- Jan 8, 2016
- 17,541
- 6,721
- 48
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
We all know there are many people who break laws but are never tried/convicted (Nixon come to mind); dose not mean they are not criminals.......
But we are not talking about "people" are we? We are talking about HRC so don't go derailing. Nixon got off because of a pardon....HRC got off because of political pressure....not a lot of difference there....One does not justify the other....Really? Because I have the impression there are a lot more people who've never been tried or convicted because they simply weren't guilty...well except of making Republican/conservatives mad at them because there wasn't any evidence of them doing anything illegal even though the Republican/conservatives they really really wanted them to be guilty. Of something. Anything actually.
tulc(guesses the Stones were right: you really don't always get what you want)![]()
My point was that there are more people who "don't get tried or convicted" who didn't do anything then people who "get away with it" so unless you have evidence that they can arrest/try/convict Sec Clinton with you're the one making a false comparison here, not me.But we are not talking about "people" are we? We are talking about HRC so don't go derailing. Nixon got off because of a pardon....HRC got off because of political pressure....not a lot of difference there....One does not justify the other....
My point was that there are more people who "don't get tried or convicted" who didn't do anything then people who "get away with it" so unless you have evidence that they can arrest/try/convict Sec Clinton with you're the one making a false comparison here, not me.
tulc(just thinks Republicans/conservatives can't have it both ways, claim she's guilty but then can't show evidence of that guilt)![]()
Of course you can prove that, right.....right?....No?....then it is just opinion....which is worth as much as a water bucket with a hole in the bottom.....My point was that there are more people who "don't get tried or convicted" who didn't do anything then people who "get away with it" so unless you have evidence that they can arrest/try/convict Sec Clinton with you're the one making a false comparison here, not me.![]()
...you mean they didn't find any reason to charge her. I'm not sure but isn't that what "no crime was committed" sort of means? so that would be "No charges, no trial, no conviction, no jail time." You see "ELITE!!" I see "no crime was committed". So in spite of the Republican/conservative desperation, she isn't found guilty of anything (well except of being an old person line) and the Republican guy has a conviction on record.But isn't it true that she was proven to have sent classified emails and that the reason she was not charged because the FBI claimed she wasn't 'aware' that the information was classified? So it was just an 'accident'..? oops.
...So she got off due to ignorance. But I thought ignorance of the law was no excuse... Just not for the underprivileged, non-elites I guess.
...you mean they didn't find any reason to charge her. I'm not sure but isn't that what "no crime was committed" sort of means? so that would be "No charges, no trial, no conviction, no jail time." You see "ELITE!!" I see "no crime was committed". So in spite of the Republican/conservative desperation, she isn't found guilty of anything (well except of being an old person line) and the Republican guy has a conviction on record.
tulc(also hasn't been convicted of anything, wonders if there's sch a thing as "white trash elite"?)![]()
So, we have your typical non-answer....gotcha....Or it's just as proven as your post was.
tulc(is just sayn')![]()
Maybe you have not heard of the lack of knowledge defense argument....? "Ignorance of the law is no defense"....except, of course, if you are HRC....you mean they didn't find any reason to charge her. I'm not sure but isn't that what "no crime was committed" sort of means? so that would be "No charges, no trial, no conviction, no jail time." You see "ELITE!!" I see "no crime was committed". So in spite of the Republican/conservative desperation, she isn't found guilty of anything (well except of being an old person line) and the Republican guy has a conviction on record.
tulc(also hasn't been convicted of anything, wonders if there's sch a thing as "white trash elite"?)![]()
And there it is. The thing so many Republican/conservatives want so desperately to say but realize what it makes them sound like when they do.If Democrat elites make no big deal about illegal immigration, classified information, the budget or anything else, that says a lot. So loose on everything to the point that their following sees that, and they just dont care either. So sloppy and careless. They sow it into our culture.
...Now they don't even care that the elections are rigged. We need order in this house.