Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well Comey won't be there to protect Hillary next time she's investigated.
Remember last year Comey tried to say she's innocent because she didn't have "intent", even though intent was not a criteria....
Comey's BS was the only thing saving her.
tRump promised to jail Hillary.
Pubs have been trash-talking for decades.
They now OWN America. Now's the time to pounce on her. The whole table is set for them.
Well Comey won't be there to protect Hillary next time she's investigated.
Remember last year Comey tried to say she's innocent because she didn't have "intent", even though intent was not a criteria....
Comey's BS was the only thing saving her.
Hillary isn't some super-criminal. Investigation after investigation have yielded nothing. The real crime is the repeat investigations costing taxpayers huge sums of money. Wasted.
The investigations have been exhausted. Try to find something else to salivate over.
Judicial Watch are a right-wing organization with an agenda. Not gonna happen. Maybe they should focus their attention on the current investigation, or that what they want to distract us from
Mueller has the other one covered. They have sued both democrat and republican administrations. All three administrations before Trump were sued by them.
For example: Bush Administration
In July 2003 Judicial Watch joined the environmental organization Sierra Club in suing the George W. Bush administration for access to minutes of Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force.[7] Judicial Watch was involved in a similar legal dispute with Vice President Dick Cheney in 2002 when the group filed a shareholder lawsuit against Halliburton. The lawsuit, which accused Halliburton of accounting fraud, alleged that "when Mr. Cheney was chief executive of Halliburton, he and other directors inflated revenue reports, boosting Halliburton's share price." [8] As reported by the Wall Street Journal the court filing claims the oil-field-services concern overstated revenue by a total of $445 million from 1999 through the end of 2001.[9]
Judicial Watch is actually very credible. You don't know of what you speak. They are infamous in filing FOIA requests. Something that all Americans should support.
Judicial Watch is the antithesis of credible. It's one of the original birther sites. That should tell you everything you need to know about them.
Hillary isn't a super anything. Run of the mill criminal like a run of the mill politician. Average at best. That is why both of her attempts at the presidency ended in defeat.
Hillary isn't a super anything. Run of the mill criminal like a run of the mill politician. Average at best. That is why both of her attempts at the presidency ended in defeat.
If she's a "run-of-the-mill criminal", then all those investigations that turned up zilch were conducted by....????
^ Zilch? Read Comey's findings last year, he found enough to indict her but chose not to because she didn't have "intent" (despite intent not being a criteria).
^ Zilch? Read Comey's findings last year, he found enough to indict her but chose not to because she didn't have "intent" (despite intent not being a criteria).
Zilch. Read Comey's statement. No prosecutor would have filed charges. There is no evidence that any of the information handled by her personal server ever ended up in any illicit hands, she didn't have any intent to compromise information. Your desire to prosecute is based on your animosity, not on any real damage.
^ Zilch? Read Comey's findings last year, he found enough to indict her but chose not to because she didn't have "intent" (despite intent not being a criteria).
The FBI doesn't indict.
That's the Justice Dept's responsibility.
Now that tRump has his own boy at the FBI and his little elf at Justice, what's he waiting for?
^ Zilch? Read Comey's findings last year, he found enough to indict her but chose not to because she didn't have "intent" (despite intent not being a criteria).
So why hasn't Jeff Sessions indicted her?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.