‘Lock Her Up’...?? For What..?

[KCfromNC]

Surprise. Government investigates the elite and finds nothing wrong.

Not always
Judge Says Trump Must Pay $2 Million Over Misuse Of Foundation Funds
Judge Approves $25 Million Settlement Of Trump University Lawsuit

 

[Hank77]

Hillary should at least get 5 years of house arrest for washing her computer hard drives with the wrong detergent.
M-Bob

Maybe this is why that didn't happen?

• Bush White House email controversy – During the Lawyergate investigation, it was discovered that the Bush administration used Republican National Committee (RNC) web servers for millions of emails which were then destroyed, lost or deleted in possible violation of the Presidential Records Act and the Hatch Act. George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Andrew Card, Sara Taylor and Scott Jennings all used RNC webservers for the majority of their emails. Of 88 officials investigated, 51 showed no emails at all.[243] As many as five million emails requested by Congressional investigators were therefore unavailable, lost, or deleted.[244]

List of federal political scandals in the United States - Wikipedia

 

[TLK Valentine]

Hillary is as corrupt as they come. So is Trump.

Lock em both up, then?

 

[essentialsaltes]

You do realise your OP has nothing to do with the already ongoing investigation with Barr and Durham? They have not come to an end as alluded to.

Durham's investigation is into the origins of the Russia investigation. Hillary's involvement with that is primarily that she was the object of 'dirt' that the Trump campaign wanted from Russian sources. She's closer to a victim than a suspect in that investigation.

Whereas Huber was directly tasked with looking at Clinton's alleged corruption, and found nothing.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Democrat leaders have willingly provided their income tax returns, haven't demanded that the Attorney General investigate their political opponents, never withheld congressional approved funds to foreign powers to gather "dirt" for domestic purposes nor repeatedly led public chants of "Lock him/her up" at political rallies!

How old are you that you think this sort of behavior is limited to republicans? Ever heard of Dan Rostenkowski? Bill Clinton?

This President has taken the abuse of public power to a whole new level that is unprecedented in American history!

No he hasn't. He's corrupt alright. But he's not unique.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Lock em both up, then?

As long as they get due process. Hillary can go to prison for the murder of Khadafi and both Ahlakis, (Obama too) and Trump for Ahlakis 8 year old daughter and this Iranian.

 

[Kaon]

It took the FBI decades to restore its image and now this President wants to take it back down the same "slippery slope" by trying to use it as his personal police force!

Once the nation has dispensed with this President, it is imperative that Congress introduce measures that prevent those in high office from such blatant abuse of their powers!

Trump will remain in office.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Trump will remain in office.

Not indefinitely, I think is the point.

 

[LostMarbels]

So, two more years of pointless scratching around...?

No, this is going to continue for at least 5 more years while Trump is in office, and might even continue with Don Jr. The dems will never stop the 'pointless scratching'.

 

[LostMarbels]

Whereas Huber was directly tasked with looking at Clinton's alleged corruption, and found nothing.

Still amazes me, as educated and advanced a society we are, people still struggle with cronyism and corruption. The corrupt protect themselves by appointing individuals they themselves have dirt on, control, or have some other means of 'utilising' said individuals. No kidding these people like comey and others have found no corruption concerning HRC. They are essentially investigating themselves.

 

[Kaon]

Not indefinitely, I think is the point.

Hmm...

 

[Allandavid]

Still amazes me, as educated and advanced a society we are, people still struggle with cronyism and corruption. The corrupt protect themselves by appointing individuals they themselves have dirt on, control, or have some other means of 'utilising' said individuals. No kidding these people like comey and others have found no corruption concerning HRC. They are essentially investigating themselves.

So...Hillary was somehow “protecting” herself by convincing Trump’s DOJ to open an investigation of her and stretch it out for two years....??

Yeah, that flies....

 

[essentialsaltes]

Still amazes me, as educated and advanced a society we are, people still struggle with cronyism and corruption. The corrupt protect themselves by appointing individuals they themselves have dirt on, control, or have some other means of 'utilising' said individuals. No kidding these people like comey and others have found no corruption concerning HRC. They are essentially investigating themselves.

John Huber was appointed by Jeff Sessions.

"Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed Thursday a federal prosecutor was evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One … In a letter directed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, Sessions revealed that he asked U.S. Attorney John Huber to lead the evaluation into issues raised by the committees in recent months."

Huber was one of the two probes described in this thread: Trump allies await results of two internal probes that could expose Russia investigation backstory

Neither of those has produced anything.

So rather than retroactively trying to make Huber some sort of Clinton crony, are you willing to state on the record that Durham is not a Clinton crony? And that you will accept the conclusions of his investigation? Or does your acceptance depend on what that conclusion is?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Hmm...

Donald's opponents have to accept the unpleasant truth that at the moment, Donald is the President of the United States.

However, Donald's supporters have to accept the unpleasant (to them) truth that he will someday not be the President of the United States.

Like it or not, he will eventually vacate the White House in one of six ways:

1. Defeated (losing in November)
2. As a lame duck (in January 2025)
3. In handcuffs (impeached and convicted)
4. In disgrace (resignation)
5. In a straitjacket (25th Amendment)
6. In a pine box (death)

Once one of these circumstances comes to pass -- and it's a mathematical certainty that one will -- @jgarden is correct: is imperative that Congress introduce measures that prevent those in high office from such blatant abuse of their powers...

...because we all know Donald will not permit any check on his power so long as he wields it.

 

[SimplyMe]

How old are you that you think this sort of behavior is limited to republicans? Ever heard of Dan Rostenkowski? Bill Clinton?



No he hasn't. He's corrupt alright. But he's not unique.

I don't think bad behavior is limited to one party. In fact, I find it rather funny, in a sad sort of way, that the party's have switched positions. Roughly three years ago Democrats were complaining about the Senate ignoring their Constitutionally mandated duties when Republicans failed to hold hearings on an Obama Supreme Court nominee, and now we hear Republicans using the exact same arguments when they cry about how Pelosi is refusing to send the impeachment articles to the Senate. In both cases, we see the parties mostly caring about how the Constitution can be used to further their politics, not about using it to create a good government.

This is my biggest fear, right now, with the Republicans and Trump. Instead of coming out and wanting to find out the truth of what Trump did in withholding funds for Ukraine, in what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine and if he was pursuing a "shadow government agenda," instead we get defenses and obfuscation. But the fact that Republicans are allowing it now, trying to claim "everyone does it" or "it was wrong but nothing really we can do;" then we can be assured that the next corrupt Democratic President will do something similar, or even worse.

Trump had done a lot of "firsts" with the office of the Presidency, at least "firsts" for Presidents in the last 100 years or so -- and because he's now "gotten away with those things" we're going to see many future presidents do those same type of things. Republicans cried and screamed at Obama's use of Executive Orders but are basically cheering on Trump's use of them (such as to create the border wall). Sure, they'll cry and scream again when the next Democrat uses them in a similar way (to fund something Republicans don't want) but they'll know they don't have any real argument, just their outrage.

At some point, we -- as a country -- need to step back and require our leaders to act in a correct manner, not to further the political party of their choice.