First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Is Hillary gonna go to jail now
35088 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / F / Seireitei, Soul S...
Offline
Posted 26 days ago

Deyre
Isn't it obvious. Now the FBI can restart it since she's not relevant as a candidate


Um, they already reopened the case back at the beginning of October when they found emails related to the Anthony Weiner investigation that were connected to the Clinton server. They investigated and found no new evidence of wrongdoing on Hillary's part, so therefore did not change their stance on that the investigation was over and there was no crime committed. I'm not defending Hillary because I think that she has done some very bad things, including rigging primary elections so that she'd win the Democratic nomination over Bernie Sanders, which I'm still really sore about, but unless they find new evidence linked to the email case, they're not likely to open the case again.
35908 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Georgia, USA
Online
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

Ejanss wrote:



Y'know the expression "It was funny for a while, but now it's sad"?

.


Save it for when Hillary's campaign plane is shot down while trying to escape to Saudi Arabia.
14749 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

fluffytailz3000 wrote:

Jailing Clinton is unconstitutional.


Not if she actually did anything.

Personally pursuing it, however, and breaking rules of presidential power to become single-mindedly obsessed with using the Department of Justice system to punish ONE rival for personal vendettas, ike Don promised to in the debates (and everyone gasped "Oh, he just didn't... "), does border a bit on the unconstitutionality of what a certain equally paranoid and hyperdefensive presidential Dick once made the fatal mistake of doing when he thought his "enemies" were picking on him.

Study up on your history, kiddies, we're about to see it repeat.
37319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 25 days ago

Ejanss wrote:


fluffytailz3000 wrote:

Jailing Clinton is unconstitutional.


Not if she actually did anything.

Personally pursuing it, however, and breaking rules of presidential power to become single-mindedly obsessed with using the justice system to punish ONE rival for personal vendettas, ike Don promised to in the debates (and everyone gasped "Oh, he just didn't... "), does border a bit on the unconstitutionality of what a certain equally paranoid and hyperdefensive presidential Dick once made the fatal mistake of doing when he thought his "enemies" were picking on him.

Study up on your history, kiddies, we're about to see it repeat.


Dude.... She broke laws, and so did Bill. Well. There's massive chaos in Washington DC right about now. I think there's a lot of deck chairs getting re-arranged over there, now that Trump is president. They don't have time to think about covering for Hillary. They're thinking about covering their own asses.

Looking right at you, Comey, Loretta Lynch. Yeah, you guys.
14749 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

DeadlyOats wrote:


Ejanss wrote:

Not if she actually did anything.

Personally pursuing it, however, and breaking rules of presidential power to become single-mindedly obsessed with using the justice system to punish ONE rival for personal vendettas, ike Don promised to in the debates (and everyone gasped "Oh, he just didn't... "), does border a bit on the unconstitutionality of what a certain equally paranoid and hyperdefensive presidential Dick once made the fatal mistake of doing when he thought his "enemies" were picking on him.

Study up on your history, kiddies, we're about to see it repeat.


Dude.... She broke laws, and so did Bill. Well. There's massive chaos in Washington DC right about now. I think there's a lot of deck chairs getting re-arranged over there, now that Trump is president. They don't have time to think about covering for Hillary. They're thinking about covering their own asses.

Looking right at you, Comey, Loretta Lynch. Yeah, you guys.


Well, while you look at them, any real wrongdoing is for a jury to decide.
Not for a personally driven "Independent investigation", wielded by a business-based politician who saw no other way of handling his foes but seeing some legal way of having them removed from their jobs by DOJ/IRS hook or crook.
That's got "Wounded abuse of power" written all over it--since the president doesn't have absolute authority to fire the Attorney General for not going after whoever the president told him he was "supposed" to--and point was, it's happened before. For pretty much similar reasons.

Didn't turn out so well for the prez's image last time, as I recall.
Led, in fact, to...pretty much what we've got the betting pool open on happening with Trump.
37319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

Ejanss wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:


Ejanss wrote:

Not if she actually did anything.

Personally pursuing it, however, and breaking rules of presidential power to become single-mindedly obsessed with using the justice system to punish ONE rival for personal vendettas, ike Don promised to in the debates (and everyone gasped "Oh, he just didn't... "), does border a bit on the unconstitutionality of what a certain equally paranoid and hyperdefensive presidential Dick once made the fatal mistake of doing when he thought his "enemies" were picking on him.

Study up on your history, kiddies, we're about to see it repeat.


Dude.... She broke laws, and so did Bill. Well. There's massive chaos in Washington DC right about now. I think there's a lot of deck chairs getting re-arranged over there, now that Trump is president. They don't have time to think about covering for Hillary. They're thinking about covering their own asses.

Looking right at you, Comey, Loretta Lynch. Yeah, you guys.


Well, while you look at them, any real wrongdoing is for a jury to decide.
Not for a personally driven "Independent investigation", wielded by a business-based politician who saw no other way of handling his foes but seeing some legal way of having them removed from their jobs by DOJ/IRS hook or crook.
That's got "Wounded abuse of power" written all over it--since the president doesn't have absolute authority to hire, fire or tell the Attorney General what to do--and point was, it's happened before. For pretty much similar reasons.

Didn't turn out so well for the prez's image last time, as I recall.


What's happened before? Who did it before? When did this happen before?
14749 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

DeadlyOats wrote:


Ejanss wrote:

Well, while you look at them, any real wrongdoing is for a jury to decide.
Not for a personally driven "Independent investigation", wielded by a business-based politician who saw no other way of handling his foes but seeing some legal way of having them removed from their jobs by DOJ/IRS hook or crook.
That's got "Wounded abuse of power" written all over it--since the president doesn't have absolute authority to hire, fire or tell the Attorney General what to do--and point was, it's happened before. For pretty much similar reasons.

Didn't turn out so well for the prez's image last time, as I recall.


What's happened before? Who did it before? When did this happen before?


Um...DUDE: Wikipedia Is Your Friend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre
37319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

Ejanss wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:


Ejanss wrote:

Well, while you look at them, any real wrongdoing is for a jury to decide.
Not for a personally driven "Independent investigation", wielded by a business-based politician who saw no other way of handling his foes but seeing some legal way of having them removed from their jobs by DOJ/IRS hook or crook.
That's got "Wounded abuse of power" written all over it--since the president doesn't have absolute authority to hire, fire or tell the Attorney General what to do--and point was, it's happened before. For pretty much similar reasons.

Didn't turn out so well for the prez's image last time, as I recall.


What's happened before? Who did it before? When did this happen before?


Um...DUDE: Wikipedia Is Your Friend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre


Watergate was about using federal assets to SPY on his rivals. Not about pursuing justice. All of America (that voted against her) are calling for justice, not just Trump. Long before Trump started talking about sending her to jail, she has been the subject of so many investigations. Investigations where "others" went to jail in her stead. So many people "committed suicide," and one was out-right murdered to keep things quiet.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/06/gop-lobbyist-joins-quest-to-solve-murder-dnc-staffer-seth-rich.html

The house of cards she's built is caving in on her...
52844 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago
I would think they already past all that, FBI open investigation twice and closed it. Its seem that FBI hand are tied up and unable to find hard good soild reason to put Clinton behind bar..

What FBI should done is after they closed the first investigation is to wait till after the election is over and if Clinton is not the winner.. than they can reopen the case without media interfere with them due to Clinton running for President.

Unless they found something on Email and never release the information about it on the news.. They probably were relief that Clinton didn't win.. -shrugs- I'm just guessing. Who knows..
14749 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

DeadlyOats wrote:


Ejanss wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:


Ejanss wrote:

Well, while you look at them, any real wrongdoing is for a jury to decide.
Not for a personally driven "Independent investigation", wielded by a business-based politician who saw no other way of handling his foes but seeing some legal way of having them removed from their jobs by DOJ/IRS hook or crook.
That's got "Wounded abuse of power" written all over it--since the president doesn't have absolute authority to hire, fire or tell the Attorney General what to do--and point was, it's happened before. For pretty much similar reasons.

Didn't turn out so well for the prez's image last time, as I recall.


What's happened before? Who did it before? When did this happen before?


Um...DUDE: Wikipedia Is Your Friend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Massacre


Watergate was about using federal assets to SPY on his rivals. Not about pursuing justice. All of America (that voted against her) are calling for justice, not just Trump. Long before Trump started talking about sending her to jail, she has been the subject of so many investigations. Investigations where "others" went to jail in her stead.


The problems, however, start when presidents find out that "Independent DOJ special-prosecution investigators" actually ARE independent--answering to no one but the DOJ--especially with prezzes who think they control everybody and everything that happens in their press headlines.
That tends to be dangerous thinking for keeping the job, and one of those "Constitution" things Boss Baby keeps tripping up on.
Banned
1524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

BlackRose0607 wrote:


Deyre
Isn't it obvious. Now the FBI can restart it since she's not relevant as a candidate


Um, they already reopened the case back at the beginning of October when they found emails related to the Anthony Weiner investigation that were connected to the Clinton server. They investigated and found no new evidence of wrongdoing on Hillary's part, so therefore did not change their stance on that the investigation was over and there was no crime committed. I'm not defending Hillary because I think that she has done some very bad things, including rigging primary elections so that she'd win the Democratic nomination over Bernie Sanders, which I'm still really sore about, but unless they find new evidence linked to the email case, they're not likely to open the case again.


You dont really know why they stopped. Obama is likely covering up for her. But now that he is gonna be booted off the white house soon with Trump as president, Trump said himself to clean the washington and FBI from corruption to say the least by big banks and establishment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFGiZT-MnI4 (Donald Trump: "Because you'd be in jail")
1149 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / South Australia
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago
It was just clearly talk to drive his group. The most he would've done would be request that it be reopened, but since it has, I doubt there be anything more.
qwueri 
16442 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M
Online
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago
Very doubtful, the most Trump could do is convince Congress to open yet another investigation.
35088 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / F / Seireitei, Soul S...
Offline
Posted 26 days ago

Deyre wrote:


BlackRose0607 wrote:


Deyre
Isn't it obvious. Now the FBI can restart it since she's not relevant as a candidate


Um, they already reopened the case back at the beginning of October when they found emails related to the Anthony Weiner investigation that were connected to the Clinton server. They investigated and found no new evidence of wrongdoing on Hillary's part, so therefore did not change their stance on that the investigation was over and there was no crime committed. I'm not defending Hillary because I think that she has done some very bad things, including rigging primary elections so that she'd win the Democratic nomination over Bernie Sanders, which I'm still really sore about, but unless they find new evidence linked to the email case, they're not likely to open the case again.


You dont really know why they stopped. Obama is likely covering up for her. But now that he is gonna be booted off the white house soon with Trump as president, Trump said himself to clean the washington and FBI from corruption to say the least by big banks and establishment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFGiZT-MnI4 (Donald Trump: "Because you'd be in jail")


It was stated in several well known news source stories in America that James Comey stated in a letter to Congress on November 6 that the FBI had found no new evidence of wrongdoing or leaked American security information in the new emails that they went through starting in October. It wasn't Obama who made the announcement or decision about it. Maybe you should fact check before you post next time.
Either way, the investigation is closed unless they find new evidence because of something that we have called due process here in America. Maybe you've heard of it?
14749 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 26 days ago , edited 26 days ago

BlackRose0607 wrote:
It was stated in several well known news source stories in America that James Comey stated in a letter to Congress on November 6 that the FBI had found no new evidence of wrongdoing or leaked American security information in the new emails that they went through starting in October. It wasn't Obama who made the announcement or decision about it. Maybe you should fact check before you post next time.
Either way, the investigation is closed unless they find new evidence because of something that we have called due process here in America. Maybe you've heard of it?


And point being, if Trump does get to open his investigation--right after he finishes "going after" all those mean women who accused him of harassment--he's not exactly going to take No New Evidence for an answer.
And that's when the fun starts.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.