kd7eir Loc: Tucson, AZ

... of the truth (pants-pissing COWARD that he is) that he has me blocked from posting in his threads, so I'll post a response here to his BS claim that Hillary laundered $84 million dollars.

And yet not A SINGLE COURT IN THE USA has ever found, in the THIRTY YEARS that the Republican traitorous assholes have been attacking Hillary cause to file even ONE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT against her.

Either Republicans are the dumbest damn people to ever inhabit the universe, or Hillary is smarter than ALL REPUBLICANS, JUDGES, AND COURTS COMBINED in the USA, or perhaps the TRUTH which is that Hillary HAS NOT COMMITTED all the crimes that the Republicans keep circle jerking about.

In contrast, keep in mind that with the supposed "witch hunt" - three former Trump campaign officials -- one-time deputy campaign chairman Rick Gates, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and ex-foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos -- have plead guilty and agreed to cooperate with Mueller. 13 Russians have been indicted, Manafort was just hit with another round of criminal charges, Cohen is being investigated for bank and wire fraud, along with campaign finance violations.

Too bad that "law and order" "patriotic" Republicans are too damn STUPID to accept REALITY.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Thanks for the truth of the matter.

tradio Loc: Oxford, Ohio

Hillary lover!

19photo30 Loc: Olympia, WA

Does it really make you more "macho" to use all the swear words? Just wondering. Makes it hard to understand what you're trying to say!

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I have no idea what is going on with you and LA Shooter to cause him to block you nor is that any of my business. But getting to the people you mention on the Republican side and the Mueller investigation, yes some people have pled guilty to crimes, some incredibly minor that hardly anyone ever is indicted for. But, and this is an important point, well worth considering, is that not one of the people who have been indicted or pled guilty have been guilty of colluding with the Russians to alter the election results. Not one. Each has been charged or found guilty of minor crimes having no relationship to the colluding theory you Liberals push.

On the contrary, you don't mention anything about President Obama who actually did use $350,000 of taxpayer money to alter the Israeli election of Prime Minister Netanyahu. You also don't mention anything about Hillary, the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Shultz and Donna Brazille who ALL colluded not only to sink Bernie Sanders' chance at the Presidency. Nor do you mention Donna Brazille giving Hillary questions to one of the Primary debates. Even if President Trump DID collude with the Russians, that does not mean there is any crime involved. So to make a big stink about Trump colluding while ignoring President Obama's meddling in the Israeli is pretty hypocritical isn't it? Calling Trump a cheat while ignoring all of Hillary's corrupt and unethical moves is pretty hypocritical as well isn't it?

Almost every day I get emails from various places that point out that Comey lied, Brennan lied, Eric Holder lied and we already know that Hillary and Obama both lied about Benghazi, with regard to what caused the attack in the first place. Why don't I ever as in EVER see you on the Left complaining about these people lying? I am citing facts here, not some vast Right Wing Conspiracy theory as Hillary claims. If the Left is so moral and interested in the truth then why not be moral and want the truth in all of it, rather than just demand that Republicans be truthful, honest and ethical? Isn't that supposed to be the Democratic way, the high road; you know what I mean.

Oh, about Hillary being indicted maybe you should check with the Obama justice department starting at Attorney General Loretta Lynch and her meeting with Bill Clinton, then move on down one notch to the FBI, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and then just a smaller notch downward to Strzok and Paige. These people, ALL, had a hand in the Hillary investigation over 30,000 emails, passing classified documents and so on. Yet we know now that there really was not a real investigation. You know as well as I do that Hillary's attorney having classified documents on her computer is illegal. Huma Abedin having classified documents on her computer and Anthony Weiner's computer is illegal. Yet they were there. Now if it was so important to get into Cohen's computer files then why wasn't it just as important to get into these computers of Hillary's people who DID have classified documents on their computers. But somehow in the fairytale land of the Left, under Obama's Presidency, that was all OK and seemingly appropriate. Now if you really want to tell yourself that this all above board and legal then have at it. But we ALL know that Hillary is guilty but was never going to be prosecuted under the Obama reign.

Have a wonderful day,

Dennis

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Truth my ass!!!

Dennis

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

I can’t imagine anyone banning you.

Your risibly dishonest rants are comedy platinum.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

Most anyone that doesn't agree with la shooter is on the ignore list including me . Almost brings a tear to my eye.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

wow, what a retort

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

that's where YOUR truth comes from....YOUR ASS

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Your reality isn't true reality but the Democratic Party talking points...

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS BS

GeneB Loc: Chattanooga Tennessee

Do you know how to tell when a politician lies?........................They open their mouth.

Checkmate Loc: Southern California

Hey KKKrakkken, only left wing dick heads sweat the small stuff. Basically ALL DemoCrap women were street walkers at one time and many married their pimps.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Really? From the Washington Post.

In an interview Tuesday with MSNBC, after calling for a “purge” of FBI agents proven to be biased against President Trump, Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.) made an eye-popping accusation against Hillary Clinton.
“We’ve seen a lot of ends-before-the-means culture, both out of the Obama administration; out of Hillary Clinton, you know, with her $84 million of potentially illegal campaign contributions or the Clinton Foundation Uranium One [scandal],” said Rooney. “People need a good clean government.”

What was behind Rooney’s claim that Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign possibly received millions in illegal money? It was the first time a member of Congress had referred to a Federal Election Commission complaint lodged by a pro-Trump super PAC against Clinton and most state Democratic parties.

In the complaint, the Committee to Defend the President asked the FEC to determine whether the defeated Democrat engaged in “unprecedented, massive, nationwide multimillion-dollar conspiracy” to allow large donors to spread more money around. The “conspiracy,” however, may have simply taken advantage of new loopholes in campaign finance law — loopholes expanded after a Supreme Court victory by the lawyer who filed the new complaint.

The story starts in 2012, when Republican donor Shaun McCutcheon sued over FEC regulations that limited how much money donors could give to parties and candidate, in total, in any campaign cycle. McCutcheon’s case made it to the Supreme Court in 2013, where defenders of the FEC limits failed to convince the court’s conservative bloc that lifting the limit would allow candidates to blow past their own donation limits by routing more money through state parties.

“How realistic is that?” asked Justice Samuel Alito during oral arguments. “How realistic is it that all of the state party committees, for example, are going to get money and they’re all going to transfer it to one candidate?”

In the end, it was very realistic. In 2016, Clinton’s campaign created a Hillary Victory Fund — a joint fundraising committee — that allowed the candidate to raise money for both her campaign and 32 state parties at the same time. Donald Trump’s campaign did the same, albeit with fewer state parties. During the campaign, neither move courted much controversy.

After the campaign, the dam broke. In October, former Democratic National Committee chair Donna Brazile began releasing excerpts from her memoir “Hacks,” in which she described a DNC that was effectively run “from Brooklyn” — i.e., by Clinton’s campaign. Brazile’s criticisms got noticed by Dan Backer, who’d won McCutcheon’s case at the Supreme Court, and who happened to be the attorney behind the Committee to Defend the President. Donors who had given to the Hillary Victory Fund, whose money had been “earmarked” to elect Clinton, had, he argued, been part of a laundering scheme.

“The DNC, in turn, contributed most of those funds to HFA, made coordinated expenditures with HFA and otherwise transferred control of its money to HFA, as both the DNC’s own public filings and former DNC chairwoman Donna Brazile’s public confessions make clear,” Backer wrote in the complaint. “In McCutcheon v. FEC, 134 S. Ct. 1434, 1455 (2014), the Supreme Court itself recognized this precise arrangement would flatly violate federal earmarking restrictions, … though the court dismissed the possibility of such a flagrantly illegal scheme as ‘unlikely’ to occur. Not even the Supreme Court could anticipate the extent to which the Democratic Party and its elite, wealthy donor class would commit willful felonies in a futile attempt to facilitate Clinton’s election.”

Until Tuesday, most coverage of the FEC complaint had appeared in conservative media. Fox News reported that Clinton and the DNC had been accused of a “corrupt money scheme.” Backer explained the complaint’s logic in the conservative op-ed pages of Investor’s Business Daily.

Democrats, meanwhile, basically ignored the story. Reached for comment, several state party chairs — all of their state parties having been named in the complaint — said they were unaware of it. In the weeks since Brazile’s book was released, state Democratic Party chairs have criticized the 2016 funding arrangement; none thought it was illegal.

In an email, Backer argued that the complaint rested entirely on what Democrats had said and done about the JFC.

“If state parties never had any actual custody or control, the ‘allocation’ of funds to them was never a contribution to them, but rather an attempt to paper the funds through strawmen on the way to the DNC, where the funds were placed under the control of Team Clinton in Brooklyn,” Backer wrote. “Thus, the $300,000(ish) from Calvin Klein was not a contribution to each of the participating entities, but rather an excessive contribution to at least the DNC, and since they took that money and put it under the custody and control of Team Clinton, it is an excessive contribution to the campaign. If that’s how it was pitched to donors (I’ll bet you a steak dinner on that one), those doing the pitching violated federal law.”

Democrats have, by and large, declined to comment about Backer’s complaint. Campaign finance watchdogs, however, believe that the pro-Trump super PAC may be on to something. Paul S. Ryan, a vice president of Common Cause who works on campaign finance issues, said that “the possibility of this type of scheme was why I was critical of McCutcheon in the first place,” and that some type of probe into practice of new, larger joint fundraising agreements might have been inevitable.

“In my view, the complaint does show enough smoke to warrant investigation into whether there was a fire,” said Ryan. “It would be good to get some guidance from the FEC on this. Either way you cut the Backer complaint, this is either illegal activity, or it’s legal but troubling.”

Campaign finance watchdogs had been waiting for a tough examination of the donor pools created in 2016. It’s unclear how long it might take the FEC to dig in; it took years after the 2008 and 2012 cycles for the commission to levy fines against the campaigns of John Edwards and Mitt Romney.