ThatOwlWoman (12-04-2019)
ThatOwlWoman (12-04-2019)
"The Trump Administration has consistently tolerated and even encouraged partisan political speech by federal employees, as long as this speech praises President Trump and attacks his political adversaries," it says. "For example, President Trump rejected the recommendation of his own Office of Special Counsel that adviser Kellyanne Conway be removed from her job for repeatedly violating the Hatch Act by attacking former Vice President [Joe] Biden and publicly advocating for and against various U.S. Senate candidates."
"The retaliatory response to Special Agent Strzok’s protected political speech is consistent with a policy and practice adopted by this President and his administration to stifle dissenting speech by current and former federal employees, and to chill such speech in the future."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/jus...iring-n1039696
“What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
― Charles Dickens
ThatOwlWoman (12-04-2019)
christiefan915 (12-05-2019)
Say the people who fell for:
-the Russia collusion hoax,
-the "Investigating Biden's corruption is worse than Biden BEING corrupt" hoax,
-the Covington Catholic hoax,
-the Roy Moore pedophile hoax,
-the Kavanaugh rape gang hoax,
-the Jussie Smollett hoax,
-the Duke Lacrosse team hoax,
-the Trayvon Martin hoax,
-and the "hands up don't shoot" hoax.
Attachment 13076
"There is nothing in the FBI guidelines that prevents agents from having or expressing a political opinion in their capacity as an individual, even publicly. Strzok’s messages were private — he sent them to another member of Mueller’s team, Lisa Page, with whom he was reportedly having an extramarital affair."
https://thehill.com/policy/national-...lic-enemy-no-1
“What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
― Charles Dickens
ThatOwlWoman (12-04-2019)
Translation: Agents openly coordinating a plot to lie to the FBI and DOJ, manipulate investigations, rig the justice system, and overthrow a duly elected president is just...harmless political speech. Yeah, that's it. See no treason, hear no treason.
Attachment 13078
ThatOwlWoman (12-04-2019)
ThatOwlWoman (12-04-2019)
Um...no. Trying to falsely overthrow a duly elected government is treasonous. That's obvious and clear. What playing fast and loose with legal terms looks like...is more like Democrats using a blatantly dishonest made-up definition of bribery ALREADY UNANIMOUSLY REJECTED BY THE SUPREME COURT to misrepresent their own McCarthy-style impeachment witch hunt as legitimate.
Try again.
Bookmarks