Hillarly email lawsuit tossed

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/9/federal-judge-fbi-exhausted-search-clinton-emails/

BUT HER...oh. we can still do the dank redpill memez tho, right?

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/9/federal-judge-fbi-exhausted-search-clinton-emails/

This says it all. Just another liberal judge:

Judge Boasberg, an Obama appointee to the court

Originally posted by Killjoy12
This says it all. Just another liberal judge:

[B]Judge Boasberg, an Obama appointee to the court [/B]

In other words, your dislike of liberal judges is prompting you to blindly assume this isn't a fair judgement.

But hey, when people you don't like aren't found guilty, then obviously the judged is biased!

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Naturally your critique of the lawsuit has nothing to do what's actually in the lawsuit or the evidence provided the other side.

In other words, your dislike of liberal judges is prompting you to blindly assume this isn't a fair judgement.

But hey, when people you don't like aren't found guilty, then obviously the judged is biased!

You don't think judges can be biased? He was appointed by Obama. Do you really think Obama would appoint a conservative judge.

Originally posted by Killjoy12
You don't think judges can be biased? He was appointed by Obama. Do you really think Obama would appoint a conservative judge.

Originally posted by Killjoy12
You don't think judges can be biased?

The first statement is an obvious truth no one has disputed. The other is an assertion you've failed to substantiate.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Merrick Garland was no liberal

If he was appointed by Obama. Probably a Hardcore Leftist Extremist. Way WORSE then a "Liberal".

Don't they already have the evidence that she was knowingly sending classified documents? What are a few more messages going to do? It doesn't look like she is going to get in trouble so why bother? That rule apparently doesn't apply to her.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Naturally your critique of the lawsuit has nothing to do what's actually in the lawsuit or the evidence provided the other side.

In other words, your dislike of liberal judges is prompting you to blindly assume this isn't a fair judgement.

But hey, when people you don't like aren't found guilty, then obviously the judged is biased!

I read the entire article. Where does it discuss the evidence provided by the other side?

"The Court of Appeals may have asked the Government to ‘shak[e] the tree harder’ for more emails, but it never suggested that the FBI must shake every tree in every forest, without knowing whether they are fruit trees,” he wrote.

The judge said the FBI had already uncovered 55,000 pages of emails when it was ordered to do more. The agency interviewed people that most frequently exchanged work related emails with Mrs. Clinton, contacted her four service providers, and reviewed two phones and three iPads, which yielded little records."

^^^not evidence, btw.

Why hasn't Trump put in a special prosecutor like he promised?

Stupid Trump. Not my president.

I don't really care about this Clinton email shit anymore now that the election is over tbh. I always felt like it was more a sign of incompetence than criminal intent. Since she's not running for president that seeming incompetence seems somewhat irrelevant.

Also, I've always thought it was pretty embarrassing for our government that they even allowed her to run a private server in the first place. So I don't put the entire blame squarely on her shoulders; you don't leave it up to the end user to create the proper security infrastructure.