Peter Strzok's WIFE also Worked To Keep The Clintons From Being Indicted.

originally posted by: carewemust
investigators are finding that conspiratorial, unethical, and illegal actions were common-place in the Obama administration.

Is that what you are calling right wing partisan paranoids these days?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: carewemust
investigators are finding that conspiratorial, unethical, and illegal actions were common-place in the Obama administration.

Is that what you are calling right wing partisan paranoids these days?

At least we are not calling for the rape and murder of the POTUS son and the head of DHS.

What do you call those guys? Careful because you are one..

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: carewemust
investigators are finding that conspiratorial, unethical, and illegal actions were common-place in the Obama administration.

Is that what you are calling right wing partisan paranoids these days?

At least we are not calling for the rape and murder of the POTUS son and the head of DHS.

What do you call those guys? Careful because you are one..

Really? I don't remember EVER calling for either of those two things against anyone, let alone the president, his son or the head of DHS.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: carewemust
investigators are finding that conspiratorial, unethical, and illegal actions were common-place in the Obama administration.

Is that what you are calling right wing partisan paranoids these days?

At least we are not calling for the rape and murder of the POTUS son and the head of DHS.

What do you call those guys? Careful because you are one..

Really? I don't remember EVER calling for either of those two things against anyone, let alone the president, his son or the head of DHS.

No you said Trump saying ms 13 were animals was much worse than those things..

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: rickymouse
It is kind of sickening that this kind of deception was going on in Washington. I have always known that Washington DC was corrupt, but I actually trusted somewhat in our intelligence and investigation agencies to be kind of honest with stuff like this. Well I was wrong to believe in any government agency I suppose.

We hear the word "swamp" so often that it looses its impact. It's so bad that President Trump decided to only tell a few TRUSTED advisors what he and Vladimir Putin discussed during their summit last week.

After the Trump/Kim Jong meeting, the negative rhetoric from the Media and Democrats was so bad, he decided to keep the agreements with Russia in a very close "need to know" circle.

The talks between leaders of countries should not be made available until congress and the leaders of countries are briefed on the discussions and the leaders get back together and hash out what can happen and what won't happen. The press does not need to be spewing twisted details of the meetings, it could lead to failed negotiations between the countries. Lots of things are discussed in these meetings, much of which never comes into play.

What happened to classified information these days? Just because something is discussed does not mean it will ever be implemented. Some strange inappropriate discussions lead to improved results in the final process. The press is taking everything discussed as "going to happen" Some of this is said as a Jest like we do here on ATS and the press seems to print it as it is real. Satire is used everywhere in this country to express things and many take it wrong. If a reporter or editor can not identify satire by taking something out of context, they should not be a reporter or editor.

a reply to: notsure1

No I didn't.

Quote and source me SPECIFICALLY saying that Trump calling MS13 animals was a terrible thing. I may have said that Trump calling illegal immigrants animals is a terrible thing but I certainly have never defended or apologized for MS13.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: notsure1

No I didn't.

Quote and source me SPECIFICALLY saying that Trump calling MS13 animals was a terrible thing. I may have said that Trump calling illegal immigrants animals is a terrible thing but I certainly have never defended or apologized for MS13.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Boadicea
I really hope he doesn't kiss his daughter with that filthy mouth

What's the problem? He's just emulating the p**** grabber in chief. I fail to see how any Trump supporter can claim the moral high ground here since they support someone who has said FAR worse about WAY more people without any problems.

lol and this

You mean like calling all illegals rapists, murderers and bad people? Or attempting to normalize nazis by saying each side has comparable people? Or slandering a gold star family? Or slandering McCain by saying "he's dying anyways"? Or calling certain countries "#hole countries"? Or saying that 2nd amendment people should stop Clinton? Encouraging attacks on dissenters at his rallies?


All of those according to you are way worse than raping a toddler and stripping raping and beating the female head of DHS..

a reply to: notsure1

Clearly context deciphering isn't one of your strong suits. If you think that is me saying I support anything like rape or murder then you clearly need to go back to English class and study some more.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: notsure1

Clearly context deciphering isn't one of your strong suits. If you think that is me saying I support anything like rape or murder then you clearly need to go back to English class and study some more.

You just think its worse than rape and murder..

Thats your words not mine..

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Lumenari


Hillary must have been speaking from a position of experience. Her hubby was unfaithful too. She has a lot in common with Strzok's wife.

Like how unfaithful are we talking here? Like Trump style?

No.. If you remember, Colin Powell said Bill Clinton was constantly "banging bimbos". Hard to beat that level of transgression.

Not true. It was "dicking bimbos".

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Lumenari


Hillary must have been speaking from a position of experience. Her hubby was unfaithful too. She has a lot in common with Strzok's wife.

Like how unfaithful are we talking here? Like Trump style?

No, rapey BJ Clinton level of unfaithful!

originally posted by: rickymouse
It is kind of sickening that this kind of deception was going on in Washington. I have always known that Washington DC was corrupt, but I actually trusted somewhat in our intelligence and investigation agencies to be kind of honest with stuff like this. Well I was wrong to believe in any government agency I suppose.

How can anybody on this Earth who has seen the JFK assassination not know these agencies are on an agenda that is very bad for us and especially for the victims of all those Despots they supported over the years?

The Warren commission lied and the members were rewarded royally who participated in the Assassination (George Bush) and the cover up (Gerald Ford). I have reviewed the information from the Zapruder film, watched it frame by frame and it is a sure fact that JFK was killed by a shot to his right frontal Cortex from a shooter on the Grassy Knoll on the left and NOT from any shot from the Book Depository.

There were shots from there but the patsy was buying a coca cola in the break room with his manager when the shots were firing. He can't be in two places at one time.

That is when they stepped out and we never reeled them in. Instead the media becomes melded to them.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: notsure1

Clearly context deciphering isn't one of your strong suits. If you think that is me saying I support anything like rape or murder then you clearly need to go back to English class and study some more.

Ha, you got smoked by the truth of your own posts that totally prove you are not ever credible.




1 million Stars for Notsure for that one if I could!!!

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: rickymouse
It is kind of sickening that this kind of deception was going on in Washington. I have always known that Washington DC was corrupt, but I actually trusted somewhat in our intelligence and investigation agencies to be kind of honest with stuff like this. Well I was wrong to believe in any government agency I suppose.

How can anybody on this Earth who has seen the JFK assassination not know these agencies are on an agenda that is very bad for us and especially for the victims of all those Despots they supported over the years?

The Warren commission lied and the members were rewarded royally who participated in the Assassination (George Bush) and the cover up (Gerald Ford). I have reviewed the information from the Zapruder film, watched it frame by frame and it is a sure fact that JFK was killed by a shot to his right frontal Cortex from a shooter on the Grassy Knoll on the left and NOT from any shot from the Book Depository.

There were shots from there but the patsy was buying a coca cola in the break room with his manager when the shots were firing. He can't be in two places at one time.

That is when they stepped out and we never reeled them in. Instead the media becomes melded to them.

A large majority of people who go into politics get there because they desire to gain power and prestige. A person who just wants to live symbiotically with their neighbors does not want to be at the top and have to move out of their community. Electing a powerful person to represent you means you are usually electing an alpha person to go to Washington DC. So the biggest jerks are sent there usually, someone elected because they are nice will not get nearly as much done. John McClain is outspoken, he desires power, he has been a senator for many moons. Same with the Bushes and Clinton, the majority of people in high end politics are not nice, they are there because they desire power. Now just because someone desires power does not mean they are corrupt, but they will make corrupt deals to stay on top or climb the ladder with less conscience problems than a nice person.

Kennedy was also there because he desired power. He was not as corrupt as many were, but he was still a politician. Strange that Politician has a prefix polite in it, most politicians I knew were not very polite. They seemed to try to be politically correct and were usually always trying to deceive people by using political correct language that they were nice people. But in reality, they just hid the real self from the public a lot of times. There are politicians out there that are nice and not too deceitful, but they usually do not get much done for the people they represent. I knew a few good politicians personally in my lifetime and three of the six were very good people but they still were politically correct and did not express their true feelings all the time.

a reply to: Chadwickus

You've never heard the expression f*** up to move up have you?

It actually happens a lot in American bureaucracy and even the American military!

As far as your saying that the case she got thrown out indicates she's no good at being manipulative... Well that would really depend on whether or not the people being prosecuted were friends or enemies of the Clintons now wouldn't it?

It could be that blowing said case was one of those things she was there to do.

Also you're acting like it's somehow a smoking gun proof that because she was already a high ranking SEC employee this couldn't possibly be true. To that I say, well no S*** she was already a high ranking employee... If they promoted someone from Arby's that would look really F***ing suspicious now wouldn't it?

I actually totally despise the source this story comes from, but your "rebuttals" are beyond piss weak and pathetic quite honestly.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: vinifalou

Another strawman.

Did she not deserve that promotion?

Is there tangible evidence that she did in fact work to keep the Clintons out of jail as inferred in the op?

Or is the coincidence enough to draw conclusions from?

Rhetorical question. Quite clearly that is the case.

Enjoy your wank fest.

In other words, nothing to see here. Move along.

a reply to: roguetechie

Piss weak, is making stuff up with ZERO evidence.

But it’s anti Hillary, so it’s kewl.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Yeah, you’re right, there is nothing to see here.

Prove me wrong.

Bring evidence.

Party association aside...... What does it take to for you AntiTrumpers to stop defending the CLintons? My feeling for that family have nothing to do with Trump, democrats or republicans. I saw who they were when I was a kid in high school.
I remember Bill sitting there on the television... look straight at me and declare I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN...... only to follow up later with...... Well, that all depends on how you define the word sex.
I remember how they worked so hard to destroy a mans life via the whole Travelgate farce... they guy spent everything he had defending his name and his years of service..... all so their friends who already had money, could have more.
..... and the big one for me, the one that sealed the deal. When your husband cheats on you, over and over, cost the family hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawsuits and legal fees.... and you sit there defending him like a guard dog, doing everything in your power to attack the women your husband is screwing around with....instead of throwing him out of the house before the ink dries on the divorce papers... somethings not right.
Politics be damned. ANYTHING is better than letting that family back in the white house. Hate Trump all you want but for Pete's Sake..... at least follow I HATE TRUMP with..... but I am glad a Clinton is not in office

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Yeah, you’re right, there is nothing to see here.

Prove me wrong.

Bring evidence.

Why, so I can get wrapped up in which sources are legitimate? If you are incapable of even questioning the timing and coincidence, on top of the clear conflicts of interest, then no amount of evidence will sway you. You've chosen a side and that is where you've dug in.

Next.