You're lumping me in with criminal actors based on a difference of opinion.
That seems like a pretty serious allegation based on me having a difference of opinion.
I was already done with you, but I read the first line. Ya'll are about to learn all about prosecutorial discretion and I don't want to hear a peep.
Why would I get in trouble? What kind of trouble would I get in?
Does not change whether the law was broken. The question isn't if I would support an indictment, but the DOJ. And the answer to that is...
That's genuinely terrible.
Is that some kind of threat?
Coming from the side that has been looking for anything they can find on this man like blood hounds for seven years, this rings more than a little...
So what? Does not disprove anything I said. And if this was done to negate the appearance of political influence, they did a pretty shitty job....
That's exactly what you said, you're acting like she shouldn't be held accountable because a bunch of idiots told her what she was doing was okay,...
Ridiculous defense to claim ignorance here. She knew exactly what she was doing.
For the millionth time, wiping the private server containing the emails is obstructing justice, not cooperating.
Fair, but wiping the server isn't being cooperative. Quite the opposite.
The opposite. I don't think Hillary should've been indicted. Or if she was indicted, then Trump as well.
There's no question Trump broke the law. The issues here are as follows: 1. The Justice Department chose not to indict Hillary for essentially...
Yes, the media has a history of "softening the discussion" on Trump. Put the crack pipe down and get back to us when you're sober.
Wiping a private server isn't returning them immediately.
Absence of integrity? Intellectual humility? You must be new here.
Bullshit.
It didn't have to be the highest level of classification to support an indictment. Color me skeptical that this was just the straw that broke...
