Under fire after secret meeting, Lynch to step back from Clinton probe

a reply to: Xcathdra

Same # different day. S.s.d.d.

a reply to: Xcathdra
You don't deserve one. You only believe the things that support your opinion.

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: poriggity
I've had a feeling from the beginning that Hillary will walk away from this unscathed. She's a murderous traitor to the USA, yet no one seems to care.. especially the Democratic party or the main stream media.

Whom did she murder?

If she is guilty of murdering someone, I'd care quite a bit about that.

But I don't believe she has been found guilty of anything.

So let me get this straight. OJ wasn't found not guilty of murder, therefore he didn't actually murder two people?

Not guilty isn't the same as 'innocent'.

The only thing it means is the state failed to make it's case.

a reply to: Sillyolme
Speaking of being completely and totally wrong.

Troll somewhere else.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Whoa!

The meds run strong today!

Something is seriously wrong with the world when I find myself in total agreement with Neo.

What's happening!!!

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: poriggity
I've had a feeling from the beginning that Hillary will walk away from this unscathed. She's a murderous traitor to the USA, yet no one seems to care.. especially the Democratic party or the main stream media.

Whom did she murder?

If she is guilty of murdering someone, I'd care quite a bit about that.

But I don't believe she has been found guilty of anything.

So let me get this straight. OJ wasn't found not guilty of murder, therefore he didn't actually murder two people?

Not guilty isn't the same as 'innocent'.

The only thing it means is the state failed to make it's case.

Exactly, thanks for making my point. Most of the Hillary sycophants on here think Hillary has never done wrong, like she's some innocent babe in the woods. Most equate her being never found guilty of anything to being innocent of ever doing anything wrong.

I imagine if the email scandal and the foundation scandal get too hot for Bill & Hillary to handle they'll find some poor schmuck employee to throw under the bus or perhaps the employee will shoot him/her/itself out of depression over their guilt with a note admitting all and in tall capital letters state "Hillary Had Nothing To Do With It".

Poor Vince.

STM

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

I see you get your education from conspiracy theory blogs. Even less credible now. If that's possible.
You and trump . Next you'll tell me Ted cruzs father killed JFK.

I don't' want to seem to attack you personally, but, it might bear remembering that we are posting on a conspiracy theory site.

Sorry. I forgot.

I'll shall hang my head in shame.

Eh?

Not directed at you.

I know that was not directed at me, but just after you made the post about this being a conspiracy site, I made a post mocking the absurd levels conspiracies can be taken, in regards to the current political topic.

Apparently, it was not well-received.

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: poriggity
I've had a feeling from the beginning that Hillary will walk away from this unscathed. She's a murderous traitor to the USA, yet no one seems to care.. especially the Democratic party or the main stream media.

Whom did she murder?

If she is guilty of murdering someone, I'd care quite a bit about that.

But I don't believe she has been found guilty of anything.

So let me get this straight. OJ wasn't found not guilty of murder, therefore he didn't actually murder two people?

If he was found not guilty, the court decided he did not murder those people.

As much as I hate to say this, it's pretty evident there's a common theme here among a number of the Hillary defenders...

This theme being..."Well, I'm here 'til 5 no matter what. It all pays the same."

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
As much as I hate to say this, it's pretty evident there's a common theme here among a number of the Hillary defenders...

This theme being..."Well, I'm here 'til 5 no matter what. It all pays the same."

Another observation that could be made is that it seems the anti-Hillary folks resort to calling people trolls or shills when another person's opinion does not coincide with their need for confirmation bias.

a reply to: introvert

Ordinarily I would agree with your statement in a general sense. However, in this case there is a GIGANTIC difference between simple difference of opinion and pathological DENIAL!!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Sillyolme

Whoa!

The meds run strong today!

There was a reply before about smoking a pork shoulder. I think something more than a pork shoulder was being smoked.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: introvert

Ordinarily I would agree with your statement in a general sense. However, in this case there is a GIGANTIC difference between simple difference of opinion and pathological DENIAL!!

What denial is that?

Myself and others have asked for proof of the claims people have made and we are met with snarky resentment and attitude.

It seems to be the ones that want her to be guilty of something are having a rough time proving it and are in denial of current reality.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: poriggity
I've had a feeling from the beginning that Hillary will walk away from this unscathed. She's a murderous traitor to the USA, yet no one seems to care.. especially the Democratic party or the main stream media.

Whom did she murder?

If she is guilty of murdering someone, I'd care quite a bit about that.

But I don't believe she has been found guilty of anything.

So let me get this straight. OJ wasn't found not guilty of murder, therefore he didn't actually murder two people?

If he was found guilty, the court decided he did not murder those people.

So, he was innocent of murdering those people? or just not guilty because the state didn't make their case?

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: poriggity
I've had a feeling from the beginning that Hillary will walk away from this unscathed. She's a murderous traitor to the USA, yet no one seems to care.. especially the Democratic party or the main stream media.

Whom did she murder?

If she is guilty of murdering someone, I'd care quite a bit about that.

But I don't believe she has been found guilty of anything.

So let me get this straight. OJ wasn't found not guilty of murder, therefore he didn't actually murder two people?

If he was found guilty, the court decided he did not murder those people.

So, he was innocent of murdering those people? or just not guilty because the state didn't make their case?

Either way, he was cleared of the charges. If someone is going to claim he is guilty of something, the burden of proof is on them.

a reply to: introvert

How long does the FBI usually spend investigating innocent people?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: poriggity
I've had a feeling from the beginning that Hillary will walk away from this unscathed. She's a murderous traitor to the USA, yet no one seems to care.. especially the Democratic party or the main stream media.

Whom did she murder?

If she is guilty of murdering someone, I'd care quite a bit about that.

But I don't believe she has been found guilty of anything.

So let me get this straight. OJ wasn't found not guilty of murder, therefore he didn't actually murder two people?

If he was found guilty, the court decided he did not murder those people.

So, he was innocent of murdering those people? or just not guilty because the state didn't make their case?

Either way, he was cleared of the charges. If someone is going to claim he is guilty of something, the burden of proof is on them.

He was found to be responsible for their deaths, in court.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: introvert

How long does the FBI usually spend investigating innocent people?

That's an absurd question.