.