Should we prosecute Hillary?

iolo said:
I do get the feeling that, in the USA, there is disagreement about everything, and many of us are beginning to wonder how long the Union can possibly survive.
Click to expand...

It won't be disagreements that dissolve the union. It will be debt.
 
tsuke said:
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-10/trump-would-jail-clinton-there-s-a-name-for-that

" What separates functioning democracies from weak or failed ones is that political parties alternate in power without jailing the opponents they beat in elections. That sometimes means giving a pass to potentially criminal conduct, but that’s a worthwhile sacrifice for making republican government work."

This is a very interesting quote I want to discuss with everyone. Basically it says that no matter what your predecessor does in office you are not supposed to bring suit to it as it threatens our republic. What does everyone think?
Click to expand...

very convenient for Hillary to start circulating this now......she should have thought about whether she might be prosecuted BEFORE she committed the perjury.......
 
tsuke said:
your missing the argument of the new york times though. THeir argument is that to prevent the US from being a banana republic it doesnt matter whether the parties are guilty or not we should not prosecute them. I was hoping to get a discussion on whether or not people agree with that.
Click to expand...

if anything, being like a banana republic would be if we FAILED to prosecute a former leader for their crimes......
 
iolo said:
As long as the accusers can be fined into poverty if found to be involved in vexatious prosecution - otherwise nobody will be safe from constant bullying.
Click to expand...

Wales must be a banana republic.....or is it just an owned state within a banana republic.......
 
Norah said:
I think that if there is enough evidence to justify charging her then she should be charged. We are a nation of laws not men and so no one person should be above the law no matter their political party or title.
Click to expand...

I agree with this... and the experts whose job it is have said there is not enough evidence. It is very irresponsible for a presidential candidate in a debate to threaten jail for the other if he is elected, a presidential who is not a lawyer, investigator, police officer, or professional prosecutor. It would not be the presidents job to make the decisions Trump is claiming he would make!
 
Norah said:
I'm not saying that she is or isn't I'm just saying that if she broke the law she should be held accountable just like everybody else.
Click to expand...

Yes, and she has already been through the process. Charges were not brought.
 
tsuke said:
your missing the argument of the new york times though. THeir argument is that to prevent the US from being a banana republic it doesnt matter whether the parties are guilty or not we should not prosecute them. I was hoping to get a discussion on whether or not people agree with that.
Click to expand...

If that's what they said, they are wrong!
 
iolo said:
I do get the feeling that, in the USA, there is disagreement about everything, and many of us are beginning to wonder how long the Union can possibly survive.
Click to expand...

we are just I puking out the last vestiges of racism


they will never again gain much power
 
iolo said:
Who says she is, and what is stopping them charging her? I do hope that Mr Clinton gets round to nailing Trump for his lies when this is all over. If he really has money, it would by nice to have it transferred to someone decent in damages.
Click to expand...

biglaugh7_zpsd701e485.gif
 
PostmodernProphet said:
very convenient for Hillary to start circulating this now......she should have thought about whether she might be prosecuted BEFORE she committed the perjury.......
Click to expand...

Perjury? Really?

Did you know that if she lied to Congress they, the Republican Congress, could directly charge her with contempt. For some reason they have chosen not to do that.
 
Jarod said:
I agree with this... and the experts whose job it is have said there is not enough evidence. It is very irresponsible for a presidential candidate in a debate to threaten jail for the other if he is elected, a presidential who is not a lawyer, investigator, police officer, or professional prosecutor. It would not be the presidents job to make the decisions Trump is claiming he would make!
Click to expand...

Yep; in Liberal loony land, corruption and cronyism trumps the law. The fact that Comey admitted Hillary lied about her e-mails and just about everything else is enough to press for charges and independ4nt prosecutor; as a lawyer, you should know that Comey cannot declare there is not sufficient evidence to press a case, that is for a for a prosecutor to decide.....but alas, your just a common ambulance chaser and partisan hack.
 
Jarod said:
I agree with this... and the experts whose job it is have said there is not enough evidence. It is very irresponsible for a presidential candidate in a debate to threaten jail for the other if he is elected, a presidential who is not a lawyer, investigator, police officer, or professional prosecutor. It would not be the presidents job to make the decisions Trump is claiming he would make!
Click to expand...

?????.....it wouldn't?.....it's every American's job, certainly the leader of our country ought to be doing what is every American's job......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top