Why have these people escaped punishment
5 responses | 0 likes
Started by wglassfo - Oct. 9, 2018, 3:29 a.m.

Starting with Hillary, and then the long list of upper law enforcement people such as the FBI, DOJ etc etc.  Why have these people not been brought before a grand jury or something. Trials, possible guilty verdicts, punishment

Fired, resigned, going on speeking engagements, selling books etc  doesn't seem like justice to me

Flynn was probably doing what he thought was right and look at what happened to him

Is this right

Seems to me congress has done about as much as they can

Folks talk a good story about the crimes commited, but nobody does anything

Why not??

If you were Flynn would you think this was justice

Lately it was all about Kavanaugh, now it is the mid terms and then it will be forgotten

But possible criminals will get rich selling books

Where is the justice in all this??? I can't even begin to count the possible crimes committed. Can you???

No wonder Trump got laughed at in his speech at the U.N.

By mcfarm - Oct. 9, 2018, 6:42 a.m.
Like Reply

seems we indeed have laws for regular people and then there the libs....but new news on the deep state. Supposed to be an explosive admission by a doj lawyer out today...hang then high

By carlberky - Oct. 9, 2018, 1:37 p.m.
Like Reply

"I can't even begin to count the possible crimes committed. Can you???"

No, I can't, Wayne. Other then the server thing , could you list just a few provable ones ? 

By wglassfo - Oct. 9, 2018, 6:36 p.m.
Like Reply

Actually it is not up to you or me to say some body is guilty or not guilty of this or that

That is why we have the blind folded lady. The court system decides guilt or innocence. Perhaps I worded my post wrong

What I meant to say is there are numerous people that allegedly broke  laws and should be brought before a grand jury

To judge before the facts are known is wrong. That is what the dems and numerous people in the public did. They judged Kavanaugh pre-maturely. The Dems said no matter who, was nominated they would vote no. If you can't see what is wrong in that situation, then no amount of words will ever change your mind

A court of law is to decide guilt or not guilty. That is what the foremen of the jury reads. Guilty or innocent

After all the facts are known.

I meant to say that a whole bunch of people should go before a court and be judged and if guilty then punished accordingly. Somebody needs to decide who the prosecutor should prosecute

Isn't that the job of a prosecutor

So far I don't see any prosecutor doing their job.

Except Flynn of course

Did I make myself clear and did I word my previous post incorrectly??

By wglassfo - Oct. 9, 2018, 6:46 p.m.
Like Reply

I re-read my post just to be sure

I said possible crimes

You said provable crimes

Aren't you getting the cart before the horse

A court of law decides guilt or not guilty

I said nothing about provable crimes

I should have said

 somebody should bring those people before a court of law and let the blind folded lady decide

I thought that was a given but now we should both know

 Any more questions???

By carlberky - Oct. 9, 2018, 9:51 p.m.
Like Reply

" somebody should bring those people before a court of law and let the blind folded lady decide"

Fair enough, Wayne. What are the specific charges for each person ? Hillary, Comey, Mueller, etc.

If anyone says treason, they should look up the definition.

By the way, Trump has the Justice Department available to do just what you want. Why hasn't he done so since he came to the Office  ? Don't  you think he would love to ?