Eric Arthur Blair
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2015
- 25,955
- 15,964
- 1,415
Hillary Clinton lost her appeal about forty years ago, if she ever had any.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah but I’m still skeptical if anything will happen to her,the clintons are protected by some very powerful rich people in the world who control outcomes of court proceedings to high profile figures and politicians Re immune from prosecution.Wonderful news!After losing an appeal to an order to testify in court about her emails and Benghazi, the untouchable crook is scheduled to be deposed beginning September 9, 2020. Part of her defense in trying to avoid the courts was her ridiculous claim (by her lawyers) that she's too important to be forced to testify. What a putz!
Perhaps she will wear that orange jumpsuit someday.
Hillary Clinton lost her appeal, order stands to testify on private server and Benghazi emails
Amid the chaos and anarchy across blue-city America that exclusively possessed public attention for the last couple of weeks, it was not hard to miss any other bit of news — especially if that news has not appeared or been even briefly mentione...www.americanthinker.com
Clinton had argued that she shouldn't be required to testify because she was a former high-level government official and that the FBI already tried to retrieve her emails. Clinton's lawyers even mentioned some "indisputable right" allowing her not to appear in court, according to Judicial Watch. Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president, said Clinton's lawyers' petition practically states that "she's too important to have to testify to us." "She's desperate to stop this questioning by Judicial Watch because no one has asked her questions like this before[.] ... We know what the issues are, and the court wants specific questions answered, but now she's seeking this extraordinary emergency intervention to stop us."
Here comes the Supreme court...
Ooops. Misread it. Good.
wonder if she will appeal to the Supreme Court?
oh wait. I was right. That was overturned today. She doesn’t have to testify.
Bet jw takes it to the Supreme court.Appeals court nixes Hillary Clinton deposition on emails
D.C. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins suggested it was time to consign the Clinton email imbroglio to the history books.www.politico.com
I believe Hillary Clinton was absolutely guilty of deliberately mishandling of classified information. I also think she deliberately tried to destroy the subpoenaed evidence AND also deliberately broke the law regarding FOIA. No doubt in my mind about it at all, BUT here's the problem; in order to convict somebody of something in a court of law you gotta have sufficient admissible evidence. Notice those 2 words: 'sufficient' and 'admissible', therein lies the rub and that's where my doubts begin to surface. You gotta have a very strong case to get a Clinton into Court and then convict them, and the Court itself has to be at least non-partisan. I wouldn't bet money that a left-leaning judge will convict her even if enough evidence does exist.
And here's the deal: even if Hillary Clinton gets deposed, she doesn't have to answer any questions. 5th amendment, right? Or she says, "I don't remember that", or "I can't recall", and plays the befuddled old lady who is confused with all this high tech stuff. BS? Sure, no question. I truly believe that she and a number of others ought to see the insides of a prison cell, but in this country you gotta have proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe the current investigations will yield something that we do not yet know, some information or evidence that is useful enough to make a difference. We'll see.
I do hope that the Durham investigation will result in people at least being indicted, but Barr isn't going to do that without enough evidence to win in court. Unlike the democrats, who would use anything whether it is true or not to slime somebody, witness Michael Flynn. But Barr isn't like that, he won't use the power of the DOJ to prosecute a democrat without sufficient, admissible evidence. Nor should he. But here again is another good reason not to vote for Biden, for to do so means a return to the old days when the DOJ becomes a political weapon.
The whole thing is a joke. Hillary already beat this. It is sad enough that our pathetic "justice" system took EIGHT YEARS and great trouble and expense by pro lawyers just to get to the point of asking the obvious questions needing asked of the ONE PERSON able to answer them, but at this point, she will simply say she doesn't remember, and that will be the end of it. Hillary skates free.After losing an appeal to an order to testify in court about her emails and Benghazi, the untouchable crook is scheduled to be deposed beginning September 9, 2020. Part of her defense in trying to avoid the courts was her ridiculous claim (by her lawyers) that she's too important to be forced to testify. What a putz!
Perhaps she will wear that orange jumpsuit someday.
Hillary Clinton lost her appeal, order stands to testify on private server and Benghazi emails
Amid the chaos and anarchy across blue-city America that exclusively possessed public attention for the last couple of weeks, it was not hard to miss any other bit of news — especially if that news has not appeared or been even briefly mentione...www.americanthinker.com
Clinton had argued that she shouldn't be required to testify because she was a former high-level government official and that the FBI already tried to retrieve her emails. Clinton's lawyers even mentioned some "indisputable right" allowing her not to appear in court, according to Judicial Watch. Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president, said Clinton's lawyers' petition practically states that "she's too important to have to testify to us." "She's desperate to stop this questioning by Judicial Watch because no one has asked her questions like this before[.] ... We know what the issues are, and the court wants specific questions answered, but now she's seeking this extraordinary emergency intervention to stop us."
The whole thing is a joke. Hillary already beat this. It is sad enough that our pathetic "justice" system took EIGHT YEARS and great trouble and expense by pro lawyers just to get to the point of asking the obvious questions needing asked of the ONE PERSON able to answer them, but at this point, she will simply say she doesn't remember, and that will be the end of it. Hillary skates free.After losing an appeal to an order to testify in court about her emails and Benghazi, the untouchable crook is scheduled to be deposed beginning September 9, 2020. Part of her defense in trying to avoid the courts was her ridiculous claim (by her lawyers) that she's too important to be forced to testify. What a putz!
Perhaps she will wear that orange jumpsuit someday.
Hillary Clinton lost her appeal, order stands to testify on private server and Benghazi emails
Amid the chaos and anarchy across blue-city America that exclusively possessed public attention for the last couple of weeks, it was not hard to miss any other bit of news — especially if that news has not appeared or been even briefly mentione...www.americanthinker.com
Clinton had argued that she shouldn't be required to testify because she was a former high-level government official and that the FBI already tried to retrieve her emails. Clinton's lawyers even mentioned some "indisputable right" allowing her not to appear in court, according to Judicial Watch. Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president, said Clinton's lawyers' petition practically states that "she's too important to have to testify to us." "She's desperate to stop this questioning by Judicial Watch because no one has asked her questions like this before[.] ... We know what the issues are, and the court wants specific questions answered, but now she's seeking this extraordinary emergency intervention to stop us."
...or take the 5th!...she will simply say she doesn't remember, and that will be the end of it.
And you, believe wrongly.I believe Hillary Clinton was absolutely guilty of deliberately mishandling of classified information. I also think she deliberately tried to destroy the subpoenaed evidence AND also deliberately broke the law regarding FOIA. No doubt in my mind about it at all, BUT here's the problem; in order to convict somebody of something in a court of law you gotta have sufficient admissible evidence. Notice those 2 words: 'sufficient' and 'admissible', therein lies the rub and that's where my doubts begin to surface. You gotta have a very strong case to get a Clinton into Court and then convict them, and the Court itself has to be at least non-partisan. I wouldn't bet money that a left-leaning judge will convict her even if enough evidence does exist.
And here's the deal: even if Hillary Clinton gets deposed, she doesn't have to answer any questions. 5th amendment, right? Or she says, "I don't remember that", or "I can't recall", and plays the befuddled old lady who is confused with all this high tech stuff. BS? Sure, no question. I truly believe that she and a number of others ought to see the insides of a prison cell, but in this country you gotta have proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Maybe the current investigations will yield something that we do not yet know, some information or evidence that is useful enough to make a difference. We'll see.
I do hope that the Durham investigation will result in people at least being indicted, but Barr isn't going to do that without enough evidence to win in court. Unlike the democrats, who would use anything whether it is true or not to slime somebody, witness Michael Flynn. But Barr isn't like that, he won't use the power of the DOJ to prosecute a democrat without sufficient, admissible evidence. Nor should he. But here again is another good reason not to vote for Biden, for to do so means a return to the old days when the DOJ becomes a political weapon.
Here comes the Supreme court...
Ooops. Misread it. Good.
wonder if she will appeal to the Supreme Court?
oh wait. I was right. That was overturned today. She doesn’t have to testify.
Bet jw takes it to the Supreme court.Appeals court nixes Hillary Clinton deposition on emails
D.C. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins suggested it was time to consign the Clinton email imbroglio to the history books.www.politico.com
So they want another 33 years of "Lock Her Up".
This isn't a criminal trial. It's a political hack engaging in baseless speculation and expecting the court to entertain it.Here comes the Supreme court...
Ooops. Misread it. Good.
wonder if she will appeal to the Supreme Court?
oh wait. I was right. That was overturned today. She doesn’t have to testify.
Bet jw takes it to the Supreme court.Appeals court nixes Hillary Clinton deposition on emails
D.C. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins suggested it was time to consign the Clinton email imbroglio to the history books.www.politico.com
So they want another 33 years of "Lock Her Up".
Good old Daryl, supporting criminal activity so long as it's a Dem doing it.
Little hypocrite.
This isn't a criminal trial. It's a political hack engaging in baseless speculation and expecting the court to entertain it.Here comes the Supreme court...
Ooops. Misread it. Good.
wonder if she will appeal to the Supreme Court?
oh wait. I was right. That was overturned today. She doesn’t have to testify.
Bet jw takes it to the Supreme court.Appeals court nixes Hillary Clinton deposition on emails
D.C. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins suggested it was time to consign the Clinton email imbroglio to the history books.www.politico.com
So they want another 33 years of "Lock Her Up".
Good old Daryl, supporting criminal activity so long as it's a Dem doing it.
Little hypocrite.
Abuse of the legal system is disgraceful.
This isn't a criminal trial. It's a political hack engaging in baseless speculation and expecting the court to entertain it.Here comes the Supreme court...
Ooops. Misread it. Good.
wonder if she will appeal to the Supreme Court?
oh wait. I was right. That was overturned today. She doesn’t have to testify.
Bet jw takes it to the Supreme court.Appeals court nixes Hillary Clinton deposition on emails
D.C. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins suggested it was time to consign the Clinton email imbroglio to the history books.www.politico.com
So they want another 33 years of "Lock Her Up".
Good old Daryl, supporting criminal activity so long as it's a Dem doing it.
Little hypocrite.
Abuse of the legal system is disgraceful.
Says the asshole who supported years of legal system abuse so long as it was directed at Trump.
You are dismissed. Child.
Very true,as I said,politicians are immune from prosecution ESPECIALLY presidents,it’s a fucked up world that the people let that happpen.That fat old bitch won't ever be prosecuted.
Neither will her philandering fucktard of a husband