[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Judge Jeanine Explains Why 'Liar-in-Chief' Hillary Must Be Indicted Judge Jeanine Explains Why 'Liar-in-Chief' Hillary Must Be Indicted As seen on Justice With Judge Jeanine Wallace: Hillary's Latest Comment on Her Emails Was 'Positively Clintonian' Hillary: I 'Short-Circuited' While Talking About FBI Interview Few Young Americans Happy With Presidential Choices, Dems or GOP Judge Jeanine Pirro says that FBI Director James Comey is now caught between a rock and a hard place and must indict Hillary Clinton after she continues to lie about her email scandal. In her Opening Statement last night, Judge Jeanine pointed out that Clinton insists she has been completely truthful - both with the American people and the FBI - about the agency's investigation into her private email server. She said that Clinton's ongoing claim that she never sent classified emails, however, directly contradicts what Comey swore under oath. "That means that she lied to the FBI," Judge Jeanine stated. "Jim Comey's hands are now tied. He cannot do the dance anymore about how there was no intent or that he's not sure what negligence means or that it's only recklessness or carelessness or that the statute isn't clear or that no reasonable prosecutor would go forward." "He has an obligation to recognize what this woman has said - not once, not twice, but ten times - and what he has said under oath. Jim, you're running with dogs, and you know better than I that when you lie with dogs, expect to get fleas." Watch Judge Jeanine's fiery opening statement above and read a full transcript below. Clinton has just dug a hole for herself that now requires an indictment. Her response this past Sunday to Chris Wallace in an interview when he says that FBI director Comey said none of the things Hillary told the American people were true says it all. Take a listen: So the target says the FBI director has characterized her answers to the FBI as truthful. Seriously, Hillary? That's not what the director says. But let's hear it from the director himself: So FBI director Comey under oath swears before Congress that Hillary Clinton did not tell the truth. Hillary Clinton lied. Not once, not twice, but more than ten times. So when the Washington Post - known for its liberal leanings - gives Hillary Clinton four Pinocchio’s and Politifact rates it a "pants on fire" statement, and factcheck.org gives it a false rating, you would think the woman would understand and recognize the error of her ways... You would think that the presidency demands a certain amount of integrity and honesty. George "I cannot tell a lie" Washington and "Honest" Abe Lincoln are spinning in their graves. So what does the liar in chief do now that she's been exposed? She doubles down on the lie and says in yet another interview - quote - "as the FBI said, everything that I’ve said publicly has been consistent and truthful with what I’ve told them." And yesterday the crescendo got so loud at the national Hispanic and black journalist conference she tripled down and said she may have short circuited - take a listen to this one: Hillary it would have been so easy for you to say, you know, I’ve already said I made a mistake. Or I’ve learned my lesson. But no... Not you. This is a woman who does not know what the truth is. And if her brain short circuits is she telling us she needs work done? Or that the work done was no good. Or that the work done didn't work? And they want to call Donald Trump unstable? At least the man says what he thinks and believes. You may not like it but at least he's honest. Give me honest any day of the week. But this is far more serious and I’ll tell you why. Jim Comey swore that Hillary Clinton sent classified emails. Accordingly she lied to us. He knew that she sent classified emails so if the FBI knew she sent classified emails did they ask her whether she did. If they did, irrespective of her answer, they would have had to take her out in cuffs. If she said no, that's lying to the FBI and if she said yes that's admitting that she violated federal criminal statutes. If the FBI already knew she had sent classified information on her private server and they did not ask her if she did, that means that they intentionally did not want to charge Hillary Clinton. Jim Comey was the man in charge who made the decision to prosecute Martha Stewart for lying to the FBI on a case that had nothing to do with national security. Hillary Clinton’s case had everything to do with national security and worse everything to do with the future of this nation. When Hillary says "what I told the FBI which he (Comey) said was truthful is consistent with what I have said publicly" - she is telling us that she repeated the lie that she told us about not sending classified emails when she spoke to the FBI! That means she lied to the FBI. She is clearly stating that what she told the FBI is what she told us. She lied to us as per Comey and now she's telling us she told the FBI the same lie. Jim Comey's hands are now tied. He cannot do the dance anymore about how there was no intent or that he's not sure what negligence means or that it's only recklessness or carelessness or that the statute isn't clear or that no reasonable prosecutor would go forward. Comey, the prosecutor who wasn't in that room, who didn't use the opportunity to size up a defendant, to analyze her truthfulness and her body language. The man who didn't even speak to every one of the FBI agents in that room who quickly made a determination that she did not have the intent which was not even an element of the crime in the first place is now caught between a rock and a hard place. Jim Comey, for his entire truth, saying has an obligation to his oath and the constitution. He has an obligation to recognize what this woman has said not once not twice but ten times and what he has said under oath. Jim you're running with dogs and you know better than I that when you lie with dogs expect to get fleas. Let Judge Jeanine know what you think on Facebook and Twitter. Huckabee: Hillary Can't Fix America's Problems Because She Helped Create Them Trump Slams Hillary for 'Short-Circuiting' on Email Question Krauthammer: Hillary Needs 'Lying Lessons' From Her Husband 'Daily Caller' Editor: Hillary Just 'Gift-Wrapped the Weekend' for Trump WATCH: State Dept Spox Breaks Out in Laughter After Saying Dept Is Transparent Poster Comment: Sound like like FBI and Prosecutor honchos just protecting their sinecures in case she's elected. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)
Jeanine is awesome!
Comey's original explanation of why he was not recommending to the DOJ that HildaBeast be prosecuted was suspect/questionable itself ( to put it politely). Judge Pirro is dreaming if she thinks Comey will do anything right now about Hillary lying to Wallace about what Comey said. However if Assange releases a WikiLeaks September or October Surprise and it affects Hillary's polling numbers, Comey may want to demonstrate by his follow up actions that he was not part of a cover up conspiracy with Loretta and the Clintonistas. Here's the statute that applies to Hillary Clinton - 18 U.S. Code Part 1 Chapter 37 s. 793. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793 See paragraph (d) failing to release all of the email to investigators, and (f)(1) and (2) causing the emails to be removed from their "proper place of custody" and not advising Obama of the removal once she knew what happened and paragraph (g) she entered into a conspiracy by hiring someone to set up her personal server. The statute does not appear to require proving "intent" contrary to Comey's presser. And since Guccifer, who was in federal custody awaiting sentencing for hacking into Blumenthal's emails by which he was also able to hack into Hillary's server, Comey must have been advised of what Guccifer told the FBI. In an interview Guccifer said he saw up to 10 different foreign IP's who were hacked into Hillary's personal server on at least one occasion, which means Hillary's gross negligence did indeed put our national security at risk. And based on what Senator Cotton said on Face the Nation this weekend, Hillary's gross negligence led to the execution of a valuable US espionage asset ( Amiri) - because she and her staff openly discussed him and shortly thereafter Iran arrested Amiri, a scientist they hailed as a "hero" and then suddenly changed their minds calling him a US spy, which Amiri was, in fact. Addendum re: Guccifer - his real name is Michal Lazar. Here's what he said in May 2016 in an interview: www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/04/romanian-hacker-guccifer-breached-clinton- server-it- was-easy.html snip Lazar emphasized that he used readily available web programs to see if the server was “alive” and which ports were open. Lazar identified programs like netscan, Netmap, Wireshark and Angry IP, though it was not possible to confirm independently which, if any, he used. In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server. "As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other parts of the world,” he said. With no formal computer training, he did most of his hacking from a small Romanian village.
U.S. Constitution - Article IV, Section 4: NO BORDERS + NO LAWS = NO COUNTRY
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||