Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 133 of 134 FirstFirst ... 3383123131132133134 LastLast
Results 1,981 to 1,995 of 2003
  1. #1981
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,546
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    It's a good thing that Clinton holds elected office. Otherwise investigating them might be a waste of time.
    what does that have to do with what she has done? this is ridiculous. she was in a powerful position when these things happened. it doesn't mean **** where she is now.



    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    They will ***** and moan about how she gets an extra blanket or something. She will be in front of congress testifying about her portion sizes compared to other inmates.

    this is hysterical because this is how the the media reacts to things about Trump that actually happened. oh no Trump got 2 scoops of ice cream when everyone else only got 1!
    Last edited by SpecialFNK; 11-14-2017 at 07:27 PM.



  2. #1982
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    77,385
    This is how ****ing stupid people sound babbling about Uranium One:

    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!

  3. #1983
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    90,617
    Uranium, Bhenghazi, whataboutclinton?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #1984
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    77,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Uranium, Bhenghazi, whataboutclinton?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It's just so funny that they catch the car and run into the bumper and all they can do is complain that the car did or do something.

  5. #1985
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    128
    This Uranium one thing is the most obvious conspiracy to make up for Trump's complete disaster of a presidency ive ever seen. It had no semblance of truth when it first came out in the breitbart editor's book, still wasnt true when Trump started spewing lies about what the actual story was, and it still is a complete conspiracy made up of obvious connected dots that dont actually connect if you took 5 seconds to look into the facts now that Trump is using it as a distraction to his own FBI investigation and failed presidency.

  6. #1986
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    77,385
    Quote Originally Posted by fl2018 View Post
    This Uranium one thing is the most obvious conspiracy to make up for Trump's complete disaster of a presidency ive ever seen. It had no semblance of truth when it first came out in the breitbart editor's book, still wasnt true when Trump started spewing lies about what the actual story was, and it still is a complete conspiracy made up of obvious connected dots that dont actually connect if you took 5 seconds to look into the facts now that Trump is using it as a distraction to his own FBI investigation and failed presidency.
    They will still be barking about Uranium One when 2020 comes around even if Hillary Clinton dies next week. Or maybe Benghazi. Wonder if they can make a hybrid scandal. Benghazi-Uranium One?
    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!

  7. #1987
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,546
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...l-counsel.html

    Gregg Jarrett: Hillary Clinton must face the consequences of her actions and the scrutiny of a special counsel
    No person in this country is so high that he or she is above the law. This includes Hillary Clinton.

    There is no station in life or standing in government or political aspiration that absolves someone from criminal conduct. In this way, we are all creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. An orderly society cannot function if it permits individuals to disregard the law with impunity.

    This fundamental principle, enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court more than a century ago, is what gives sustenance to our democracy. Without it, lawlessness, chaos and tyranny at the hands of the few would inexorably ensue.

    It follows, then, that Clinton is no higher or lower than any American. She must abide by the rule of law regardless of her condition or circumstance. Running for high office, including the presidency, does not somehow establish an entitlement to legal absolution.

    Yet, this essential doctrine seemed to be entirely lost on Democrats during Tuesday’s hearing by the House Judiciary Committee in which Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified.

    Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat, asked the following question: “In a functioning democracy, is it common for the leader of the country to order the criminal justice system to retaliate against his political opponents?”

    Sessions responded that “the Department of Justice can never be used to retaliate politically against opponents and that would be wrong.”

    Conyers, a notorious partisan, appears to have deliberately misstated both the law and the facts. The Justice Department is duty-bound to investigate acts that appear to have violated criminal statutes. If there is sufficient evidence to support an indictment of charges, our system of justice demands they be brought.

    This is not retaliation, as Conyers would have people believe, but the enforcement of laws unimpeded by political motivations.

    Clinton is not exempt merely because she ran for the presidency and lost. If that were the case, anyone could rob a bank and be excused from punishment by becoming a candidate for office.

    Sessions has been lethargic in determining whether the criminal prosecution of Clinton is warranted. On July 27, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to the attorney general demanding that he appoint a special counsel to investigate alleged wrongdoing by Clinton in the controversial sale of a uranium company to Russia. Sessions never responded. A second letter in September was also ignored.

    Finally, on the eve of his testimony, Sessions advised the committee that he had, indeed, directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate whether a special counsel is needed. There is compelling evidence that Clinton may have used her office as secretary of state to confer a benefit to the Russian government in exchange for money.

    If a “pay-to-play” scheme helped secure the sale of 20 percent of America’s uranium assets to Russia while enriching Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton and their foundation, it would constitute various crimes including bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud and, arguably, racketeering.

    The committee has requested that a special counsel also reopen the Clinton email case to ascertain whether actions taken by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and then-FBI Director James Comey may have obstructing justice in an effort to exonerate Clinton.

    If so, then the question of whether Clinton violated the Espionage Act in mishandling 110 classified documents found on her unsecured and unauthorized personal server must be re-examined for potential criminal charges against her.

    As I have argued in columns for several months, the attorney general has no choice but to appoint a special counsel and must do so immediately. During his confirmation hearing on Jan. 10, Sessions vowed to recuse himself from any questions involving “both the Clinton email investigation and any matters involving the Clinton Foundation.”

    Therefore, he must hand the entire matter over to a special counsel in order to comply with his promise under oath and to eliminate his admitted conflict of interest.

    President Trump has criticized Sessions for his conspicuous failure to pursue investigations into Clinton and others in the Obama administration for their suspected criminality. President Trump was right to do so and is well within his constitutional authority to voice his concern.

    It is a complete myth perpetuated by the media – and reiterated by Conyers during Tuesday’s hearing – that a president may not be engaged in criminal cases at the Department of Justice. There is not a single law prohibiting him from directing the department to pursue any matter that merits criminal prosecution.

    To the contrary, under Article II of the Constitution the president is specifically empowered to enforce all laws – something often accomplished by instructing the Justice Department to take action. Agencies and departments in the executive branch are not independent. They are constitutionally under the direction of the president. He may tell them what to do and what not to do.

    Over the course of our nation’s history, presidents have been intimately involved in both civil and criminal cases. President Thomas Jefferson ordered his attorney general to prosecute Aaron Burr for treason. President John F. Kennedy ordered his Justice Department to intervene in multiple civil rights cases.

    A president may not abuse his office to pursue political vendettas under the guise of criminal prosecutions. But where there is sufficient evidence of illegality, he has every right to demand that the law be enforced. His failure to do so would constitute an egregious breach of his constitutional duty.

    The more we learn about the machinations of Hillary Clinton and the unscrupulous nature of her dealings as secretary of state and, later, as a presidential candidate, the more we have come to learn that the trajectory of her political career has been punctuated by a sense of privilege and entitlement that transcends the law.

    It is time she face the consequences of her actions and the scrutiny of a special counsel.
    if Hillary didn't do anything wrong, then I have to assume everyone would have no problem her being investigated. if she is properly investigated and they don't find anything then she walks. but when there has been this much dirt then it deserves being investigated.



  8. #1988
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...l-counsel.html




    if Hillary didn't do anything wrong, then I have to assume everyone would have no problem her being investigated. if she is properly investigated and they don't find anything then she walks. but when there has been this much dirt then it deserves being investigated.
    you cant just investigate your political foes with no basis in fact for investigating her. We arent North Korea or the Philippines. There is 0 evidence for what you are alleging, and what you are alleging is complete ******** based in conspiracy theories that are debunked with 3 minutes of research.

    If you want to go ahead and investigate her i could care less, i dont care for hillary and wish she would go away, but youre just doing it to deflect from Trump's clear conflicts without caring for any actual evidence on hillary.

  9. #1989
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    42,859
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...l-counsel.html




    if Hillary didn't do anything wrong, then I have to assume everyone would have no problem her being investigated. if she is properly investigated and they don't find anything then she walks. but when there has been this much dirt then it deserves being investigated.

    Yababab bllahhabah....

    Just go watch Shep Smiths broadcast last night - you know - he's on Fox. Tore up and spit out the whole Uranium One thing. Down to zero. Ashes. Then move onto some other idiotic "R"idiculous conflated nonsense preferably starring HC. Sort of like rabid mice eating the wiring in your house when an asteroid the size of a car (named Mueller) is about to land on your house.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  10. #1990
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    40,820
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/...l-counsel.html




    if Hillary didn't do anything wrong, then I have to assume everyone would have no problem her being investigated.
    You mean like how Trumpers consistently have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with Trump being investigated because he's super duper innocent right? None of his followers have any problem or ever complain about the Russia investigation because its so clear he didn't do anything wrong......oh wait

    I'm so exhausted from all of it. Just lock them both up and let's all start over.

  11. #1991
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    77,385
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    You mean like how Trumpers consistently have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with Trump being investigated because he's super duper innocent right? None of his followers have any problem or ever complain about the Russia investigation because its so clear he didn't do anything wrong......oh wait

    I'm so exhausted from all of it. Just lock them both up and let's all start over.
    The sad thing is all of this stuff has already been investigated. They swore up and down that Benghazi was the crime that would finally lock Hillary up and then the House GOP released a report after 13+ hours of testimony that concluded Hillary had no culpability. But that didn't stop them from chanting "lock her up" about it on the campaign trail. She's been investigated up and down so many times and no one has ever found anything to get her on. But they keep investigating her so the public assumes she's guilty. Mostly because the public is pretty stupid.
    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!

  12. #1992
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,546
    Quote Originally Posted by fl2018 View Post
    you cant just investigate your political foes with no basis in fact for investigating her. We arent North Korea or the Philippines. There is 0 evidence for what you are alleging, and what you are alleging is complete ******** based in conspiracy theories that are debunked with 3 minutes of research.

    If you want to go ahead and investigate her i could care less, i dont care for hillary and wish she would go away, but youre just doing it to deflect from Trump's clear conflicts without caring for any actual evidence on hillary.
    debunked by who, some Liberal media/Liberal fact checkers.
    there's dirt on her that doesn't even involve the Uranium One deal.





    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    You mean like how Trumpers consistently have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with Trump being investigated because he's super duper innocent right? None of his followers have any problem or ever complain about the Russia investigation because its so clear he didn't do anything wrong......oh wait

    I'm so exhausted from all of it. Just lock them both up and let's all start over.
    I have no problem investigating Trump. there has been what 3 separate investigations and have yet to come up with anything damaging against Trump.

    one of the things people want to jump up and down about Trump is obstruction of justice, yet with Hillary we know that she deleting thousands of emails. we also know that then FBI directer Comey changed his draft away from grossly negligent. there were leaked information from FBI officials that did not agree with letting Hillary off last summer, and that is just with what she was being investigated with there. that doesn't even include the corrupt Clinton Foundation that just happened to dry up with foreign donations after she lost the election. how much foreign money was given to her with the intent that they would be rewarded by "President Hillary Clinton".



  13. #1993
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    40,820
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    debunked by who, some Liberal media/Liberal fact checkers.
    there's dirt on her that doesn't even involve the Uranium One deal.







    I have no problem investigating Trump. there has been what 3 separate investigations and have yet to come up with anything damaging against Trump.

    one of the things people want to jump up and down about Trump is obstruction of justice, yet with Hillary we know that she deleting thousands of emails. we also know that then FBI directer Comey changed his draft away from grossly negligent. there were leaked information from FBI officials that did not agree with letting Hillary off last summer, and that is just with what she was being investigated with there. that doesn't even include the corrupt Clinton Foundation that just happened to dry up with foreign donations after she lost the election. how much foreign money was given to her with the intent that they would be rewarded by "President Hillary Clinton".
    It's an open investigation. How could you possibly know if they had anything damaging on Trump yet?

  14. #1994
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    77,385
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    It's an open investigation. How could you possibly know if they had anything damaging on Trump yet?
    Holy ****! Maybe he's Bob Mueller and he's just been playing us this whole time!

  15. #1995
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    40,820
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Holy ****! Maybe he's Bob Mueller and he's just been playing us this whole time!
    No, Mueller actually cares about facts and evidence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •