Texas grand jury clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers While the right wing media drums up another fake story, it turns out the outrage about Planned Parenthood and the fiction they were selling fetuses for profit has been unmasked, by a Texas Republican, the Harris County District Attorney, who btw was appointed by Rick Perry. He cleared Planned Parenthood of wrongdoing, and in a totally sweet moment instead indicted two leading members of the group that broke the faked story: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/25/politics/planned-parenthood-activists-indicted/index.html All I gotta say is, knew it. Nice to see the truth still matters.
Is NBC news left enough for you to believe? http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ls-contained-info-above-top-secret-ig-n499886 The smelly bitch wouldn't even pass a background check for security clearance after all this, yet you want her to be our president. And you, like her, blame her mistakes on a "right wing conspiracy". Yea - OK. At what point will you actually hold Hillary accountable for breaking the law? No doubt she'd be indicted already if she weren't Hillary Clinton. Obama is likely seeing to it that she's above the law. Bunch of corrupt assholes running this show.
As for living in an echo chamber, you'd be surprised to know that I follow news agencies across the spectrum including things like al jazeera, reuters, bbc & huffpo
NSN a few months ago was outraged, outraged Smelly bitch? Your misogyny is showing. Temper temper! For reasonable people here, obviously the NBC story does NOT support NSN's earlier claim about the FBI. "No doubt..." LMAO!
Perhaps. But the only ones you quote here are unreliable right wing billionaire funded propaganda "sources". If it makes you feel any better I sometimes turn on Fox News. I used to do that more, but they are so boringly predictable.
I have no issue with women in general, but this smelly bitch aggravates me. What claims have I made about the FBI? The NBC News story points out the higher than top secret emails that were on Hillary's unsecured server. That's a felony. Why hasn't she been indicted for this? Keep avoiding the real issue. Answer this, if Hillary broke the law, should she go to jail? http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...heck-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law
I would be hesitant to utilize a source that has headline writers who don't understand the FBI does not have the power of indictment. Hell, even your buddies at Breitbart probably know better than that.
It's like watching the X Files except Mulder and Scully fabricate the evidence and then beat the suspects until they confess or die. Oh and there's no werewolves or aliens.
No. You need to own your post. Your source was Newsmax - that is what you linked to and that is who you paraphrased and highlighted in red incorrectly. That is your responsibility. If Newsmax cites someone incorrectly that is their responsibility and might be an indication that they should not be used blindly just because you may like what they print.
"The FBI is ready to indict Hillary Clinton and if its recommendation isn't followed by the U.S. attorney general, the agency's investigators plan to blow the whistle and go public with their findings, former U.S. House Majority leader Tom DeLay tells Newsmax TV." It seems pretty clear to me what is being said, FBI puts together information that can be used to indict, presents said evidence to U.S.A.G. so they can proceed with indictment. Them saying the FBI is prepared to go public with the findings if there is no indictment makes it clear the FBI and the writer knows only the A.G. can indict. Seems an argument without substance to attack a headline, it's what news organizations do to draw in the reader.
No legitimate news organizations or any news organization that knows the law and that is the problem with using half-ass "news organizations." Again, the FBI has no power to indict, they simply gather evidence that the Justice Department uses to decide if an indictment is called for. A Newsmax headline writer may have made an ignorant mistake or they may have intentionally embellished to make a point but that doesn't make their statement correct or worthy of repetition. Too many people here have problems with reading comprehension as it is and all too many have almost no idea how our government functions. You may choose to excuse this, I don't when people spread falsehoods for one reason or another.
