Politics First Charges filed in Mueller Investigation

Before, or after the person was dead?

Did she have sex with the corpse, perhaps?

Remove some of the body parts and eat them?

barfo

 

Before.

That's all I'm going to say. It's beyond dirty politics.

 

Then I'm going to have to call bullshit. "She's evil, but I can't say why!"

barfo

 

It's not right to the person's family.

That's all there is to say.

Her husband gave the eulogy, and so did a few other prominent democrats and republicans.

 

Right... how many jars of your urine are you saving around the house?

barfo

 

Who is Billy Dale?

Billy Dale was the victim of one of Clinton's earliest major ethics controversies. He ran the white house travel office from 1982 to 1993.

Hillary fired the people who worked in the white house travel office a few months after her husband took office. She gave the travel business to relatives of the Clintons as well as friends and donors to the Clintons.

The thing is, the travel office serves at the president's pleasure. The administration could fire and reorganize the thing as they saw fit, without any ethical challenges. Though these sort of staffers usually server for years or decades and through the terms of multiple presidents of both parties.

Instead, she sought to prosecute Dale for supposedly embezzling $18K (which was investigated and proven not true earlier).

Ultimately the friends of Clintons were removed from the travel office programs, but the FBI was maliciously used to persecute and then prosecute Dale even after the firing. All this to cover up Hillary's unethical moves and abuse of her husband's office.

Dale was tried and found not guilty in 1995. (A similar thing happened to the guy who supposedly posted the youtube video that Clinton lied about in the Benghazi scandal).

Ken Starr sought notes taken by the administration officials and their lawyers regarding the firing, but was denied by the Supreme Court due to attorney client privilege. For lack of this evidence, Clinton would not be charged for her crimes by Starr.

Robert Ray, who worked out the plea deal with her husband resulting in Paula Jones getting paid $900K+, and his disbarment from the Supreme Court and his license suspended in Arkansas, could not prosecute because the evidence was sufficiently buried.

Ray cited eight separate conversations between the First Lady and senior staff and concluded: "Mrs. Clinton’s input into the process was significant, if not the significant factor influencing the pace of events in the Travel Office firings and the ultimate decision to fire the employees." Moreover, Ray determined Hillary Clinton had given "factually false" testimony[63] when questioned by the GAO, the Independent Counsel, and Congress[61]about the travel office firings, but reiterated that "the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that she knew her statements were false or understood that they may have prompted the firings.

A two-year-old memo from White House director of administration David Watkins surfaced that identified First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton as the motivating force behind the firings, with the additional involvement of Vince Foster and Harry Thomason.[39] "Foster regularly informed me that the First Lady was concerned and desired action. The action desired was the firing of the Travel Office staff."[40] Written in fall 1993, apparently intended for McLarty, the Watkins memo also said "we both know that there would be hell to pay" if "we failed to take swift and decisive action in conformity with the First Lady's wishes."[39] This memo contradicted the First Lady's previous statements in the GAO investigation, that she had played no role in the firings and had not consulted with Thomason beforehand; the White House also found it difficult to explain why the memo was so late in surfacing when all the previous investigations had requested all relevant materials.[40] House committee chair Clinger charged a cover-up was taking place and vowed to pursue new material.[39]

So she's innocent? NO.

 

None, of course. I'd figure that's your thing.

 

I would just like to point out that someone has been complaining about the charges against Manafort are from acts from over 10 years ago (which is not accurate but whatever) while bringing up a case from 1993.

 

So, you think Manafort should be allowed to get away with his crimes? Why?

barfo

 

Psst... When a bunch of this shit happened Manafort worked for the dems.

Why not let Mueller run this investigation. You just might like where it leads.

 

I was implying that Denny was unhinged.

barfo

 

How does it lack due process? A grand jury indicted him, and he will now have a trial, assuming he doesn't plea bargain beforehand. How is that any different than what would have happened if the FBI was running the investigation by itself?

barfo

 

Judges have signed off on warrants, the assistant AG is overseeing Mueller's investigation.

 

Maybe Manafort just never crossed their radar before. Should they let him go because of that?

People get caught for crimes in a variety of ways. Should the special counsel look the other way? If they'd passed the thread off to some other law enforcement agency to follow up on, would you be ok with that, or would that still be overreach?

barfo

 

If the AG wanted to supervise Manafort's investigation, maybe he shouldn't have lied about Russia?

barfo