• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If Hillary Isn't Indicted, the Rule of Law and the Republic Are Dead

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,255
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The United States has reached a crossing the Rubicon moment: either Hillary Clinton is indicted for knowingly violating statutes regarding State Department security, or the rule of law and the Republic are dead. This is a binary moment: we either let Hillary evade the laws that were established to protect the security of the nation and confess there is no rule of law now for the Oligarchy, or the agencies tasked with defending the nation indict her.

As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.

Discussion?

Article is here.
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
We all know in a week or two..............

The FBI well hold a press conference and say.........

WE could not find any evidence of wrong doing................... not that HRC is innocent................ but just they could not find any........

Case closed for the general public..........but to live on in RW circles for a couple of generations
 

Truckstop

DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
1,295
Reaction score
780
Location
Mesa, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.

Discussion?

Article is here.

Most partisans already don't care if there side breaks laws. Sadly, the rule of law is not for everyone, not just because of Hillary.
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
25,617
Reaction score
22,282
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I doubt she will be indicted.
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
32,100
Reaction score
35,989
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I doubt she will be indicted.

Me as well, but there's still always that chance, if it happens soon, it could be Trump vs. Sanders as her standing among democrats will tank, and that will sure be interesting.

Light vs. Dark, the ultimate showdown.
 

Linc

NIMBY
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
54,073
Reaction score
16,098
Location
IL—16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
In the eyes of a Ranger;

Hillary is guilty of every GOP smear until she can prove herself innocent .
 

chuckiechan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Messages
16,568
Reaction score
7,252
Location
California Caliphate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If they don't indict, they should cut Bradly Manning loose, and quash the arrest warrant for Snowden.
 

DifferentDrummr

Bald eagle
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
7,437
Reaction score
1,950
Location
Confirmation Bias Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.

Discussion?

Article is here.

Too late. The rule of law and the republic died with Bush vs. Gore in 2000.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
70,538
Reaction score
40,181
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Me as well, but there's still always that chance, if it happens soon, it could be Trump vs. Sanders as her standing among democrats will tank, and that will sure be interesting.

Light vs. Dark, the ultimate showdown.

I almost agree but think it is more a case of establishment vs. outsiders. There is justice vs. 'just us' - which may sound the same but are worlds apart in their application.
 

Donc

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
9,792
Reaction score
2,589
Location
out yonder
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Me as well, but there's still always that chance, if it happens soon, it could be Trump vs. Sanders as her standing among democrats will tank, and that will sure be interesting.

Light vs. Dark, the ultimate showdown.


If she gets indicted more than likely the shakeout will trump/Cruz vs Biden.:2wave:
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,954
Reaction score
16,568
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.

Discussion?

Article is here.

If that is the case then it hasn't been America for a long time. Because I am sure that she is not the first high ranking politician to get away with violating the law.

Even if she is indicted it doesn't mean she will be found guilty.
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
We all know in a week or two..............

The FBI well hold a press conference and say.........

WE could not find any evidence of wrong doing................... not that HRC is innocent................ but just they could not find any........

Case closed for the general public..........but to live on in RW circles for a couple of generations

Lol...

Yea, a elitist Politician not being held to the same standards as your average everyday American is exactly what the American people want right now. :roll:

She would almost be better off if she were indicted.
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Lol...

Yea, a elitist Politician not being held to the same standards as your average everyday American is exactly what the American people want right now. :roll:

She would almost be better off if she were indicted.

"Elitist" means best and brightest...............what's wrong with that?
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
76,105
Reaction score
32,157
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If she gets elected I wonder how that will impact anyone that ever has been or ever will be charged with the improper handling of classified data. Kinda tough to enforce those laws on the little people when the person sitting on the throne isnt held accountable.
 

Captain America

Jedi Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
22,909
Reaction score
13,235
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Too late. The rule of law and the republic died with Bush vs. Gore in 2000.

The very fact that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al., are out and about, freely walking the earth is enough evidence for me to know that some people are just above the law.
 

soot

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2013
Messages
4,308
Reaction score
2,530
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"Elitist" means best and brightest...............what's wrong with that?

"Elite" means best and brightest.

"Elitist" means the belief that certain roles, responsibilities, rights and privileges should be reserved only for the best and brightest.

And in the strictest sense I don't really know that there's anything necessarially "wrong" with that, but neither am I sure that there's anything necessarially "right" with that.

I would think that it would be contingent upon what we define as "elite".

And I'm not sure that I'd consider a carpet-bagging felon who rose to power pretty much exclusively on the true greatness of her husband and the "cult of personality" to be "elite" to the degree that I'd want to reserve any roles, responsibilities, rights or privileges to her or those like her.
 

Vern

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
13,075
Reaction score
4,285
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.

Discussion?

Article is here.

Dan,first thing, its an "editorial" not an article and a WND "editorial" that. And did you notice that your WND “editorial” waxed poetically for 6 paragraphs before even mentioning Hillary. Now, why is “not indicted” means “she didn’t break the law” automatically ruled out? Methinks you’ve been reading too many conservative headlines. And of course your “editorial” requires you to “just know” she broke the law. it reminds me of your Glass Steagall posts. you had an a version of reality that just wasn't supported by the facts. the first we need to do is to find out what version of “reality” you believe. Are you a conservative who believes….

It was illegal to even have a private server

It’s a crime to have emails that weren’t classified when they were sent

She told an aid to strip off the “TOP SECRET” from email (this is the back up narrative for the above narrative)

The .gov server is secure. (this is key to believing the above back up narrative)

Deleting non work related emails is a crime

The only smart thing from conservatives with the email narratives is that you guys are getting your excuses ready ahead of time. No more fumbling for answers when your version of reality is shattered. No more cutting and running from threads anymore like you did with the facts about Glass Steagall. And just like your Glass Steagall posts, actual facts were simply ignored that contradicted your narrative.

Dan, until you hold the conservative media accountable for lying to you, they’re not going to stop
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
"Elitist" means best and brightest...............what's wrong with that?

Nothing unless you're a hack who thinks the rule of law should only apply to the GOP and its supporters.
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Dan,first thing, its an "editorial" not an article and a WND "editorial" that. And did you notice that your WND “editorial” waxed poetically for 6 paragraphs before even mentioning Hillary. Now, why is “not indicted” means “she didn’t break the law” automatically ruled out? Methinks you’ve been reading too many conservative headlines. And of course your “editorial” requires you to “just know” she broke the law. it reminds me of your Glass Steagall posts. you had an a version of reality that just wasn't supported by the facts. the first we need to do is to find out what version of “reality” you believe. Are you a conservative who believes….

It was illegal to even have a private server

It’s a crime to have emails that weren’t classified when they were sent

She told an aid to strip off the “TOP SECRET” from email (this is the back up narrative for the above narrative)

The .gov server is secure. (this is key to believing the above back up narrative)

Deleting non work related emails is a crime

The only smart thing from conservatives with the email narratives is that you guys are getting your excuses ready ahead of time. No more fumbling for answers when your version of reality is shattered. No more cutting and running from threads anymore like you did with the facts about Glass Steagall. And just like your Glass Steagall posts, actual facts were simply ignored that contradicted your narrative.

Dan, until you hold the conservative media accountable for lying to you, they’re not going to stop

At least we now know why she needed that private server

It was so she could just use one device
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
"Elite" means best and brightest.

"Elitist" means the belief that certain roles, responsibilities, rights and privileges should be reserved only for the best and brightest.

And in the strictest sense I don't really know that there's anything necessarially "wrong" with that, but neither am I sure that there's anything necessarially "right" with that.

I would think that it would be contingent upon what we define as "elite".

And I'm not sure that I'd consider a carpet-bagging felon who rose to power pretty much exclusively on the true greatness of her husband and the "cult of personality" to be "elite" to the degree that I'd want to reserve any roles, responsibilities, rights or privileges to her or those like her.

Really now............... That's absurd
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Nothing unless you're a hack who thinks the rule of law should only apply to the GOP and its supporters.

You said that.......not me....................Is all you can do in discussing a serious subject is to "piss" on the poster because you have not a wit of a clue of what's going on.........
 

imyoda

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
5,731
Reaction score
1,025
Location
Sarasota, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
UPDATE and RELATED


'Fear of losing' another reason why Justice Dept. may not indict Clinton | Washington Examiner
'Fear of losing' another reason why Justice Dept. may not indict Clinton

“A former Justice Department official under two Republican presidents said the department is unlikely to indict Hillary Clinton, in part because the agency may be afraid to lose.

Ronald Sievert wrote in USA Today that as many suspect, politics is a big reason why the Obama administration's Justice Department is unlikely to pull the trigger on Clinton.

"[P]olitical appointees who make the final decisions will at least unconsciously be searching for ways to evaluate the case in a way that would evade an obvious debacle for the Democratic Party ……….
…. Sievert, who worked under the administrations of Reagan and George H.W. Bush, also said that institutionally, Justice has always taken its time with these sorts of cases. "Justice has not always had a reputation for being strong and aggressive, especially in the face of an intimidating defense," he wrote……….

……….. "There sometimes appears to be an institutional fear of losing, however minimal the chance," Sievert wrote. "This is an endemic characteristic of many bureaucracies."

Several reports have said the FBI is looking to interview Clinton and her aides about her use of a non-secure email system, and that the FBI wants to bring charges against Clinton. But Sievert said Justice is most likely working now to "avoid applying the plain language of the law to Hillary Clinton."

From the start, there was never going to be an indictment of HRC……….
Unless she shot someone while sending an email with Top Secret – For your eyes only……. That not being the case here……….

There is no prosecutor willing to risk his or her future employment………. Now being seen as a peoria being his/her legacy………..

All that remains now is a Press Conference………….

My guess, to be held right after the primaries and before the start of the convention……….


ALSO SEE:
Hillary's 'classified' smokescreen hides real crime: Column
 

Velvet Elvis

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
4,954
Reaction score
2,195
Location
Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Please. She won't be indicted. She's probably paid half of them off, under the table. The other half have probably been promised all kinds of sweetheart deals and incentives if she becomes president. Hell...I wouldn't doubt most of them end up voting FOR her.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
49,511
Reaction score
33,461
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
As much as I detest all the fake Republican conspiracy theories, they happen to be right on this one. The rule of law either works for everybody or it doesn't exist, and this is no longer America.

Discussion?

Article is here.


I think the article's assertion that the rule of law and the Republic are "dead" if Hillary isn't indicted is a tad overblown.

1. The citizenry does not actually know for a fact whether or not Hillary is guilty; the FBI is the body with access to that information, and they are investigating.

2. Conscientious FBI agents could always leak the information, or allow it to fall into, say, Anonymous's hands.

3. Apparently, in an article I don't have a link to but saw in a couple of threads on DP, Hillary is only one of many SoS's that have done such things with classified information. She's the only one a fuss was made over. Two wrongs don't make a right, but still. Why is she the only one to catch such flak?

4. It bears keeping in mind that the only way this even came up is through 7 bogus investigations into Benghazi, which multiple GOPers have since admitted were pure political theatre designed to smear her. So on this point, it's kind of like Bill's situation: He lied under oath, and that is a crime. But I simply cannot put out of my mind the fact that the only reason he was in a position to lie under oath is that the GOP spent something like 30 million bucks to investigate a blowjob; a politician cheating on a spouse is simply not the kind of thing that an official investigation should be about.
 
Last edited:

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,255
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I think the article's assertion that the rule of law and the Republic are "dead" if Hillary isn't indicted is a tad overblown.

1. The citizenry does not actually know for a fact whether or not Hillary is guilty; the FBI is the body with access to that information, and they are investigating.

2. Conscientious FBI agents could always leak the information, or allow it to fall into, say, Anonymous's hands.

3. Apparently, in an article I don't have a link to but saw in a couple of threads on DP, Hillary is only one of many SoS's that have done such things with classified information. She's the only one a fuss was made over.

4. It bears keeping in mind that the only way this even came up is through 7 bogus investigations into Benghazi, which multiple GOPers have since admitted were pure political theatre designed to smear her. So on this point, it's kind of like Bill's situation: He lied under oath, and that is a crime. But I simply cannot put out of my mind the fact that the only reason he was in a position to lie under oath is that the GOP spent something like 30 million bucks to investigate a blowjob; a politician cheating on a spouse is simply not the kind of thing that an official investigation should be about.

Yea, impeachment over a blow job was a little over the top, especially considering the fact that Dennis Hastert was diddling little boys and paying them hush money to keep quiet. LOL.
 
Top Bottom