^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes, it is.
The question was specifically: "Will Obama or Hillary be indicted?"
She wasn't given an opportunity to answer fully; but, clearly she assumes these two biggest fish are too big to indict.
Unfortunately, I happen to agree with her about Obama at least. I think the best we can hope for is that history accurately paints him as disgraced due to his abuses of power and having everyone around him convicted.
The only way we might get Zero is if there were a traceable trail of bribes into his accounts from Iran and other bad actors. But I'm assuming that Swiss and other banking systems will never give up the information.
I don't think HRC, LL and others turning on him would be enough.
Americans do not want their former Presidents subjected to prosecution, and this probably also applies to former First Ladies.
Americans do not want their former Presidents subjected to prosecution, and this probably also applies to former First Ladies.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Once Americans know the crimes 0bola committed, including using a fraudulent identity and nationality to falsely gain the presidency, as well as the other numerous crimes he was party to, they will not rest until he faces justice.
I am truly amazed that people think he shouldn’t face legal justice.
From my profile page, again:
“In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.”
Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
> “Will Obama or Hillary be indicted?”
I was discussing things Q with my brother in law last night over a few thousand beers, this suddenly struck me I and I proposed this to him.
What if Hillary gets indicted first? Not Comey, Brennan, etc. Hillary. Why?
In Barr’s interview with CBS he said that Huber had been working on the Clinton matters and was wrapping things up.
“WILLIAM BARR: Right, so Huber had originally been asked to take a look at the FISA applications and the electronic surveillance but then he stood back and put that on hold while the Office of Inspector General was conducting its review, which would’ve been normal for the department. And he was essentially on standby in case Mr. Horowitz referred a matter to him to be handled criminally. So he has not been active on this front in recent months and so Durham is taking over that role. ***The other issues he’s been working on relate to Hillary Clinton. Those are winding down and hopefully we’ll be in a position to bring those to fruition.”***
Durham has the Spygate job not Huber. But we already knew this. The Session letter says what he was doing.
Let’s walk this through. OIG finishes Spygate. Durham acts on OIG recommendations. If Durham is just beginning or is even in the middle of his task, Huber is almost done.
This theory also sets up Obama because of his known involvement in her email cover-up.
Thoughts?
-SB
Americans do not want their former Presidents subjected to prosecution, and this probably also applies to former First Ladies.
Here’s a starter list that should easily help the population along with this issue...
Never actually qualified to be pres? Yep.
Selling military secrets to our enemies? Yep.
Supporting enemies while sending US military into their path? Yep.
Eating children? Yep.
>> Americans do not want their former Presidents subjected to prosecution
Respectfully sort of disagree.
In some sense, that’s true. Nixon is a good example. Despite everything, I think his enemies were mostly satisfied just to get rid of him. Hounding him out of office was their victory.
But think about this: Look at the intense hostility toward Trump. Do you think for ONE SECOND that the left would not leap at the chance of prosecuting him? Their hatred of him is white hot and beyond all bounds of reason. For many, if they could publicly hang him and televise it on CNN/MSNBC that would still not be enough. And for what? The “crime” of beating their “beloved” HRC in an election. Because that’s what it really is. If he had not won against HRC, no one would have the slightest interest in his tax returns, his love life (Stormy) or anything else. They would be happy to have him still on a reality show providing entertainment.
What I’ve learned over the years is that the rabid left is not like us. They don’t play by the same rules in any sphere. Not in politics, not the way they think, not in the legal system, ...
IMO, 0vomit could have gone the route of Nixon and avoided prosecution if there had been a similar outcome. If he had been forced to resign over Fast and Furious or something else, many of us would have felt some satisfaction that justice had prevailed. If we learned while he was still in office that he was not a US citizen (much less natural born) there may have been a demand for something more than him just “fading away”. But 0vomit and his minions closed off the option of no prosecution when they piled on lie after lie and scandal after scandal.
IMO, BJC *MIGHT* get away with his crimes because he’s a former President. But not 0vomit. If it is shown that on top of everything else he was not even eligible for the office, I don’t think he will be looked at as a “former President”. I think he will be looked at as a foreign invader, as a scammer, as an abuser of all of us. People don’t like being duped or ripped off. People don’t like being played for fools. If/when this all comes out, there are going to be many reactions, but my guess is that 2 of the strongest will be:
1. Denial. Because many on the left will not be able to wrap their heads around finding out that their hero was a complete fraud. Think of the many times when you’ve seen this happen. People in denial about their cheating spouse or their drug addicted brother or their not-quite-bright kid or the “wonderful” employee that they hired who turns out to be a dud.
2. Anger. Those who aren’t in denial will be angry at being played for a fool. They’ll want vindication or revenge of some sort. You might be surprised that there will be plenty on the left who are just as angry as the rest of us. Maybe more so. Nearly all of us here have known from the git-go that 0vomit was a fraud. But when the true believers find that their idol is not made of gold but of clay, many will be livid. Think about Hollywood stars or rock stars. People idolize them and make excuses for their bad behavior. But when the facade comes crashing down, they turn on them. One day the public attitude can be slavish adoration hanging on every word written about or photo taken of the idol. The next day the erstwhile fans are eager for ever juicy tidbit of dirt or gossip. If there’s one thing that the masses like better than building up idols, it’s tearing them down.
Speaking for myself, I want to see justice. Not revenge (although I harbor those feelings at times), but justice. I want a trial. I want a FAIR sentence. Not a slap on the wrist, and not vengeful. Fair. A sentence commensurate with the crimes committed. And that goes not just for 0vomit but for ALL those who knew and helped perpetrate the fraud. I’m looking at you, Nancy Pelosi, for signing the document swearing that he was eligible. I’m looking at all the newsreaders who propped him up and knowingly lied to us for all these years. All the politicians who knew (which includes many on the right) and did nothing to stop this fraud.
Evil has been defeated but the damage it has caused to people and places cannot be completely undone. Despite the best efforts of "the good guys," things will never again be exactly as they were.
Normally I would agree with you but obama is at the heart of this shadow govt thing pulling strings and I don’t see how you stop it if the truth never comes out about him.
Lefty 'Americans' maybe, real Americans want justice no matter what the rank.