Hillary Clinton

Trump had her ready to bite nails in two when he told her that he didn't believe 17 intelligence agencies had traced WikiLeak hacks back to Russia.

She was close to spitting when she was trying to talk. I thought it was great.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuegl6ob0Po&feature=youtu.be

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lfj9pHXiJ2E

 

LMAO

Not at all. You would only have to worry about that if she would be a fellow forummer Carry on!

 

http://youtu.be/_t-6oXT14DY

 

When Bin Laden got shot in the head

 

VG reads Buzzfeed

 

how is this not a benetton commercial

 

Universal advice for the entire planet.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y

Oh yeah, she's definitely touched by human death.
______________________________________________

So when the facts are not expedient to one's defense of a lawbreaker, then submit snapshots of them kissing a baby or other such things? Wouldn't it be great if that's how things really worked?

 

I did not write this but...Yeah.

I was asked tonight how I could ever support Trump after the comments he made over 11 years ago about women and if I would still support him if he made those comments to my daughter?

My response was this....

If he had put our nations security at risk, I would not vote for him.

If his organization received large donations from countries that killed women and gays, I would not vote for him.

If he boasted 30 Years of government experience, but still could not discern if an email was classified or not, without someone letting him know if it was or not, I would not vote for him.

If he boasted about how he has defended children his entire life, but is for abortion, (even late term, when the child can feel pain) I would not vote for him.

If he caused lives to be destroyed in Benghazi and then lied to the faces of the parents as they stood at their child's casket, I would not vote for him.

If people who came against him mysteriously turned up dead, I would not vote for him.

If he suddenly developed a southern accent when he was in the South, campaigning, I would not vote for him.

If he continually broke the law and that was ignored, I would not vote for him, but right now, the only person who does all these things is Hillary Clinton.

Right now, the fact that Donald made these remarks over 12 years ago, does not move me. I'm bigger than those remarks and we all have said stupid things throughout our lives.

To me, the fact that Hillary lies continuously, is a much bigger problem. We can see the effects of her lies by the state of our country right now.

 

The text accompanying this pic read "Rabbit Hillary Shit Goblins On The Loose!"

 

But Trump has no political experience

There's no dirt to dig up from his political past becuase there isn't one

Let me say that again, No political experience

 

So you are a Gadaffi sympathizer?

She is supposed to give a shit? That just makes her look badass

 

It makes her look psychopathic. She must have been a Bin Laden sympathizer, Did you see the look on her face as she watched him being shot? A woman of many faces, eh?

 

Hillary doesn't give a shit about Gaddafi, a bad and a very mean dictator.
But Hillary cares a lot about poor Lybian people.
That is why she is happy and smiling in that video.
Because of the people. The dictator is dead.
Hillary is good and nice.

 

Hey maybe Chelsea could be president in 20 years too.
Or someone from the Bush family.
Because that is soooo different from all the non-democratic backwards countries with ruling families.

 

Let's see how Clinton fares when it comes to being honest and legal.

As part of the Judiciary Committee’s ongoing oversight of Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State, the Justice Department (DOJ) provided in camera review’ of certain immunity agreements. After a specific request from the Committee, based on references made in the immunity agreements to certain “side agreements,” DOJ subsequently provided in camera review of those “side agreements” between DOJ, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Beth Wilkinson, the lawyer representing both Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson. Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers. Please provide a written response to the below questions and make DOJ staff available for a briefing on this matter no later than October 10, 2016.

1.Why did the FBI agree to destroy both Cheryl Mills’ and Heather Samuelson’s laptops after concluding its search?

2.Doesn’t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information? If so, doesn’t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?

3.Please explain why DOJ agreed to limit their search of the Mills and Samuelson laptops to a date no later than January 31, 2015and therefore give up any opportunity to find evidence related to the destruction of evidence or obstruction of justice related to Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State.

4.Why was this time limit necessary when Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson were granted immunity for any potential destruction of evidence charges?

5.Please confirm whether a grand jury was convened to investigate Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized use of a private email server. Disclosure is authorized under Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(A)(i) and (e)(3)(D).
__________________________________________________________​_________________________

​That means nothing to you.

You've been shown over and over again that gross negligence is a crime in Clinton's case.

You've even been show the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement she signed, stating that she received proper training in the handling of classified material, and that she understands her legal obligations under that agreement.

You've also been shown that FBI Director Comey does not have any authority to inject an "intent clause" into the U.S. Code concerning gross negligence.

You've also been shown that Bryan Nishimura was prosecuted for gross negligence for the same type of . . . gross negligence as Clinton has done.

You've been shown that a computer specialist deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails despite orders from Congress to preserve them and was then given immunity by the Justice Department during its investigation into her personal email account?

But this means nothing to you.

You've also been shown that the decision to let Hillary Clinton off the hook for mishandling classified information has roiled the FBI and Department of Justice, with one person closely involved in the year-long probe telling FoxNews.com that career agents and attorneys on the case unanimously believed the Democratic presidential nominee should have been charged.

The source, who spoke to FoxNews.com on the condition of anonymity, said FBI Director James Comey’s dramatic July 5 announcement that he would not recommend to the Attorney General’s office that the former secretary of state be charged left members of the investigative team dismayed and disgusted. More than 100 FBI agents and analysts worked around the clock with six attorneys from the DOJ’s National Security Division, Counter Espionage Section, to investigate the case.

“No trial level attorney agreed, no agent working the case agreed, with the decision not to prosecute -- it was a top-down decision,” said the source, whose identity and role in the case has been verified by FoxNews.com.

But that doesn't mean anything to you as you have arbitrarily designated Comey as your authority of choice.

You've also been shown how election fraud has been going on on her side of the campaign:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi9O_Gl15XA&feature=youtu.be

But that doesn't mean anything to you, either.