That whole "Lock her up!" thing? Yeah, just for show (Shocker!)

[Sunburn74]

That really is what you want? Politicians who win and the second they win completely go 180 on everything they stood for? That really is the kind of political process you want to see succeed time and time again?

Someone promises the hardcore racist, anti gay, pro nazi bullshit that gives you a raging hard on and then goes 180 and is pro equality, pro homosexuality, and anti nazi and now your hard on is lost? That really is what you want?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Classic bait and switch.

Either there was no crime and he was lying the entire time about scandals with no basis as he has been lying about everything else. Or there were serious fraudulent white collar crimes committed by HRC and he doesn't care about policing serious corruption at the federal level, with his incoming cabinet being exclusively CEOs who know where the money is.

Take your pick. You can't have it both ways

The odds of "serious fraudulent white collar crimes committed by HRC" are now essentially zero -- zip -- nada -- nichts -- nothing. We have had the longest congressional witch-hunt in US history. We have had the most thorough FBI investigations to memory. They have investigated the e-mails at variously State Department, Hillary's home server, and the nexus of files confused between Humma Abedin and her disturbed husband Anthony "Big-Dog" Weiner. They have investigate the accounts or relevant aspects of the Clinton Foundation. there is no evidence of play for pay; there is no evidence of coverup that can't be explained as commercial e-mail deletions. If there is no evidence that Hillary's server had been hacked, then there cannot be any sense in leveling some minor infraction for the small handful of e-mails which have security status that is questionable anyway.

The odds of some treasonous foreknowledge by Donald J. Trump, Paul Manafort or any number of people surrounding the candidate increases with evidence of personal contacts in Ukraine and Russia, and there are mechanisms whereby an investigation into the e-mail and other communications of Donald J. Trump can be examined. Such an examination would prove whether or not subject Donald J. Trump is guilty in foreknowledge of Russian hacking, therefore culpable at minimum of misprision of a felony -- which is also a felony and an impeachable offense. It may even be possible to determine evidence of a greater crime, with plotting, collusion, planning or coordination of hacking detrimental to the entire US presidential election of 2016.

There are ample grounds for impeachment and other criminal charges if such can be proven from the evidence mentioned.

Donald J. Trump may have compromised the security of the people of the USA, and contributed to the intended corruption of an American election, whether or not outcome-changing influence can be proven, since it only requires that Russians tipped their hand of an intent to fix the election through propaganda, misinformation and compromises to the security of State Department, the DNC, the RNC and possibly other entities.

Let the inquiry proceed, let the investigation proceed, and if there are Americans with backbone and integrity enough in the US Congress, let the impeachment proceed.

 

[MrSquished]

and won.

Yes we already know Trump lied more than any recent politician and won. We've moved on. Now we are on to pointing out things like what a douchebag he is. Try to keep up.

 

[Jhhnn]

The odds of "serious fraudulent white collar crimes committed by HRC" are now essentially zero -- zip -- nada -- nichts -- nothing. We have had the longest congressional witch-hunt in US history. We have had the most thorough FBI investigations to memory. They have investigated the e-mails at variously State Department, Hillary's home server, and the nexus of files confused between Humma Abedin and her disturbed husband Anthony "Big-Dog" Weiner. They have investigate the accounts or relevant aspects of the Clinton Foundation. there is no evidence of play for pay; there is no evidence of coverup that can't be explained as commercial e-mail deletions. If there is no evidence that Hillary's server had been hacked, then there cannot be any sense in leveling some minor infraction for the small handful of e-mails which have security status that is questionable anyway.

The odds of some treasonous foreknowledge by Donald J. Trump, Paul Manafort or any number of people surrounding the candidate increases with evidence of personal contacts in Ukraine and Russia, and there are mechanisms whereby an investigation into the e-mail and other communications of Donald J. Trump can be examined. Such an examination would prove whether or not subject Donald J. Trump is guilty in foreknowledge of Russian hacking, therefore culpable at minimum of misprision of a felony -- which is also a felony and an impeachable offense. It may even be possible to determine evidence of a greater crime, with plotting, collusion, planning or coordination of hacking detrimental to the entire US presidential election of 2016.

There are ample grounds for impeachment and other criminal charges if such can be proven from the evidence mentioned.

Donald J. Trump may have compromised the security of the people of the USA, and contributed to the intended corruption of an American election, whether or not outcome-changing influence can be proven, since it only requires that Russians tipped their hand of an intent to fix the election through propaganda, misinformation and compromises to the security of State Department, the DNC, the RNC and possibly other entities.

Let the inquiry proceed, let the investigation proceed, and if there are Americans with backbone and integrity enough in the US Congress, let the impeachment proceed.

And then we get Pence. He's already leading Donald thru it, holding his hand all the way.

Trump might be the better alternative.

 

[compuwiz1]

I think Trump is soft playing on Hillary for show, in the hopes that Obama doesn't pardon her. If O doesn't feel any threat from Trump, he may not pardon her. If he doesn't, I think the Trump administration and his new AG will unleash hell on her. It will be interesting to see who gets pardons before Obama leaves office. After that, we will look into why.

 

[Victorian Gray]

and won.

By promising shit to folks like you. Congratulations, you got the president that you deserve.

 

[superstition]

There are four points that should be kept in mind, all of which tend to be ignored:

1) If Hillary Clinton is guilty of something then she should be investigated and punished appropriately under the law. That she was his political opponent and the Democratic Party's nominee is irrelevant to this.

2) Trump had no basis for saying "lock her up" because he did not have the outcome of a trial by jury. Innocent until proven guilty is supposed to the basis of our legal system (unless you're the IRS or FBI — when dealing with TOR exit node operators and such).

3) Trump saying "I'll see that's she's prosecuted for her crimes and will not pardon her" is appropriate. It's particularly appropriate given the way the Clintons made money from the pardoning of Marc Rich, an international criminal on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list.

4) Some "liberal" Democratic politicians promised/implied strongly that they would impeach George W. Bush if they could. But, as soon as that was a possibility, Pelosi used the Let's Look Forward, Not Back™ rhetoric, the same line Obama used later. How much does Let's Look Forward, Not Back™ mean Elites Have Immunity?

 

[cubby1223]

Threatening to investigate/jail a political opponent actually is a big deal. It happens in all sorts of places over the world that we really don't want to emulate.

And as the topic of this thread clearly states, we are not emulating.

 

[Jhhnn]

I think Trump is soft playing on Hillary for show, in the hopes that Obama doesn't pardon her. If O doesn't feel any threat from Trump, he may not pardon her. If he doesn't, I think the Trump administration and his new AG will unleash hell on her. It will be interesting to see who gets pardons before Obama leaves office. After that, we will look into why.

Put down the crack pipe. Trump always knew it was convenient bullshit, like birtherism.

 

[cubby1223]

Keep telling yourself that. It was a slime campaign reduced to a slogan.

Tell what? Many didn't believe Trump would imprison Hillary if he were elected. He is now elected and soon will be President, and states he will not imprison Hillary.

I don't know what you are telling yourself, but the above is very clear and not really up for any alternate interpretation.

Despite what you may believe, there are a wide range of people who voted for Trump, and they voted for Trump for all sorts of individual reasons.

 

[ivwshane]

And then we get Pence. He's already leading Donald thru it, holding his hand all the way.

Trump might be the better alternative.

Not really. Trump can lead his followers to wherever he wants. Do you think pence would have that same charisma or loyal following? No he wouldn't and without that people might actually question his moves. With trump as their cult leader he can do no wrong in their eyes.

So no, pence wouldn't be worse. He'd still sick ass but at least he wouldn't be sucking ass while telling people what they want to hear.

 

[MrSquished]

Tell what? Many didn't believe Trump would imprison Hillary if he were elected. He is now elected and soon will be President, and states he will not imprison Hillary.

I don't know what you are telling yourself, but the above is very clear and not really up for any alternate interpretation.

Despite what you may believe, there are a wide range of people who voted for Trump, and they voted for Trump for all sorts of individual reasons.

62% of Trump voters believed he would go after her.

" A recent poll by YouGov and The Economist showed that 62% of Trump voters believed in his campaign promise to appoint a special prosecutor."'

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../11/22/donald-trump-hillary-clinton/94266466/

 

[superstition]

Do you think pence would have that same charisma or loyal following? No he wouldn't and without that people might actually question his moves.

So no, pence wouldn't be worse. He'd still sick ass but at least he wouldn't be sucking ass while telling people what they want to hear.

You need to watch the VP debate from start to finish.

Trump lost the debates. Pence didn't. Not only did Pence not lose that debate, I've never seen anyone more adept at not answering a single question directly or honestly. The only person who did do that in that debate was Kaine and he really only did it once (the church/state separation question).

Pence is a scarier prospect. He's a far more accomplished liar than Trump can ever be. Trump merely has been able to ride his outsider status, celebrity, and roughshod plainspokenness — qualities Pence doesn't have. Trump has been coasting with people who don't follow politics closely and who wanted to disrupt Washington-as-usual. We'll see how long Trump will be able to ride those qualities once people who don't pay much attention to politics get more clued-in about the fact that he's a sell-out.

Pence, by contrast, is a career politician coated with Teflon Truthiness who escaped losing reelection over his anti-gay stuff in Indiana (support plummeted to 40% or so) by getting with Trump and has likely emerged from that even better at lying. The media, the GOP, and the politicians in Washington in general are far more comfortable supporting someone like Mike Pence and whatever politics he promotes. He probably realized that anti-gay stuff is too risky so at least that is hopefully off the table.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Trump and Pence have really become a cute pair. When Pence was first announced a lot of people both pro- and anti-Trump weren't happy, due to the way Trump announced it some thought he was unhappy and forced to accept Pence by the GOP, but over these several months they've come to cover each other's weaknesses well. They way they stick up for each other now is adorable. <3

 

[cubby1223]

62% of Trump voters believed he would go after her.

" A recent poll by YouGov and The Economist showed that 62% of Trump voters believed in his campaign promise to appoint a special prosecutor."'

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../11/22/donald-trump-hillary-clinton/94266466/

Ok. 38% of the survey did not, and yet still voted for Trump. Proves my point that not every Trump supporter was in it for the jailing Hillary stance. Also proves my point that people who voted for Trump are not all alike and are varied of what stances they support or don't support.

Just like not all Clinton voters supported every stance Clinton had.

 

[MrSquished]

Ok. 38% of the survey did not, and yet still voted for Trump. Proves my point that not every Trump supporter was in it for the jailing Hillary stance. Also proves my point that people who voted for Trump are not all alike and are varied of what stances they support or don't support.

Just like not all Clinton voters supported every stance Clinton had.

I never claimed EVERY Trump supporter was about jailing Hillary. I honestly didn't think that many Trumpists were fucking idiots though.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

And then we get Pence. He's already leading Donald thru it, holding his hand all the way.

Trump might be the better alternative.

It doesn't matter. For the risk that Trump as Enemy of the People will bring down the house on all of our heads merits his immediate obstruction and removal from the People's White House. Further, whatever the Pence-not-worth-a-shilling believes in dogma or policy delusion, he is not the disordered, volatile self-honoring personality and risk to the United States of America as is Donald J. Trump.

Sweep out the Trash in the House by 2018. Remove the Trash from the White House now, next year, or by any constitutional means before the end of 2020.

Resist. What was good for the Goose is sauce for the Gander. We must prevent the Tory menace in Congress, the White House or the Supreme Court from gaining any ground, unless it is ground we all can gain, and not some ill-conceived future outcome without guarantee. We will not gamble our future on a Trump Presidency, a Republican Congress, or the delusional and mentally-ill Walking Dead of the True Believer Faithful.

Fellow Americans! We must Resist the Enemy Within.

 

[Dari]

Seriously, no one cares about this. People care about jobs and security. Going after Clinton would set a precedent that not even Trump would want to start. Witch hunts are for less civilized people.

 

[mikeymikec]

Blimey: Two pages into this thread and we haven't had a single "bu-bu-but Hillary..." response yet.

As long as she doesn't do anything to really piss him off, she can probably avoid prosecution. Sounds fair to me.

Not sure if troll or serious.

Seriously, no one cares about this. People care about jobs and security. Going after Clinton would set a precedent that not even Trump would want to start. Witch hunts are for less civilized people.

So I guess spurring chants of "lock her up" is in no way similar to instigating a witch hunt?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Blimey: Two pages into this thread and we haven't had a single "bu-bu-but Hillary..." response yet.



Not sure if troll or serious.

A**Hole, Troll or otherwise. I have no illusions about Hillary. But I'd rather ally myself with a doctrinaire Socialist or even a Communist -- which I am not -- than give aid and comfort to the Enemy Within.

I reject Republican loyalists of the 2016 election as fellow Americans, fellow human Beings, and anything other than Aliens from another Planet.

And I will never -- NEVER -- "Forgive" the last 16 years of Republican lying, bigoted posturing, spending and carnage.

They are lost to me. Which is a mild way of saying dead. No Republican loyalist will share my pew in Church; nor my restaurant table. They are not welcome on my doorstep. They will not merit my emergency roadside assistance unless they either lie or pass my trick question.

 

[Sunburn74]

Seriously, no one cares about this. People care about jobs and security. Going after Clinton would set a precedent that not even Trump would want to start. Witch hunts are for less civilized people.

People at his rallies and the Republican national convention weren't chanting about jobs or security.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

People at his rallies and the Republican national convention weren't chanting about jobs or security.

If America had always seemed like a Colossus or your analogous Lady Liberty, she has always shared something with the Crocodile. She has a tough skin, shining in the sun.

She has a putrid puddle of yellow piss floating a sordid dark underbelly that needs to be excised and burned.

 

[Dari]

Blimey: Two pages into this thread and we haven't had a single "bu-bu-but Hillary..." response yet.



Not sure if troll or serious.



So I guess spurring chants of "lock her up" is in no way similar to instigating a witch hunt?

Of course not. It's a way for people to vent. Of course, the congressional investigations are not over. If they find something they can take to a prosecutor, then the government will let justice take its course. Other than that, going after your opponent using the instruments of power is not a good idea. It can come back and bite you in the asshole.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Sixteen years, counselor! Sixteen years -- gettin' in touch with mah feminine side, as we were frustrated by obstruction, bigoted posturing, gridlock, war-spending that begat more war-spending, and treachery. I am Virgil, guiding you through the gates of Hell. We are now in the 9th circle -- the circle of Traitors.

 

[HomerJS]

Sure. Let me know when droves of his voters come out and cry "You betrayed us!" and you'll have a meaningful point. Until then, you're pointing out the obvious.

His supporters don't mind if Trump sticks a dick up their asses without asking. Remember he already said he can shoot people in the street and they wouldn't care.