JEFF SESSIONS Has Appointed TWO PROSECUTORS To Investigate Obama Admin and Hillary.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No trial because she hasn't committed any crimes.
You have to be charged with an offense before you go on trial.
Of course she's been on trial in the court of public opinion since 1992.

FTFY

a reply to: introvert

The funny thing is this sort of stuff has been going into the Q threads. Maybe ATS Qsters are looking for new converts.

a reply to: Cancerwarrior

That didn't answer my question. Basically you just told me that you and Trump are small people who revel in making sure people you don't know are upset. I already knew that though.

a reply to: introvert

My comments are not dependent upon whether or not you were addressing me.

Well of course they aren't.
I am sorry you missed out on "home training".

That is an odd thing to say, actually.

Only for your generation. Sadly you have no idea how to address people other than to vomit every idea that pops into your head on to whomever you choose unsolicited. Sadly it is not even as comical or amusing as a troll.

Much like that "deep state" idiocy, right? You and the OP's source are projecting.

O mighty protector of those unable to discern, I leave you to your self appointed task.

P.S.
Do those people have any idea the scorn or distaste you have for them?

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: introvert

The funny thing is this sort of stuff has been going into the Q threads. Maybe ATS Qsters are looking for new converts.

The entire Q thing is based on shadiness and ignorance.

Oh, and weird pedo stuff.

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Example:

Trump says we have had alot of terrorist attacks in the US. The media says nuh-uh no we don't. So Trump says the media just doesnt report on the terror attacks, so to prove him wrong they go crazy showing all the stories they reported on terrorist attacks. Proving he was right in the first place.

Its hilarious to watch, for those of us paying attention anyway.

Plus, I love the fact that every morning he has a fresh tweet ready to remind people such as you that he is still the President, thereby triggering all of you people into a liberal fueled head spinning frenzy.

Something the media won’t tell you, Terrorism doesn’t include just “attacks”, but also failed plots, giving material support to terrorists, acquiring weapons for attacks, bomb threats, etc. They never talk about this and pretend everything is tickity-boo for their credulous readers.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Well of course they aren't. I am sorry you missed out on "home training".

They aren't. Perhaps you do not understand what you were told and that is why you posted a video.

I think it is more for you than me.

Only for your generation. Sadly you have no idea how to address people other than to vomit every idea that pops into your head on to whomever you choose unsolicited. Sadly it is not even as comical or amusing as a troll.

Sure. Are you deflecting or projecting?

Perhaps both.

O mighty protector of those unable to discern, I leave you to your self appointed task. P.S. Do those people have any idea the scorn or distaste you have for them?

Why would I care?

You can't even stay on topic without having to lash-out emotionally.

Get a grip and man up.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
kek, that was funny.

a reply to: introvert

Why would I care?

exactly
thank you for so eloquently making my point

may I continue my discussion with the op now?

a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Terrorism is only terrorism if they actually attack someone. We don't charge people with stockpiling weaponry even if they end up on some sort of watch list for it. If we started doing that, then all those Patriot groups could be charged for stockpiling private army's worth of firearms.

Also, most bomb threats aren't taken seriously. Many public installations receive bomb threats on a near daily basis. The key is picking out the ones that sound credible and the ones that are just a loon trying to stir #.

By the way, if you want to talk about material support for terrorists, then you need to discuss Saudi Arabia, but this country's politicians (including your hero Trump) don't want to go against the country that is obviously funding terrorists in the Middle East.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Basically you just told me that you and Trump are small people who revel in making sure people you don't know are upset. I already knew that though.

Nothing coherent to argue with, so you devolve to attacks on character.

I'm noticing a trend here with you people.

a reply to: Cancerwarrior

I mean you pretty much already went down that path when you celebrated how Trump makes me upset. I don't know what's sadder, that you can't tell when you are flinging mud or your thin skin in light of the mud you sling.

I asked you some pointed questions in reference to the OP and the claim you were making about Trump. No assumptions. No slurs. You instead tell me how you enjoy Trump making me mad, and now you feign offense because I attacked back. If you wanted a real discussion, how about not deflecting with pettiness yourself?

a reply to: carewemust

www.cnn.com...

Instead, Sessions revealed Thursday that Utah's top federal prosecutor, John Huber, is looking into allegations that the FBI abused its powers in surveilling a former Trump campaign adviser, and claims that more should have been done to investigate Hillary Clinton's ties to a Russian nuclear energy agency.

At least one of the msm news sources is covering this, even if it is only a small bit.

House Republicans nevertheless first urged Sessions to appoint a special counsel last year to investigate various matters surrounding Hillary Clinton, including how the FBI dealt with her handling of classified information, as well as allegations that a Russian energy nuclear agency donated to the Clinton Foundation in order to later secure her approval of its purchase of a uranium mining company when Clinton was secretary of state.

Perhaps John Huber and Corey Hiland will complete a full investigation of these matters?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

BRQP lol
I have no clue what those letters in your post mean.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

Why would I care?

exactly
thank you for so eloquently making my point

may I continue my discussion with the op now?

Sure. No problem.

Sorry for getting in the way of your roleplaying.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Krazysh0t

BRQP lol
I have no clue what those letters in your post mean.

FTFY = Fixed That For You. I changed the year you wrote from 2008 to 1992 because Hillary has been dealing with obnoxious and unfounded right wing accusations since at least when Bill was President.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Terrorism is only terrorism if they actually attack someone. We don't charge people with stockpiling weaponry even if they end up on some sort of watch list for it. If we started doing that, then all those Patriot groups could be charged for stockpiling private army's worth of firearms.

Also, most bomb threats aren't taken seriously. Many public installations receive bomb threats on a near daily basis. The key is picking out the ones that sound credible and the ones that are just a loon trying to stir #.

By the way, if you want to talk about material support for terrorists, then you need to discuss Saudi Arabia, but this country's politicians (including your hero Trump) don't want to go against the country that is obviously funding terrorists in the Middle East.

Terror-related crimes gives a hint of the threat terrorism poses. Terrorism and terror-related crimes are prosecuted on a frequent basis.

www.fbi.gov...

Sorry, off-topic.

a reply to: NiNjABackflip

Ok and? I didn't say they weren't. But you are just using the fallacy of large numbers here to make it seem like terrorism is some sort of large threat in the country. How does that frequent basis compare to other crimes being prosecuted? I'll give you a hint, terrorism gets beat by a land slide. The CATO institute gives a 1 in 45,808 chance of dying by a terrorist attack. The odds of that death being due to a muslim hike the odds up to 1 in 46,192,893. The odds for it being an illegal immigrant are even worse at 1 in 318,324,873.

Oh and btw, m ost terror attacks are pertuated by right wing terrorists. It even gets worse when you look at successful attempts to thwart the plan.

In terms of police action, 76 per cent of the Islamist incidents were thwarted versus just 35 per cent of the right-wing extremist incidents.

Right wing events also seem to cause deaths more frequently:

More people died in the Islamist incidents, a total of 90 due to mass shootings like the one in Fort Hood, Texas in 2009.

However, around 33 per cent of right-wing extremist incidents involved deaths versus 13 per cent of Islamist terror acts. They also caused 79 deaths.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry, but the FBI data speaks for itself. Terror-plots are always on the go. We just dismiss them because no one is killed. No need to politicize it.

a reply to: carewemust

When will this administration stop harassing Hillary Clinton?
You'd think they would actually try to run the country.

Oh wait! They don't know how.