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.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,561 posts, read 12,525,568 times
Reputation: 10475
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow
To summarize:
1. We don't lock up former first ladies.
2. He never promised to prosecute her.
3. If he did it, leftists would cry "Banana Republic" and "Kangaroo Court" and Trump is compromising to satisfy the political opposition.
4. It's Obama's fault.
5. Sessions is still investigating and will be doing so for years.
6. She's being heavily protected by someone. But don't worry, there are 50,000 sealed indictments pending that will be filed at some point.
7. She has either bought her way out of it, killed those who were going to prosecute her, or swept it all under the rug by the media.
8. Only Hillary knows the answer to the question.
9. No one believed him when he said it. Chanting "lock her up" was just a fun way of venting.
10. The evidence against her has been destroyed by unknown parties.
11. It's a strategic decision, because she can do more harm to Democrats when she's not locked up.
12. She bribed someone.
13. Liberal whining makes Trump hesitant to act on his campaign promises.
14. The left is doubling down and thinks "the crooked fool" (Hillary or Trump? Not sure) has a chance.
15. Trump doesn't have to keep his campaign promises because Obama didn't keep his campaign promises.
This may be my favorite thread on C-D.
16. obama had quietly pardoned her before he left office, to save his own skin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
You understand that to break a promise, you can no longer be in that position, right?
What the time frame to fulfill a campaign promise? Be somewhat specific...
He still has a lot of time. It's not like he hadn't been fulfilling any other of the campaign promises. The haters are fine with the Russia, Russia, Russia investigation dragging on and on, but they have no patience for an investigation had that started after that. The haters are in such a hurry when they want to be.
The U1 investigation is still quietly going on, are they supposed to indict her before that investigation is finished?
Sure, they could settle for the email disaster but what is the fun in that? That would only net her, comey and a few others. They are probably wanting to hit the ground running with U1, since that will drag in many, many more - including mueller and obama.
The left should begin learning how to be patient. Here's a little something that may help them achieve that goal...
She will never be locked up (I've said it many times), even with all the evidence against her...it just won't happen, even when they were chanting it....
Why would he have to direct someone?
Because he's not the Attorney General. If Trump wanted to see Hillary prosecuted, he would have to direct his Attorney General to investigate and bring charges if warranted.
You're right--she will never be locked up. And the reason she won't be locked up is that no prosecutor would look at the evidence against her and think it is sufficient to convince a jury of her guilt. All of the other reasons given in this thread are just excuses for what actually happened: Trump lied to his base about his intentions to have Hillary prosecuted to gin up enthusiasm for himself.
Because he's not the Attorney General. If Trump wanted to see Hillary prosecuted, he would have to direct his Attorney General to investigate and bring charges if warranted.
You're right--she will never be locked up. And the reason she won't be locked up is that no prosecutor would look at the evidence against her and think it is sufficient to convince a jury of her guilt. All of the other reasons given in this thread are just excuses for what actually happened: Trump lied to his base about his intentions to have Hillary prosecuted to gin up enthusiasm for himself.
You're crazy.....anyone other than those in DC would have lost their SC.....and in jail.....
This is what comey said, he should have handed it off to any prosecutor and it would have went to court
Quote:
“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.â€
Clinton’s emails included seven message chains with information classified as top secret.
“None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.â€
“The security culture of the State Department …was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.â€
Comey acknowledged that the FBI did not normally make public its recommendations to prosecutors as to whether to bring criminal charges. He added: “In this case, given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.â€
“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.â€
You're crazy.....anyone other than those in DC would have lost their SC.....and in jail.....
This is what comey said, he should have handed it off to any prosecutor and it would have went to court
NOTHING is stopping Trump/Sessions from pursuing and investigation and indicting Hillary Clinton if they believe there is enough evidence to get a conviction. James Comey does not have to sign off on it.
As far as your comment about anyone other than those in DC, it's Trump/Sessions call. Are you saying they're protecting Hillary? Or that she bribed them? If you think they believe there is enough evidence to prosecute, why aren't they prosecuting?
You're right--she will never be locked up. And the reason she won't be locked up is that no prosecutor would look at the evidence against her and think it is sufficient to convince a jury of her guilt.
You sure you want to stand by your statement? Other prosecutors have said otherwise. You might want to read The Russian Hoax by Gregg Jarrett where he names the actual legal statutes she violated. 150 pp of footnotes for the doubters.
You sure you want to stand by your statement? Other prosecutors have said otherwise. You might want to read The Russian Hoax by Gregg Jarrett where he names the actual legal statutes she violated. 150 pp of footnotes for the doubters.
That s why Trump is such an angry frustrated impotent Republican. He s going to jail for participating in an attack of war against the United States and she s not for the actual legal statute she violated.
Bummer.
He can hatch out his "witch hunt" all over his cell wall as loud as he wants too.
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.
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.
