It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats Freak Out Over Trump Wanting to Prosecute Clinton

page: 8
39
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: p3x795mt

Okey dokey artichokey.


Would this really be quite so out there?? It wouldn't take much for these two candidates to both flounder entirely.

My paranoid tinfoil hat theory since the start of this election was that the two were both so farcical, this could be either

a) a distraction from what things Obama wants to enact while still in office or
b) a play for him to retain control...

Can you imagine how little it would take to set the whole powder keg off?

One of the candidates having something REAL juicy released and being forced to drop out, millions of disillusioned voters, maybe an innocent black guy gets shot by police, chaos...

Actually, isn't this preferable? The other option is that these are LITERALLY the best you have to offer... Now THAT is terrifying.




posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 07:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Did Trump interfere with the legal process with his contribution to the Florida AG?
Is a meeting more damning than cash?


I am honestly not familiar with this case, but it begs the question... was he being investigated for something when he made the contribution? If not, then NO there is no conflict of interest, at least not on the AG's part anyway. If he was, then certainly there is a conflict and the AG who took the money should loose their position at least for the intern (until a full investigation can be performed).



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
Let's continue to behave like uncivilized countries, past and present. Isn't one of the first things they do after gaining office is to have their opponent killed or jailed?

Let's take on all those dysfunctional and cruel behaviors. Trump is leading the way.


So basically what your telling us is that Hillary (or anyone else who runs for president for that matter) should be given a free pass (no matter her crimes) just because she is running for president? Seriously that what it sounds like. If he becomes president he most certainly should launch an investigation if he feels that the previous POTUS hasn't done his job in that respect. It's not like he is talking about repealing double jeopardy and convicting her of crime she's already been cleared of. He merely wants to prosecute her for suspected criminal activity she hasn't been held accountable for in the past. To me that's no different that the FBI/DEA/other nameless alphabet agency going after a crime family for suspicion of participating in organized crime.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:11 AM
link   
What I find most ironic about the uproar over Trump offhand comment is this:

A candidate for president should know that a President cannot involve himself in an investigation and declare someone guilty. If they do it is an abomination.

If the President however, involves himself in an investigation and declares the person innocent, well that's just Thursday (as long as they are on your team).

Last year (during the investigation), President Obama came on air and said "Hillary did nothing illegal and was just extremely careless, yada, yada, yada".

How exactly did the investigation conclude again?

Why was it not an "OMG the sky is falling!! moment when a President interjected himself into the investigation?



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kaploink
Geez, I wonder if the Republicans would be outraged if Obama said he would instruct his AG to go after Romney or McCain after he was elected due to all the lies. That he would toss both in jail. I have a feeling the talk shows would be in full outrage mode.

I see you guys are playing games again. These Dictator comparisons are so wrong it is stupid. Trump stated she "would be in jail" which is his opinion and said he would "appoint an independent prosecutor" to see if her criminal acts are prosecutable. There is a huge difference between that and the kangaroo court and illegal jailing of someone who hasn't broken the law.

The sad part is that we are so stupid that I have to post this so some people understand your lies.
edit on 10/11/2016 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: 200Plus
What I find most ironic about the uproar over Trump offhand comment is this:

A candidate for president should know that a President cannot involve himself in an investigation and declare someone guilty. If they do it is an abomination.

If the President however, involves himself in an investigation and declares the person innocent, well that's just Thursday (as long as they are on your team).

Last year (during the investigation), President Obama came on air and said "Hillary did nothing illegal and was just extremely careless, yada, yada, yada".

How exactly did the investigation conclude again?

Why was it not an "OMG the sky is falling!! moment when a President interjected himself into the investigation?

Yet Obama has played judge, jury and executioner of even American citizens via drone execution. So while you are right...I believe...Obama has already done so.

And no...Trump never implied jailing Hillary illegally. As I stated above.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:55 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Frankly, Ms. Dana Bash sounds like a simpleton, only with the saving grace of a half decent grasp of grammar.

If that idiot honestly doesn't know what the difference is between a despotic dictator and how they usually handle those they don't particularly like, and how Trump said he would proceed againt Clinton, then there's no hope for her.

A dictator would shoot Clinton in the head and be done with it...Trump was talking about criminal prosecution, involving due process of Law...not really that difficult a distinction for someone with even half a brain.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: AshFan


No...not her either.

It was the Milkman darling, sorry but there it is.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Debate 2 between Trump and Clinton had Trump saying Hillary would go to jail if he had a say, or words to that effect.

Hillary was so stunned she couldn't respond apparently.

Democrats and ultra Hillary supporters are flipping out and so outraged.

CNN even compared Trump's comments to Hitler and Stalin !!

But it's ironic and yet perfectly acceptable for Democrats to support going after climate change -- global warming "deniers" just for not believing something so controversial.

Even the high priestess of the Justice Department Loretta Lynch is on board with the hypocrisy of persecuting the "deniers" !!!



Democrats Freak Out Over Trump Wanting to Prosecute Clinton; Dem Platform Calls for Prosecuting ‘Climate Deniers’


Democrats and the media (but we repeat ourselves) are in complete meltdown over Donald Trump’s remarks about prosecuting the criminal Hillary Clinton last night, because that’s what third-world dictators do, or something.

CNN’s chief political correspondent Dana Bash said during their post-presidential debate coverage that she didn’t like Donald Trump‘s promise to direct prosecutors to press charges against Hillary Clinton, likening it to actions from authoritarians like Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler.

“Not to sound too corny, but what makes this country different from countries with dictators in Africa, or Stalin or Hitler, or any of those countries with dictators and totalitarian leaders is that when they took over, they put their opponents in jail,” Bash said.

Outrageously outrageous, isn’t it? So how does this square with the Democratic Party platform of wanting to imprison those who don’t believe in junk science?






This is awesome!!!


Trump is destroying the GOP once and for all and the evangelicals are helping him do it!!


I have never been happier with politics and my predictive ability.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   



It was the Milkman darling, sorry but there it is.


No, he didn't have red hair either.. That's due to mommys pact with Satan.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: xuenchen

Frankly, Ms. Dana Bash sounds like a simpleton, only with the saving grace of a half decent grasp of grammar.

If that idiot honestly doesn't know what the difference is between a despotic dictator and how they usually handle those they don't particularly like, and how Trump said he would proceed againt Clinton, then there's no hope for her.

A dictator would shoot Clinton in the head and be done with it...Trump was talking about criminal prosecution, involving due process of Law...not really that difficult a distinction for someone with even half a brain.





I love watching y'all eat each other.

It's just soooo awesome!!!

No democrat could ever have done this kind of irreversible damage.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: xuenchen

Frankly, Ms. Dana Bash sounds like a simpleton, only with the saving grace of a half decent grasp of grammar.

If that idiot honestly doesn't know what the difference is between a despotic dictator and how they usually handle those they don't particularly like, and how Trump said he would proceed againt Clinton, then there's no hope for her.

A dictator would shoot Clinton in the head and be done with it...Trump was talking about criminal prosecution, involving due process of Law...not really that difficult a distinction for someone with even half a brain.





I love watching y'all eat each other.

It's just soooo awesome!!!

No democrat could ever have done this kind of irreversible damage.






Untrue.

Federal reserve



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: 200Plus
What I find most ironic about the uproar over Trump offhand comment is this:

If the President however, involves himself in an investigation and declares the person innocent, well that's just Thursday (as long as they are on your team).

Last year (during the investigation), President Obama came on air and said "Hillary did nothing illegal and was just extremely careless.





Someone that careless ..... I wouldn't trust with my handbag, Nevermind a

whole country, its economy and its people.

Or to be any where in proximity to a nuclear button



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere




Her own people chanted "Lock her up" at the Convention.


No they didn't! What universe do you live in?



posted on Oct, 12 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: xuenchen
Democrats Freak Out Over Trump Wanting to Prosecute Clinton

Imagine, someone wanting to be president so he can jail his opponents!

More insanity from the Killer Klown of Amerikkkan political Cirque du Freaque!


Actually I think Trump aspires to do much more than put a known felon like Hillary in jail, it's just a coincidence that his opponent should be, and deserves to be sitting in a woman's prison somewhere, like Leavenworth, so knowing that, it isn't something Trump ran for office to get done, but just one of those things that obviously should be done. It's on the real short list of annoyances to spend 2 minutes getting done. Not a thing to spend a lot of time getting done. It's almost an "irrelevant annoyance" that when you aren't protected by all of America's corrupt insiders, you would already be sitting in a prison if you did the same things she has done.



posted on Oct, 12 2016 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: InTheLight

The husband of someone under federal investigation meeting to talk with the nation's top law enforcement official is at the very least a conflict of interest.


At the most, he will bring her down by his actions and that is pitiable as women must always seem to bear the burden.


Her gender has nothing to do with it.

I agree that amongst the well balanced people this is true. But gender and race do seem to motivate some of trumps behaviours.

But then so does cheap dime store psychology. Should I do Freud First or Jung Second?



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 12:51 AM
link   
November 13, 2016

Getting lots of mixed signals on this, but Rudy Giuliani is rumored to be the Attorney General in Donald Trump's administration. He said today that using a "Special Prosecutor" to investigate Hillary looks possible.

Story: fortune.com...



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 05:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
November 13, 2016

Getting lots of mixed signals on this, but Rudy Giuliani is rumored to be the Attorney General in Donald Trump's administration. He said today that using a "Special Prosecutor" to investigate Hillary looks possible.

Story: fortune.com...


Chris Christie flat out said trump would not be prosecuting her and trump has said "I hadn't even thought about it..I need to focus on America.."


Aka he never was going to..he is a life long dem that hoodwinked the gop



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join