Quote:At least she's smart enough to know who she's working for. Not going to click the link to read the article, but if I worked for the Clinton syndicate, and had 20 years of dirt on them, I'd be backing that up somewhere safe. She clearly isn't a mastermind here considering she put it on a shared laptop with her perv husband.
Hubby needs the insurance, too. Huma is likely a Saudi double agent and almost certainly Hillary's bedmate. Of course she and Anthony know all about Arkancide and the Body Count, etc. Maybe she forwarded all evidence of criminality to her special Yahoo account. The marriage to the Jewish pedophile Anthony W doesn't make too much sense on the surface, but who knows? If this was a movie, he would either be Mossad or maybe it was True Love. But now the NYPD and FBI have evidence that Hillary herself may be a pedo, so the Anthony W connection would make perfect sense. It's sort of spinning out of control right now.
Quote:Orin Kerr who teaches law at George Washington University.
The guy that's obsessed with Hillary and hates Trump. The first thing that I saw on his Twitter is #NeverTrump.
You don't think there's some bias there?
Also, that's only one lawyer. You said there were more.
Quote:The guy that's obsessed with Hillary and hates Trump. The first thing that I saw on his Twitter is #NeverTrump.
You don't think there's some bias there?
Also, that's only one lawyer. You said there were more.
Maranda Fritz - Thompson Hine
Clark D. Cunningham - Georgia State University
There is certainly a legitimate question. Again that's what the courts are for.
Quote:It's the law. If this was centered around anybody else but HRC the constitutionalist would be in an uproar.
There is previous case law on Huma's side as well. You should read United States v Ganias.
<a class="bbc_url" href='https://epic.org/amicus/ganias/'>https://epic.org/amicus/ganias/</a>
Stop using facts and actual American laws.
It's always about the emails. We will be hearing it for 8 more years. Fox and OAN have NOTHING else to talk about. Hence this section of our MB has nothing else to talk about.
Won't somebody please care about the emails??!!
Quote:Stop using facts and actual American laws.
It's always about the emails. We will be hearing it for 8 more years. Fox and OAN have NOTHING else to talk about. Hence this section of our MB has nothing else to talk about.
Won't somebody please care about the emails??!!
Contents of the emails are extremely important. Even more so now that they know 5 foreign agencies hacked her server. Remember guys C stands for cookie right.
Quote:Stop using facts and actual American laws.
It's always about the emails. We will be hearing it for 8 more years. Fox and OAN have NOTHING else to talk about. Hence this section of our MB has nothing else to talk about.
Won't somebody please care about the emails??!!
... but he's wrong. He's applying incorrect case law. You may choose to believe him, but you'd be as wrong as he was.
If the e-mails were discovered as a result o a bad search, the Federal judge wouldn't have issued the warrant. There is no credible evidence to suggest that the discovery was mishandled. Unless anyone can provide some, its and act of deflection.