ActRight

The FBI's email announcement set off a torrent of anger and frustration among some of Bernie Sanders' most diehard supporters, a vocal minority who have been agitating for an indictment of the former secretary of state in the hopes it would vault the Vermont senator to the Democratic nomination.

No reasonable person could possibly reconcile what Comey said about Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail system with his final recommendation.

No season 4 spoilers in the video This is episode 10 One of my favorite scenes from the season and the series overall!

Ted Cruz called for “full access” to “all the information that the FBI used to come to today’s dubious decision.”

The fix was in. Tuesday, FBI Director James Comey painted a devastating picture of Hillary Clinton’s reckless lawbreaking with her emails and the damage it likely caused — but then recommended no c…

Write this down. Record the date. Remember it. July 5, 2016. 11:15 a.m. One day after America's 240th birthday. When historians conduct their autopsy on Lady Justice, that will be the time of death. That is the precise moment when Justice drew her last labored breath, cursed our ridiculous...

Equality not only unleashed the energy of the American people so that they would become the most prosperous in the world, but it shaped their moral condition, it suited them to live in a world of constant change, it liberated them from the dead hand of the past, and it engaged them in the frenzied and exhilarating “race” for infinite potential futures... (click the link below to read the full essay by Ted McAllister)

Republicans continue to do the Left’s dirty work.

There is no longer the Rule of Law in this nation.The law is clear.  Knowingly removing classified documents is a criminal offense.The very setting up of such a server and transmission or reception of classified material violates the statute since it is not possible&nbs

?Brexit Voters Were Angry? ? “Donald Trump’s supporters are angry“. At this point, if you are on the team still trying to convince anyone that this entire assembly of our union is…

Action star Matt Daemon, who has made millions starring in films with guns, wants to ban yours.

Like many, I was disappointed at first by the statement that the FBI would not be recommending the DOJ indict Clinton. They admitted that she broke the law but stated that they believed it wasn’t [...]

In a world of conquests and ideological terrorism, a nation is just as strong as its military. Our military is needed more than ever, and the well-being of veterans is essential. But President Obama has never cared about the stability of the U.S. military, as is evident by his demeaning attitude and his anti-military policies, including his latest act to repeal a regulation on transgendered individuals in the military effective July 1st.

There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services. Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States. Get Free Exclusive NR Content In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence. I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed. It is a common tactic of defense lawyers in criminal trials to set up a straw-man for the jury: a crime the defendant has not committed. The idea is that by knocking down a crime the prosecution does not allege and cannot prove, the defense may confuse the jury into believing the defendant is not guilty of the crime charged. Judges generally do not allow such sleight-of-hand because innocence on an uncharged crime is irrelevant to the consideration of the crimes that actually have been charged. It seems to me that this is what the FBI has done today. It has told the public that because Mrs. Clinton did not have intent to harm the United States we should not prosecute her on a felony that does not require proof of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, although there may have been profound harm to national security caused by her grossly negligent mishandling of classified information, we’ve decided she shouldn’t be prosecuted for grossly negligent mishandling of classified information. I think highly of Jim Comey personally and professionally, but this makes no sense to me. Finally, I was especially unpersuaded by Director Comey’s claim that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based on the evidence uncovered by the FBI. To my mind, a reasonable prosecutor would ask: Why did Congress criminalize the mishandling of classified information through gross negligence? The answer, obviously, is to prevent harm to national security. So then the reasonable prosecutor asks: Was the statute clearly violated, and if yes, is it likely that Mrs. Clinton’s conduct caused harm to national security? If those two questions are answered in the affirmative, I believe many, if not most, reasonable prosecutors would feel obliged to bring the case.

An Illinois man who celebrated the Fourth of July weekend by burning an American flag in protest against the United States was arrested Monday as a reminder that freedom in this country is mostly a facade. After all, the United States Supreme Court ruled decades ago that flag burning as a form of protest is …

Sometimes in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another.

Paul Joseph Watson, Anger as FBI recommends no charges for former Secretary of State. Many Americans reacted furiously to the FBI’s announcement that

“FBI director said Crooked Hillary compromised our national security. No charges. Wow! #RiggedSystem”

Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet.

On July 4, 1776, the United States announced its independence from Great Britain based on the key principle of rule of law. On July 5, 2016, the United States said, “F*** it. I’m With Hillary!”

please subscribe... im tired of all these low quality casino movie clips soo i made really good quality ones of some the best scenes on casino please go to m...

Ridiculous.

Because migrants come from a different culture.

“Comey: "Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring" charges in Clinton email case”

The FBI does not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton over her use of private email but said she was 'careless' in handling classified information.