My thoughts on continued investigation of emails and Clinton Foundation

[WVPATX]

Personally, I think the investigation must continue. I think DOJ should appoint a special prosecutor, convene a grand jury, depose witnesses under oath, offer immunity when necessary to get at the bottom of this thing, both the e-mails and the Foundation.

We MUST follow the law. No one must be above the law. If Clinton is indicted, I would hope Trump would pardon her. But I also hope he would pardon the sailor spending a year in prison for taking a picture of a sub.

Having said this, if Huma, Mills or others violated the law, they should be prosecuted. We must send a message to other future power players that no one is above the law. It would restore enormous confidence in both the DOJ and FBI, imo.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

Personally, I think the investigation must continue. I think DOJ should appoint a special prosecutor, convene a grand jury, depose witnesses under oath, offer immunity when necessary to get at the bottom of this thing, both the e-mails and the Foundation.

We MUST follow the law. No one must be above the law. If Clinton is indicted, I would hope Trump would pardon her. But I also hope he would pardon the sailor spending a year in prison for taking a picture of a sub.

Having said this, if Huma, Mills or others violated the law, they should be prosecuted. We must send a message to other future power players that no one is above the law. It would restore enormous confidence in both the DOJ and FBI, imo.

Scary precedent my friend.....

 

[WVPATX]

Scary precedent my friend.....

Without confidence that powerful people are not above the law, we have no law. Everyone is harmed. I would absolutely pardon Clinton. She has paid a huge price for her actions. But the others that aided and abetted this criminal activity, they need to serve time.

And there is plenty of precedent. Scooter Libby served time for perjury. Nixon's fellows served time. Americans don't trust the DOJ or the FBI and that must end, imho.

 

[CAJUNEER]

Scary precedent my friend.....

Exactly.

 

[WVPATX]

Scary precedent my friend.....

What is the scary precedent? The pardon of Clinton or the investigation?

 

[Mntneer]

Personally, I think the investigation must continue. I think DOJ should appoint a special prosecutor, convene a grand jury, depose witnesses under oath, offer immunity when necessary to get at the bottom of this thing, both the e-mails and the Foundation.

We MUST follow the law. No one must be above the law. If Clinton is indicted, I would hope Trump would pardon her. But I also hope he would pardon the sailor spending a year in prison for taking a picture of a sub.

Having said this, if Huma, Mills or others violated the law, they should be prosecuted. We must send a message to other future power players that no one is above the law. It would restore enormous confidence in both the DOJ and FBI, imo.

I think the FBI, if investigating the Foundation as I believe they are, should continue that investigation, and if there is substantial evidence of guilt then we have to allow the system to play itself out.

Same holds true for Trump.

 

[Original Mountaineer1]

What is the scary precedent? The pardon of Clinton or the investigation?

Investigation of Clinton.

 

[WVPATX]

Investigation of Clinton.

I know many that agree with you. What about Huma, Cheryl Mills, etc.?

 

[countryroads89]

Let me remind you that your President-elect has a court date of 28 November.... and continues to be audited by the IRS.

Wouldn't that be something? The POTUS guilty of fraud and racketeering and/or charged with tax evasion.

 

[WVPATX]

Let me remind you that your President-elect has a court date of 28 November.... and continues to be audited by the IRS.

Wouldn't that be something? The POTUS guilty of fraud and racketeering and/or charged with tax evasion.

I'm fine with that continued investigation. So I'm sure you're fine with the continued investigation of the emails and the Foundation. If so, we are in rare agreement.

 

[mneilmont]

I'm fine with that continued investigation. So I'm sure you're fine with the continued investigation of the emails and the Foundation. If so, we are in rare agreement.

Simply cannot cut investigation and make believe it never happened. There has to be a reasonable disposition of the charges.

 

[eerdoc]

What is the scary precedent? The pardon of Clinton or the investigation?

We already have the scary precedent---Ford pardoning a truly guilty Nixon. Absolutely disgraceful. Do not see Trump pardoning Hillary--Obama will have beat him to that punch. He pardons her for whatever crimes against the Country of which she has been or will be charged.

 

[CAJUNEER]

We already have the scary precedent---Ford pardoning a truly guilty Nixon. Absolutely disgraceful. Do not see Trump pardoning Hillary--Obama will have beat him to that punch. He pardons her for whatever crimes against the Country of which she has been or will be charged.

He can't pardon do future convictions.

 

[eerphone]

Exactly.

Really, what is so scary ? The dark place this might lead ? Prove that we are all equal under the law ? That our government institutions are there for the people ? That there was serious abuse of power ? That we will have our college age students laying in the street in a fetal position afraid a policeman is going to abuse them ? What ?
I favor a pardon, my wife and her friends all empathically want both situations followed to conclusion. Why did the Clintons work the system, they have received more from the system than most Americans ?

 

[CAJUNEER]

Really, what is so scary ? The dark place this might lead ? Prove that we are all equal under the law ? That our government institutions are there for the people ? That there was serious abuse of power ? That we will have our college age students laying in the street in a fetal position afraid a policeman is going to abuse them ? What ?
I favor a pardon, my wife and her friends all empathically want both situations followed to conclusion. Why did the Clintons work the system, they have received more from the system than most Americans ?

Scary precedent is that the administration of the winner of a presidential election jails the opponent.

 

[eerphone]

Scary precedent is that the administration of the winner of a presidential election jails the opponent.

Wouldn't that be a result of an investigation by DOJ, a Grand Jury decision, a trial, and a verdict by a judge or jury.
Not just removed off the street like in a 3rd world country.

 

[CAJUNEER]

Wouldn't that be a result of an investigation by DOJ, a Grand Jury decision, a trial, and a verdict by a judge or jury.
Not just removed off the street like in a 3rd world country.

In a perfect world justice would be blind and have all appearance of being impartial. In the world we live in even justice rightly administered can at times appear vindictive. Better to love mercy than justice.

 

[Airport]

In a perfect world justice would be blind and have all appearance of being impartial. In the world we live in even justice rightly administered can at times appear vindictive. Better to love mercy than justice.

We could send her to Alderson and she could stay in the Martha Stewart suite. That would be magnanimous.

 

[mneilmont]

In a perfect world justice would be blind and have all appearance of being impartial. In the world we live in even justice rightly administered can at times appear vindictive. Better to love mercy than justice.

How do we erase these infractions as though they never happened? How do history books note it? Does she take this as a legal precedence, therefore, free to continue doing whatever she devices for future activity? I probably don't want to see the old bitch hanging from the highest tree, but somehow she has to acknowledge that any future acts will have consequences. Historically, lawyers will push just a little bit over THE line.

 

[CAJUNEER]

How do we erase these infractions as though they never happened? How do history books note it? Does she take this as a legal precedence, therefore, free to continue doing whatever she devices for future activity? I probably don't want to see the old bitch hanging from the highest tree, but somehow she has to acknowledge that any future acts will have consequences. Historically, lawyers will push just a little bit over THE line.

Better to allow a state to prosecute her than the federal government.

 

[mneilmont]

Better to allow a state to prosecute her than the federal government.

No disagreement there, but there are not many states with that kind of money in their budget to withstand the prosecution challenges that will be offered.

 

[WVPATX]

Scary precedent is that the administration of the winner of a presidential election jails the opponent.

Why not conduct a fair, impartial investigation. Jail the wrong doers as determined by the Grand Jury and a Jury of their peers. Pardon Hillary, she has already paid the price. That is called equal justice.

If Huma or Mills committed felonies and are convicted, they should be punished. If the techs that controlled the servers committed crimes, they should be punished. But do it within our laws. That will demonstrate to everyone that no one is above the law and restore some sense of fairness to both DOJ and the FBI. If people don't believe they will get a fair shot, we have anarchy.

 

[WVPATX]

Better to allow a state to prosecute her than the federal government.

The law that may have been broken were federal, not state.

 

[CAJUNEER]

The law that may have been broken were federal, not state.

Many laws overlap. Usually when a multi-state crime is committed the Feds take over due to jurisdiction limits for states. However, states could possibly prosecute leaving the Feds out of it and giving the process every appearance of fairness. With a case this prominent it is not enough to be fair. It must also appear fair.

 

[WVPATX]

Many laws overlap. Usually when a multi-state crime is committed the Feds take over due to jurisdiction limits for states. However, states could possibly prosecute leaving the Feds out of it and giving the process every appearance of fairness. With a case this prominent it is not enough to be fair. It must also appear fair.

The Foundation is a federal beef, crossing state lines. The email scandal a federal beef with federal laws broken. With all due respect, the states have no jurisdiction. Fairness is the convening of a Grand Jury. Fairness is the appointment of a special prosecutor, not involved in the DOJ. Fairness is a thorough FBI investigation. And fairness is a trial of their peers. Like it or not, that is how the system works. If no crimes were committed, so be it.

But I, if I'm Trump, would absolutely pardon Hillary. She has already paid the ultimate price. But for her cohorts, lock them up if they broke the law.

 

[CAJUNEER]

The Foundation is a federal beef, crossing state lines. The email scandal a federal beef. With all due respect, the states have no jurisdiction.

There's a NY law, I'd wager, under which the Clintons could be prosecuted.

 

[WVPATX]

There's a NY law, I'd wager, under which the Clintons could be prosecuted.

Perhaps, I'm not sure. But selling federal government favors for money is a federal crime. The entire Email mess involved many federal crimes. It's simply impossible for one state, any state, to run this deal. States don't prosecute federal crimes.