Trump Authorizes Congress To Pursue Criminal Charges Against Hillary

a reply to: 727Sky

What exactly would they be investigating?

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: Cancerwarrior

Are you serious? All of that has been investigated over and over. And not one charge. I can't stand her either. However, sometimes it's time to stop beating a dead horse.

As if the Clinton's incredible political power and legendary reputation for burning enemies and destroying people's careers had nothing to do with the fact that she got away scott-free? I wonder if James Comey's brother being one of the financial lawyers for the Clinton Foundation had something to do with her kid-glove treatment? Hmmmm

a reply to: Mike.Ockizard

There are several videos of her speaking both in a military uniform and as a democrat congress person.. If all democrats were like her it would be a better country in many more ways . youtu.be...

Isn't it interesting that all those people that shriek fake news anytime CNN is mentioned are strangely quiet in this thread? I guess an article's veracity is only in question when it's not pro-Trump.

Again: are people really so gullible to think that politicians as high up as the Clintons or Bushes or Obamas will ever go to jail for the crimes they've committed? The system protects their own no matter what. The amount of dirt and blackmail that they have on their colleagues alone will guarantee that it will only be a slap on the wrist, AT BEST.

a reply to: Stevenjames15

Are you serious? All of that has been investigated over and over. And not one charge. I can't stand her either. However, sometimes it's time to stop beating a dead horse.

And if you think for a minute that those investigations that have been closed and opened multiple times are indicative of her innocence then you have remained willfully ignorant of how the world works.

As another poster pointed out, if you or I did even a tenth of what she has done, they would have no problems throwing us UNDER the jail to rot. She has money and she has a last name and political connections.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: 727Sky

What exactly would they be investigating?

I am not privy to that information and if I were I would not be telling anyone so the word could get out and hard disk wiped and records destroyed..

a reply to: 727Sky

So nothing? Sounds about right.

a reply to: 727Sky

He's going to lock her up, or at least try. It suits his agenda and ego.

Fair chance she'll get out of the country though.

a reply to: 727Sky

LOL Congress doesn't need approval from a President to pursue investigations and inquiries. He can authorize the Dept of Justice to pursue charges against her, but not Congress. And after actually watching the clip, he didn't authorize anything at all.

TLDR: This is clickbait.

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: hellobruce

...

Hillary Clinton’s use of private servers to send classified state secrets is inexcusable. ...

No, it's a crime! In fact, it's a felony crime with mandatory incarceration time in a federal penitentiary if tried and convicted.

Hello...Bruce???? Are you reading?????

I get it guys: you have to circle the wagon and protect your precious ideology and political party because God forbid you ever admit you were wrong. But your lack of objectivity is really hurting your defense. I didn't even vote for Donald Trump, I don't identify as a Democrat or Republican, and her guilt is blatantly obvious. The cover-up of her crimes is obvious. The system is protecting her because of what might happen if the REAL dirt gets out, and that too is obvious. Keep an eye on the proceedings for Anthony Weiner's prosecution, I can just about guarantee that if he decides to rat people out he's either going to end up dead in the jail cell, or (unlikely) his testimony can very well bring down the United States government and many of its institutions. The proven crimes of Hillary Clinton can put her in jail for life if they prosecuted her to the fullest extent of the law, and there literally aren't enough pits of Hell available to house her and her buddies if all the circumstantial allegations have truth to them... which they do.

a reply to: StrizzMatik

I can just about guarantee that if he decides to rat people out he's either going to end up dead in the jail cell,

He could have a mysterious skiing accident, like that one guy, or a mountain biking accident like another one of the Clintons "friends". Or he can be like John ashe and have his cause of death listed as a heart attack but in reality his throat was crushed. Then there is Gareth Williams who somehow commited suicide and then stuffed himself in a duffel bag.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: 727Sky

LOL Congress doesn't need approval from a President to pursue investigations and inquiries. He can authorize the Dept of Justice to pursue charges against her, but not Congress. And after actually watching the clip, he didn't authorize anything at all.

TLDR: This is clickbait.

Obviously you did not watch the first video or any of the others...

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: StrizzMatik

I can just about guarantee that if he decides to rat people out he's either going to end up dead in the jail cell,

He could have a mysterious skiing accident, like that one guy, or a mountain biking accident like another one of the Clintons "friends". Or he can be like John ashe and have his cause of death listed as a heart attack but in reality his throat was crushed. Then there is Gareth Williams who somehow commited suicide and then stuffed himself in a duffel bag.

SHSHSHSHHHHH! Don't cloud the issue with facts and logic! Come out back, I got a pool I want to show you... *cocks the hammer*

a reply to: Pyle

So the FBI investigating wasnt enough?

That would be a BIG FAT HELL TO THE DOUBLE NO to INFINITY , after the Clinton did the unethical and ransacked the Attorney General in a surprise meeting on the Tarmac days before the FBI decided to not prosecute.

Time to look without an administration that the Clintons aren't cozy with.

originally posted by: 727Sky

originally posted by: damwel
You have to do something to go to jail. Right wing media brainwashing the public into believing you did something will not put her in jail. I guess we will see then.

Yep as I said in the Op we will find out one way or the other... If she is found guilty will you come back and say I guess the mean old right wing media was correct after all when claiming there was much smoke and surely there was a fire ?

Why should we? In your OP, you basically said that if she isn't found guilty you wouldn't accept those results. So we have no reason to go along with your request here since you are already telling us you will renege if you are wrong.

a reply to: StrizzMatik

I get it guys: you have to circle the wagon and protect your precious ideology and political party because God forbid you ever admit you were wrong.

But your lack of objectivity is really hurting your defense. I didn't even vote for Donald Trump, I don't identify as a Democrat or Republican, and her guilt is blatantly obvious. The cover-up of her crimes is obvious.

The system is protecting her because of what might happen if the REAL dirt gets out, and that too is obvious

As a Libertarian who wrongly supported Bernie and didn't vote for either Trump or the FeMail Death Star, I couldn’t agree more.

The fact that Bill Clinton met with the Attorney General on the Tarmac days before the final FBI decision to prosecute is warrant enough to open the Investigation again.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: 727Sky

originally posted by: damwel
You have to do something to go to jail. Right wing media brainwashing the public into believing you did something will not put her in jail. I guess we will see then.

Yep as I said in the Op we will find out one way or the other... If she is found guilty will you come back and say I guess the mean old right wing media was correct after all when claiming there was much smoke and surely there was a fire ?

Why should we? In your OP, you basically said that if she isn't found guilty you wouldn't accept those results. So we have no reason to go along with your request here since you are already telling us you will renege if you are wrong.

Humm you might want to show me where I said I would not accept the results.. I did say if she were innocent then we would know the claims against her were false and one more nail in the coffin of fake news... at least that was the intent..

You really should read the whole thread and not cherry pick

a reply to: damwel

Slathering on the willful ignorance pretty thick, there, aren't you?

But, no, you are only half correct--"you have to do something to go to jail," AND you have to have prosecutors and law-enforcement officials with enough personal integrity to follow through with prosecution, as it's not their place to decide if someone is not guilty of something.

Being in the judicial system myself (and having been for nearly a decade of my professional career), there is absolutely plenty of evidence to at least send the case of her server/emails to a grand jury, and let them decide. The fact that both the DOJ and FBI colluded to keep that from happening stinks worse than skunk road kill dipped in armpit sweat and left to dry in the hot summer sun wrapped in gym socks.