The FBI says that Hillary can break the law, but if you do the same you go to jail

T

TheDonald

Banned
Not even exaggerating, this is exactly what the director of the FBI said. Then he ran away like a scared little boy who knows that he can not answer any questions without breaking the law himself.......................

We are now officially living in a one party dictatorship that is making The former Soviet Union or the current North Korea look tame.
 
Can you help me? I'm looking for the thread that will serve as the depository for all rightie & Trump supporter tears?

Is this it?
 
Thing1 said:
Can you help me? I'm looking for the thread that will serve as the depository for all rightie & Trump supporter tears?

Is this it?
Click to expand...

Nothing is over until it is over. I actually predicted exactly this outcome yesterday. Do remember that Putin now can send over his personal Hillary email stash and mock the FBI silly.

Why didn't Comey mention the racketeering case against the Clintons?????
 
giphy.gif



TRUMPTARD TEARS​
 
“The FBI says that Hillary can break the law, but if you do the same you go to jail”
Click to expand...

Actually not.

But never underestimate the propensity of most on the right to lie, this thread being one of many examples.
 
F_Donald_Weldon said:
Actually not.

But never underestimate the propensity of most on the right to lie, this thread being one of many examples.
Click to expand...

Comey said that if others did what Hillary did, that they would face the law for their crimes. I listened to the entire interview, you won't because he said exactly what I said that he said, before he ran away without incriminating himself.
 
TheDonald said:
Comey said that if others did what Hillary did, that they would face the law for their crimes. I listened to the entire interview, you won't because he said exactly what I said that he said, before he ran away without incriminating himself.
Click to expand...

Lol, I want you to find the exact quote, because I listened to the whole thing and I never heard him state that if others did what Hillary did, that they would face the law for their crimes. I think you misunderstood.
 
Rana said:
Lol, I want you to find the exact quote, because I listened to the whole thing and I never heard him state that if others did what Hillary did, that they would face the law for their crimes. I think you misunderstood.
Click to expand...

Unless the author is taking this quote of out context here it is:


After announcing his no-charge recommendation, Comey added:

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/laws-are-for-little-people-1467742661
 
cawacko said:
Unless the author is taking this quote of out context here it is:


After announcing his no-charge recommendation, Comey added:

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/laws-are-for-little-people-1467742661
Click to expand...

So that is clearly saying something different. Being subject to administrative or security sanctions is not the same as being subject to criminal sanctions.

If I tell my employee to come to work tomorrow and she does not... she would be subject to administrative sanctions... but the DOJ would be unlikely to file any charges.


If you cant see the difference between administrative sanctions and criminal charges, you are an IDIOT!
 
cawacko said:
Unless the author is taking this quote of out context here it is:


After announcing his no-charge recommendation, Comey added:

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/laws-are-for-little-people-1467742661
Click to expand...

Sorry, what theDonald is claiming and what was actually said is two different things.
 
Jarod said:
So that is clearly saying something different. Being subject to administrative or security sanctions is not the same as being subject to criminal sanctions.

If I tell my employee to come to work tomorrow and she does not... she would be subject to administrative sanctions... but the DOJ would be unlikely to file any charges.


If you cant see the difference between administrative sanctions and criminal charges, you are an IDIOT!
Click to expand...
Exactly, thanks
 
Jarod said:
So that is clearly saying something different. Being subject to administrative or security sanctions is not the same as being subject to criminal sanctions.

If I tell my employee to come to work tomorrow and she does not... she would be subject to administrative sanctions... but the DOJ would be unlikely to file any charges.


If you cant see the difference between administrative sanctions and criminal charges, you are an IDIOT!
Click to expand...

Hey Jarod.....it is indisputable that Hillary DID send and receive email that was marked classified, secret, etc....

so in you legal opinion, why was she not liable criminally....????

Simple enough question.
 
Why is anyone surprised by the acceptance of lawlessness by JPP demalquedacrats? The means always justify the ends to them. You notice in all their responses that they aren't even dating to claim she was innocent. They are merely gleeful that she got away with it. They are true traitors to this country. I hope Crooked Hillary dies a horrific death and her daughter and grandkids are with her in a fiery plane crash so the Clinton nightmare ends forever.
 
NOVA said:
Hey Jarod.....it is indisputable that Hillary DID send and receive email that was marked classified, secret, etc....

so in you legal opinion, why was she not liable criminally....????

Simple enough question.
Click to expand...

I would have to see a statute that you think she violated. I don't know all Crimes and have not memorized the Federal Criminal Code. I don't know of any crimes she committed. I know that crimes require intent, sometimes specific and sometimes general. I don't think HRC had the intent to commit any crimes here, that is why I have always maintained that she would not be prosecuted.

Trump keeps trying to compare this to what General Petraeus did, but its clearly different than specifically and intentionally showing classified material to your mistress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top