General Discussion

OnDoutside

(20,869 posts)

7. He wasn't charged because SHE should have been charged !

Tue Aug 9, 2016, 12:08 PM

Aug 2016

Firstly, she was acting the maggot, presumably trying to make a name for herself.
Secondly, from all the video angles shown, there was little or nothing in it.
Thirdly, iirc, she touched/impeded a Presidential candidate, which could have meant that she was liable to be charged, so Lewandowski could be said to have saved her from worse.

Lewandowski is an asshole but this was a nothing story, I don't know why you're trying to make something of it now ?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Has a single DUer heard anyone on cable, network, radio, newpaper, [View all] malaise Aug 2016 OP

It was all over the news, as I recall bigwillq Aug 2016 #1

Since he was not charged????? malaise Aug 2016 #4

Yes. Act_of_Reparation Aug 2016 #2

IIRC, this was analyzed from multiple camera angles citood Aug 2016 #3

Since he was not charged???? n/t malaise Aug 2016 #6

He wasn't charged because SHE should have been charged ! OnDoutside Aug 2016 #7

Stick around malaise Aug 2016 #8

Should I get the popcorn in ? OnDoutside Aug 2016 #14

I remember seeing that he wasn't charged announced on the news. citood Aug 2016 #11

You see that is only mandatory for the other side n/t malaise Aug 2016 #12

Its not 'mandatory' for anyone citood Aug 2016 #13

Because he's so "precious" misterhighwasted Aug 2016 #5

Besides the initial reports, this was revisited when he was hired by CNN pinboy3niner Aug 2016 #9

Good for the New Yorker malaise Aug 2016 #10

yeah, but she DID kill vince foster, remember? and there's not statute of limitation Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #15

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! malaise Aug 2016 #16

it's all HERE! Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #17