Congressman Trey Gowdy says Clinton investigation goes deeper than anyone knows

How many Hillary threads are you gonna start today? You seem really shook.
 
Overpressure said:
I agree that some of that shit stunk, but to my knowledge nothing rose to the level of criminality but I'm open to seeing a list of crimes
Click to expand...

Google James Comey's speech where he laid it all out. I've heard it on Rush a half dozen times.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Most people would agree that if you've done nothing wrong then you shouldn't be punished. Not terribly difficult here to understand that he's saying she did the shit she was accused of and that while it's not criminal enough to pursue charges it was worthy of disciplinary action.
Click to expand...

So it's exactly like I said when you decided to respond with a personal attack. Basically she drove without a seatbelt once.
 
superpunch said:
We're like a banana republic because our elite class can get away with crimes that we normal citizens can not get away with. That's very unAmerican. Titles of nobility are prohibited in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Normal citizens can use non-secured emails.
 
klnOmega said:


Cliffs:
--While he doesn't agree with Comey's decision to not recommend indicting Hillary, after receiving classified intel, he understands why Comey did it.
--Said that Comey's primary goal was to give the American public confidence in the investigation. Says he can't say more because its classified.
--Host asks if he is suggesting that the are more entanglement between Justice department and Clinton than anyone understands. Gowdy responds "you are very perceptive".

In case it wasn't obvious before, Comey knew Hillary was caught with her hand in the cookie jar, but had his hands tied because he knew the DOJ was protecting her. If he had recommended to indict her, the whole thing would have become a shitslingingfest between the DOJ and Obama vs. the FBI and Congress. So Comey made the wrong decision, but the one he felt would best preserve the confidence of the people in our system.

The real question now is what is going to happen as this investigation goes forward under a new FBI. Are they going to look into Lynch's secret meeting with Bill Clinton aboard his jet? Did Obama direct the DOJ to block for Hillary? Its clear that we need a special prosecutor to go back over everything that was done and make sure it was all legal. I think anyone left or right can agree on that.
Click to expand...

This kind of shit isn't very helpful. Put up or shut up imo. If the investigation is deeper, then he shouldn't b e saying anything until indictments are issued. If it never reaches that point, then we are dealing with conspiracy theories, just like the left with their Putin paranoia.
 
CargoKing said:
Well, one is the president of our country, so we should probably start there.
Click to expand...

A pox on both their houses.

Let's start by investigating every elected federal official for foreign relations.....looking at you israel......
 
IngaVovchanchyn said:
Rowdy Trey Gowdy would be a hoot as AG.
Click to expand...
He reminds me a rooster a neighbor had. Always on the lookout and quick to let you know when you crossed his territorial line. He would get squawking, puff up and chase you so you'd know you'd been dealt with barnyard gangsta style, although it was a neighborhood and not a barnyard and that I know some decent recipes for poultry. Lol
 
Overpressure said:
Clearly, since you like to make assertions without backing them up. That's always unconvincing
Click to expand...

Why am I not surprised a leftist wants someone else to do shit for him?



She broke the law, bud. It's black and white. There's no grey area.

Edit: and before you go rattling on about intent, the statute doesn't require intent.
 
Last edited:
IngaVovchanchyn said:
This kind of shit isn't very helpful. Put up or shut up imo. If the investigation is deeper, then he shouldn't b e saying anything until indictments are issued. If it never reaches that point, then we are dealing with conspiracy theories, just like the left with their Putin paranoia.
Click to expand...

Just based on the timing, this is an incredibly transparent case of buthillarying. I agree that the tactic is flawed though. Appointing Mueller brings the chance of full exoneration for Trump because obviously, if you have nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear, right?
 
So this rejuvenated and irrelevant attack on Clinton is a pretty clear sign of mass shookitude. That's at least the right order of response- panic- though it's, as usual, Hillaryously misguided.
 
Hans Gercmiov said:
She broke the law. He says it right there. You're fucking pathetic.
Click to expand...
But...but...Hillary. Get the fuck over it. They didn't even have enough to attempt prosecution, and she subsequently lost the election. Focus on our current shit show of an executive branch. Hillary is in no position to influence our countries direction at this point. The Clintons are done. Republicans and conservatards are going to have to actually develop ideas that aren't, "The Clintons are corrupt!". Grow up, learn to think, and move the fuck forward.
 
Trumpettes:

latest
 
Jack V Savage said:
So it's exactly like I said when you decided to respond with a personal attack. Basically she drove without a seatbelt once.
Click to expand...

Nice to see your attempt at parallel reasoning at least incorporates the aspect of breaking the law. That's shows progress on your end. Too bad your comparison lacks the element of possible harm coming to others, which is supposedly the big problem with the fumbling of classified info. Seatbelt laws are for one's own protection and to lessen the coverage claims for insurance companies. So basically one's not exactly like the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,882
Messages
55,451,154
Members
174,783
Latest member
notnormal

Share this page

Back
Top