quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

Well then I would challenge you to come up with where I have kissed Trumps ring. And maybe you should find something where I used *terms* against you. Forced birthers ????? Give me a break!!!!!
No????
but why?


whingeeeeeeeeeeee

ETA: And by all means possible, defend abortion. That's a real stand up thing for a woman to do, abort the baby.

Actually you posted this...

quote:

.I'm getting out the popcorn and beer for this one. Trump is shoving political correctness up the PC asses. With major media outlets, CEO's, democrats and worst of all, weenie ass RINO, moderate and establishment republicans coming down hard on the Donald, he not only won't fold but doubles down. Most other republicans by now would have backed down and crawled back into their holes profusely slobbering their apologies along the way. Now the focus seems to be rubbing off of Trump as the issue and onto the actual issue of illegal immigration. And it's resonating across the board.

This is just way freakin kewl.

here on this post http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4822744

you wrote

quote:

Trump is a wild card and at this point is all we have. If he stays true to his word, as a conservative I don't see too much of a problem with him. I think he's having a wet dream if he thinks he can bring jobs back from around the world by tacking on tariffs to imports. He might be a bit moire hawkish than what I'm comfortable with. I'm not sure exactly what he has in mind to deal with the Obama care fiasco. But he couldn't possibly be any worse than Obama or Hillary. It's also too bad Gary Johnson didn't run in the Republican primary. There are better choices than Trump but after the gang of 8 thing, I would prefer Trump over Rubio. I like Trump a whole lot more than Kasich. Kasich, after promising not to vote in favor of any new federal gun control, voted for Clinton's stupid assault weapon bill. That was a promise well within his control that he could have kept. I would prefer Trump over McCain or Romney. We could do a whole lot worse........unless of course he loses.

here http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4907678


or here

quote:

The only reason I'm registered as a Republican is so that I can vote in the primaries. I realize Trump is a wild card but how bad could he be ? We've had Obama for 2 terms. The only promise I think we can count on is finally getting the border situation fixed though I'd sure wonder how he's going to get Mexico to play for a wall. I'm not so sure how exactly he will get all these jobs back from China, Mexico ect. I am sure at some point, probably in a debate or a good interview he's going to get nailed down on having to give some specifics.

Now, yes you have "issues" with him, but YOU made the claim first that I "kissed hillarys ring", and you wanna bitch asking for proof YOU havent shown?... without withdrawing your dumb statement??
yeah, you really are a moron.

AND If you cant comprehend, that it was your list that started with a list of RONS words, NOT MINE.
SO no I didnt say YOU had said those terms, I said that if you want to accuse me of saying all the things that Ron said , then I can infer you have said shit too.

Do you engage your brain ?????
Yes, again, you said "defend" abortions, I dont defend abortions, I defend the womens right to choose what she does with her body.
I dont like abortions, Ive never had one, I wish no one had to have one. But I certainly do not want to see women going back to coathangers and self induced abortions that KILLL REAL people.
SO yes of course you can harp on that that is ipso facto "defending", bu tit doesnt make you right.
I support education, choice, more support, free birthcontrol, education, choice, more support, free birthcontrol.
I am against FORCED birthing, and yes if the right to abortion is taken away, it will exactly be forced birthing.
No choice, no right over her body, her life, her liberty.
By the way, this week was a BANNER week for womens choice.
And I know also that you are mostly ok with abortion until late term.

quote:

Whenever Bill Clinton gets on a plane to meet a woman, he’s usually up to no good.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch said her impromptu tarmac summit at Phoenix Sky Harbor was a purely social affair. Golf and grandchildren were on the agenda, she said -- and not how a home-brew server crammed with classified information ended up in Bill’s basement.

However, the attorney general normally doesn’t meet with family members of a target in an active FBI criminal investigation.

Hillary is just that -- a target in an FBI criminal investigation.

But you’d never know that listening to Attorney General Lynch. She borrowed the narrative of the Hillary campaign when she described the FBI criminal investigation as a “security inquiry.”

Downplaying the FBI criminal investigation is a deliberate communications strategy of the Clinton campaign. It’s a very bad sign that the person who must approve any grand jury referral has adopted Hillary’s dishonest language.

Many won’t believe Lynch and Clinton only discussed grandkids and golf in her cozy jet. But I do.

That’s all they needed to discuss for Bill to interfere with a criminal prosecution. Sophisticated insiders don’t need to use clumsy and explicit language. Merely having the tarmac summit interferes with the investigation, even if golf and grandkids were the only topics discussed.

The tarmac summit sent a signal. It is a signal to all of the hardworking FBI agents who have the goods on Hillary.

(J. Christian Adams discussing Clinton/Lynch meeting with Megyn Kelly, 6/29)

The attorney general has made it clear what team she is on. The attorney general isn’t on the side of justice. She’s on the Democratic Party team.

This is the unspoken message from Lynch to all of the FBI agents on the case and to all the front-line lawyers at the Justice Department:

When you send your recommendation to refer Hillary’s case to the grand jury, you had better realize your burden to convince me I should sign off on a grand jury request is higher than you thought. These are my friends.

I have never believed Hillary will be indicted, even though the case appears fairly easy to make. As I told The Kelly File last night, I suspect a county district attorney could win the case. For a swarm of seasoned assistant United States attorneys? It seems like a slam dunk.

But that’s not what matters in the age of Obama. An indictment of Hillary would likely increase her popularity with Democrats. It’s Ken Starr all over again. Remember, Bill Clinton became more popular when he was under legal attack...

This is a marriage of a Clinton-style carnival ride in an age of Obama-style lawlessness. The stars of “no controlling legal authority” are behaving badly in an age of “punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends.”

That it is no longer about a dalliance with a White House intern and instead involves national security makes the gangsterism all the more frightening.

quote:

Citing a “well-placed source in the FBI,” Fox News anchor Bret Baier reported Friday that FBI agents are “livid” over Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s private meeting with former President Bill Clinton.

However, it’s not just because of how bad it looks amid the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email use.

“Not just because of the optics and the bad appearance, but also because Bill Clinton is a potential target, a potential witness intricately involved in the second part of the investigation,” Baier said. “And that is the corruption investigation into the possible mishandling, misdealings with the Clinton Foundation.”

Though Lynch claimed she and Clinton only talked about “grandchildren,” Baier said “you don’t have to be talking about the substance of investigations to have influence on somebody who is going to make a decision about the end result.”

“It’s a real problem,” he added.

Baier also noted that FBI agents were not pleaseD when President Barack Obama prematurely proclaimed there would not be any national security implications related to Clinton’s use of a private email server.

quote:

A former U.S. attorney says there is no doubt that, before the November election, the FBI will recommend to Attorney General Loretta Lynch that she prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling of classified information, warning that intervention by the White House would provoke a revolt of Watergate proportions.

In an interview with WND, Joseph diGenova said that based “on all the available evidence, including what is publicly known and what is known in the law enforcement community, there is sufficient, credible evidence needed to meet the predicate to begin a grand jury – sufficient evidence for probable cause to believe various crimes have been committed.”

“There is simply no doubt that the FBI is going to recommend a series of charges to Attorney General Lynch,” he insisted. [though I admit there must be some given the political climate]

DiGenova said he has been speaking with former FBI, Secret Service and intelligence people about the case.

“Based on the information they have secured from their brothers and sisters in the law enforcement community, there is unanimity on the fact that charges are going to be recommended by the FBI,” he said.

“It is impossible for them not to, under the circumstances,” he stressed.

DiGenova acknowledged, however, that Lynch has the discretion to do nothing.

But to the people in the FBI and intelligence community, he said, that would be “inconceivable.”

“There is going to be a revolt of Watergate proportions if criminal charges do not go forward.”

Purposeful avoidance

The FBI criminal investigation of Clinton began with questions regarding her handling of classified information through a private email server.

“First of all, the key to this is the private server,” diGenova said. “The existence of that server and its use by Hillary and her aides in an unencrypted mode, along with all their unencrypted personal devices, is a per se violation of the Espionage Act. It is the failure to properly store, maintain and protect classified information.”

DiGenova noted the FBI already has established a criminal case against a number of people on that charge, including Gen. David Petraeus, the former director of the CIA.

“The FBI, by virtue of seizing not only Hillary Clinton’s server but also numerous servers at the State Department, has begun to unravel the various communication levels and levels of classification beyond what the State Department is slowly releasing to the public,” he said.

He explained that the FBI is “acting on the basis that the server was set up purposefully to avoid disclosure to the public, the press, the
Congress and the courts in response to legitimate legal requests and in response to subpoena.”

“That establishes the intent necessary for criminal activity, in the area of negligent handling of classified information,” he said.

DiGenova said the FBI has established a connection between the official acts of Clinton as secretary of state and the speech and fundraising activities of the Clinton Foundation.

He said he wouldn’t be surprised if the FBI has already begun retrieving documents from the Clinton Foundation as its investigation of
Hillary Clinton expands into issues of political corruption.

“If I were a U.S. attorney today and this investigation was in my office, I would empanel a grand jury and I would seek charges. This is a no-brainer,” he said. [and yet the comrades are convinced she did nothing wrong, let alone criminal].

“This is a locked case of minimally a violation of the classified information statutes,” he said. “There are people who have lost their jobs, lost their security clearances, have been convicted of crimes, for leaving a single document out on their desks overnight.

“This case dwarfs, and I underscore dwarfs, the Petraeus case by multiples in the thousands.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

"FBI 'revolt of Watergate proportions' if Hillary skates: Ex-U.S. attorney has 'no doubt' charges will be referred to Lynch"

quote:

A former U.S. attorney says there is no doubt that, before the November election, the FBI will recommend to Attorney General Loretta Lynch that she prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling of classified information, warning that intervention by the White House would provoke a revolt of Watergate proportions.

In an interview with WND, Joseph diGenova said that based “on all the available evidence, including what is publicly known and what is known in the law enforcement community, there is sufficient, credible evidence needed to meet the predicate to begin a grand jury – sufficient evidence for probable cause to believe various crimes have been committed.”

“There is simply no doubt that the FBI is going to recommend a series of charges to Attorney General Lynch,” he insisted. [though I admit there must be some given the political climate]

DiGenova said he has been speaking with former FBI, Secret Service and intelligence people about the case.

“Based on the information they have secured from their brothers and sisters in the law enforcement community, there is unanimity on the fact that charges are going to be recommended by the FBI,” he said.

“It is impossible for them not to, under the circumstances,” he stressed.

DiGenova acknowledged, however, that Lynch has the discretion to do nothing.

But to the people in the FBI and intelligence community, he said, that would be “inconceivable.”

“There is going to be a revolt of Watergate proportions if criminal charges do not go forward.”

Purposeful avoidance

The FBI criminal investigation of Clinton began with questions regarding her handling of classified information through a private email server.

“First of all, the key to this is the private server,” diGenova said. “The existence of that server and its use by Hillary and her aides in an unencrypted mode, along with all their unencrypted personal devices, is a per se violation of the Espionage Act. It is the failure to properly store, maintain and protect classified information.”

DiGenova noted the FBI already has established a criminal case against a number of people on that charge, including Gen. David Petraeus, the former director of the CIA.

“The FBI, by virtue of seizing not only Hillary Clinton’s server but also numerous servers at the State Department, has begun to unravel the various communication levels and levels of classification beyond what the State Department is slowly releasing to the public,” he said.

He explained that the FBI is “acting on the basis that the server was set up purposefully to avoid disclosure to the public, the press, the
Congress and the courts in response to legitimate legal requests and in response to subpoena.”

“That establishes the intent necessary for criminal activity, in the area of negligent handling of classified information,” he said.

DiGenova said the FBI has established a connection between the official acts of Clinton as secretary of state and the speech and fundraising activities of the Clinton Foundation.

He said he wouldn’t be surprised if the FBI has already begun retrieving documents from the Clinton Foundation as its investigation of
Hillary Clinton expands into issues of political corruption.

“If I were a U.S. attorney today and this investigation was in my office, I would empanel a grand jury and I would seek charges. This is a no-brainer,” he said. [and yet the comrades are convinced she did nothing wrong, let alone criminal].

“This is a locked case of minimally a violation of the classified information statutes,” he said. “There are people who have lost their jobs, lost their security clearances, have been convicted of crimes, for leaving a single document out on their desks overnight.

“This case dwarfs, and I underscore dwarfs, the Petraeus case by multiples in the thousands.”

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/fbi-revolt-of-watergate-proportions-if-hillary-skates/#pEvbuGQB596uaLwE.99

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

the kicker with that is, youre either setting yourself up as someone who knows more than a US attorney, or youre convinced that the democratic run administration is more interested in politics than in justice.

in the first instance youre laughably pompous, in the next instance, your laughing about your (apparent) comrades getting away with crimes.

either way, you look pretty bad. maybe you are the one who went to trump university?

quote:

During her deposition given to Judicial Watch under court order for its Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, Huma Abedin made a startling admission.

Daniel Halper, who recently moved from the Weekly Standard to the New York Post, reports:

Hillary Clinton’s closest aide revealed in a deposition last week that her boss destroyed at least some of her schedules as secretary of state — a revelation that could complicate matters for the presumptive Democratic nominee who, along with the State Department she ran, is facing numerous lawsuits seeking those very public records. (snip)

“If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that . . . that certainly happened on . . . on more than one occasion,” Abedin told lawyers representing Judicial Watch, the conservative organization behind the e-mails lawsuit. (snip)

Clinton has admitted to destroying “private personal e-mails” as secretary of state. But Abedin’s admission that she used so-called “burn bags” — a container material is placed inside before it is destroyed — for some of her schedules is the first time anyone close to her has disclosed destroying public records.

To say the least, this was not standard operating procedure at the State Department:

“I spent eight years at the State Department and watched as four US ambassadors and two secretaries of state shared their daily schedules with a variety of State Department employees and US officials,” said Richard Grenell, former diplomat and US spokesman at the United Nations.

“I’ve never seen anyone put their schedule in the burn bag — because every one of them had a state.gov e-mail address and therefore their daily schedules became public records, as required by law.”

Only because her email system was private could Hillary hope to keep her daily schedule secret – from America’s enemies, from historians, and from America’s legal system – by burning her schedule. It’s no smoking gun, since we can’t point to specific meetings, but it is a smoking burn bag.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So, some wide adnd brawiling cocksucker, lets say it is yoiu has in inside sicrleflech? gobble it you fuckng turd

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So, some wide adnd brawiling cocksucker, lets say it is yoiu has in inside sicrleflech? gobble it you fuckng turd

spend a little too much time with the vodka today?