Hers wasn't revoked, it is inactive but if her and her husband want to practice in future they can. They just need to pay fees and do continuing education. There are no factual claims their licenses were revoked, just internet tin foil hat folks claim it like you just did. A simple search can yield all the facts.
Plus at least she earned a degree and isn't a drop out like the 3rd Mrs Trump.
Tin foil hat goofball
I'm sure Melania couldn't fill those size 15 wookie shoes.
Looks like someone's afraid of a woman who's so fit she could snap his fat arse in half.
 July 19, 2016 at 10:35am
At least Melania didn’t say,”Everyday I wake up in a house built by slaves”
They didn't need a trial. He was on parole and part of his parole agreement was that he not use any computers. He violated that parole condition when he used a computer to edit his video, which was EXTREMELY convenient for Clinton and Obozo.
 June 28, 2016 at 11:23am
So,where exactly is the imprisoned Benghazi videomaker ,you know,the crazy guy who caused it all on You Tube??????
"The next lines of the Psalm read: 'Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow.'"
Let morons stop pretending that they don't understand the English language and acting like they can convince the rest of us that we don't understand it at least as well as they do.
 June 7, 2016 at 3:41pm
The law firm against Trump paid $675000 to the Clintons,well,well
Trump gave over $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation slush fund..
so, Trump is clearly biased against himself..
You just said they were "against Trump".
'My enemy is siding with my opponent'
is like a 'dog bites man' story... not exactly newsworthy.
It would be interesting if HIS OWN LAWYER or law firm had donated to his political opponent. There are businesses that routinely donate to both sides, so even then it could be debatable how significant it would be.
Unless he is guilty of fraud, expects a judgement against himself, and is trying to muddy the waters of public opinion I can't see any reason to open mouth and insert s#!t like this.
I am assuming that he hopes that he can give his supporters a fig leaf under which to oppose his impeachment. High crimes and misdemeanors, remember? If found guilty of a federal crime he would not be eligible to be president.
..."when an offense against a statute is also a "high crime or misdemeanor", it may be, and usually is, referred to by a different name, when considered as such. Thus, an offense like "obstruction of justice" or "subornation of perjury" may become "abuse of authority" when done by an official bound by oath. As such it would be grounds for impeachment and removal from office, but would be punishable by its statutory name once the official is out of office."
Is anyone else looking at this seriously? We could have both Clinton and Trump convicted. Whoever the VP is may be the next President.
It gets even better.
Not every Hispanic disliked Trump building the wall idea, just this Curiel member of la Raza, who in his passion to get more illegals across the borders hates the wall and passionately doing anything to get hiLIARy the WH., then this Curiel must recuse himself from the case. It’s only fair to remind poeple he is pro hiLiary and is a Hispanic. Nothing racial about it, many Hispanics do not pro HiLIARy. My neighbors are from Guatemala and they are for Trump. They are nice law biding citizens, born in the USA like Curiel but smarter to realize that democrats make the poor poorer and less educated to always vote democrat.