- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 75,399
- Reaction score
- 39,739
- Location
- USofA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
So will the Assistant AG and dear friend of Podesta Peter Kadzik recuse himself?
:lol: This is joke, yes?
So will the Assistant AG and dear friend of Podesta Peter Kadzik recuse himself?
I'm not laughing; I'm just sick about this. Sick for our nation. Sick for those who have already cast ballots in states that don't provide an opportunity to amend their votes.
THe hacker chatter? Oh you mean Assange and Wikileaks cause that is the only major hacker chatter.
Not really. To me, it's all conspiracy-type stuff until we see some good evidence. It is, however, interesting that we're starting to get murmurs of this reported in the mainstream media.
So will the Assistant AG and dear friend of Podesta Peter Kadzik recuse himself?
So then there isn't really chatter in the "hacker community" other than Wikileaks.
That would require a level of integrity slightly higher than a mafia soldier, so don't count on it.So will the Assistant AG and dear friend of Podesta Peter Kadzik recuse himself?
I disagree, Clinton's now-gone landslide trajectory was due in large part to the now-temporary Trump implosion. As Trump has resurged, Clinton's massive lead is now gone. It was supposed to be Trump making Clinton look good by comparison, now the roles have reversed.
Yep. And you can expect destruction of government documents like you've never seen before.So if she wins next week, this all stops ?
Does she load up the FBI and DOJ with her cronies and then claim it was all just a vast right wing conspiracy ?
Or does she have them do some bs investigation that of-course leads to her innocence ?
Im trying to imagine the optics of such a thing.
Because this is corruption beyond measure and so much of it has already seen the light of day already just through wikileaks.
I heard tonight on my way home something about a decision stemming out of the Clinton 1 debacle where the SC ruled that a sitting President couldn't be charged with a crime or something like that....Anyone know anything about that?
I've never heard of that, but I don't see how that could be Constituional. Not that that means anything.
I've never heard of that, but I don't see how that could be Constituional. Not that that means anything.
Something about a sitting President can't have criminal charges against him/her until they are no longer in office....I don't know...
Nah, it's not true.