Posted on 06/29/2016 12:58:03 PM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
It is not possible to fathom
The spouse is one thing, but Bill’s into this Clinton Foundation stuff up to his eyeballs as well. There’s NO good reason Lynch should have met with him. Something’s up.
He was handing her the check.
Bagman Bill.
I agree. Unless it was a romantic get-together.
Notice how the writer is suggesting that it was just a chance, coincidental meeting, since they both happened to be in Phoenix at the same time?
I’m going to have to charge her Bill. But Barry said he would pardon her. Trump is going to be president.
Imagine an episode of Law and Order where a well-connected politician spouse of a high profile defendant in an espionage case privately meets with the district attorney, and it is brushed off to the press as just an exchange of pleasantries. It seems highly improbable that such a scenario wouldn’t be aggressively challenged as legal corruption, but yet here we are.
Corruption doesn’t interest the media unless there is a R by the name.
MSM will go wild over this story. NOT!
“He spoke to myself...”
Moron.
“The rule of law is utter horse shit people. Only the peons follow them.”
I wish I could argue with you about that. People don’t understand how putrid it’s become.
Here in Oregon, an illegal alien shot up a bunch of people this week, killed one. He’d been released in my town a few years earlier. They laugh at our laws.
Can you say , “Obstruction Of Justice” and did she bring her knee pads ?
He asked her if she lifted weights.
Golf and grandchildren? They must think all of us just fell off the melon truck.
How convenient. I doubt if Trump will overlook this.
Yes, this event reminds me of that photo of John Roberts, right after the Obamacare ruling. He was in Malta, standing in front of a bank with a briefcase.
Naah, nothing suspicious there.
“Remember even Bonnie and Clyde came to an end! Tommie gun with extreme prejudice style.”
Yes, I do. Tommy G, with bodies bouncing in slow motion with multiple angles, is too nice an end for the expletives looting/destroying the greatest republic in the history of civilization.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5H7zO6Ky8RE
Two Kinds of Plunder
I do not think that illegal plunder, such as theft or swindling which the penal code defines, anticipates, and punishes can be called socialism. It is not this kind of plunder that systematically threatens the foundations of society. Anyway, the war against this kind of plunder has not waited for the command of these gentlemen. The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. Long before the Revolution of February 1848 long before the appearance even of socialism itself France had provided police, judges, gendarmes, prisons, dungeons, and scaffolds for the purpose of fighting illegal plunder. The law itself conducts this war, and it is my wish and opinion that the law should always maintain this attitude toward plunder.
The Law Defends Plunder
But it does not always do this. Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Thus the beneficiaries are spared the shame, danger, and scruple which their acts would otherwise involve. Sometimes the law places the whole apparatus of judges, police, prisons, and gendarmes at the service of the plunderers, and treats the victim when he defends himself as a criminal.
The Law - Frederic Bastiat
The greatest crime couple in the history of the republic ALERT!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.