Lock her up, thumbs up or thumbs down....

I say she needs some jail time.....

Trump is smart enough to now stay above the fray.

If -o be gone-obama doesn't pardon her,

maybe Comey will get her......again

 

I think I know what our President-Elect is doing...and he's smart to play it the way he is. I hope it plays out the way I think it will.

If, somehow, Shrillery avoids prosecution, which she deserves because she already ADMITTED she commit a crime (FACT!), President Trump should pardon every person who was charged and/or convicted and/or serving time for anything relating to mishandling classified information from the time she took office as SoS until the present date.

I hate saying that - because my entire 25-year Army career was in the Intelligence Community and I FULLY understand the implications of absolving actual criminals for betraying their oath.

However, the Rule of Law applies to ALL of us - even if our name happens to be "Clinton". To let her off and let stand convictions that took place during her tenure would be a travesty and a GROSS miscarriage of justice.

Contrary to the tone we've taken in this terribly dark time in our country's history - there is a such thing as RIGHT vs. WRONG.

We, as a nation, have allowed ourselves to be sucked into the unholy pit of grey-area and nuanced decision making - and we've got a LONG way to go to right our course!

Hopefully, President Trump will be the man to affect a much-needed positive change.

As I said before - we voted his a$$ in...and we'll damn-sure vote his a$$ BACK OUT if he lets us down!

 

I agree with all you say except that

her guilty azz should pay for what she has done.

I understand all of the ramifications either way it goes.

This is a tough one, but in the end, no one should be above the law.

 

What is it that you think she should be charged with?

Please pick something where she hasn't been cleared.

 

In our system one has to charge someone before things like having a court case.

 

Well, so much for your basic knowledge of Justice 101.

 

I think he's being mum about it until obama is out and he's in. Then he has his AG prosecute her based on what we already know. Comey made his reccomendation, but a new AG doesn't have to accept it if he thinks he can successfully prosecute the case.

No sense in making it out to be something political, which is what it would be now if he started saying "lock her up!". Trump just has to let the courts work as they should, and I'm pretty sure he will.

 

Heres what is going on. Its a brilliant move on Trumps part in my opinion. If Trump comes out now and says he has no interest in pursuing that then Obama is in a juicy pickle, if he Pardons Hillary then its admission that he knows she is guilty and his Presidency will be solidly recorded as the most corrupt we have ever seen in our recorded history otherwise why would he feel the need to pardon her when the president elect has stated he has no interest? He wouldn't. Now, after Trump is sworn in, things change, Obamas pardon power is gone and Trump being in the executive branch has no business trying to direct the judicial branch who to prosecute. In short Trump has no interest in it but it certainly doesn't mean the AG wont. Nope this is ploy to prevent Obama from Pardoning her on his way out. If Obama Pardons her anyway then we will know for a fact, that he know her crimes are deep as (*)(*)(*)(*).
In Chess, this would be the best possible move you have out of your options. Either way Trump wins. He gets to force Obama to admit he is a corrupt POS OR he gets to prosecute Hillary anyway through proxy.

 

A pardone can only be given to a convicted person. Hilarybhas not been convicted yet and she has not even been indicted.

 

For one putting Americas security at risk to hide her clinton foundation scam.

For another being a scum bag that sells influence to the highest bidder in order

to pad her own pockets. If anyone else was running charity where 94% of the

donations went in their bank account, they would be in the cell next to bernie madoff.

 

All if you know nothing gaboomkas who are talking about lardons fir Hillary need to know that a person needs to be a convicted criminal in order to get a pardon. You cannit get a pardon fir maybe possibly you may get convicted.

 

Would you like to make a Wager?

You are ignorant of the facts.

President obama most certainly can absolve her

without her being charged.

Again would you like to make a wager?

Before you do, here's a hint........

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1: Pardon Power

 

I'd like to see her brought up on racketeering charges based on Clinton Foundation activities while she was SoS, which is to say violations of the RICO statutes. I believe those who say that such a case would be easy to make. A number of other things could be charged, everything from failure to adhere to FOIA requirements up to failing to properly secure classified documents, but I believe the pay-to-play issues enjoy the benefits of (1) being very serious and (2) being fairly easy to connect the dots.

You should do some research before making such claims.

According to a NY Times article:

So the know nothing gaboomkas at the NY Times appear to take exception to your statement.

 

Well It appears that I'm smarter than all you liberals put together.

Well so much for your knowledge of justice 101......

 

I don't think you get it. You have to do more than make accusations like that. And, there is no proof of either of your charges.

BTW:
Today, we have Trump admitting to actual IRS crime with his foundation.

Do you think he should be charged?

After all, we KNOW there was a crime in this case, while you have only suspicions (and hate) for Clinton.

 

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1: Pardon Power

Looks like the joke is on you, you know nothing gaboomka

 

So far, "connect the dots" hasn't been accomplished.

And, after gigantic tax dollars going into investigation upon investigation, it has been determined that there is no chargable offense wrt the DoS.

You've got zip.

On the other hand, the Trump foundation even admits their guilt to the IRS.

If you are so "law and order" maybe you should go after the KNOWN crime before trying to gin something up from the past.

 

This is fun so I will play.

It's you that doesn't get it.

These are known facts not accusations.

Anyone who commits a crime should pay the cost...

Yours is an accusation...

 

And they think they are so smart

 

The difference between us is that I'd like to see this adjudicated in a court of law, rather than relying on your pronouncements of the Secretary's innocence. I mean, I'm sure you're right, but I assume we have judges, juries, and lawyers for a reason, so maybe we should make use of them? That's our legal system. If she is found innocent, I promise to say no more about it; if she's found guilty, I'd hope you'd do the same.

 

I hope they take the leash off Gowdy, he will wreck her.

 

I'm not a vindictive person, but being a former USAF crew chief with Secret responsibility, I VEHEMENTLY disagree with Trump and his failure to prosecute as the Clintons are 'good ppl!"

As far as I am concerned, Trump is on probation as getting my continuing support!!!! Right now, he is just a remix of Democrats!

 

Not sure about a "pardone" but a pardon can (and has) be given without a charge(s) being brought.

See Ford pardoning Nixon.

 

If Trump pardons Hillary, he doesn't understand the Mil & has a long way to get me back!

 

Gowdy spent millions in taxpayer funds and years investigating her. He had her in front of his commitee for ten hours, under oath on national tv and could not produce any evidence of a crime. Gowdy is a greasy little grandstanding ********. He has proven himself to be a complete failure and a big phony.