Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!news.datemas.de!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: OT: "Every American"...
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 19:06:48 -0800
Organization: Datemas.de http://www.news.datemas.de
Message-ID: <o764sa$bvg$2@news.datemas.de>
References: <o734m0$3r7$1@news.datemas.de> <efkvkmF2eu1U1@mid.individual.net> <o744vt$ih5$1@dont-email.me> <040220171111192098%nospam@nospam.invalid> <o7531b$nue$1@dont-email.me> <040220171237081072%nospam@nospam.invalid> <o75h7f$92h$2@news.datemas.de> <040220171706461759%nospam@nospam.invalid> <o75rsf$s7b$2@news.datemas.de> <040220172000548677%nospam@nospam.invalid> <2017020418143231728-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> <040220172132409034%nospam@nospam.invalid> <o7636s$90u$2@news.datemas.de> <040220172147473452%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: ElYTkUFFDarf/bMPOgbS5Zhi4cXc1znCLRzfMXvroA/JQHSxBFn7+5rgZOi141xsfrUd1nMDTNI=
Injection-Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 03:06:51 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.datemas.de; logging-data="12272"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@datemas.de"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
In-Reply-To: <040220172147473452%nospam@nospam.invalid>
Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:99520

On 2017-02-04 6:47 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article <o7636s$90u$2@news.datemas.de>, Alan Baker
> <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> read/listen to her statements. there are ones that contradict other
>>>>>>>>> ones. contradictory statements cannot both be true. thus, she lied
>>>>>>>>> under oath. so did comey too, for that matter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So your answer would be "No, I have no factual references)...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> her statements under oath are as factual as it gets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And which of those statements factually supports your allegation that
>>>>>> she "paid off" an FBI director?
>>>>>
>>>>> why else would he not prosecute someone who broke the law?
>>>>
>>>> Because he couldn't find a law that she broke.
>>>
>>> yet plenty of other people did, including perjury and setting up a mail
>>> server in her basement that carried classified email. had anyone else
>>> done either, let alone both, they'd be in deep, deep shit.
>>
>> You mean like the Republicans?
>
> along with democrats & independents.
>
> anyone who looks at the facts can see what's really going on.
>

LOL!