I suspect this is a setup to get someone to do something stupid.

[BS Filter]

Because they needed secrecy to set their plans in motion. If trump-o had some sort of evidence, he didn't need secrecy. Now woud be a great time for him to reveal any evidence he might have. Any time before now would have been a good time if he had anything like that.

Why?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

. I think it's something else.

Dementia is common among those experiencing the tertiary stage of syphilis.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Has there ever been such singular focus on one man in the history of the United States?

There has been so much organized power brought into play time after time after time that it is only natural to question the source of this power and their motives.

the real war isn't between democrats and Republicans. It is between the globalists and those who wish to preserve American autonomy.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

We win when we take the House.

Yes, Republicans will take the House and then they'll do nothing like always.

 

[forkup]

I doubt a 5th grader would understand the convoluted syntax used by the law in question, and I doubt previous Presidents were in 100% compliance with it.

How about we audit Obama next and see how well he did?

Said sentiment is also given in this opinion piece.

The Morning Rant: Minimalist Edition

You are funny Marty. First, I as a 5th grader would have understood the implied meaning. And they are 5th graders, considering you understand the word syntax you have no such excuse.

Second, you are arguing literally that your excuse for Trump breaking the law is an unproven allegation that Obama did the same. It's not even a whataboutism, it's a possible whataboutism.

Absolutely hilarious as a defense.

 

[martybegan]

You are funny Marty. First, I as a 5th grader would have understood the implied meaning. And they are 5th graders, considering you understand the word syntax you have no such excuse.

Second, you are arguing literally that your excuse for Trump breaking the law is an unproven allegation that Obama did the same. It's not even a whataboutism, it's a possible whataboutism.

Absolutely hilarious as a defense.

No, What I am saying is they are looking for any excuse to keep him off the 2024 ballot and yet even if they could prove something AND try him, there is no mechanism to keep him off the State slates of electors.

And by any excuse I mean some chickenshit technicality that has probably existing more in its breaking than in following by past Presidents, Obama included.

 

[forkup]

No, What I am saying is they are looking for any excuse to keep him off the 2024 ballot and yet even if they could prove something AND try him, there is no mechanism to keep him off the State slates of electors.

And by any excuse I mean some chickenshit technicality that has probably existing more in its breaking than in following by past Presidents, Obama included.

She did break the rules, and did so seriously. The decline to prosecute is a shockingly transparent "wink wink, nudge nudge" from the current admin to their hoped for successor admin.

The real question is do we trust someone to keep their security clearances if they can't follow the rules, and how can a person be President if we can't give them a security clearance?

This is you right?

 

[martybegan]

This is you right?

and has she been prosecuted?

Didn't think this through, did ya?

 

[forkup]

and has she been prosecuted?

Didn't think this through, did ya?

But she was investigated, just like Trump is, unless you have other information. I did think things through. You on the other hand.

 

[martybegan]

But she was investigated, just like Trump is, unless you have other information. I did think things through. You on the other hand.

"Investigated"

Just like the guy who shot that woman in the Capitol.

"Investigated"

Any un-announced raids on Hillary's house?

 

[forkup]

Oh and before you try. this is me in 2016

and has she been prosecuted?

Didn't think this through, did ya?

No, I believe politics should not drive decisions made by the FBI. Unfortunately, when you make a decision during an election year you will influence the elections for one party or another regardless. At that point, I believe it's the duty of the FBI to just tell the truth. In the case of Clinton, Comey first came out saying that Clinton was in the clear. The problem was. Potential additional evidence was discovered after that statement. Comey could sit on it, in which case, the GOP would blame him for trying to cover up evidence if it leaked. Which it would surely do. Or he could immediately release it. In an attempt to cut off the accusation. And try to expedite the evaluation of the potential evidence. Now, I think there is nothing wrong with making decisions based on what you consider the best of 2 shitty options.

 

[martybegan]

Oh and before you try. this is me in 2016

And yet nothing has happened to Clinton and you are jerking off over the potential to "Get Trump" on what will probably be a technicality, if anything.

 

[maybelooking]

Lol. A Trump supporter doesn't know reality if it stands before them wearing a red thong and skimpy bra.

That's why you guys need conspiracies to explain away things that reality throws at you.

we dont need a description of your outfit.

 

[forkup]

"Investigated"

Just like the guy who shot that woman in the Capitol.

"Investigated"

Any un-announced raids on Hillary's house?

Did she need raids? She testified and cooperated in an investigation that lasted over a year. Trump hides behind every legal strategy good, bad and ridiculous to prevent it.

 

[maybelooking]

Did she need raids? She testified and cooperated in an investigation that lasted over a year. Trump hides behind every legal strategy good, bad and ridiculous to prevent it.

asinine. she DESTROYED evidence and then joked about it.

and you ask if she needed raids?

LMAO. zero credibility idiot.

 

[forkup]

And yet nothing has happened to Clinton and you are jerking off over the potential to "Get Trump" on what will probably be a technicality, if anything.

AGAIN, an investigation doesn't mean conviction. Something you have no problem understanding when the target is Trump.

You are crying and saying the EXACT opposite of what you said when Clinton was the one under investigation.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

But she was investigated,

just like the foxes investigating the mysterious dissaprarance of chickens from the coup, true.

 

[martybegan]

Did she need raids? She testified and cooperated in an investigation that lasted over a year. Trump hides behind every legal strategy good, bad and ridiculous to prevent it.

You base that on what?

Who's ducking and weaving now?

 

[martybegan]

AGAIN, an investigation doesn't mean conviction. Something you have no problem understanding when the target is Trump.

You are crying and saying the EXACT opposite of what you said when Clinton was the one under investigation.

Because I know people like you will do anything to stop him from running again.

Here's a simple concept, you miserable SJW TDS bastards can't be fucking trusted.

 

[kaz]

Too late Trump already did something stupid. That's why they got a warrant to search his house.

It's sad how much you trust government