THE GOD OF REALITY

.

I received a interesting question from a dear e-mail friend of mind that got me thinking about the birth of Christ.  Since it is the Christmas Season I share some ideas on the topic..........

My friends question.........

 Getting close to Christmas. As a biology teacher. Have you considered the blood of Jesus had to come from being a virgin birth? What if Jesus had a blood transfusion. Would his blood been contaminated or he was pure enough that the blood would have been purified?

My response........

........ didn't have transfusions back then! Erythrocytes (red blood cells) do not have a nucleus (except in the early stages of formation in bone marrow) therefore they do not contain DNA......"purity is a condition of the DNA." (besides the cells given in a transfusion are replaced in several weeks anyway!)

Clarification…..the Virgin Birth was NOT about “parthenogenesis”…biological development of a non-fertilized ovum which produces offspring with a monoploid compliment of DNA. (half the amount…common in several plants and invertebrate animals.) Jesus was human in every way except sin…He was NOT a “haploid.”)

 The virgin birth was about DIVINITY...the "purity" is about DNA .....NOT MORALITY......Mary, His mom was 100 % Homo sapiens...she gave Jesus 23 human chromosomes (DNA) from the House of David that goes ALL the way back to Patriarch Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (Israel) THIS fulfilled the "promise" made to Abraham through HIS righteousness given to him directly from God. The "other" 23 chromosomes (DNA) DID NOT COME FROM THIS PLANET! Those chromosomes (DNA) were "pure"...DIVINE.....from God's Eternal Cosmic Kingdom. Gabriel (an Angel of God...and Extraterrestrial I might add by definition since he was not from Earth) announced to Mary that she was FAVORED by God through her "purity in the blood line of Abraham." (being Catholic we have this in our Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.....HER conception....VERY important concept when talking DNA and GENETICS!  She was in a “pure” state in reference to Her DNA….She was not a “haploid” either!) You don't have to be a biologist (like me!) to realize we are talking "artificial insemination."

I know that my faith would say she conceived by the Holy Spirit as recorded in Scripture WHICH IS TRUE ....HOWEVER...since the Holy Spirit of God dwells within ALL who accept God's Gift of Grace....AND there is no question Gabe was very "pure" as well... the 23 Divine chromosomes involved in the Holy Conception of the Son of God was via "artificial insemination." Scripture is NOT contradicted! (duh….Gabe didn’t do the inseminating ala’ the Nephilum. Angels are forbidden to procreate with humans)

The reason many will not understand what I am saying is that man equates sexual reproduction with morality. Sexual reproduction has NOTHING to do with morality......it is about God's PERFECT Law of "Genetic Recombination of Gene Codes." The "morality" issue occurs when man ABUSES this Law! The Conception of Jesus (Yeshua ben Joseph) in the Blessed Womb of Mary was a FULLFILLEMENT of God's PERFECT Genetic Laws AND had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MORALITY. Man's mind tends to be in the "gutter" which is expected since we are in a fallen state in DIRE need of the Blood of Christ to resolve our disconnect with a Holy God!!!

We know that Jesus had seemingly apparent "supernatural powers" (whatever that means!) recorded in God's Holy Word. With 50% of His DNA coming from God's Cosmic Kingdom....no wonder He could "walk on water" etc.!

Bill...the Holy Bible is ABSOLUTE TRUTH.....no mistakes...contradictions etc. The problem is that the INTERPRETATION of Scripture is illusion. God's "gift" of Science ...given at this "time" of human history actually PROVES the Bible is TRUTH. God wants INFORMED Faith..NOT blind Faith.  

 The power of positive prayer is evidence of the God of Reality and I suspect the prayer works at the "quantum level." I find it ironic that today's Scientists are BLIND to the reality of Scripture and Science.  It is VERY sad that alleged believers reject the connection between Science and the Bible

....... didn't have transfusions back then! Erythrocytes (red blood cells) do not have a nucleus (except in the early stages of formation in bone marrow) therefore they do not contain DNA......"purity is a condition of the DNA." (besides the cells given in a transfusion are replaced in several weeks anyway!)

Clarification…..the Virgin Birth was NOT about “parthenogenesis”…biological development of a non-fertilized ovum which produces offspring with a monoploid compliment of DNA. (half the amount…common in several plants and invertebrate animals.) Jesus was human in every way except sin…He was NOT a “haploid.”)

 The virgin birth was about DIVINITY...the "purity" is about DNA .....NOT MORALITY......Mary, His mom was 100 % Homo sapiens...she gave Jesus 23 human chromosomes (DNA) from the House of David that goes ALL the way back to Patriarch Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (Israel) THIS fulfilled the "promise" made to Abraham through HIS righteousness given to him directly from God. The "other" 23 chromosomes (DNA) DID NOT COME FROM THIS PLANET! Those chromosomes (DNA) were "pure"...DIVINE.....from God's Eternal Cosmic Kingdom. Gabriel (an Angel of God...and Extraterrestrial I might add by definition since he was not from Earth) announced to Mary that she was FAVORED by God through her "purity in the blood line of Abraham." (being Catholic we have this in our Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.....HER conception....VERY important concept when talking DNA and GENETICS!  She was in a “pure” state in reference to Her DNA….She was not a “haploid” either!) You don't have to be a biologist (like me!) to realize we are talking "artificial insemination."

I know that my faith would say she conceived by the Holy Spirit as recorded in Scripture WHICH IS TRUE ....HOWEVER...since the Holy Spirit of God dwells within ALL who accept God's Gift of Grace....AND there is no question Gabe was very "pure" as well... the 23 Divine chromosomes involved in the Holy Conception of the Son of God was via "artificial insemination." Scripture is NOT contradicted! (duh….Gabe didn’t do the inseminating ala’ the Nephilum. Angels are forbidden to procreate with humans)

The reason many will not understand what I am saying is that man equates sexual reproduction with morality. Sexual reproduction has NOTHING to do with morality......it is about God's PERFECT Law of "Genetic Recombination of Gene Codes." The "morality" issue occurs when man ABUSES this Law! The Conception of Jesus (Yeshua ben Joseph) in the Blessed Womb of Mary was a FULLFILLEMENT of God's PERFECT Genetic Laws AND had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MORALITY. Man's mind tends to be in the "gutter" which is expected since we are in a fallen state in DIRE need of the Blood of Christ to resolve our disconnect with a Holy God!!!

We know that Jesus had seemingly apparent "supernatural powers" (whatever that means!) recorded in God's Holy Word. With 50% of His DNA coming from God's Cosmic Kingdom....no wonder He could "walk on water" etc.!

Bill...the Holy Bible is ABSOLUTE TRUTH.....no mistakes...contradictions etc. The problem is that the INTERPRETATION of Scripture is illusion. God's "gift" of Science ...given at this "time" of human history actually PROVES the Bible is TRUTH. God wants INFORMED Faith..NOT blind Faith.  

 The power of positive prayer is evidence of the God of Reality and I suspect the prayer works at the "quantum level." I find it ironic that today's Scientists are BLIND to the reality of Scripture and Science.  It is VERY sad that alleged believers reject the connection between Science and the Bible

 

Check out my Blog.......
http://thedoubtingthomasjourney.blogspot.com/

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Sweet
To: 'David'
Sent: Mon, Nov 21, 2016 11:24 pm
Subject: RE: signs
 

Getting close to Christmas. As a biology teacher. Have you considered the blood of Jesus had to come from being a virgin birth? What if Jesus had a blood transfusion. Would his blood been contaminated or he was pure enough that the blood would have been purified?

ALGOREisms

 

...Global warming is a cyclic process based on the Sun's cyclic processes. The reason it is NOT affected by man's alleged carbon emissions is because of the following....... the "green house effect" is based on silicon GLASS IN THE CEILING of a green house that allows sunlight to pass through and prevent loss of the warmth created by the light inside the "house" warming up the house The reason carbon can't do this is because it exists as a gas called carbon dioxide (CO2) (erroneously called a "green house gas") that weighs 44 grams per mole...it is the heaviest gas in the atmosphere (densest) and IT SINKS TO THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH and is absorbed by green plant life (mostly the microscopic phytoplankton in bodies of water) that manufactures carbohydrate nutrients and OXYGEN AND dissolves in bodies of water forming bicarbonate ions which bind to calcium ions (minerals) depositing LIMESTONE. THE RERSULT OF this is that CO2 is a BUFFERED gas...as it increases, biomass and limestone deposition increases keeping the net amount CONSTANT. The ice core studies that claimed human activity has increased CO2 to dangerous levels DID NOT take Biology and Geology into the issue. Wonder why? READ BELOW....... (BTW...ONE VOLCANO RELEASES MORE CO2 INTO THE ATMOSPHERE THAN ALL THE CARS COMBINED SINCE THE MODEL "T" FORD!.....I taught these truth to my students...they KNOW the truth)

Man made global warming is a Novus Ordo Seclorum (secular new world order) device to help control human populations and bring them under a one world EVIL government. (Brexit and the election of Donald Trump has forced the secular new order to goon the "back burner" until the time of the Biblical Tribulation.)

The news media disperses false information that all scientists are in agreement on man made global warming. I and thousands more like me KNOW THE TRUTH...so does President elect Donald Trump. MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS A WEAPON OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER.

In addition....man has learned how to modify weather patterns using aluminum silicates and barium salts at high altitude ("chem trails") that absorb very high energy electromagnetic radio energy from DARPA's HAARP project.

DARPA.....The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is an agency of the U.S. Department of Defense responsible for the development of emerging technologies for use by the military. DARPA was created in February 1958 as the Advanced Research Projects Agency by President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Its purpose was to formulate and execute research and development projects to expand the frontiers of technology and science, with the aim to reach beyond immediate military requirements. The administration was created in response to the Soviet launching of Sputnik 1 in 1957, and DARPA's mission was to ensure U.S. military technology would be more sophisticated than that of the nation's potential enemies.

HAARP.....High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program

Sounds innocent? It was in the beginning! When they found out their experiments were altering weather patterns they knew they needed a "smokescreen" to cover-up what was happening and the secular new world order that infiltrated out government after President Eisenhower suddenly knew they had a "tool" to affect world populations. THEY NEEDED A FALSE FLAG......hence..MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING.

POST ELECTION PROTESTING

 

It is very sad that we see so much post-election protesting, sadly in many places with violence, being propagated by the clinton supporters. (probably supported by George Soros) Some how I suspect if hilary had won it would be a lot different....sadness yes....but I doubt they would attempt to destroy our Constitution and overturn the voice of the people with petitions and violence. Protesting the opinions of others is an American right but is protesting the votes of other fellow Americans really an acceptable right?  The election is over....it is .time to heal NOT continue the protesting of the campaign!

Until the California vote came in (which went for hillary as expected, and after Donald already had the election basically won by electoral vote, Donald was leading the popular vote by hundreds of thousands......AFTER the California vote came in hilary was ahead in the popular vote by 200,000 votes. I for one would NOT appreciate the election of a president based on such a close margin AND the the vote of ONE LIBERAL STATE or possibly even votes by a state with a large population of ILLEGALS . I guess if I was a liberal I would selfishly say "go California", however, I hope I would instead realize that the "people of America" are infinitely more important than my selfish desires.

 (NOTE....just in at 6pm Nov.9.....the popular vote margin is decreasing and the trend is that Donald may actually end up winning the popular vote as well.)

ALSO...for those who hate the Electoral College...I suggest you look up the 1787 Constitutional Convention. I feared that hilary would beat Donald in the Electoral vote and be the 45th President of the United States and Donald would win the popular vote and lose the election like Governor Samuel Tilden whose monument I use to fly kites off of when I was a kid. I feared a clinton presidency so much that I would have screamed "get rid of the Electoral College" like so many are doing as I write this email.

If anything is learned by this election...it's the fact that our framers of our country were geniuses in creating the "checks and balances" of the Electoral College. Protection of our Constitutional Government "trumps" (pun intended!) the popularity of any single person running for any political office and the Electoral College PROTECTS our Constitution by protecting the election of the President.

 CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT ON THE ELCTORAL COLLEGE.......

"Some elements of the Electoral College, such as the indirect vote through intermediaries, were hotly debated at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. It was eventually justified in part as a stopgap to potentially 'reverse the vote if the people elected a criminal, traitor, or similar kind of heinous person.' The Founders wanted to empower democratic elements in the American system, but they feared a kind of pure, unrestrained democracy that had brought down great republics of the past."

The violence we see taking place as we write is VERY disturbing. The right to protest is a Constitutional right BUT NOT with violence. It is sad that the present administration is silent on this and the news media is playing it up instead of condemning it. (especially that racist Juan Williams of Fox News) 150 years ago a French political analyst Alexis DeToqueville said that a true Democracy requires a politically educated citizenry. What we have had up to today is more like "junior high student council voters." Maybe enough Americans have awakened as evidenced by the election of a non-political outsider. It would NOT have happened without the protection of our forefather's Electoral College and California could have ALONE elected a President tainted by criminal investigation. If you don't believe this is an issue, there would be no need of the present administration to consider "pardoning" the losing candidate for President. I am still perplexed that the democrat party even considered nominating a candidate with so much baggage. The republican political party DID NOT NOMINATE THE WINNING CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT.....THE PEOPLE DID! Infact.....their leadership opposed their own candidate and went with the opposition candidate......something that violates the Regan postulate. DeToqueville sure knew what he was talking about!

The Electoral College May SAVE America

hillary & The FBI  and DOJ....... Corruption and  FBI problems at end of email.................??????

.......SEEMS scary (article at end) .....but believe it or not......our forefathers designed a "checks and balances" to prevent such a problem...THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE.   The delegates of each state are pledged but NOT obligated by law to vote for the states winner. The winner of tonight's election is NOT President Elect UNTIL the Electoral College  holds its vote the Monday after the second Wednesday in December following the election.  It is at this time we have a "President Elect."  

The following quote reveals the "checks and balances" in the electoral system......(Entire article on the Electoral College is below the quote and comment.......)

"Some elements of the Electoral College, such as the indirect vote through intermediaries, were hotly debated at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. It was eventually justified in part as a stopgap to potentially 'reverse the vote if the people elected a criminal, traitor, or similar kind of heinous person.' The Founders wanted to empower democratic elements in the American system, but they feared a kind of pure, unrestrained democracy that had brought down great republics of the past."

With the FBI changing it's mind every week and more WikiLeaks coming and the statements made by the New York Police Department.....no matter who is elected tonight.....there is plenty of time for ANYTHING TO HAPPEN TO CLINTON AND OR TRUMP! (Trump may also be under investigation)

Why We Use Electoral College, Not Popular Vote

America’s presidential election system was designed to empower the states, not just the American people as an undifferentiated mass

Commentary By

Jarrett Stepman @JarrettStepman

Jarrett Stepman is an editor for The Daily Signal. Send an email to Jarrett.

The Electoral College remains in place over two centuries after the framers of the Constitution empowered it to select presidents. Though occasionally maligned, this system of electing a chief executive has been incredibly successful for the American people.

Many modern voters might be surprised to learn that when they step into a ballot box to select their candidate for president, they actually are casting a vote for fellow Americans called electors. These electors, appointed by the states, are pledged to support the presidential candidate the voters have supported. The Electoral College holds its vote the Monday after the second Wednesday in December following the election.

The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College after much debate and compromise, but it has provided stability to the process of picking presidents. Though the winner of the national popular vote typically takes the presidency, that vote failed to determine the winner in four elections: 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000.

Some see the Electoral College as a peculiar and mystifying institution that ensures only a few, select individuals will ever cast a direct vote for president in the United States. Others complain that the system rewards smaller states with more proportional power than the large ones.

Every four years, around election time, there are murmurs about revamping the system and moving toward a direct, national popular vote.

The Founders’ College

As one of The Heritage Foundations legal experts, Hans von Spakovsky, noted in a paper on the Electoral College: “In creating the basic architecture of the American government, the Founders struggled to satisfy each state’s demand for greater representation while attempting to balance popular sovereignty against the risk posed to the minority from majoritarian rule.”

Some elements of the Electoral College, such as the indirect vote through intermediaries, were hotly debated at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. It was eventually justified in part as a stopgap to potentially reverse the vote if the people elected a criminal, traitor, or similar kind of heinous person. The Founders wanted to empower democratic elements in the American system, but they feared a kind of pure, unrestrained democracy that had brought down great republics of the past.

The product of the Founders’ compromise has been well balanced and enduring, and we would be wise to leave it intact.

Alexander Hamilton defended the Electoral College in Federalist 68. He argued that it was important for the people as a whole to have a great deal of power in choosing their president, but it was also “desirable” that “the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”

Hamilton also wrote that this system of intermediaries would produce a greater amount of stability, and that an “ … intermediate body of electors will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements, than the choice of one who was himself to be the final object of the public wishes.”

As students of ancient history, the Founders feared the destructive passions of direct democracy, and as recent subjects of an overreaching monarch, they equally feared the rule of an elite unresponsive to the will of the people. The Electoral College was a compromise, neither fully democratic nor aristocratic.

The Constitution states:

Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled in the Congress.

In addition to balancing the protection of individual rights and majority rule, the Founding Fathers attempted to create a “federalist” system that would keep most of policymaking power reserved to states and localities. America’s presidential election system also was designed to empower the states, not just the American people as an undifferentiated mass.

The total number of electors and thus electoral votes across all states and the District of Columbia—included after the passage of the 23rd Amendment—adds up to 538. The winner must receive a majority, or 270, of these votes to become president.

The system empowers states, especially smaller ones, because it incentivizes presidential candidates to appeal to places that may be far away from population centers. Farmers in Iowa may have very different concerns than bankers in New York. A more federalist system of electing presidents takes that into account.

The states are free to select the method in which they choose their electors. In the early days of the republic, most states chose to have their legislatures pick electors, rather than the people. But, over time, the states shifted to choosing electors via the state’s popular vote instead. Every state has opted for popular election at least since the Civil War.

Calls to Abolish

Modern opponents of the Electoral College argue against what they call antidemocratic aspects of the institution, criticizing both the intermediary electors and the state-by-state system of voting.

Calls to fundamentally change the Electoral College reached a peak after Republican George W. Bush defeated Democrat Al Gore in the tightly contested 2000 election. Gore narrowly won the national popular vote, and many of his supporters howled that the system—even without the Supreme Court stepping in—was unfair.

One organization, National Popular Vote, has worked toward eliminating the Electoral College through an amendment to the Constitution or a state compact. National Popular Vote argues that the current system encourages presidential candidates to spend most of their time in “swing states” rather than campaigning for votes across the entire country.

This plan for a national popular vote has received a moderate level of support, but Heritage’s von Spakovsky has called it bad policy, based on mistaken assumptions. Swing states, he wrote, “can change from election to election, and many states that are today considered to be reliably ‘blue’ or ‘red’ in the presidential race were recently unpredictable.”

Many states have signed on to a bill that essentially would tie a state’s electoral votes to the national popular vote. Those states will pledge to swing all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national vote.

But this is because the incentives would be to appeal only to the biggest population centers. Swing states change over time, and the 2016 election could be a prime example of swing-state unpredictability and erosion of the traditional partisan political map.

Additionally, if the president were elected by unfiltered national vote, small and rural states would become irrelevant, and campaigns would spend their time in large, populous districts.

Over 200 Years of Success

Unneeded tinkering with a process that is over two centuries old could destabilize one on the steadiest political systems in the world.

As author and Texas lawyer Tara Ross wrote in a Heritage Foundation memorandum:

America’s election systems have operated smoothly for more than 200 years because the Electoral College accomplishes its intended purposes. America’s presidential election process preserves federalism, prevents chaos, grants definitive electoral outcomes, and prevents tyrannical or unreasonable rule. The Founding Fathers created a stable, well-planned, and carefully designed system—and it works.

On Election Day, Americans should appreciate the great and long-lasting constitutional tradition bequeathed to them—including the quirky Electoral College system created by the nation’s Founders.

SCARY ARTICLE...........................

  Some truth, some speculation.  The first paragraph is pure speculation and a guess as to why Comey caved to the Clintons.

 

There is no question that the game is rigged, but it isn’t easy to prove it.  The players are too good at it. 

America is now like a third world country, the government is corrupt and in full control.  There is no two party system and no checks and balances.

Just passing this on... quite likely our next President!  

Lynch and Obama made it clear to Comey that, if he pressed for an indictment, he would be taking the Democrat nominee for president out of the election. If he failed to get a conviction, then he would be facing charges of tampering with and changing the outcome of a federal election, to which he would be facing the rest of his life in prison, and Obama and Lynch, as well as others, would see to it that he did. Now you know why he presented his case the way he did and why it was so obvious he was reluctant to not press for an indictment. 

Hillary's statement to the FBI was intentionally given without a court reporter present or without any recording of her testimony to prevent her from having any further exposure to legal charges such as perjury. If she lied to Congress, they have no written FBI deposition to confront Hillary with. This was set up to let her walk without fear of being charged with giving False Testimony or being charged with Obstruction of Justice. This is what those in the "legalese world" call a "Straw Man" legal charge. (It is a charge designed to make someone, especially lawyers, appear innocent of the charges!) 

EXAMPLE: Bill beats up Shirley at their home. Bill is arrested for "Felony Spousal Abuse" . Bill's lawyer gets the charges dismissed because Bill is not married to Shirley! (They are only "live-in boyfriend and girlfriend".) Bill walks out of court totally exonerated of the charges––thanks to a technicality! The twist in the case is the arresting officer knew all along Bill was not married to Shirley, because the officer and Bill are old fraternity brothers. The officer intentionally charged Bill with something he knew would not stick. Bill would easily have been convicted of Assault and Battery, but he was not charged with that! This is what is known as the "STRAW MAN" charge. It is how you make a guilty person appear innocent. This is exactly what was done with the Hillary Clinton case! 

If she had been charged with "Destruction of Government Documents", she would have easily been convicted, because she admitted to doing this! Instead, she was charged with "Mishandling Classified Documents" which has wiggle room for reasonable doubt regarding Criminal Intent! I think citizens are finally fed up with the Clintons and the cesspool of corruption that is our current government. Real Americans are ready to take our country back. All of these years of corruption have taken a toll on American lives. Citizens' opinions of a lying White House, a corrupt Congress, the "pay to play" politicians, the legalese lawyers and lobbyists, big overspending "welfare mentality" government, the "looking for a loop hole" justice system, the lying media, and our censored educational system with an agenda to dumb down the next generation, is at its lowest point ever. Hillary is on the wrong side of every issue. 

The British Exit from the EU (Brexit) is just a small sign that real citizens of civilized nations are ready to take their country back. They are sick of the results of open borders and globalization led by power-hungry elitists. Hillary Clinton has no character or integrity. She is an arrogant, condescending political elite who is only interested in lining the Clinton pockets with donations to the Clinton Foundation (wink, wink) from PACs, lobbyists, and foreign nations that buy access and favors.

The Clinton Foundation is nothing more than an operation used to launder money for the Clintons and other politicians involved in illegal activities. The Clintons are able to use the information of those participating to obtain cover for their activities, or blackmail those who are laundering money through them. Just count the number of politicians who arrive in Washington with nothing, but then leave as millionaires and billionaires. Did their votes serve in the best interest of their constituents or did they only benefit themselves? If the representatives of your state fall in this category, then I suggest an investigation be launched.

FYI....It has come to light that Comey was (or still is) on the Board of Directors of the HSBC Bank where the Clinton Foundation has holdings.

ED KLEIN who wrote the book on the Clintons, now published and available -- said Hillary was called to the office of Valerie Jarrett and Obama back in 2009 and told her she had to stop sending emails thru her personal server ––– OBVIOUSLY SHE DIDN'T LISTEN TO THEM. So, YES, Obama knew and Jarrett knew and Huma knew, ... along with how many others!!!!

"FBI Director James Comey basically delivered a coded message to the American People and the world. He said...she is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, certainly should not be president, and should be brought to justice ... However, our country has been infiltrated and is basically corrupt.

Another key point is in what Comey said:  There were 80 email chains, which means an exchange between people, ... Hillary sending AND RECEIVING, ... so if he charges Hillary, he has to charge the others in the chain. What if the exchange is with Obama? It is not a stretch to think the Sec of State would be in email contact with PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES).

Let's just say...Bill went to Loretta and said shut this down...or else if Hillary is charged she will tell under oath that some of the emails were with the President...so he is also guilty of a felony...THAT is IMPEACHABLE .

The law firm Kahn worked for is also the law firm for the royal court of Saudi Arabia and the tax lawyers for the Clintons and for the Clinton Foundation. It is also the firm Loretta Lynch worked for. They also represent a small Tech firm in Denver Colorado. which so happens to be the same Tech firm that managed Hillary's private server. Coincidence?