|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jul 6, 2016 3:53:00 GMT
That is not even remotely funny.
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jul 6, 2016 3:53:18 GMT
I watched with my boss, he is a Hillary supporter and all to eager to excuse her actions. He asked what my thoughts were. I said, I take greater care with security of the financial information that I handle as your family office controller than she did as Secrertary of State with responsibility of national security. I think Comey saying that if someone else did exactly what HILIEry did there would be consequences and turning on his heel and walking out of the presser spoke volumes about the political pressure he acquiesced to. Bill Clinton's meeting with Lynch on a private plane stinks to high heaven. The Clinton's believe as sociopaths do that they do no wrong. They believe what they do is for the greater good and it makes them above the law. It is so childish to change names in this manner. Completely negates any interest I have in what you've got to say.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 6, 2016 4:25:57 GMT
That is not even remotely funny. I'm sorry but are you not aware of "The Clinton Body Count"? www.thepoliticalinsider.com/another-clinton-associate-found-dead-bill-hillarys-body-count-increases/Amending this to clarify - "The Clinton Body Count" is a wide spread conspiracy theory that began in 1994 with a website run by an Indianapolis lawyer named Linda Thompson of the American Justice Federation. From Wiki: "Thompson was opposed to the Bill Clinton presidency. In 1994, in a letter to congressional leaders, former Rep. William Dannemeyer listed 24 people with some connection to Clinton who had died "under other than natural circumstances" and called for hearings on the matter. This list was mostly compiled by Thompson."
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 6, 2016 6:24:42 GMT
There is a lot of ugly on this thread. But giving even the tiniest bit of credence to the filth that is "Clinton Body Count" is beneath every one of you. It's even lower than birtherism.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 6, 2016 6:32:30 GMT
That's an interesting site. I noticed an article about Sarah Palin giving "the speech of the year." Huh.
|
|
|
Post by Kymberlee on Jul 6, 2016 10:46:15 GMT
Thoughts? I have lost all faith in justice and fairness in this country. It's dead and gone. If you are a Clinton or an Obama, you are basically free to commit any offense or crime you like. I am sickened by my country's government today and ashamed to have any of these people represent us. We are now officially a disgrace. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, liberal or conservative, this should nauseate you. We are all supposed to be equal under the law and it is so clear that we are not. I don't care which candidate you support, as an American, this should offend you. My thoughts exactly. So after taking 15 minutes to lay out how Clinton DID mishandle information, didn't hand over all information requested, DID send classified information, was extremely careless in her handling of classified information and had a system that was probably compromised by foreign actors ... FBI Director Comey says they won't recommend any criminal prosecutorial action due to lack of precedent. This is the woman that could be our leader for the next 4 years. I'm so disgusted and beyond words at this point.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jul 6, 2016 12:54:53 GMT
Thoughts? I have lost all faith in justice and fairness in this country. It's dead and gone. If you are a Clinton or an Obama, you are basically free to commit any offense or crime you like. I am sickened by my country's government today and ashamed to have any of these people represent us. We are now officially a disgrace. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, liberal or conservative, this should nauseate you. We are all supposed to be equal under the law and it is so clear that we are not. I don't care which candidate you support, as an American, this should offend you. My thoughts exactly. So after taking 15 minutes to lay out how Clinton DID mishandle information, didn't hand over all information requested, DID send classified information, was extremely careless in her handling of classified information and had a system that was probably compromised by foreign actors ... FBI Director Comey says they won't recommend any criminal prosecutorial action due to lack of precedent. This is the woman that could be our leader for the next 4 years. I'm so disgusted and beyond words at this point. Not quite. It was not as a lack of precedent, it was that they did not find strong evidence in order to recommend prosecution or charges. They found her careless, which is not criminal. As for the compromised actors "probably" is most certainly not definitely! Thus lack of evidentiary support needed.
|
|
sweetpeasmom
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,592
Jun 27, 2014 14:04:01 GMT
|
Post by sweetpeasmom on Jul 6, 2016 13:16:30 GMT
My thoughts exactly. So after taking 15 minutes to lay out how Clinton DID mishandle information, didn't hand over all information requested, DID send classified information, was extremely careless in her handling of classified information and had a system that was probably compromised by foreign actors ... FBI Director Comey says they won't recommend any criminal prosecutorial action due to lack of precedent. This is the woman that could be our leader for the next 4 years. I'm so disgusted and beyond words at this point. Not quite. It was not as a lack of precedent, it was that they did not find strong evidence in order to recommend prosecution or charges. They found her careless, which is not criminal. As for the compromised actors "probably" is most certainly not definitely! Thus lack of evidentiary support needed. gross negligence n. carelessness in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another's property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property. If gross negligence is found by the trier of fact (judge or jury), it can result in the award of punitive damages on top of general and special damages. Comey said over and over again, she was careless in her actions. She has put the lives of Americans at risk. She sent and received emails while in hostel territories on unsecured devices/servers. While they did not find (and I wouldn't expect them to) any evidence that her system was hacked, Comey also said they were pretty certain that other countries have her emails. Thus putting the lives of Americans at risk (my words, not his). She signed a document when she was sworn in as SOS, if she mishandled classified information, she would be criminally prosecuted. THAT IS WHAT SHE DID!! I don't think she thought to herself, I want to have a private server in my home so I can intentionally be careless with classified documents. In this case, based on the statutes she violated, intent is not necessary. I heard a great example yesterday (at least I thought so). A parent that leaves their child in a hot car and the child dies. That parent did not intentionally leave that child in there. However, they were grossly negligent and will be charged as such. It is a terrible horrible thing that happens. But there are consequences. How are we supposed to trust someone that is that careless with top secret information to be the Commander in Chief? Save
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 6, 2016 14:57:56 GMT
^^^ sounds to me like your beef should be with the FBI, then, because they're the ones who decided there weren't going to be any charges brought.
|
|
sweetpeasmom
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,592
Jun 27, 2014 14:04:01 GMT
|
Post by sweetpeasmom on Jul 6, 2016 15:08:33 GMT
^^^ sounds to me like your beef should be with the FBI, then, because they're the ones who decided there weren't going to be any charges brought. Yes I do in fact have an issue with the FBI and their recommendation. I have issue with Hilary for doing this and I have issue with the FBI stating what they found and still are choosing not to recommend charges. So much of this stinks to high heaven! Save
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Jul 6, 2016 15:25:44 GMT
And if I am understanding what I am reading, there will now be congressional hearings investigating the FBI.
The merry-go-round keeps going around.
|
|
Nink
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,947
Location: North Idaho
Jul 1, 2014 23:30:44 GMT
|
Post by Nink on Jul 6, 2016 15:29:11 GMT
And if I am understanding what I am reading, there will now be congressional hearings investigating the FBI. The merry-go-round keeps going around. That's rich. Congress, or should I say, the people that make up Congress are the ones that need to be investigated.
|
|
|
Post by blondiec47 on Jul 6, 2016 15:35:06 GMT
And if I am understanding what I am reading, there will now be congressional hearings investigating the FBI. The merry-go-round keeps going around. Not a Hillary supporter and would never vote for her, and even I rolled my eyes when I read that. She will never be held accountable as long as a dem is in the white house. This will just be a waste of time
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 18:21:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2016 15:56:33 GMT
What was missing was "intent". "Extreme carelessness" is a fair assessment of Hillary's use of her emails. But without "intent" you can't bring criminal charges against someone for "extreme carelessness" as much as one might want to. I mean look at "responsible" gun owners who are extremely careless with their guns so much so it results in the death of innocent people. And inspite of their "extreme carelessness" there was no "intent" on their part so criminal charges are not brought against them. I see the House is going to hold hearings about Hillary and her emails. Boy look how quickly the Republicans sprang into action. Too bad they can't do the same when it comes to guns by expanding background checks or stopping individuals on the no fly list/terrorist list from buying guns. Something that might actually save American lives. But instead they want to waste even more tax payer money telling us something we already know. Hillary Clinton and her staff were "extremely careless" when it came to the emails and some of the information contained in said emails. But after listening to Trump give his latest speech I have no doubt the Republicans are holding the hearings on Hillary and her emails as a means to shift the public spotlight from Trump to Hillary. Only problem is Trump ain't going to like the spotlight being shifted away from him so he will even find more outrageous ideas to spew to bring that spotlight right back on him where he firmly believes it belongs. link
Edited to add "Republicans may be blowing it on Clinton's emails. They have only themselves to blame". By Greg Sargent. The reason I decided to add this article is because Sargent brings up what I think is a good point. Trump has already started and the House Hearings while attacking Hillary will also end up attacking the FBI for not doing their job. That the members of the committee can do a better job then the FBI. As pointed out in the article that might go over big with the base but not so much with general public. Attacking the FBI because they didn't provide the outcome wanted by Republican politicians.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 18:21:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2016 16:05:29 GMT
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 6, 2016 16:13:22 GMT
What was missing was "intent". And the truth, that was also missing. The fact that she literally lied for over a year about all of this is really disturbing.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jul 6, 2016 16:38:23 GMT
However, Comey said there was not evidence of any kind of coverup in regards to those emails. "We believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence that there was no intentional misconduct in relation to that sorting effort," Comey said. He also noted that while the FBI could find no direct evidence of an intrusion into Clinton's server by hostile foreign governments, given that she corresponded with individuals whose accounts were compromised and that the server was not secured by government protections, and that she used her email in hostile foreign territories, "It is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's email account." State Dept. report slams Clinton email use Ultimately, Comey said his recommendation against charges stems from the fact that there is no precedent for charging someone under similar circumstances, saying the FBI could not find a single case in which a person was charged with crimes for similar actions. "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," Comey said, saying the FBI could not find a single case in which a person was charged with crimes for similar actions. He also emphatically stated that the investigation was conducted fairly and unbiased. "This investigation was done honestly, competently and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear," Comey said. "Opinions are irrelevant. ... We did our investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way."
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jul 6, 2016 16:44:25 GMT
Hey lawyer peas - I have a question about this part of Comey's news conference:
I don't understand how the lawyers could permanently delete any of the emails not turned over to the FBI. I've been involved in a few court cases - and one of the things the lawyers always emphasized was that if a lawsuit was filed ALL emails must be retained and you cannot delete ANYTHING.
ETA I'm wondering if the fact that I've only been involved in civil litigation as opposed to criminal?
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 6, 2016 16:46:20 GMT
However, Comey said there was not evidence of any kind of coverup in regards to those emails. "We believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence that there was no intentional misconduct in relation to that sorting effort," Comey said. He also noted that while the FBI could find no direct evidence of an intrusion into Clinton's server by hostile foreign governments, given that she corresponded with individuals whose accounts were compromised and that the server was not secured by government protections, and that she used her email in hostile foreign territories, "It is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's email account." State Dept. report slams Clinton email use Ultimately, Comey said his recommendation against charges stems from the fact that there is no precedent for charging someone under similar circumstances, saying the FBI could not find a single case in which a person was charged with crimes for similar actions. "Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," Comey said, saying the FBI could not find a single case in which a person was charged with crimes for similar actions. He also emphatically stated that the investigation was conducted fairly and unbiased. "This investigation was done honestly, competently and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear," Comey said. "Opinions are irrelevant. ... We did our investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way." You forgot to link your source, papercrafteradvocate: "FBI director will not recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton after email investigation"
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 6, 2016 16:48:48 GMT
I see the House is going to hold hearings about Hillary and her emails. Boy look how quickly the Republicans sprang into action. Actually, I think there are some very valid questions to be asked. When Director Comey said “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a criminal case against Clinton, that was not within his scope to make such a statement. To the best of my knowledge, the FBI is supposed to gather the facts and present them. It is up to the AG to determine whether or not there is a case. It also looks to me like intent was baked in when she willfully disregarded the rules of the State Department, but I'm no attorney. Too bad they can't do the same when it comes to guns by expanding background checks or stopping individuals on the no fly list/terrorist list from buying guns. Something that might actually save American lives. A vote had been planned for this week, but it appears there are still several details to be ironed out. Personally, I'd rather they get it right the first time instead of just "passing something." www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/07/06/house-gop-delays-plans-to-address-guns/Our rights and due process is what differentiates our government from a lot of others throughout the world. It's important that we get it right.
|
|
lindas
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,156
Jun 26, 2014 5:46:37 GMT
|
Post by lindas on Jul 6, 2016 16:49:56 GMT
I guess Comey didn't dig deep enough to find that similar circumstance.
Folsom Naval Reservist is Sentenced After Pleading Guilty to Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Materials U.S. Attorney’s Office July 29, 2015
Eastern District of California (916) 554-2700 SACRAMENTO, CA—Bryan H. Nishimura, 50, of Folsom, pleaded guilty today to unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials, United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner announced.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman immediately sentenced Nishimura to two years of probation, a $7,500 fine, and forfeiture of personal media containing classified materials. Nishimura was further ordered to surrender any currently held security clearance and to never again seek such a clearance.
According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system.
Nishimura’s actions came to light in early 2012, when he admitted to Naval personnel that he had handled classified materials inappropriately. Nishimura later admitted that, following his statement to Naval personnel, he destroyed a large quantity of classified materials he had maintained in his home. Despite that, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation searched Nishimura’s home in May 2012, agents recovered numerous classified materials in digital and hard copy forms. The investigation did not reveal evidence that Nishimura intended to distribute classified information to unauthorized personnel.
This case was the product of an investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Assistant United States Attorney Jean M. Hobler prosecuted the case.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 18:21:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2016 17:05:02 GMT
There is a lot of ugly on this thread. But giving even the tiniest bit of credence to the filth that is "Clinton Body Count" is beneath every one of you. It's even lower than birtherism. I've read the whole thread and I feel the exact same way, Lucy. I think this may be the ugliest political thread I've ever read.
|
|
|
Post by whopea on Jul 6, 2016 17:18:49 GMT
What was missing was "intent". "Extreme carelessness" is a fair assessment of Hillary's use of her emails. But without "intent" you can't bring criminal charges against someone for "extreme carelessness" as much as one might want to. I mean look at "responsible" gun owners who are extremely careless with their guns so much so it results in the death of innocent people. And inspite of their "extreme carelessness" there was no "intent" on their part so criminal charges are not brought against them. I see the House is going to hold hearings about Hillary and her emails. Boy look how quickly the Republicans sprang into action. Too bad they can't do the same when it comes to guns by expanding background checks or stopping individuals on the no fly list/terrorist list from buying guns. Something that might actually save American lives. But instead they want to waste even more tax payer money telling us something we already know. Hillary Clinton and her staff were "extremely careless" when it came to the emails and some of the information contained in said emails. But after listening to Trump give his latest speech I have no doubt the Republicans are holding the hearings on Hillary and her emails as a means to shift the public spotlight from Trump to Hillary. Only problem is Trump ain't going to like the spotlight being shifted away from him so he will even find more outrageous ideas to spew to bring that spotlight right back on him where he firmly believes it belongs. link
Edited to add "Republicans may be blowing it on Clinton's emails. They have only themselves to blame". By Greg Sargent. The reason I decided to add this article is because Sargent brings up what I think is a good point. Trump has already started and the House Hearings while attacking Hillary will also end up attacking the FBI for not doing their job. That the members of the committee can do a better job then the FBI. As pointed out in the article that might go over big with the base but not so much with general public. Attacking the FBI because they didn't provide the outcome wanted by Republican politicians. There is no intent necessary in the statute the way it was written. Gross negligence is sufficient. IMO, intent = treason.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Jul 6, 2016 17:49:59 GMT
There is a lot of ugly on this thread. But giving even the tiniest bit of credence to the filth that is "Clinton Body Count" is beneath every one of you. It's even lower than birtherism. I feel a need to address this because I sometimes confuse 2Peas with Reddit. There's a whole lotta sarcasm that happens over on Reddit and my post (*which I have amended as noted below) was in step with the pic posted by carly and was in sarcastic response to papercrafteradvocate. While it would have been humorous on Reddit, it was obviously not received well here at 2Peas and, sarcasm aside, I can see why after the fact. Please let's place the blame where it belongs - I was the only one to mention this conspiracy theory - no one else corresponded in kind or even acknowledged their agreement with my post, I am the only person responsible here. For those I have offended, I am sorry. *NOTE - Amending this to clarify - "The Clinton Body Count" is a wide spread conspiracy theory that began in 1994 with a website run by an Indianapolis lawyer named Linda Thompson of the American Justice Federation.
From Wiki: "Thompson was opposed to the Bill Clinton presidency. In 1994, in a letter to congressional leaders, former Rep. William Dannemeyer listed 24 people with some connection to Clinton who had died "under other than natural circumstances" and called for hearings on the matter. This list was mostly compiled by Thompson."
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 6, 2016 18:00:47 GMT
My hat is off to you, MizIndependent. I appreciate your candor. I was not offended, I figured the meme carly posted was just a bit of dark humor/sarcasm, as was your post, but stepping up like that is a respectful response to those who were.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 18:21:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2016 18:03:54 GMT
There is a lot of ugly on this thread. But giving even the tiniest bit of credence to the filth that is "Clinton Body Count" is beneath every one of you. It's even lower than birtherism. I've read the whole thread and I feel the exact same way, Lucy. I think this may be the ugliest political thread I've ever read. Seriously? There have been plenty of very ugly political threads.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jul 6, 2016 18:04:18 GMT
I think this will satisfy the middle-grounders. But not the haters or lovers. Nothing anyone could say would satisfy either extremes. ETA the findings did not surprise me at all. I don't hate her as a person but I certainly hate the level of deception and dishonesty she sunk to trying to cover up her lies. I also can't imagine someone being president that let classified information like that sit on a public server. Really there is no excuse for that. They found she did in fact lie and that many of the emails were classified. I guess days of having integrity in America are over? But all anyone has to say is that you hate Hillary. That's it. That's all they have to say and you and your opinion are justifiably discounted. I agree with Paul Ryan. I believe her access to secure information needs to be restricted. Oooohhhhh.... I must really hate Hillary.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 6, 2016 18:10:41 GMT
There is a lot of ugly on this thread. But giving even the tiniest bit of credence to the filth that is "Clinton Body Count" is beneath every one of you. It's even lower than birtherism. I feel a need to address this because I sometimes confuse 2Peas with Reddit. There's a whole lotta sarcasm that happens over on Reddit and my post (*which I have amended as noted below) was in step with the pic posted by carly and was in sarcastic response to papercrafteradvocate . While it would have been humorous on Reddit, it was obviously not received well here at 2Peas and, sarcasm aside, I can see why after the fact. Please let's place the blame where it belongs - I was the only one to mention this conspiracy theory - no one else corresponded in kind or even acknowledged their agreement with my post, I am the only person responsible here. For those I have offended, I am sorry. *NOTE - Amending this to clarify - "The Clinton Body Count" is a wide spread conspiracy theory that began in 1994 with a website run by an Indianapolis lawyer named Linda Thompson of the American Justice Federation.
From Wiki: "Thompson was opposed to the Bill Clinton presidency. In 1994, in a letter to congressional leaders, former Rep. William Dannemeyer listed 24 people with some connection to Clinton who had died "under other than natural circumstances" and called for hearings on the matter. This list was mostly compiled by Thompson."
Thank you. I am relieved to know you don't buy into that filthy nonsense. And for the record, I latched onto your post because it was the last one I saw on the topic. I was already fired up from carly's post and the likes on it.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 13, 2024 18:21:51 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2016 18:25:13 GMT
I feel a need to address this because I sometimes confuse 2Peas with Reddit. There's a whole lotta sarcasm that happens over on Reddit and my post (*which I have amended as noted below) was in step with the pic posted by carly and was in sarcastic response to papercrafteradvocate . While it would have been humorous on Reddit, it was obviously not received well here at 2Peas and, sarcasm aside, I can see why after the fact. Please let's place the blame where it belongs - I was the only one to mention this conspiracy theory - no one else corresponded in kind or even acknowledged their agreement with my post, I am the only person responsible here. For those I have offended, I am sorry. *NOTE - Amending this to clarify - "The Clinton Body Count" is a wide spread conspiracy theory that began in 1994 with a website run by an Indianapolis lawyer named Linda Thompson of the American Justice Federation.
From Wiki: "Thompson was opposed to the Bill Clinton presidency. In 1994, in a letter to congressional leaders, former Rep. William Dannemeyer listed 24 people with some connection to Clinton who had died "under other than natural circumstances" and called for hearings on the matter. This list was mostly compiled by Thompson."
Thank you. I am relieved to know you don't buy into that filthy nonsense. And for the record, I latched onto your post because it was the last one I saw on the topic. I was already fired up from carly 's post and the likes on it. Oh please, I highly doubt anyone believes this "filthy nonsense." Carly's post is a reaction to the travesty of justice. It seems that it's "not remotely funny" because it's anti-Hillary. If something similar but anti-Trump was shown on any late-night TV show, it would be considered hilarious.
|
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
Jun 26, 2014 3:33:18 GMT
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Jul 6, 2016 18:26:36 GMT
When you have a crooked President, a crooked AG, an inept FBI director and a total sleeze who is the subject of this investigation, it's really not surprising that it came down the way it did. Disappointing, yes. Unjust, yes. But surprising? Not at all.
|
|