In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Is there a tangible legal road to get this done?

bpostbpost Member Posts: 31,944 ✭✭✭✭
edited February 2019 in Politics
We have suffered through the Mueller investigation for nigh on two years now...

Result? Process crimes and little IRS shenanigans; ruining men's lives over diddly squat trying to get Trump.

Is there a way "WE THE PEOPLE" can force our elected or LEO's to investigate the glaring crimes of Hillary, McCabe and Comey? One would think being a nation of laws there would be a way for Joe Schmoe et al to force the investigation of Scumbags listed through the Federal Courts.

It is hard for the Feds to say US Citizen Joe Schmoe does not have standing in the case when the bad actors sold Uranium to Commies and hid the crimes behind the shield of a FBI badge.

I would die a happy man knowing the Elite sometimes get their just desserts for the crimes they commit in this Nation. Double this for getting Hillary into cuffs doing the perp walk as she should.

Comments

  • BrookwoodBrookwood Member, Moderator Posts: 10,737 ******
    edited November -1
    Just like trying to right all of the wrongs going on when more is wrong than right!

    Kind of a tongue twister I know but we are living in times where I see a lot of people who do not know the difference between right and wrong.

    Our media seems to confuse them both as well. Just like a question I asked some time ago about seeing term limits on a ballot. If We The People could just get our well intentioned ideas that truly would solve many of our nations problems up and running, I would start to believe our Republic had a chance.
  • chiefrchiefr Member Posts: 12,757 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Its not only a hoax, but it is the biggest red herring purported on the American people in a century.

    Meaning for those in Rio Linda: Cover for felonious crimes by the past regime, Hillary Clinton. Loretta lynch, Comey, Brennen, and other prominent DEMOCRATs
  • US Military GuyUS Military Guy Member Posts: 3,573 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    "Legal" ?

    Let me understand.

    You are asking if there is anyway the folks that have to obey the laws can get accountability from the folks that make the laws?

    My best guess is

    NO WAY ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH IS THAT GOING TO HAPPEN!
  • remingtonoaksremingtonoaks Member Posts: 27,192
    edited November -1
    Why yes there is, but I doubt it will ever happen.

    But the way to do this is create term limits and vote out career criminal politicians. And after a politician is folded out or reaches his term limits, have him independently through the private sector investigated for his actions while in office. When a person knows that eventually they have to be accountable for their actions, if even only in the private sector, their actions won't be as devious as the current way the government is run now. Which is you have career criminal politicians that Force new politicians to turn and look away.

    But the truth of the matter is...

    There's no way on God's green earth that will happen
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 22,938 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by bpost
    We have suffered through the Mueller investigation for nigh on two years now...

    Result? Process crimes and little IRS shenanigans; ruining men's lives over diddly squat trying to get Trump.

    Is there a way "WE THE PEOPLE" can force our elected or LEO's to investigate the glaring crimes of Hillary, McCabe and Comey? One would think being a nation of laws there would be a way for Joe Schmoe et al to force the investigation of Scumbags listed through the Federal Courts.

    It is hard for the Feds to say US Citizen Joe Schmoe does not have standing in the case when the bad actors sold Uranium to Commies and hid the crimes behind the shield of a FBI badge.

    I would die a happy man knowing the Elite sometimes get their just desserts for the crimes they commit in this Nation. Double this for getting Hillary into cuffs doing the perp walk as she should.


    One typically has to be personally damaged in order to have standing. It is deliberately a fairly high bar. I have a few leftist friends who probably believe that Comey gave the Presidency to Trump and believe they were personally damaged by it, though I doubt that would pass the first court that heard it.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • mogley98mogley98 Member Posts: 18,311 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    LOL REALLY? And their wasn't enough evidence of Subpoenaed Emails being destroyed to warrant that investigation??!!

    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    I believe the investigations wouldn't have taken place if there wasn't sufficient reasons to warrant them. When someone draws attention to themselves by questionable actions, should it be ignored due to party affiliation? No. When someone yells foul because another does something unethical, immoral, or illegal, should it not be investigated and just ignored due to party affiliation? No. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, do you really believe it's a turtle? I believe they need to complete their investigations, in the time necessary to find the answers. IMHO. [^]
    Why don't we go to school and work on the weekends and take the week off!
  • remingtonoaksremingtonoaks Member Posts: 27,192
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by mogley98
    LOL REALLY? And their wasn't enough evidence of Subpoenaed Emails being destroyed to warrant that investigation??!!

    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    I believe the investigations wouldn't have taken place if there wasn't sufficient reasons to warrant them. When someone draws attention to themselves by questionable actions, should it be ignored due to party affiliation? No. When someone yells foul because another does something unethical, immoral, or illegal, should it not be investigated and just ignored due to party affiliation? No. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, do you really believe it's a turtle? I believe they need to complete their investigations, in the time necessary to find the answers. IMHO. [^]



    I don't really find any humor in it, and sadly no. If evidence is purportedly gone, what could actually be done without it? Slick work? Or "move along, nothing to see here." I do not have that answer and to be realistic, anyone that believes they do are only speculating. [;)]


    Ummm. It's against the law to destroy evidence... Hillary destroyed emails after they were subpoenaed...

    And if I destroyed evidence after it was subpoenaed, I would go to jail for obstruction of justice...
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 22,938 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by mogley98
    LOL REALLY? And their wasn't enough evidence of Subpoenaed Emails being destroyed to warrant that investigation??!!

    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    I believe the investigations wouldn't have taken place if there wasn't sufficient reasons to warrant them. When someone draws attention to themselves by questionable actions, should it be ignored due to party affiliation? No. When someone yells foul because another does something unethical, immoral, or illegal, should it not be investigated and just ignored due to party affiliation? No. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, do you really believe it's a turtle? I believe they need to complete their investigations, in the time necessary to find the answers. IMHO. [^]



    I don't really find any humor in it, and sadly no. If evidence is purportedly gone, what could actually be done without it? Slick work? Or "move along, nothing to see here." I do not have that answer and to be realistic, anyone that believes they do are only speculating. [;)]


    Ummm. It's against the law to destroy evidence... Hillary destroyed emails after they were subpoenaed...

    And if I destroyed evidence after it was subpoenaed, I would go to jail for obstruction of justice...


    I'm truly confident that you clearly know much more about it then those involved. You seem to know everything. [B)]


    Clinton confirmed that some 30,000+ emails were scrubbed after the subpoena date. Apparently if you claim they are recipes and yoga schedules, subpoenaed material can be destroyed.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 31,944 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by mogley98
    LOL REALLY? And their wasn't enough evidence of Subpoenaed Emails being destroyed to warrant that investigation??!!

    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    I believe the investigations wouldn't have taken place if there wasn't sufficient reasons to warrant them. When someone draws attention to themselves by questionable actions, should it be ignored due to party affiliation? No. When someone yells foul because another does something unethical, immoral, or illegal, should it not be investigated and just ignored due to party affiliation? No. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, do you really believe it's a turtle? I believe they need to complete their investigations, in the time necessary to find the answers. IMHO. [^]



    I don't really find any humor in it, and sadly no. If evidence is purportedly gone, what could actually be done without it? Slick work? Or "move along, nothing to see here." I do not have that answer and to be realistic, anyone that believes they do are only speculating. [;)]


    Are you Barzillia's Homie?

    The Evidence is the FACT the evidence is gone and with known intent to destroy evidence the server was wiped by a program called Bleach Bit. This fact is by their own admission. Smashing Blackberry's with a hammer to prevent any traceability is De Facto a crime in and of itself.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 22,938 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by mogley98
    LOL REALLY? And their wasn't enough evidence of Subpoenaed Emails being destroyed to warrant that investigation??!!

    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    I believe the investigations wouldn't have taken place if there wasn't sufficient reasons to warrant them. When someone draws attention to themselves by questionable actions, should it be ignored due to party affiliation? No. When someone yells foul because another does something unethical, immoral, or illegal, should it not be investigated and just ignored due to party affiliation? No. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, do you really believe it's a turtle? I believe they need to complete their investigations, in the time necessary to find the answers. IMHO. [^]



    I don't really find any humor in it, and sadly no. If evidence is purportedly gone, what could actually be done without it? Slick work? Or "move along, nothing to see here." I do not have that answer and to be realistic, anyone that believes they do are only speculating. [;)]


    Ummm. It's against the law to destroy evidence... Hillary destroyed emails after they were subpoenaed...

    And if I destroyed evidence after it was subpoenaed, I would go to jail for obstruction of justice...


    I'm truly confident that you clearly know much more about it then those involved. You seem to know everything. [B)]


    Clinton confirmed that some 30,000+ emails were scrubbed after the subpoena date. Apparently if you claim they are recipes and yoga schedules, subpoenaed material can be destroyed.




    And your point Don? I haven't claimed squat. Recipes? Seriously? Trump tactics now? How about, if you don't like garlic bread you must like skunk's *? No different tactic than most arguments out of Washington and especially here. [V]


    Perhaps I should have said 'one' instead of the generic 'you'. I was referring to Clinton and the legal team she hired to review, delete and destroy the 'personal' emails post-subpoena. It was Clinton, not Trump who said the deleted and destroyed emails were recipes, yoga schedules and the like.

    Not every time the pronoun 'you' is used does it refer to, well, you.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • randomnutrandomnut Member Posts: 943 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    GreatGuns, I'll not feel like we've lost anything when you move. Hopefully the rest of the liberals will follow.
  • randomnutrandomnut Member Posts: 943 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by GreatGuns
    quote:Originally posted by randomnut
    GreatGuns, I'll not feel like we've lost anything when you move. Hopefully the rest of the liberals will follow.


    As I shall not miss people like you one bit either. Not a liberal, but you have a fitting moniker. [;)]


    What?? I even miss ECC, you can identify as whatever the hell you wany.
  • spasmcreekspasmcreek Member Posts: 38,925
    edited November -1
    mueller McCarthy has a long way to go yet
Sign In or Register to comment.