Jump to content

Its definitely not happening


GreezyChef

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Old49er60 said:

Just wondering, so you guys consider lying to the FBI a crime? You believe when you do that you should be held accountable?

It is on the BOOKS as a felony....18 usc section 1001.......the LAW considers it to be a crime....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Old49er60 said:

Oh I completely agree. Which is why I believe Michael Flynn should have been held responsible yet so many on here made excuses for him. Roger Stone the same. No pardons just make them accountable 

There has to be EVIDENCE of lying....not just some made up BS by a lying dimturd.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Old49er60 said:

So you convicted these already because of party but when a person confesses that is not good enough evidence. Just be honest, if it is a dem or a rino you convict them just on these charges but a trumplican you won’t convict even when they admit it. 

Here's a question I have: What's the difference in what Kristian Saucier did vs what Hillary Clinton was accused of?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristian_Saucier

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy

Did they both violate the law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Old49er60 said:

So you convicted these already because of party but when a person confesses that is not good enough evidence. Just be honest, if it is a dem or a rino you convict them just on these charges but a trumplican you won’t convict even when they admit it. 

His "confession" has been shown to have been coerced.......try again nimrod......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Old49er60 said:

Let me be very very clear, you asked what is the difference, well they are not the same in anyway.

but let me make sure this is understood, lying under oath should be held accountable. Does not matter if it is bill clinton or Donald trump. Party should not play the role. 
 

Just posting this before they respond.

Deflecting is a psychological defense mechanism that people use to take the blame off of themselves or someone they admire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Old49er60 said:

Let me be very very clear, you asked what is the difference, well they are not the same in anyway.

but let me make sure this is understood, lying under oath should be held accountable. Does not matter if it is bill clinton or Donald trump. Party should not play the role. 
 

If you or I did what Hillary Clinton did with email, what do you think the punishment would be? Government agencies take security very, very seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

If you or I did what Hillary Clinton did with email, what do you think the punishment would be? Government agencies take security very, very seriously.

He already said " Does not matter if it is bill clinton or Donald trump. Party should not play the role. "

Deflecting is a psychological defense mechanism that people use to take the blame off of themselves or someone they admire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

He already said " Does not matter if it is bill clinton or Donald trump. Party should not play the role. "

Deflecting is a psychological defense mechanism that people use to take the blame off of themselves or someone they admire.

I actually agree with him. But how many Democrats defended what HRC did?

I understand what deflection is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ctown81 said:

He already said " Does not matter if it is bill clinton or Donald trump. Party should not play the role. "

Deflecting is a psychological defense mechanism that people use to take the blame off of themselves or someone they admire.

This isn't about party--this is about the "haves" and the "have nots". 

In 1992, the congressional bank was allow congressional members to write and cash "hot checks"--some got a slap on the wrist, others weren't re-elected. But had this been you or I--we would have had criminal charges filed against us and possible jail time--and that is not including the bank fees we would have gotten on top of the bad checks. It is deflecting, it is about "rules for thee, but not for me". 

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-03-13-mn-3718-story.html

As far as this current topic, I am with 49er on this--get their rear end in a court room, present the evidence, and convict their rear ends. If convicted, call them what you want, if they are not convicted--well then--they would be INNOCENT of the crime. Then you just call them what ever you want. Good or bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...