Trump Triggers Attempted Shooting/Bombing of Obama’s House

[robosmith]

59 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Gets a free pass on this. Literally slapped on the wrists.

Never will see a jail cell for it. 

He knows not to get his own hands dirty, or at least knew it this instance.

We are in agreement. He has done plenty of criminal things. 

Got off with a slap on the wrists, and used the bad press to boost his votes and ratings.

The current charges are also criminal. 

However  you will not convince me them being pursued so heavily and hastily have anything to so with doing the right thing vs finally finding something to silence Trump and going guns a blazing about it. 

Its purely political.

 

IF you agree he committed crimes, prosecution for them is NOT "purely political," just because he cannot buy his way out of them THIS TIME.

In reality, insurrection is much more serious than any of his prior crimes. People died.

[robosmith]

41 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Hillary mishandled classified information. She didn’t steal it. She didn’t retain it. She didn’t lie to investigators. Trump stole classified information.  He retained it. He lied to investigators about it.  There’s no equivalence here at all.  

Right. None at all. Hillary was sent UNMARKED classified documents TO HER EMAIL on the NIPRNet. Without markings, there is NO INTENT to mis-store them.

IF anyone is guilty of anything, it would be whomever copied the MARKED documents from the SIPRNet, stripped the markings and pasted them to the NIPRNet email.

But most likely that information was POST classified AFTER it was sent to Hillary; so, ZERO INTENT. Which is the conclusion drawn by COMEY.

Only lDIOTS who get all their info from FOS LIES believe there is anything more to it.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

Right. None at all. Hillary was sent UNMARKED classified documents TO HER EMAIL on the NIPRNet. Without markings, there is NO INTENT to mis-store them.

Of course there was. She knew they were classified.

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

F anyone is guilty of anything, it would be whomever copied the MARKED documents from the SIPRNet, stripped the markings and pasted them to the NIPRNet email.

That would be hillary.  That's why she tried to destroy the evidence.

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

But most likely that information was POST classified AFTER it was sent to Hillary;

The FBI said otherwise.

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Presidential Records Act.

Do have a warm and fuzzy day.

The PRA does NOT apply to classified documents even if Trump imagines he declassified them by thinking about it.

IF you disagree, quote the part of the PRA which transforms classified secrets into Trump's personal property.

Thing is, you cannot.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, robosmith said:

IF you agree he committed crimes

So did George Bush. So did Joe Biden, through protecting his son who is clearly a criminal. What's your point?

The gravity of the crime shouldn't matter at all. One having been committed is enough to send you to jail.

What you'll get, is no different than Russia once that happens--when jailing opposition, becomes the norm.

Anyone stating the same standard should be applied to regular population as a head of state, is full of s***.

 

 

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

So did George Bush. So did Joe Biden, through protecting his son who is clearly a criminal. What's your point?

The gravity of the crime shouldn't matter at all. One having been committed is enough to send you to jail.

What you'll get, is no different than Russia once that happens--when jailing opposition, becomes the norm.

Anyone stating the same standard should be applied to regular population as a head of state, is full of s***.

 

 

You have no evidence that Joe Biden committed a crime. It’s all speculation. 

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

They will never be prosecuted because they committed NO CRIMES. Unlike the fraudulent Trump whom YOU DEFEND.

What FOS LIES tells you is all you "know." LMAO

And lack of self-control, etc....

No...I've learned self control over the years. 

No crimes? According to the Durham report that's true. But we know what they did and recognize it as deploable and dishonorable. Hence...we will never let them go unscathed. By the time this is done...these heroes of yours will be equated with slime.

You love to lecture about people following Trump. Yet you follow and indeed celebrate the lowest of the low.

[West]

So the drunk uncle lefties are yelling about something to do with Trump getting Obama nearly killed. 

Don't approach the crazies, kids

[robosmith]

Just now, CdnFox said:

Of course there was. She knew they were classified.

LMAO. So, you imagine you're the expert on what Hillary "knew."

You're an lDIOT.

Just now, CdnFox said:

That would be hillary.  That's why she tried to destroy the evidence.

Read the Federal Records Act. I know actually reading US law would be a first for you. LMAO

In FACT, the FRA specifically says that the employee determines what records are personal; which may be destroyed.

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law

Quote

Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.

...

But was it "probably ... a violation of law," as Grassley charged?

The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."

In fact, the department refers to a past fight over former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's notes, as Josh Gerstein points out. Notes and tapes of Kissinger's conversations were sent to the Library of Congress — rather than leaving them to the State Department — restricting their public access. FOIA requests were denied by the State Department because they were under the aegis of the Library of Congress. Kissinger declined to turn the documents over to archivists' requests.

What's more, the Supreme Court held that the Kissinger documents did not have to be turned over under FOIA — even though they were notes taken while Kissinger was at State — because State did not have possession of them.

Then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the majority in 1980:

"We hold today that, even if a document requested under the FOIA is wrongfully in the possession of a party not an 'agency,' the agency which received the request does not 'improperly withhold' those materials by its refusal to institute a retrieval action. When an agency has demonstrated that it has not 'withheld'requested records in violation of the standards established by Congress, the federal courts have no authority to order the production of such records under the FOIA."

 

Just now, CdnFox said:

The FBI said otherwise.

Comey was the decision maker after Lynch recused herself.

[robosmith]

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

So did George Bush.

Really? When was GWB charged with a crime?

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

 

So did Joe Biden, through protecting his son who is clearly a criminal. What's your point?

Only "clearly" to you. Reports are that MOST people who don't pay their taxes ON TIME are not even CHARGED. 

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

The gravity of the crime shouldn't matter at all.

Bullshit. Of course, the gravity matters greatly as a matter of US law. As does INTENT.

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

One having been committed is enough to send you to jail.

Only if it's SERIOUS. Probation like Hunter got is OFTEN the punishment for misdemeanors. Duh

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

What you'll get, is no different than Russia once that happens--when jailing opposition, becomes the norm.

Many European countries have prosecuted CRMINALS in high office. Israel, France and Italy for 3 RECENTLY.  NO ONE is above the law.

7 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Anyone stating the same standard should be applied to regular population as a head of state, is full of s***.

You're the one who is IGNORANT of the FACTS.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

No...I've learned self control over the years. 

But you're still threatening your violence HERE.

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

No crimes? According to the Durham report that's true. But we know what they did and recognize it as deploable and dishonorable. Hence...we will never let them go unscathed. By the time this is done...these heroes of yours will be equated with slime.

You keep imagining YOU have something to do with that. No one is listening to you about it, beyond your buddies here.

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

You love to lecture about people following Trump. Yet you follow and indeed celebrate the lowest of the low.

Just because you IMAGINE someone is "lowest of the low" does not make it true.

OTOH, Trump has been convicted of fraudulent behavior TWICE in the last 5 years (Trump U and Trump Foundation) plus being indicted for 37 felonies, and you continue to defend HIM while "threatening" Democrats who were never even charged.

Your HYPOCRISY is HUGE. And yes, that is a whataboutism commentary on your character.

3 hours ago, West said:

So the drunk uncle lefties are yelling about something to do with Trump getting Obama nearly killed. 

Don't approach the crazies, kids

^Pure projection. LMAO

[CdnFox]

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

LMAO. So, you imagine you're the expert on what Hillary "knew."

Well i defer to the fbi - but sure

 

Quote

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — not just a rank-and-file House member — alleged Tuesday that Hillary Clinton likely broke the law with her use of private emails as secretary of state.

Yep - the experts agree she broke the law.  The reporter thinks he's a lawyer but actual lawyers know she broke the laws

 

Sorry kiddo - you strike out again. Maybe we should change your name to 'robo-fail'?  it does seem to be your default setting

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, robosmith said:

But you're still threatening your violence HERE.

You keep imagining YOU have something to do with that. No one is listening to you about it, beyond your buddies here.

Just because you IMAGINE someone is "lowest of the low" does not make it true.

OTOH, Trump has been convicted of fraudulent behavior TWICE in the last 5 years (Trump U and Trump Foundation) plus being indicted for 37 felonies, and you continue to defend HIM while "threatening" Democrats who were never even charged.

Your HYPOCRISY is HUGE. And yes, that is a whataboutism commentary on your character.

^Pure projection. LMAO

oh - and by the way - your document was before the senate hearings

Here's some stuff from after the investigation

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/clintons-handling-of-classified-information/

• Clinton repeatedly claimed that she did not send or receive any information that was marked classified in her personal emails. That’s false. FBI Director James Comey said more than 2,000 emails contained classified information and some of them “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information.”

• Clinton said her lawyers “went through every single email” to determine which ones were personal and which were work-related, and that they were “overly inclusive” in which ones were provided to the State Department. Comey said the lawyers did not go through every email. Rather, they used header information and search terms to identify work-related emails, and, he said, it is “highly likely” they missed some.

 

Clinton lied and broke the law.  But - they let her off the hook. 

 

[Nationalist]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

But you're still threatening your violence HERE.

You keep imagining YOU have something to do with that. No one is listening to you about it, beyond your buddies here.

Just because you IMAGINE someone is "lowest of the low" does not make it true.

OTOH, Trump has been convicted of fraudulent behavior TWICE in the last 5 years (Trump U and Trump Foundation) plus being indicted for 37 felonies, and you continue to defend HIM while "threatening" Democrats who were never even charged.

Your HYPOCRISY is HUGE. And yes, that is a whataboutism commentary on your character.

^Pure projection. LMAO

I see this worries you. Good.

It's not "violent" to allow folks to read and hear the truth about Clinton or Schiff or any of them. That you'd even suggest this is beyond hypocritical. It's down right Tweenkie.

You don't think anyone will listen? Oh robo-fail, they do listen. They do see what's has transpired. Most recognize slime when they see it.

So enjoy the limited power of Ol' Joe. It won't last long and when it's all said and done...

He, his kid, and his whole damned family will be destroyed. 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Nationalist

[Deluge]

On 7/8/2023 at 8:05 AM, Contrarian said:

@Deluge, remember, the old times? ?

I remember that moderates and centrists usually swing left.  

[Rebound]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

I see this worries you. Good.

It's not "violent" to allow folks to read and hear the truth about Clinton or Schiff or any of them. That you'd even suggest this is beyond hypocritical. It's down right Tweenkie.

You don't think anyone will listen? Oh robo-fail, they do listen. They do see what's has transpired. Most recognize slime when they see it.

So enjoy the limited power of Ol' Joe. It won't last long and when it's all said and done...

He, his kid, and his whole damned family will be destroyed. 

Could you please tell us, what is your problem? Is it ADHD? Is it OCD? Illiteracy? Opioids? Meth? 

You try to change the subject of every single thread. No matter what the topic, your answer is something entirely unrelated. Clinton and Schiff have utterly, absolutely, completely, nothing whatsoever to do with Donald Trump doxxing Obama. They didn't make him do it. 

You need help, dude. 

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Contrarian said:

You learnt about bullet points and bold.

I wish you could learn about English.

[Rebound]

13 hours ago, West said:

So the drunk uncle lefties are yelling about something to do with Trump getting Obama nearly killed. 

Don't approach the crazies, kids

Trump releases Obama’s address on Truth Social

Same day, a Trump supporter drives a van with explosives and rifles to that address, and livestreams his attempt to get an optimal sight line with his rifle.  
 

So, yeah. Trump really did trigger this guy to make an attempt on Obama. 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Could you please tell us, what is your problem? Is it ADHD? Is it OCD? Illiteracy? Opioids? Meth? 

You try to change the subject of every single thread. No matter what the topic, your answer is something entirely unrelated. Clinton and Schiff have utterly, absolutely, completely, nothing whatsoever to do with Donald Trump doxxing Obama. They didn't make him do it. 

You need help, dude. 

My "problem" is I sit here watching this parade of stupid, whine, lie and destroy everything they touch.

You said "whataboutisms" were not important. They most certainly are important. They clearly show the lopsided justice system in action. So sure...you destructive little fops wanna play hardball? DOXX Barry. DOXX Clinton. DOXX Schiff. DOXX Garland and Wray. Why? Because that is EXACTLY what you little shits have been doing.!

[Rebound]

5 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

My "problem" is I sit here watching this parade of stupid, whine, lie and destroy everything they touch.

You said "whataboutisms" were not important. They most certainly are important. They clearly show the lopsided justice system in action. So sure...you destructive little fops wanna play hardball? DOXX Barry. DOXX Clinton. DOXX Schiff. DOXX Garland and Wray. Why? Because that is EXACTLY what you little shits have been doing.!

I did not doxx anyone. 
You simply lack any sense of morality. If a man with a gun murders 50 children, you are not actually capable of comprehending the meaning of it. You just think about it as a political attack on your gun rights. 
 

You’ve said as much:  If your own mother or child isn’t murdered by a gun, then there’s simply no such thing as gun violence. If you don’t get cancer, there is no such thing as cancer. It’s really quite shocking to see how your thinking is always to redirect every conversation into something else. 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Rebound

[Nationalist]

5 minutes ago, Rebound said:

I did not doxx anyone.

ROFLMAO!!!

What a cowardly excuse.

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

You simply lack any sense of morality. If a man with a gun murders 50 children, you are not actually capable of comprehending the meaning of it. You just think about it as a political attack on your gun rights. 

If a man with a gun murders 50 children, I would sentence him to death.!

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

You’ve said as much:  If your own mother or child isn’t murdered by a gun, then there’s simply no such thing as gun violence. If you don’t get cancer, there is no such thing as cancer. It’s really quite shocking to see how your thinking is always to redirect every conversation into something else. 

BS I've said as much. Show me.

BTW...Tweedle-Dee...my wife had cancer and beat it. What's shocking is the lengths you'll go to and the lies you'll let roll right off your own keyboard.

[West]

On 7/9/2023 at 9:27 PM, Contrarian said:

There are no kids here, are you into kids? Let me guess, what is really hiding behind this account? West Man? or Woman? 

I think in the end you are into trannie porn and here you are exhibiting yourself? See a priest and confess is my advice. 

????