LoneLaugher
Diamond Member
What kind of retard thinks that a pardon is something that someone who has never been charged with a crime would receive?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I dont think he will. That would be an implication of guilt. I also don't think trump is going to delve any further into this matter.
What kind of retard thinks that a pardon is something that someone who has never been charged with a crime would receive?
Will Obama pardon Hillary, Bill and Chelsea? What do you think?
What kind of retard thinks that a pardon is something that someone who has never been charged with a crime would receive?
You don't understand much do you?
I think the election is the fuck over. It's time to fucking move forward and quit looking back. Hillary got her dick knocked in the dirt, she was, in my estimation, humiliated a second time. Let her be. She'll never run again, her influence is nonexistent, she's done. Your time will be better spent worrying about Trump because I'll tell you what, he's not going to be the President you think he will...
The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
No she's not. She hasn't broken any laws and doesn't need a pardon. Stop being an idiot. Trump is NOT going to prosecute her. Republicans have been trying to get something on the Clintons for 25 years. If they had anything, she'd already be in jail.
Or even Hillary?The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
Why would he pardon Bill and Chelsea?
everyone in this Nation is innocent until proven guilty except the Clintons, they are always guilty, without a trial or conviction...Trump cannot prosecute anyone. That is under the direction of the DOJ and FBI. Even Colin Powell called the Clintons, the Clinton Mafia.... Ceny is you must. I have no problem with people on the left ignoring the facts.The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
No she's not. She hasn't broken any laws and doesn't need a pardon. Stop being an idiot. Trump is NOT going to prosecute her. Republicans have been trying to get something on the Clintons for 25 years. If they had anything, she'd already be in jail.
I have a problem with people repeating Republican lies. 16 investigations, a special prosecutor and $100 million spent investigating the Clintons, say you're lying.
The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
No she's not. She hasn't broken any laws and doesn't need a pardon. Stop being an idiot. Trump is NOT going to prosecute her. Republicans have been trying to get something on the Clintons for 25 years. If they had anything, she'd already be in jail.
I think it's pretty obvious to any honest person that she comitted perjury while under oath testifying before a Congressional Investigating committee.
The FBI Director has already said she a) lied to the FBI b) was Extremely careless in handling TS documents c) Lied about how many devices she had d) lied about destroying State documents ...but you know all those things and you just want to ignore them. Will not repeat them again.Trump cannot prosecute anyone. That is under the direction of the DOJ and FBI. Even Colin Powell called the Clintons, the Clinton Mafia.... Ceny is you must. I have no problem with people on the left ignoring the facts.The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
No she's not. She hasn't broken any laws and doesn't need a pardon. Stop being an idiot. Trump is NOT going to prosecute her. Republicans have been trying to get something on the Clintons for 25 years. If they had anything, she'd already be in jail.
I have a problem with people repeating Republican lies. 16 investigations, a special prosecutor and $100 million spent investigating the Clintons, say you're lying.
The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
No she's not. She hasn't broken any laws and doesn't need a pardon. Stop being an idiot. Trump is NOT going to prosecute her. Republicans have been trying to get something on the Clintons for 25 years. If they had anything, she'd already be in jail.
I think it's pretty obvious to any honest person that she comitted perjury while under oath testifying before a Congressional Investigating committee.
I don't think the Clinton crime family should be pardoned.
The should be made an example of what happens to crooks.
My two cents.
You would need to READ ALL of comey's testimony and him speaking to the public regarding the case.Rep Trey Gowdy rips into FBI Director James Comey on Hillary Clinton's 'intent'
Gowdy: Good morning, Director Comey. Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private e-mail, was that true?
Comey: Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.
Gowdy: It was not true?
Comey: That's what I said.
Gowdy: OK. Well, I'm looking for a shorter answer so you and I are not here quite as long. Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her e-mails sent or received. Was that true?
Comey: That's not true. There were a small number of portion markings on I think three of the documents.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said "I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material." That is true?
Comey: There was classified information emailed.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton used one device, was that true?
Comey: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said all work related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?
Comey: No. We found work related email, thousands, that were not returned.
Gowdy: Exactly. Intent and consciousness of guilt, right?
Comey: That is right?
Gowdy: Consciousness of guilt and intent? In your old job you would prove intent as you referenced by showing the jury evidence of a complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the public record and you would be arguing in addition to concealment the destruction that you and i just talked about or certainly the failure to preserve.
You would argue all of that under the heading of content. You would also — intent. You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme when it started, when it ended and the number of emails whether
They were originally classified or of classified under the heading of intent. You would also, probably, under common scheme or plan, argue the burn bags of daily calendar entries or the missing daily calendar entries as a common scheme or plan to conceal.
Two days ago, Director, you said a reasonable person in her position should have known a private email was no place to send and receive classified information. You're right. An average person does know not to do that.
This is no average person. This is a former First Lady, a former United States senator, and a former Secretary of State that the president now contends is the most competent, qualified person to be president since Jefferson. He didn't say that in '08 but says it now.
She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, kept the private emails for almost two years and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private email account.
So you have a rogue email system set up before she took the oath of office, thousands of what we now know to be classified emails, some of which were classified at the time. One of her more frequent email comrades was hacked and you don't know whether or not she was.
And this scheme took place over a long period of time and resulted in the destruction of public records and yet you say there is insufficient evidence of intent. You say she was extremely careless, but not intentionally so.
You and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do defendants announce 'On this date I intend to break this criminal code section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this date.'
It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial evidence or if you're Congress and you realize how difficult it is prove, specific intent, you will form lathe a statute that allows for gross negligence.
My time is out but this is really important. You mentioned there's no precedent for criminal prosecution. My fear is there still isn't. There's nothing to keep a future Secretary of State or President from this exact same email scheme or their staff.
And my real fear is this, what the chairman touched upon, this double track justice system that is rightly or wrongly perceived in this country. That if you are a private in the Army and email yourself classified information you will be kicked out. But if you are Hillary Clinton, and you seek a promotion to Commander in Chief, you will not be. So what I hope you can do today is help the average person, the reasonable person you made reference to, the reasonable person understand why she appears to be treated differently than the rest of us would be. With that I would yield back.
Rep Trey Gowdy rips into FBI Director James Comey on Hillary Clinton's 'intent'
The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
The problem with that is, the president does not pardon those he thinks have not broken the law. If he pardons her, it's practically an admission she and the rest of the family are felons!
And if he doesn't, she's open to prison...
She's toast either way.
No she's not. She hasn't broken any laws and doesn't need a pardon. Stop being an idiot. Trump is NOT going to prosecute her. Republicans have been trying to get something on the Clintons for 25 years. If they had anything, she'd already be in jail.
I think it's pretty obvious to any honest person that she comitted perjury while under oath testifying before a Congressional Investigating committee.
No she didn't. What should be obvious to any honest person is how brutally the Republican Party has lied about, attacked and smeared the Clintons, for their own benefit. 25 years of lies which every American now believes.
The truth no longer matters. You denigrate Clinton for lying, and elect Trump who told more lies than all of the rest of the candidates combined.