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.
Hey Hillary, put away the victim card. You are lying AGAIN. Unprecedented is not unprecedented. Remember how Bill won in 1992?
Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger was indicted FOUR DAYS before the 1992 election. Bill Clinton seized on the new indictment, howling about a "culture of corruption" that supposedly pervaded the administration. Bush's poll numbers declined and Bill Clinton won the election.
The indictment was thrown out a month later. Here you go Hillary, just a reminder
I was not aware that Bill Clinton was ever FBI director. Did you learn that at Trump University?
Read the information at the link Merge. Hillary is claiming this is unprecedented when in fact he benefited from an indictment that was 4 days before the election. Shortly after the election, a federal judge threw out the new indictment.
Bill Clinton seized on the new indictment, howling about a "culture of corruption" that supposedly pervaded the administration (arms-for-hostages). The indictment was overturned.
Unprecedented is not unprecedented. ... Hillary put away the victim card.
The DOJ interfered with the election just 4 days before the election in 1992, and helped Bill Clinton win.
I haven't read any account that suggests an indictment must wait for the election to occur. That's why I'm so surprised Comey hasn't formally charged Clinton with anything. This could have been done multiple times if there was any real indication that Clinton had intended to break a rule.
Yet Comey just keeps editorializing. Perhaps there's simply nothing there. Or maybe your employers over at the Trump campaign have something else to feed the disgraced FBI director?
Comey's need to editorialize to affect the election, in direct violation of the Hatch Act, is the unprecedented part of this situation.
Much better to have the indictment 4 days before the election than to have it AFTER the election, IMO!
It really doesn't matter to me, I have already voted, and it was not for the disgusting old broad, but others may have second thoughts and decide to change their vote.
Powerline blogger Paul Mirengoff wrote, "What goes around comes around."
A reader points out the irony of Hillary Clinton complaining about timing of the reopening of the FBI investigation. In 1992, the reader reminds me, President Bush was gaining on Bill Clinton as Election Day approached. But 4 days before election, the special counsel, Lawrence Walsh, obtained a new indictment of former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger.
Hillary wants you to ignore that Hillary is a fault for all of this period
Powerline blogger Paul Mirengoff wrote, "What goes around comes around."
A reader points out the irony of Hillary Clinton complaining about timing of the reopening of the FBI investigation. In 1992, the reader reminds me, President Bush was gaining on Bill Clinton as Election Day approached. But 4 days before election, the special counsel, Lawrence Walsh, obtained a new indictment of former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger.
Hillary wants you to ignore that Hillary is a fault for all of this period
I haven't read any account that suggests an indictment must wait for the election to occur. That's why I'm so surprised Comey hasn't formally charged Clinton with anything. This could have been done multiple times if there was any real indication that Clinton had intended to break a rule.
Yet Comey just keeps editorializing. Perhaps there's simply nothing there. Or maybe your employers over at the Trump campaign have something else to feed the disgraced FBI director?
Comey's need to editorialize to affect the election, in direct violation of the Hatch Act, is the unprecedented part of this situation.
LOL anyone who thinks that Comey would have put his butt on the line for Trump is living in fairy land.
But Reid did his job... Operation Mockingbird. Seems to me that the DOJ has violated the Hatch act. But if Reid believes Comey did this, why doesn't the DOJ do something?
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.
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.
