Thursday, July 14, 2016

Rep. Lieu's questioning of FBI Director Comey is something that those who still think that Hillary Clinton should have been indicted really need to see.

"The American people might be interested in knowing that all members of Congress receive security clearances just for being a member of Congress. We get to have private e-mail servers. We get to have private e-mail accounts. We can use multiple devices. We can take devices overseas."

So I guess people are right.

There really are a different set of rules for Hillary Clinton.

But that different set of rules does not do anything to protect her, instead it applies extra stringent guidelines to how she must conduct herself or risk being the subject of a witch hunt by the Republicans.

79 comments:

  1. Anonymous6:42 AM

    Well done, Rep. Lieu!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous7:12 AM

      Members of congress do not "get" to receive top secret classified information on their private e-mail servers. If they did, they and the sender(s) would be in violation of the laws protecting classified material.

      As the FBI reported, Hillary's email server hosted multiple classified documents--some marked at the highest level of security. Who transferred those documents to her server? Whoever did is in clear violation of the law. They remain unpunished while others have paid very stiff penalties for less, such as John Kirakaou and Jeffrey Sterling.

      Delete
    2. Well Anonymous 7:12 that statement was directed at FBI director Comey who did not disagree with it, and in front of a number of Republican Congressmen who did not challenge it.

      But hey, I guess you're the expert. Right?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous8:12 AM

      @anon 7:12am
      First of all, there was no law when Hillary was using a private server, just like there was no rule( yup, it's actually a rule not a law) when Bush, Cheney, Powell, or Rice did it, along with many members of congress. Now run along and iron your hood for your next Trump rally.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous8:40 AM

      Nicely put and spot on.

      Delete
    5. Love it when Gryphen occasionally shows up to give someone a reality check! Lol. I like the way he allows anti IM trolls to mingle with us. It gives us the opportunity to call them out on their hypocrisy. Of course it won't change a thing with their mindset but it's still feels great to fight back. Thanks Gryphen!! Love this blog.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous7:13 PM

      Gryphen @7:18 from 7:42 in answer you—the following is excerpted from intelligence officers, retired, not me, who are free to speak out and wrote to the White House about Hillary’s email server. Please note that Hillary’s email server contained Top Secret documents. (And why don’t you look into the cases of others who have been punished severely for far less re classified info if you really want to understand why many people who see this lenient treatment of Hillary as evidence of a double standard under the law.)

      “…Our concern mounted in January when the Inspector General of the intelligence community wrote to the chairs of the congressional intelligence committees that he had received from one of the intelligence agencies two “sworn declarations” asserting that Secretary Clinton’s emails contained not only CONFIDENTIAL and SECRET information, but also information at the TOP SECRET/SAP level.

      “Anyone who has ever handled classified material knows that there are a number of things that you do not do. You do not take it home with you, you do not copy it and share it with anyone who does not have a clearance and a need-to-know, you do not strip off the classification marks and treat it as unclassified, and you do not transfer it to another email account that is not protected by a government server.

      “If you have a secured government computer operating off of a secure server that means that what is on the computer stays on the computer. This is not a matter of debate or subject to interpretation. It is how one safeguards classified information, even if one believes that the material should not be classified, which is another argument that has been made in Clinton’s defense. Whether or not the classification is unnecessary is not your decision to make.

      “But while intent might be relevant in terms of punishment, it does not change the fact that as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, then Senator Clinton had clearances for classified information for years before becoming Secretary of State. She knew the rules and yet as Secretary she handled classified information carelessly after a deliberate decision to circumvent normal procedures for its safeguarding, thus making it vulnerable to foreign intelligence, as well as to criminal hackers….”

      William Binney, Technical Director, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

      Thomas Drake, Senior Executive, NSA (former)

      Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

      Former Sen. Mike Gravel, D, Alaska; earlier, Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service, special agent the Counter Intelligence Corps.

      Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

      Larry C. Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

      Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF Intelligence Agency (ret.), ex-Master SERE Instructor

      John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

      Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)

      Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA (ret.)

      Todd Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)

      Scott Ritter, former MAJ, USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq

      Diane Roark, DOE, DOD, NSC, & professional staff, House Intelligence Committee (ret.)

      Robert David Steele, former CIA Operations Officer

      Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)

      Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA, (ret.)

      Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

      Delete
  2. Anonymous6:51 AM

    Ginsburg apologized to Trump.

    Well asshole, you ended up on the wrong side of that one didn't you?

    What's the deal with all this anger spewing out of you recently?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous7:28 AM

      No she didn't. You're lying.

      Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg expressed "regret" for recent comments she made criticizing Donald Trump in a statement released Thursday by the Supreme Court's public information office, but stopped short of a full out apology to the presumptive GOP nominee.

      “On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect,” Ginsburg said.

      As far as anger, you're the one name calling, and acting like an asshole, so fuck off.

      Delete
    2. Cracklin Charlie7:30 AM

      Regretting her remarks is not the same as apologizing, asshole.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous7:51 AM

      6:51
      Do you always hang out and project in places that bind your panties? You should really think about how self-destructive that is. Why do you want to stoke your anger-management problem, asshole?

      Delete
    4. Anonymous8:07 AM

      Well asshole, it seems you have a reading comprehension problem. There was no apology. Now run along and continue your hate filled day.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous8:39 AM

      Ruth only said because of her position in the future she would be less public with her opinion. Take that,Dumpster. Its still her opinion.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous8:58 AM

      Good golly, 6:51 feeling the angry wrath of the gryph's unhinged IM cultists lol. Whats wrong kids, pissed off you didn't get that return you expected on your 11k investment?

      Regardless Ginsburg acknowledged she made a mistake. Now she looks doubly weak and her judgement is certainly questionable.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous 8:58 AM wrote: Regardless Ginsburg acknowledged she made a mistake.

      Not really. She did not state—or in any way imply—that her assessment of Trump was mistaken. She merely expressed regret that she had revealed this assessment to the press while Trump was a candidate for public office.

      Now she looks doubly weak and her judgement is certainly questionable.

      Again, not really. I suggest to you that her judgement of Trump's character, capabilities, and fitness for any public office, is spot on.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous1:42 PM

      Sorry Ted, I skipped over your whole post in favor of slowly drilling into the side of my head with a Makita cordless drill, while simultaneously stapling my nuts to my desk....

      As those two activities are 10 times more enjoyable than bothering to read one of your painfully useless, boring, and self aggrandizing diatribes.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous2:35 PM

      Ted is right.

      Delete
    10. Anonymous3:09 PM

      You're right about Ginsburg Ted. The 1:42pm troll spends its time attacking other commenters. It reminds me of that maldeveloped personality RAM although I think it is someone else.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous3:11 PM

      @1:42, OMG that was funny!

      Delete
    12. Anita Winecooler5:05 PM

      Stihl has much better torque, Battery and Electric have the same power bands, just sayin'

      Delete
  3. Anonymous6:53 AM

    It can't be just Republicans who think Clinton should be indicted when 56% of Americans think that way - including (not surprisingly) 88% of Republicans, but also a full 31% of Democrats.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLkyhqQtME8

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous7:37 AM

      Argumentum ad populum is a fallacious argument. Just because a group of folks with no access to actual facts think she should be, doesn't mean she should.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous7:55 AM

      Anonymous7:37 AM, I guess you are a Republican - when faced with facts you don't like, you make up your own "facts."

      Delete
    3. Anonymous8:10 AM

      Funny, no one asked me.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous8:45 AM

      Nor I. Opinions taken from a small group of people don't speak for millions of U.S. citizens. That must have been that call I blocked the other day.Damn!

      Delete
    5. Anonymous8:47 AM

      7:55 - this is 7:35

      What facts have I made up.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous9:07 AM

      Cite a real source, YouTube doesn't count.

      Delete
    7. 6:53 AM - did you speak out or cite statistics when that drunken POS Bush committed treason by lying to Americans about WMD in Iraq? Did you demand an investigation over the thousands of lives lost - did you feel outrage over 9/11 and when Bush administration quietly, secretly, arranged for bin laden's family to leave the country right after the attack? Did you question why we lost over 3000 lives that day even though Bush had been warned it was coming? Did you EVER question why this country was crippled by Wall St and insider trading of bad mortgages - the fraud so deep and far reaching it impacted the global economy?

      Then after that drunk came up with a bail out of the very institutions that caused the crash, he dropped the mess on our current president - who's been blamed ever since. This country has too many uninformed, lazy voters like you. Low hanging fruit for the repubs who count on people like you. Not something you should be proud of.

      Do you have any sense at all? Do you ever read or educate yourself? Obviously, you do not and that makes you look ridiculous and stupid.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous12:55 PM

      "Cite a real source. YouTube doesn't count."

      The YouTube video was citing the Washington Post / ABC News Poll.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/11/poll-most-disapprove-of-fbi-decision-to-exonerate-clinton/

      Now please post some links that show, either this poll doesn't exist, or that the poll is invalid. And BTW, the "Secular Talk" Channel on YouTube is every bit as valid a source of political information as this blog is. Right, Gryph?

      Delete
    9. Anonymous1:35 PM

      Ok, thanks for the cite. The same poll shows 68% of respondents say either it will make no difference in their vote, or that they are now more likely to vote for Clinton. So where does that leave us?

      Delete
    10. Anonymous1:42 PM

      12:55

      Who cares how many folks think she should be indicted? They aren't privy to the facts. They didn't gather evidence and interrogate people. They haven't seen the evidence. Their opinions in this matter are irrelevant. Has our society degenerated to the point that we rely on polls of know nothings to decide whether someone is indicted? If so, the idiocracy is now.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous2:40 PM

      Anonymous1:42 PM, It matters because they are voters, and 31% of Democratic voters think Clinton should be indicted. Whether she should be indicted or not is not the point. The point is that 31% of her own party thinks she should be indicted. That's almost one fucking third. AND THEY ARE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS!

      Delete
    12. Anonymous2:50 PM

      2:20

      So what. Democratic or not, they are dummies.

      Delete
    13. Anonymous6:55 PM

      @ Anonymous 2:50 PM - Now that's a brilliant statement coming from an obvious superior intellect. BTW, whether they are smart or not is NOT THE FUCKING POINT, EITHER! Whether she should be indicted or not, is not the point. Whether the Democratic voters are smart or stupid, is not the point. Whether the 31% who think she should be indicted, end up voting for her or not, is not the point. The point is that almost one third of Democratic voters think their nominee for President of the United States might be a criminal or is a criminal. That in itself is kind of important whether she wins the election or not.

      Delete
  4. Anonymous6:58 AM

    OT:RNC list of speakers released and guess who's not on it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous8:34 AM

      dRumpf took a dump on Sara with a pile of shit list of names, not a one her's>
      http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/14/trump-dumps-sarah-palin-giving-speaking-slot-republican-convention.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politicus+USA+%29

      Delete
    2. Anonymous8:47 AM

      Let me take a wild guess who's not on the list....the Alaskan Bimbo.

      Delete
  5. Anonymous7:00 AM

    Sen. Angus King Paints A Terrifying Picture Of Trump As He Endorses Hillary Clinton

    After boarding the "Doomsday plane", Senator Angus King (I-ME) imagined Donald Trump in charge during a nuclear attack. King's knees "were a little weak" thinking about how much power the President has in that situation... And he knew he had to vote for Hillary Clinton.

    http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/14/picturing-donald-trump-charge-nuclear-attack-sen-angus-king-endorses-clinton.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous8:44 AM

      dRumpf is a Maladjusted Megalomaniac and much much worse.

      Delete
  6. Anonymous7:01 AM

    It is being reported that the candidate Trump really wants to choose to be his running mate is New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

    ...“Trump’s gut is Christie,” one source said. The New Jersey governor spent the day in back-to-back meetings in Washington as he leads Trump’s transition team.

    It has long been speculated that Christie’s bully, blowhard, attack Hillary Clinton as a criminal style has drawn Trump to him like a bug to light.

    Trump may want Christie in heart, but Gov. Bridgegate is so scandal-riddled and unpopular that it may make even Donald Trump shy away from him. Plus, the Republican Party itself seems to be pushing Trump to pick Pence.

    A selection of Chris Christie would be a dream come true for Democrats. If Trump picks Christie as his running mate, he will have selected one of the few politicians in the world that rival Trump’s unfavorable numbers.

    http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/14/democrats-dreams-true-heart-trump-chris-christie-vp.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous8:13 AM

      Plus he put his son in law's dad in prison.

      I am inclined to go with pence; very passive. Christie unleashed as vp will upstage the donald who does not team well with others. That's why palin might be in. She is the ultimate sycophant.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous8:14 AM

      Oh Christie will have a place in a mythical Trump Presidency as a McDonald's gopher.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous8:15 AM

      If I was Christie, I would make amends with my state instead of providing pro bono work for trump. Trump always rides for free and never works.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous5:14 PM

      Christie was on Fox news with footage of Trump's plane and Pence's plane in New Joisey, and Christie was under the impression that no one could beat a Trump/Christie ticket. Then they had the breaking fox news exclusive announcing who was on the two planes in Paramus and that Trump's family chose Pence as the running mate. Christie quietly turned a redder shade of magenta as the interviewer rubbed it in by saying "Now, where were we.....?" A cut to commercial, and a huuuuuuuge empty space where Christie vaporized and got beamed back to the Chrispy Creme drive through. OUCH that had to hurt.

      Delete
  7. Anonymous7:12 AM

    O/T No Sarah, no MOH on Trump's convention speaker list.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous7:20 AM

      Palin for VP! Yes, please!

      Delete
    2. Anonymous8:13 AM

      No sane person could believe the Trump kids would pick Palin for VP since they all have more education than her.

      Delete
  8. Anonymous7:21 AM

    BAM!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrX3Ql31URA

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous7:30 AM

    She isn't messing around.

    ‘Won’t Somebody Please Think of the Children?’

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/new-clinton-ad-suggests-trump-is-bad-role-model.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anita Winecooler5:15 PM

      She's running some pretty clever, effective ads.

      Delete
  10. Anonymous7:36 AM

    50-State Snapshot

    https://morningconsult.com/trump-vs-clinton-conventions-electoral-college-map/

    ReplyDelete
  11. Please spread the video of Rep. Lieus on your Facebooks.
    Here is the shortened URL http://bit.ly/29FQIbu

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous7:54 AM

    It's incredibly depressing that Hillary has been attacked for decades and held to a higher, nay impossibly high, standard. The Republicans hold her directly and solely responsible for the deaths in Benghazi when it's a fact that Ambassador Stevens knowingly made decisions to stay in Benghazi in exceedingly dangerous conditions. But Hillary won't say that because she won't blame the victim. I ask you how many people did George W. Bush kill in his wars that he lied the American people into?

    The state of the union is sickening and sad with a person the likes of Donald Trump rising to the top of the Republican party and that party acknowledging his serious faults (even stating he's a racist) but they think he's better than Hillary? Seriously? It's unbelievable that Trump as 40% or more of the electorate supporting him -- what the hell is wrong with people? He's not building a wall, bringing back the coal industry, creating jobs or looking after his African Americans or inner cities. I fear for America because it sure isn't looking good no matter who wins in the end because the Trump followers, the white nationalists (aka the poorly educated) aren't going away. Nope, they're out buying semi-automatics to take their country back.

    "Those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous1:28 PM

      The GOP has been in "attack and destroy" mode with the Clintons ever since 1992 when the couple burst on the American scene. Republicans cannot stand an articulate, educated and liberal opposition. Nor can they stand losing the White House. That's one of the reasons that Bill Clinton was besieged with attacks throughout his tenure as president.

      Since the election in 2008, they've shifted gears to attack Hillary Clinton personally and constantly. Her support during the campaign of Barach Obama after having been his primary opponent and then her acceptance of the post of secretary of state were the triggers to bring on the attack dogs.

      Wouldn't it be nice if, instead, the GOP concentrated on caring positively about the American people and making their lives better? Had we had 8 years of bi-partisan cooperation instead of total obstruction and sedition on the GOP's part in Congress, we all would be in a better place today. There would have been real infrastructure work included in the economic recovery legislation, sensible and workable new immigration policies in place, and racism would have been put aside, hopefully for good. But no, the GOP in Congress did not want to participate in the governmental process, just collect pay checks and benefits and then sit on their hands.
      Beaglemom

      Delete
  13. Anonymous8:04 AM

    I call his office all the time, sometimes just to praise and thank him. He is a great Representative. But please fix the typo in your headline and add in the "i", Gryph: Lieu

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damn, I thought I had his name right.

      Delete
    2. That's ok Gryphen - the typo doesn't impact the post. 😎👍

      Delete
    3. Anonymous2:37 PM

      Thanks, Gryph!

      Delete
  14. Anonymous8:19 AM

    Roll call says it's Pense. Somewhere a wig is crying and 2 men feel regret.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous8:21 AM

    Sarah, I know you read this.

    You are now out of politics. Find a hobby such a scrapbooking.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous8:25 AM

    This is O/T -
    The RNC Convention list of Speakers is out.
    Palin did not make the cut.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republican-conventions-non-conventional-list-model-astronaut-and-trump-clan/2016/07/14/a40686ac-49b9-11e6-90a8-fb84201e0645_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_gopconvention-8am-lede%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous8:27 AM

    OT:"The Republican Party wants America to forget that Sarah Palin was once their vice presidential nominee.

    Palin has been DUMPED by Trump. The GOP can try to erase Sarah Palin, but the seeds she sowed in 2008 have grown into the nomination of Donald Trump."

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous8:29 AM

    O/T
    Pence is the VP pick
    http://www.aol.com/article/2016/07/14/donald-trump-mike-pence-vice-president/21432206/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous11:02 AM

      The fat lady hasn't sung yet, or would that be the fat fuck crispy cream whom drumpf will force to introduce whomever. My bet, not Pence, but long SHOT Sara or NEWT> the plan ALL ALONG.
      dRumpf LOVES to shame and humiliate.

      Delete
  19. Anonymous8:46 AM

    Of course there's a different set of rules for HRC!

    Women must OBEY, it's the rethuglican way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:20 PM

      Spot on!

      Delete
  20. Anonymous8:53 AM

    Lol. All these Palin RNC posts.

    IMers are the only ones thinking, wishing, hoping she was still more relevant. The rest of the world moved on years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cracklin Charlie9:15 AM

      You do understand why we want Sporkhands to pick Sarah, don't you?

      Oh, hell...what am I saying?

      We want him to pick her, so that the dumpster fire that is the Trump campaign will burn even hotter!

      Delete
    2. Anonymous9:20 AM

      Lol. Silly, you're butt hurt. You haven't. You're here.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous9:41 AM

      No, hunnie, you don't get it. The idiot bitch makes for great 'reality TV'. It would take a veritable TEAM of writers to come up with the extreme bullshit that is palin. All that's missing from the plot is an evil twin!

      Delete
    4. Anonymous9:50 AM

      It is cute watching you IMers trying to explain away and provide cover for your embarrassing Palin obsession.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous10:21 AM

      9:50 -

      What's cute is watching you post over and over and over again while claiming others have a Palin obsession. You really are an idiot.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous11:12 AM

      9:41>
      Speaking of twins..Where is Ruffles , Tri-Ggers missing twin?
      Mono baby #1?
      DWTS Baby Tristin #5?
      and the trust fund$$?

      Delete
  21. OMG - can we PLEASE move on with the whole email bullshit claims?! Thanks for finding and sharing this Jesse. Your blog has been a springboard for me to go further with research and educate myself with facts - instead of blindly/irresponsibly repeating the lies planted by the politics of destruction.

    I'm well aware of Hillary's own stretch with the truth but this email bullshit, along with Benghazi - PLEASE!

    Why do the repubs give that lunatic Bush a complete pass on what he did to Iraq - and the bloodshed that took the lives of thousands of American soldiers as well as coalition forces - and the innocent civilians - billions spent on a lie by the president of the US! He LIED! That's treason in my world.

    Yet, the committees who've investigated Clinton over and over and over again - shamefully, disgracefully and hypocritically remain silent over the devastating losses and subsequent danger Bush and his administration caused to this nation.

    That's treason. That's murder. The repubs refusal to protect the innocent victims of gun violence because the fucking NRA owns their sorry asses has resulted in more bloodshed and murders than any terrorist attacks upon our soil, including 9/11 which occurred under the Bush administration. I'm fed up with the republican bastards that block any attempts to stop the insanity of access to guns - high powered military assault weapons available to even the most dispicable - those on the no fly list - as well as mentally incompetent and dangerous individuals - I don't care what party affiliation - they don't care about the bloodshed as long as their political position isn't at risk.

    It's way past time for all of us to make our voices heard and demand term limits, easier process for impeachment and limit salaries of politicians in Washington who are seriously overpaid with 5 star medical comps while they cut benefits to the most needy citizens.

    We need to start marching on Washington and get rid of lobbyists - and most importantly - demand the laws change that allow corporations to run the electoral process.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous8:58 AM

    Gryph thank you soooooo much for what you do. I really do appreciate the information you share with America. Once I started watching that video I couldn't stop till it was finished. Thank you again.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous10:37 AM

    OT: "I have a dream" in the background. I have a dream when real justice replaces injustice. Look at these POLICE pics>
    http://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/o-j-simpson-murder-trial-bloody-crime-scene-photos/photo/145376/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:55 AM

      Racist Pig Mark Fuhrman is knee deep in the blood of our countries injustices.
      http://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/o-j-simpson-murder-trial-bloody-crime-scene-photos/photo/145380/

      Delete
  24. Anonymous4:52 PM

    Too bad the media is still hell bent on smearing Hillary, otherwise this would have been widely reported.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anita Winecooler5:20 PM

    As sick as I am about the email non controversy/we can't trust her, I'm glad this man spoke up. Hillary's had a long career in public service and she has the experience and brains to hit the ground running. She'll make a great President and I can't wait to see Trump's face when she wipes the floor with his toupee and shoves it in his mouth (in full haz mat suit, of course!!!) and kicks him to the curb.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.