Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you admit the OP was wrong about Clinton having due process already, but decided to argue with ME anyways? bahahaha..
Or are you conceding there was evidence of a crime but the Obama administration covered it up?
I was responding to a ridiculous post asserting that if there is an investigation there SHOULD be a prosecution. That is what you claimed.
The post I responded to seems to indicate that the poster feels if there is an investigation into a crime, but no evidence of a crime can be found, the person being investigated should STILL be prosecuted.
Explain that logic if you can.
Just so we are clear about the post I responded to:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Proof you dont know what you are talking about.. "Due process" involves a prosecution. Clinton was not prosecuted,
I was responding to a ridiculous post asserting that if there is an investigation there SHOULD be a prosecution. That is what you claimed.
The post I responded to seems to indicate that the poster feels if there is an investigation into a crime, but no evidence of a crime can be found, the person being investigated should STILL be prosecuted.
Explain that logic if you can.
Just so we are clear about the post I responded to:
Sounds like some people want to prosecute just for the sake of doing it, crime, or no crime.
No Nixon ordered the firing of the Special Prosecutor which led to 2 people in the cabinet resigning. It also forced the House to start Impeachment. Remember Nixon tried to kill democracy.
I was responding to a ridiculous post asserting that if there is an investigation there SHOULD be a prosecution. That is what you claimed.
I stopped here because that wasnt at all what I claimed..
Comprehension is difficult for Democrats..
Due process is a CRIMINAL process, which doesnt at ALL have to do with an investigation. Clinton NEVER had due process because she was NOT charged with anything.
Learn what the hell you are talking about... Just like the OP needs to do..
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...process+of+law A fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious.
An investigation is NOT a legal proceedings.. Clinton has not been denied life, liberty, nor property without process.. nor was there any attempt to do so.
You're crazy talking. He never said what you claim he said. We should have had a special prosecutor to Avoid political interference and decisions. Trump would do what Obama should have done.
“I hate to say it, but if I win I’m going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation,” Trump said. “Because there have never been so many lies, so much deception.”
There are people in jail for sexually assaulting women for less than what Trump did to God knows how many poor women.
And when an accusation comes out that turns out to be true, he's put on trial and found guilty, I'll be the first one to suggest he goes to jail for it.. The EXACT same process that should follow for Clinton..
Folks, there is a reason why Presidents do not get to order special prosecutions in this country: it's because that is exactly what dictators do in places like the Congo or North Korea. This is America, where we have things like separation of powers and due process; where we don't give political winners the power to jail their rivals.
Never in the history of American Presidential politics have we ever had a candidate go into this kind of chilling territory. But then again, a lot of very negative records are being broken by Trump as of late.
Look, the Hillary email thing has been through like a year+ of investigation. FBI digging through it. Attorney General digging through it. Everything that could be scrutinized has been scrutinized. The evidence was looked at by independent entities in accordance with due process. Hillary handled her emails dismally and recklessly, and it calls her judgment into question. But nothing that can warrant the burden of criminal culpability has come of it. You can argue otherwise, but you're just letting your partisan zeal mask conjecture for fact.
For Trump to suggest now that he would convene a forum to reverse the process that's been carried out and jail Clinton is illegal and recklessly anti-Constitutional. Do people even understand what a massively dangerous precedent this sets?
And make no mistake: if you argue in support of this kind of behavior by a leader of ANY political persuasion and can't see you way through your partisan haze to recognize how dangerous this is, then you're anti-American. You're anti-Constitution. And you're not worthy of the heritage of this nation. End of story.
Are you working on your creative writing essay?
Trump did not "suggest" that he would "convene a forum to reverse the process that's been carried out and jail Clinton".
The only thing reckless around here is the liberals trying to spin that almight jab that Trump got on Clinton. She got BURNED and the liberals are mightily butthurt over that. No one is buying the horse manure, deal with it. He took her down more than a notch, he buried her with that come back.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.