POLL: Will Trump Prosecute Hillary Clinton?...

[Pogo]

Once again, like the whole premise of this thread ------ strawmen aren't real.

Your thread is dead. It was DOA.
I'm sorry, we did everything we could. It's in a better place now.

Well, you go ahead and give your boy Hussein a call. Because he is considering a Clinton Pardon. You and him need to hash it out. Good luck with that.

Again for the slower kids --- there can be no "pardon" where there was no "conviction".
And in turn there can be no "conviction" where there was no "prosecution", and to return to the beginning, there can be no "prosecution" where there was no "crime". All of which is why your entire "poll" is inoperative.

What you're describing is not the legal process of indictment > prosecution > conviction anyway. What you're describing is getting rid of political opponents by tossing them in jail. What you're calling for is political prisoners.

And that speaks volumes about who you are. Even more, I'd say, than your exhortations to "grab some pussy".

Again, take it up with your boy Hussein. He's the one considering the Clinton Pardon. Looks like you and him have a strong disagreement over this one. You should call Hussein and see if he'll invite you to the White House. Maybe then y'all can work out your differences.

Again, it's cute how you give your strawman a name, even if "Hussein" might be an unexpected one.

But strawman it still is. Not interested. The fact remains what you're suggesting is the same as a Fidel Castro or a Dim Dung Eel or a Hitler tossing people in the klink because you see them as a threat. You have no crime to prosecute.

Which, as I said, speaks volumes about you.

Desperate reach there, kid. No one has suggested arresting Ryan or McConnell. However, i am calling for them to be removed from their leadership positions. They can't be trusted.

I don't see why not. You've already established that on your planet you don't need a crime to "prosecute".

 

[paulitician]

Will Trump Prosecute Hillary Clinton?... He has indicated that he is going to pursue criminal prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Do you think it'll happen?

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Obviously an investigation is part of the prosecution process. And Trump could choose to pursue that. But will he? Stay tuned.

 

[Windship]

Lol, you dont really think he will, do you? He was at a meeting today and called obama "a very good man". Does that sound like hes gonna start prosecution?In Meeting At White House, President-Elect Trump Calls Obama 'Very Good Man'

 

[Pogo]

Will Trump Prosecute Hillary Clinton?... He has indicated that he is going to pursue criminal prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Do you think it'll happen?

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Obviously an investigation is part of the prosecution process. And Trump could choose to pursue that. But will he? Stay tuned.

Ah but your OP and poll don't say "investigation". They say "prosecution". Obviously you just skipped the part you consider superfluous.

And no, an investigation is not "part of the prosecution process". By the time the prosecution starts the investigation's done. Nor does an investigation necessarily result in something TO prosecute.

You don't have a clue in the world what you're talking about here, do ya?

 

[paulitician]

Well, you go ahead and give your boy Hussein a call. Because he is considering a Clinton Pardon. You and him need to hash it out. Good luck with that.

Again for the slower kids --- there can be no "pardon" where there was no "conviction".
And in turn there can be no "conviction" where there was no "prosecution", and to return to the beginning, there can be no "prosecution" where there was no "crime". All of which is why your entire "poll" is inoperative.

What you're describing is not the legal process of indictment > prosecution > conviction anyway. What you're describing is getting rid of political opponents by tossing them in jail. What you're calling for is political prisoners.

And that speaks volumes about who you are. Even more, I'd say, than your exhortations to "grab some pussy".

Again, take it up with your boy Hussein. He's the one considering the Clinton Pardon. Looks like you and him have a strong disagreement over this one. You should call Hussein and see if he'll invite you to the White House. Maybe then y'all can work out your differences.

Again, it's cute how you give your strawman a name, even if "Hussein" might be an unexpected one.

But strawman it still is. Not interested. The fact remains what you're suggesting is the same as a Fidel Castro or a Dim Dung Eel or a Hitler tossing people in the klink because you see them as a threat. You have no crime to prosecute.

Which, as I said, speaks volumes about you.

Desperate reach there, kid. No one has suggested arresting Ryan or McConnell. However, i am calling for them to be removed from their leadership positions. They can't be trusted.

I don't see why not. You've already established that on your planet you don't need a crime to "prosecute".

Trump can order a new investigation of Clinton. And that investigation could lead to a prosecution. You may not wanna accept that, but it is a possibility.

 

[paulitician]

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Obviously an investigation is part of the prosecution process. And Trump could choose to pursue that. But will he? Stay tuned.

Ah but your OP and poll don't say "investigation". They say "prosecution". Obviously you just skipped the part you consider superfluous.

Well obviously an investigation will take place. What prosecution doesn't involve investigating? But it isn't too difficult to get an indictment. Especially in Hillary Clinton's case.

 

[Windship]

trump= NWO, unfettered capitalism, no regulations, no consumer protections, massive tax cuts to corporations and saying it will be good for the economy and is good for jobs....the same fucking new world order bull shit again.

 

[Windship]

there will be no tariffs, there will be no wall there will only be a continuation of carter, reagan, bush, clinton, bush and obama. We continue to dissolve the country for the new world order.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Will Trump Prosecute Hillary Clinton?... He has indicated that he is going to pursue criminal prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Do you think it'll happen?

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Here you go stupid. It took me about 40 seconds to find this for your lame, ignorant sorry ass. Like I said, do a google search before posting if you don't want everybody to know just how brain dead you are.

Can President Bush pardon people who haven't even been charged with a crime?

Yep. In 1866, the Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte Garland that the pardon power "extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment." (In that case, a former Confederate senator successfully petitioned the court to uphold a pardon that prevented him from being disbarred.) Generally speaking, once an act has been committed, the president can issue a pardon at any time—regardless of whether charges have even been filed.

 

[GLASNOST]

Well obviously an investigation will take place. What prosecution doesn't involve investigating? But it isn't too difficult to get an indictment. Especially in Hillary Clinton's case.

I am sure that when Pogo returns he's going to reply with another "Ah but ....... "

 

[GLASNOST]

there will be no tariffs, there will be no wall there will only be a continuation of carter, reagan, bush, clinton, bush and obama. We continue to dissolve the country for the new world order.

Yes, you're probably right. We've seen it so many times already. Why should "this time" be any different?

 

[Pogo]

Will Trump Prosecute Hillary Clinton?... He has indicated that he is going to pursue criminal prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Do you think it'll happen?

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Here you go stupid. It took me about 40 seconds to find this for your lame, ignorant sorry ass. Like I said, do a google search before posting if you don't want everybody to know just how brain dead you are.

Can President Bush pardon people who haven't even been charged with a crime?

Yep. In 1866, the Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte Garland that the pardon power "extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment." (In that case, a former Confederate senator successfully petitioned the court to uphold a pardon that prevented him from being disbarred.) Generally speaking, once an act has been committed, the president can issue a pardon at any time—regardless of whether charges have even been filed.

What a fucking maroon.

What you have there is a nineteenth century SCOTUS screed. The same SCOTUS that gave us Dred Scott isn't a person but a corporation is.

I ain't talking SCOTUS here Sparkles. I'm talking Logic. Which is my native language I *always* converse in.

Point stands.

 

[Pogo]

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Obviously an investigation is part of the prosecution process. And Trump could choose to pursue that. But will he? Stay tuned.

Ah but your OP and poll don't say "investigation". They say "prosecution". Obviously you just skipped the part you consider superfluous.

Well obviously an investigation will take place. What prosecution doesn't involve investigating? But it isn't too difficult to get an indictment. Especially in Hillary Clinton's case.

--- and IF all that were to happen, THEN you could have your 'prosecution'.

But that's not the case is it?
Why no, it isn't. You skipped that technicality and went right to "prosecute" without a crime to do it with.

Hence, you're calling for tossing political opponents in jail without charges. Which is what I've been saying all along. You have no way to get out of that.

 

[kaz]

He has indicated that he is going to pursue criminal prosecution of Hillary Clinton. Do you think it'll happen?

I'd have broken out "no" into he doesn't follow through and Obama will pardon her. I voted no for the latter reason

 

[kaz]

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Here you go stupid. It took me about 40 seconds to find this for your lame, ignorant sorry ass. Like I said, do a google search before posting if you don't want everybody to know just how brain dead you are.

Can President Bush pardon people who haven't even been charged with a crime?

Yep. In 1866, the Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte Garland that the pardon power "extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment." (In that case, a former Confederate senator successfully petitioned the court to uphold a pardon that prevented him from being disbarred.) Generally speaking, once an act has been committed, the president can issue a pardon at any time—regardless of whether charges have even been filed.

What a fucking maroon.

What you have there is a nineteenth century SCOTUS screed. The same SCOTUS that gave us Dred Scott isn't a person but a corporation is.

I ain't talking SCOTUS here Sparkles. I'm talking Logic. Which is my native language I *always* converse in.

Point stands.

A corporation is the property of it's owners. Which means it's protected by the fifth amendment

 

[GLASNOST]

What a fucking maroon.

From the sea of knowledge ... you were obviously marooned.

 

[paulitician]

What a fucking maroon.

From the sea of knowledge ... you were obviously marooned.

One of the Clinton Bootlickers who boasted daily about Trump having no chance to win. So, there ya go. Not much credibility left with that one.

 

[GLASNOST]

What a fucking maroon.

From the sea of knowledge ... you were obviously marooned.

One of the Clinton Bootlickers who boasted daily about Trump having no chance to win. So, there ya go. Not much credibility left with that one.

And only semi-literate.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Good question, but I don't think he will.

But that's not the real question. Will he pardon her .... THAT is the question.

You do understand that before a "pardon" can exist --- both a "crime" and a "conviction" have to exist, right?

"Pardon" is not a Saturday Night Live announcer.

WRONG! Do some research before you post, otherwise people might mistake you for an ignorant liberal.

Funny you can't refute it then.

I cannot "pardon" you for cutting me off in traffic yesterday. Not because I don't feel like pardoning you but because such an incident never happened. Ergo there's nothing to hand a pardon ON. Pardons don't just waft through the air like mushroom spores.

This doesn't really go any more basic on the basic scale. We've got the basic dial set to "zero".

Off the topic anyway. Dim Dong the OP wants to "prosecute" people without a crime. That can't be done either. If you don't like how the law works -- oh well.

Here you go stupid. It took me about 40 seconds to find this for your lame, ignorant sorry ass. Like I said, do a google search before posting if you don't want everybody to know just how brain dead you are.

Can President Bush pardon people who haven't even been charged with a crime?

Yep. In 1866, the Supreme Court ruled in Ex parte Garland that the pardon power "extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment." (In that case, a former Confederate senator successfully petitioned the court to uphold a pardon that prevented him from being disbarred.) Generally speaking, once an act has been committed, the president can issue a pardon at any time—regardless of whether charges have even been filed.

What a fucking maroon.

What you have there is a nineteenth century SCOTUS screed. The same SCOTUS that gave us Dred Scott isn't a person but a corporation is.

I ain't talking SCOTUS here Sparkles. I'm talking Logic. Which is my native language I *always* converse in.

Point stands.

Fine, believe what you want. You say you're talking logic, but I have shown you that a president can pardon without charges ever being filed. You'll be scratching your little head when and if BO pardons the bulldyke before he leaves office with out a single charge being filed. Which I hope he does.

Your statement that a crime and conviction must occur before a pardon can be given is 100% wrong. And I believe you meant to call me a moron, not a maroon, unless you think I am a brownish red color, and is that a bad thing. Wait, are you a racist now?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

What a fucking maroon.

From the sea of knowledge ... you were obviously marooned.

Yea, poor ole POGO has a front seat on the short bus.