Fiona Hill: "The president was trying to stage a coup"

M

marke

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
Gee... did Comey have employees? How many? He did estimate that it would takes weeks, but took only one week. It would depend on how long the emails were obviously. Which makes more sense: the emails were shorter than expected OR Comey's brilliant plan was to be thorough by announcing that the emails would be investigated (which was against precedent) and then not bother to look at them...?

So Trump's point is that he knows Hillary is guilty without having had read any of the emails and he knows better than those who did read the emails because they did it to fast? Quoting Trump as an authority on anything is a joke.
Click to expand...
Hillary destroyed 30,000 emails the FBI did not see but Comey illegally cleared her anyway because he was a Trump-hating Clintonite. The FBI was top-heavy with Trump-hating Hillaryite crooks who illegally spied on Trump and unjustly attempted to have him kicked out of office. The FBI has long been a devoted weaponized arm of the crooked fascist democrat party.

The FBI took the democrats' word that Russia had stolen the emails and delivered them with Trump's help to Wikileaks, but that whole narrative was bogus. The FBI never found out how the emails were taken from the DSNC and delivered to Wikileaks and neither has any other agency or individual found out how the emails got into Assange's hands.
 
Skeeter

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
marke said:
President Trump was right. It was against the law for Hillary to conduct public and private business on her private server while serving as SOS. Congress subpoenaed the email records in 2014, prompting Hillary and her lawyers to delete 30,000 of them they claimed were not work-related. The FBI never examined those 30,000 emails before they were deleted. Only Hillary and her staff went through them to determine what to release and what not to release. That was a cover-up and illegal because she destroyed government property that was not hers to destroy.
Click to expand...
It was against the law if she knew what she was doing was illegal. That is hard to prove. Just like proving Trump and Russia was conspiring requires prior agreement to a course of action. That is hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Comey was not a judge. He made a call about what was likely to lead to conviction. He chose not to prosecute based on the facts. Hillary may well have been guilty, just as Trump likely was in conspiring with a foreign nation to impact the election.

There are ample facts that Trump destroyed and removed documents knowing it was illegal to do so. Trump also conspired with others to stage an insurrection. We will see how the evidence falls on that. Pence administrators are providing some interesting evidence about it.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Right Divider said:
It was against the law whether she knew it or not.
Click to expand...
If she thought it was fine to separate out entirely personal emails from government related emails and destroy them, she did not knowingly destroy emails under the act.

Intent is the cornerstone of most crimes.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Skeeter said:
If she thought it was fine to separate out entirely personal emails from government related emails and destroy them, she did not knowingly destroy emails under the act.

Intent is the cornerstone of most crimes.
Click to expand...
Having a private server for confidential government documents was illegal in the first place.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Right Divider said:
It was against the law whether she knew it or not.
Click to expand...
Not only did Trump take classified documents from the White House and try to withhold them from the National Archives, but Trump is also alleged to have flushed some down the toilet and it is said that he tore others up (which had to be taped back together by staff) and he even chewed up and swallowed some.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
It was against the law if she knew what she was doing was illegal. That is hard to prove. Just like proving Trump and Russia was conspiring requires prior agreement to a course of action. That is hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Comey was not a judge. He made a call about what was likely to lead to conviction. He chose not to prosecute based on the facts. Hillary may well have been guilty, just as Trump likely was in conspiring with a foreign nation to impact the election.

There are ample facts that Trump destroyed and removed documents knowing it was illegal to do so. Trump also conspired with others to stage an insurrection. We will see how the evidence falls on that. Pence administrators are providing some interesting evidence about it.
Click to expand...
Hillary knew it was against the law but why should that matter? She broke the law and ignorance is no excuse, especially for her and especially since she warned SOS employees more than once not to conduct official business on private servers.

Comey had no authority to dismiss charges against her and declare her innocent, yet he did that because someone needed to do that if she was to avoid being dismissed from contention in the 2016 election.

False allegations against Trump are not excuses for dismissing charges against Hillary because of her prestige in the democrat party.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
If she thought it was fine to separate out entirely personal emails from government related emails and destroy them, she did not knowingly destroy emails under the act.

Intent is the cornerstone of most crimes.
Click to expand...
Congress subpoenaed her emails to look for evidence in the Benghazi fiasco where Americans died due to failures on the part of officials like her. She destroyed the emails and then claimed the only emails she destroyed had nothing to do with Benghazi or government business, although all her business was conducted on her private emails. Hillary chose to destroy the emails she determined she was not going to turn over, leaving a curious gap with emails missing those dealing with Benghazi that should have been there.

Nixon could have not developed a better way to avoid prosecution for Watergate.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
User Name said:
Not only did Trump take classified documents from the White House and try to withhold them from the National Archives, but Trump is also alleged to have flushed some down the toilet and it is said that he tore others up (which had to be taped back together by staff) and he even chewed up and swallowed some.
Click to expand...
False allegations are lies. If Trump had broken the law Mueller and his chosen gang of democrat attack lawyers would have found it in their 3 years long multiple tens of millions of dollars witchhunt, but they found nothing.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
Skeeter said:
If so, she deserves a penalty. What do you have to say about Trump's behavior?
Click to expand...
Why do you not say that Hillary should be charged if she broke the law and Trump should be charged if he broke the law? Instead, you agree with Comey that Hillary should not be charged even though she clearly broke the law and Trump should be charged even though there is insufficient evidence to legally file charges against him?
 
M

marke

Well-known member
User Name said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1493342668163846145
Click to expand...
A famous person once said a determined prosecutor can find a crime with which to charge anyone, no matter how innocent he may be. Democrats have been searching diligently for more than 5 years for some crime with which to charge Trump, and have broken multiple laws and violated the rights of multiple people in their devilish search to kill and destroy everything Trump.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
marke said:
Is some accounting firm telling us they lied for Trump for 10 years or is the firm jockeying for a position of acceptance among those enemies of Trump now in power?
Click to expand...
Nope, they're telling us that the financial information Trump supplied to them over the last 10 years for accounting purposes has been found to be untrustworthy. Trump's fault, not theirs. They are accountants, not auditors.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
User Name said:
Nope, they're telling us that the financial information Trump supplied to them over the last 10 years for accounting purposes has been found to be untrustworthy. Trump's fault, not theirs. They are accountants, not auditors.
Click to expand...
It took these quacks 10 years to find that out? Why should we expect them to even know what they are talking about?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top