The Politics Thread

Psyche · Post Post #35 (isolation #0) » Fri May 13, 2016 1:27 pm

oh, really??

Psyche · Post Post #42 (isolation #1) » Fri May 13, 2016 1:36 pm

In post 40, drmyshottyizsik wrote:There is, but Loretta Lynch said she wouldn't indict her

that's not true

Psyche · Post Post #45 (isolation #2) » Fri May 13, 2016 1:42 pm

she did not "make it a point to announce" anything

Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, asked whether her agency would be "required" to pursue criminal charges against Clinton, and she responded accurately to that question

Psyche · Post Post #46 (isolation #3) » Fri May 13, 2016 1:44 pm

keep the distortions coming

Psyche · Post Post #50 (isolation #4) » Fri May 13, 2016 1:53 pm

In post 48, drmyshottyizsik wrote:
In post 45, Psyche wrote:she did not "make it a point to announce" anything

Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, asked whether her agency would be "required" to pursue criminal charges against Clinton, and she responded accurately to that question
Of course that's hiw she answered it, but if she were willing to indict her she would have said so, and wouldn't continuously not answer the question when asked of whether or not she would be willing to regardless

do you think the justice department should make it a practice to announce their intentions to indict people before the fbi tells them whether a crime has even been committed or not