Tweet
Just got over the Louisville loss and now this...
-
For some the glass is half full and for others half empty. My glass is out of ice.
- said no one ever... -
Don't forget groups like Judicial Watch holding their feet to the fire!Originally posted by wu_shizzle View Post"I not sure that I've ever been around a more competitive player or young man than Fred VanVleet. I like to win more than 99.9% of the people in this world, but he may top me." -- Gregg Marshall 12/23/13 :peaceful:
---------------------------------------
Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
"We have to pass it, to find out what's in it".
A physician called into a radio show and said:
"That's the definition of a stool sample."Comment
-
What is Trump the "Emperor"? If there is evidence of corruption - then the full force of the law should be applied. If there is no evidence of corruption then the FBI should move on - but this is not a decision for a "president" should make unless we want to be more like Venezuela.Originally posted by Kung Wu View PostComment
-
I see it almost the opposite. We all know Hillary is corrupt. Strangely enough, with her out of office and no longer being a peddler of influence, the Clinton Foundation is drying up at a breakneck pace. Prosecuting her isn't accomplishing anything.Originally posted by SB Shock View Post
I know going after her sounds good and all, but the one thing the US has never done, was going after former leaders. Ford pardoned Nixon, not because of partisanship, but to avoid imprisoning a former leader. Third world countries imprison their former leaders, not US.
I know she was never President, but none the less, prosecuting her would open the flood gates for every other successful candidate to prosecute the person they beat.
I don't like Hillary, but she is powerless, leave het out of jail.There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
There is a difference between vengeance and justice, although sometimes the result may look similar. How about a guilty verdict and a fine equal to the $$ they received especially the speaking fees?Originally posted by MoValley John View PostComment
-
That would be fine. I just get sick of hearing the masses from the opposition party screaming "impeach" and wanting whomever is in office thrown in jail. We don't imprison our political enemies. In my heart and in my mind, I know Hillary broke a shitload of laws. She deserves prison and we as Americans deserve justice. But the precident that sending Hillary to prison could create is far worse than just letting her and her foundation rot. Sure, fine her, don't send her to Sing Sing.Originally posted by atlwsu View PostThere are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese.Comment
-
No worries, they will probably hire Obama into the organization and get Michelle a spot in the sentate and groom her for the next presidential run.Comment
-
Actually, like an emperor, the President can pardon anyone he wants for any reason he sees fit. And he certainly sets the tone. Hillary is as crooked as Bill's weeney, but Trump getting involved at this point is a complete distraction from much more important things. If the FBI decides to look into the Foundation, that's a whole 'nother animal. But if the FBI reopens the email issue at this point, it will practically be a farce. She deserves jail, yes, but it's a complete distraction at this point.Originally posted by SB Shock View PostKung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
-
The president can only pardon for convictions in federal court, not state court and not for events/circumstance for which no charges have been filed.Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post"I not sure that I've ever been around a more competitive player or young man than Fred VanVleet. I like to win more than 99.9% of the people in this world, but he may top me." -- Gregg Marshall 12/23/13 :peaceful:
---------------------------------------
Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
"We have to pass it, to find out what's in it".
A physician called into a radio show and said:
"That's the definition of a stool sample."Comment
-
I don't believe this is accurate.Originally posted by im4wsu View Post
Edit: Well on second thought, with the way you worded it, maybe. I'd need to read up on it more.Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
-
fromthe us constitutionOriginally posted by Kung Wu View Post"I not sure that I've ever been around a more competitive player or young man than Fred VanVleet. I like to win more than 99.9% of the people in this world, but he may top me." -- Gregg Marshall 12/23/13 :peaceful:
---------------------------------------
Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
"We have to pass it, to find out what's in it".
A physician called into a radio show and said:
"That's the definition of a stool sample."Comment
-
The US Constitution does not say anything about "not for events/circumstances for which no charges have been filed", to my recollection.Originally posted by im4wsu View PostKung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
-
It says "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment" Reprieve means "reduce sentence" and pardon means to "forgive or excuse."Originally posted by Kung Wu View Post
IMO, the only way for HRC to receive a pardon from Obama is to confess and demand sentencing in a Federal Court before January 20, 2017."I not sure that I've ever been around a more competitive player or young man than Fred VanVleet. I like to win more than 99.9% of the people in this world, but he may top me." -- Gregg Marshall 12/23/13 :peaceful:
---------------------------------------
Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
"We have to pass it, to find out what's in it".
A physician called into a radio show and said:
"That's the definition of a stool sample."Comment
-
I don't understand the point you are making. I think we both know what a pardon is. The point in doubt is whether charges have to be filed or not. I do not believe they do. I think an offense only has to be committed. I think Obama could pardon Hillary right now for the email issue, and that would be the end of it.Originally posted by im4wsu View Post
Ford pardoned Nixon for any crimes that MAY have been committed. Here is the language from Ford's actual pardon:
Charges do not need to be filed.Now, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.Kung Wu say, man who read woman like book, prefer braille!Comment
Comment