Now, we can go after Hillary.
- Thread starter TwinDegrees2
- Start date
Hope he does. It's the kind of thing, along with the change of DOJ position yesyerday to pursue full attack on remainder of Obamacare to ensure a Dem turnout as well as a loud "WTF is wrong with him?" from a significant number of Independents.
As the saying goes, "Be careful what you wish for."
As the saying goes, "Be careful what you wish for."
I think more importantly we need to find out the status of the FBI and DOJ. There appears to be enough concern about their behavior during th 2016 campaign to justify taking a hard look. I would hope that both sides of the aisle would be concerned enough to do it. Also, did the DNC break laws in directing the election to HRC? Finally, it is documented that husband Bill received $500,000 for a speech while HRC was Sec of State. How was that not collusion?
Don't forget the donations to the Clinton Foundation, fusion gps, the Clinton paid for dossier and the uranium debacle.
But I say let a dead hose lie. It's time to reunite the country.
Now if the House continues to want to investigate Trump's every financial transaction, conversation and appointee he makes, than I say go for it.
I’m not. I said I would wait for the Mueller report. I did. If there is more to come out on Trump then I want it to be brought out.
I want ALL of the crooks investigated and charged if they are guilty of anything.
Your post makes it clear you are only interested in charges against Trump, no one else who may have committed crimes.
Then better investigate all of Drumpf's family for using private and personal email and cell phones. Or does that only apply to one party in your pea brained mind?
It's laughable that people think her email horse shit is worth prosecuting. Only people encased in a nihilistic bubble of privilege in which absolutely nothing matters besides "owning the libs" could care about her email server.
You have people like Bush, Cheney, Obama, Bill Clinton, and the lower members of their administrations that are responsible for actual war crimes, and you want to prosecute one of them for having a private email server with government documents on it. What an absolute joke. I remind you, Jared Kusher is doing literally the exact same thing, and worse, sharing classified government information over insecure private cell phones and laptops, and of course none of you clowns will be upset about that.
You have people like Bush, Cheney, Obama, Bill Clinton, and the lower members of their administrations that are responsible for actual war crimes, and you want to prosecute one of them for having a private email server with government documents on it. What an absolute joke. I remind you, Jared Kusher is doing literally the exact same thing, and worse, sharing classified government information over insecure private cell phones and laptops, and of course none of you clowns will be upset about that.
Answer the question......how is it collusion? Do you have some facts? You certainly leaped to that conclusion on Hillary pretty quickly? Has there been any investigation?
I never said it was collusion. I said there is a lot of questions that still need answers regarding the handling of classified information, Questionable activities by the FBI on several fronts, etc. again, I guess you don’t care if the Dems are guilty of anything. I am concerned about both sides being corrupted. Get that? How about you responding to that question?
Kuschner sharing classified docs with other people without security clearance? Haven’t seen that. How about a link.
Last edited:
You do realize that to implement single payer, Medicare for all, Socialized Medicine, or whatever the catch phrase is today, that the ACA will have to be repealed first.
The implementation of further health care programs wasn't exactly the point of my post.
Nonetheless, in answer to your question, no it doesn't require that ACA be repealed prior to planning and preparing alternatives, and I am unaware of any impediment to the enacting legislation for substitute programs to include as part of it the repeal of prior legislation currently in effect dealing with the same issues. Pretty common practice.
It's not quite the same as building a new house on a lot that already has a house in place where the original structure is removed prior to building anew, is it?
Similar threads
