Author Topic: (Topic Deleted)  (Read 981 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Scutter

  • Guest
(Topic Deleted)
« on: November 02, 2016, 02:17:59 pm »
.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2017, 11:25:06 am by Scutter »

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,695
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Clinton Foundation FBI Investigation: Loretta Lynch's Obstruction
« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2016, 07:45:15 am »
I can't believe this post got absolutely zero replies. This is the big article that's been discussed on multiple talking head shows this evening...

Truly, this site is well below critical mass.
Nah. Everyone is tired of fighting off trolls on the other threads.

We know Clinton is a criminal, we know Holder's wife's sorority sister is likely just as deep in the coverup/conspiracy/collusion as he ever was, and that they all have each other's backs obstructing justice, misfeasance or nonfeasance on investigations of criminal and treasonous activity, right down to the murder of an American Ambassador. There aren't enough lamp posts in D.C. to hoist all the people involved.

All that's left are the details. Pity we can't have more faith that whoever gets elected won't either be party to the Treason, or someone who finally figured out it is more lucrative to be the politician than the person renting them.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline DB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,219
Re: Clinton Foundation FBI Investigation: Loretta Lynch's Obstruction
« Reply #2 on: November 03, 2016, 08:49:59 am »
I can't believe this post got absolutely zero replies. This is the big article that's been discussed on multiple talking head shows this evening...

Truly, this site is well below critical mass.

This is the first I've seen this post.

A couple of things about the article that are not quite right. First, intent doesn't matter in revealing classified state secrets. It is a crime to reveal them regardless of intent - at least for the little people. The only real excuse would be as a whistleblower to state crimes. Second, the immunity agreements for Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson are contingent on them being truthful. If it is proven they were less than truthful, which would seem very likely, the immunity deal is dead and they can be prosecuted. Those are important details that were left out or danced around in this article.