No criminality in Clinton emails - FBI

Indeed. With "You hate whites I see." you imply that I am a racist.
That's a personal attack. Probably cause you can not refute what you read,
and so go rape up some personal attacks.

Amnesia much? The argument is:
Nixon the crook started it though. And where was his trial again for his illegal activities?
Oh wait, the Republicans gave him a full pardon.

Typical white border crime covered up by white people.

 

He also used illegal when commenting on what Hillary has done, hence also the "crooked" remarks. Yet she has not broken the law.

Trump is more obese that the people he calls fat.

Well democrats want a leader that is so bankrupt that he hasn't paid taxes for years and years, and got zero political experience. The joke is on America, really.

 

When this big story about how Comey and the Keystone Cops were reopening the big "investigation", I wrote the post shown below:

From Thread entitled, " FBI Reviewing New Email", in Current Events, Post #184:

"This big "shocker" is just gratuitous sucker-bait for us the Right to chase after, making fools out of ourselves.

Hint: No matter WHAT is in these hooptie Friday afternoon "stunner" emails, nobody is going to be able to prove INTENT! Comey already decided, entirely on his own, that if you can't prove intent, you don't have ANYTHING. So, this whole thing is just about Comey trying to cover his own ass and not look like a total stooge for his Paymasters....

I'll bet that off-camera, where you can't see them, all these manipulating, scheming crudballs are laughing their asses off at what fools they're going to make out of us on the Right because we're going to "bite" on this bait...."

Of COURSE Comey wasn't going to find anything incriminating! Of course he was going to overlook mountains of obvious evidence involving lies, evasion, and destruction of information and devices that were under SUBPOENA. Was anyone really so naive that they thought we were going to see justice administered to Hilarity Clinton?!

. "Oh, yeah! We're gettin' somewhere now!"

 

Trash talking paragraph of garbage with this being my favorite part I just heard on my local news that a new poll for likely voters shows that the majority are comfortable with the status quo..

Really? What poll? Link it or shut it. Let's see who made it. You like talking about people's rear ends and I can see why. You pull it out of yours all day.

 

look at Obama's approval rating

And, the electoral college victory for Hillary will be heralded by the media and Democrats as a mandate that the majority of voters like bigger govt and less liberty.

We've done this to ourselves and it began by sitting on the sidelines as well intentioned liberals began the propaganda campaign starting in elementary schools.

 

You might want to go back and reread your history on Watergate. This is where Hillary Rodham enters the picture and why she was canned, fired, booted off the Watergate Commission. Hillary would have found herself in court being prosecuted for what she did.

What Nixon did isn't even comparable to what Obama has done, not even close.

But back when Nixon was President, the President was held to higher standers and America wasn't a banana republic but a nation of laws.

It was Republicans who went to the White House and asked Nixon to resign not the Democrats.

Back in 1973/74 the radical left known as the "New Left" which Hillary was part of had just gained control of the Democrat party and their agenda was not too force Nixon to resign but to impeach and convict Nixon in Congress for lying while not under oath.

How many times has Obama lied to the American people ?

How many times has Hillary lied ?

 

So what.
Nixon never went to any trial over his illegal activities, cause the blatant immediate cover up from the Republicans.
That's how a banana republic functions! lol

- - - Updated - - -

So what.
Nixon never went to any trial over his illegal activities, cause the blatant immediate cover up from the Republicans.
That's how a banana republic functions! lol

 

After a court issued a subpoena for Hillary to turn over all of her private server e-mails, Hillary ignored the court order and destroyed 33,000 e-mails.

But Hillary went further after committing that major felony, she went into a violent destruction mode destroying more evidence.

Hillary used Bleachbit.

Bleachbit was made for banana trepublic liberal / progressives who think they are above the law.

It's so simple even a low information Democrat can destroy evidence from their computer.

Just follow Beachbit simple instructions. -> https://www.bleachbit.org/news/how-delete-secret-emails-microsoft-exchange

 

Hillary will only work for the American people if someone gives her millions of dollars to do it.

 

Who were these Republicans involved in a cover up. Name just one in Congress or the RNC.

Waiting.

Nixon didn't order the burglary of the DNC HQ's at the Watergate and didn't find out about the third rate burglary until it was reported in the newspapers.

Obama, Hillary and the Obama administration lied to the American people and conducted a cover up of a Jihadist terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya blaming the attack on a YouTube video for two weeks until Obama and Hillary were exposed lying and conducting a cover up to help Obama get reelected.

So your question is. "so what" ?

The difference between Nixon's cover up and Obama's and Hillary's cover up, no one was killed during the burglary at the Watergate.

 

How self serving and another dodge. But you seem to have no problem second guessing those with at least the same if not more.

Yes as I said gross negligence is only a crime when it is not a negligent act but an intentional act. A totally new legal concept.

 

And what would it take to be that basis?

 

What crime was he charged with by the Watergate grand jury?

 

He had already been pardoned by the time he testified to the grand jury

 

What on earth are you talking about? There was a federal grand jury, it did not indict him. Had nothing to do with Republicans. And during the impeachment the Republicans were some of the harshest inquisitors and it was they whobforced him outvoted office for FAR less egregious acts than Clinton has committed.

 

Wrong the grand jury issued its indictments in March, Ford issued the pardon in September.

 

Sure we all knew no charges would ever be brought against Hillary. She is way above the law, anyone else would have been prosecuted. We have a very politicized DOJ, FBI and what have you. Their job isn't to find out the truth and justice, it is to protect and defend Democrats. If it weren't, Lois Learner would have faces charges long ago for using the IRS to influence an election. Today, she is the Democrat's hero.

 

Your legal disagreement appears to be with the FBI Director whom I have never challenged, and have no interest in attacking or defending on that score now.

As I noted, I defer to his far greater legal acumen.

Of course, as a separate matter, his departing from standard FBI protocols in his leaking information concerning ongoing investigations has been the subject of widespread bipartisan criticism.

In any event, any legal action that might later be deemed appropriate can still be taken against Clinton and/or Trump after the election.

 

If no prosecutable evidence was found, so be it. Sniveling that she is uniquely immune to the prolonged prosecutorial zeal of Issa, Gowdy, Comey et all is silly.

No one in her position who did what she did would have been indicted, although there is nothing to prevent you from imagining otherwise, of course.

 

Of 74, Nixon testified in 75.

By the time Nixon appeared at the grand jury, on June 23 and 24 of 1975, he had, by virtue of his pardon by Gerald R. Ford, immunity from any crimes he had committed, though he was still subject to perjury charges based on what he said to this grand jury. Nixon, a lawyer, repeatedly answered questions in a hedged and clipped manner, often saying he did not recall conversations, some of them just two years old.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/11/1...anscripts-show-a-combative-richard-nixon.html

 

Then why do you discuss it and rely on it here to support you argument if you refuse to discuss it. I can line up those with greater authority than he and I can also cite the law which has no such intent requirement as he claimed existed. And if we take his new legal theory that if no one has ever been prosecuted under a law then no one can be prosecuted under a law then we may as well stop passing new laws.

And again you and he and the Democrats all hinge your position on the no inebriated found, although you never say intent for what, yet when asked during his testimony about the 302 interview reports and the lack of any inquiery into intent he said they didn't like into it. So its all moot anyway the investigation was a sham from the getgo.

 

If it was anyone but Hillary Clinton, there would have been no 7 Benghazi hearings which is why the whole email deal came about. The reason no charges were brought against her was because there was no criminal act committed. This crap about the Clinton's being above the law is bull (*)(*)(*)(*). They are typical politicians who have been under a huge microscope of partisan prosecutors for decades and the only thing that stuck was the Paula Jones/Lewinsky deal which was a result of a multi million dollar bull (*)(*)(*)(*) fishing expedition regarding a two bit land deal again started for purely political reasons. I do not consider myself a democrat nor a Clinton supporter per se, but this whole hysteria regarding Benghazi and her emails has been a manufactured hit job which came right out of the GOP congressional delegation in order to weaken her for her presidential run. If these ********s had spent 1/10 of the money, time and effort trying to build up and nominate reasonable candidate to run against her instead of trying to destroy Clinton, they would be breezing to victory right now. Today's GOP is truly the gang that couldn't shoot straight.

 

No criminality in Clinton emails - FBI



I'm glad to find Jim Comey is back in the Left's good graces. It's important to maintain the appearance that Madame Clinton isn't a corrupt scofflaw.

 

(Originally published by the Daily News on March 2, 1974. This story was written by Frank Van Riper and James Wieghart.)

Washington, March 1 (News Bureau) - In one of the biggest political scandals in the nation’s history, a federal grand jury indicted today six of President Nixon’s top aides and the lawyer for his reelection committee on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to cover up the 1972 break-in and bugging of Democratic National headquarters at the Watergate Building.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...cts-watergate-break-in-1974-article-1.2129087

 

And let's not forget that the Obama Administration, of which Madame Private E-Mail Server was one of its highest ranking officials, is The Most Transparent Administration in History, because they're all about the rule of law and accountability to The People.