Reply With Quote
Trump tweets tainting America - lawdy!
It probably couldn't even get to that point with the President of the United States tainting the jury pool so completely.
Trump tweets tainting America - lawdy!
Disney subliminally tainting America's kids - lawdy lawdy
The more you know
I know you'll never say how Disney is specifically doing it.The more you know
I also know you're re ed.
America's jury pool in a McCabe trial, yes.
Would probably apply to any potential Hillary Clinton trial too. Bad move by Dennison tbh.
Defending the ins ution would probably be part of McCabe's defense if a jury could even be found. We'll see if it even gets that far.
It's common knowledge.
Look at you big timing me.I also know you're re ed.
You're concerned. You should be.
No, it isn't.
Tell us how it works.
are you even reading what you're typing?
Defending the ins ution might have been a defense if he had just leaked the story to WSJ and admitted it. Instead he blamed two other offices for the leaks and then lied about it 4 separate times, including under oath.
oh look chumplite trying to derail another thread
oh look chump also trying to derail the thread
He doesn't care whether or not they're charged he just spent a year of his life saying they'll never be charged.
Trump tweets nullify any charges according to Pavlov.
Defending the ins ution might have been a defense if he had just leaked the story to WSJ and admitted it. Instead he blamed two other offices for the leaks and then lied about it 4 separate times, including under oath.
I am reading what I'm typing.
Defending the ins ution might have been a defense if he had just leaked the story to WSJ and admitted it. Instead he blamed two other offices for the leaks and then lied about it 4 separate times, including under oath.
My prediction is it never gets that far.
What is your prediction, TSA?
Straw man. Why do you lie, Chris?
They are definitely a problem for prosecutors if they attempt a trial.
I always said investigate everything and charge who they think should be charged.
You don't want certain things investigated and have declared investigations to be sham investigations.
You're shook.
I predict it will get that far.
Explain how McCabe would use defending the ins ution as a defense.
Then what?
Will he be convicted and put in prison?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.fb7d071050f8
The disclosure of which McCabe was accused of authorizing came in October 2016, around the time Comey would announce the FBI was resuming its probe of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. At the time, Devlin Barrett — then a reporter at the Wall Street Journal — was preparing a story on the bureau’s handling of that case and another investigation into the Clinton family foundation. McCabe felt the story would portray him and the FBI unfairly, so he authorized two other FBI officials to give Barrett his account. Barrett now works for The Washington Post.
When you are shook you start lying. I've never once said they shouldn't be investigating certain things. Calling an investigation a sham doesn't change that.
So you're saying they should be investigating Trump and possible connections to Russia and obstruction of justice?
Yes or no.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
