EE PatronMar 26th 2019, 15:07:22
Where did i ever say Hillary should not be in jail? Lol. That's not what I'm saying that at all. In fact i do think she should be investigated, although there was about 10 Benghazi hearings and they weren't very fruitful, and the clunton foundation hearing was a wash as well, i think all criminals should be investigated for their crimes. Lol. Why is that so hard to imagine?
My point is based on the special councils outline, no one would have been indicted because there was no collusion with the 2016 election. As noted by special council, all russian meddling was investigated and neither Hillary nor Trump had direct contact with russians to seek influence. Meaning it would exonerate both of them.
Again, it's bad there was clearly russian meddling in the election to help trump win, as the report indicates thru the dozens of russian nationals and organizations indicted, but the president did not conspire to make it happen which is good. Nor did hillary pay russians to screw trump. Also good.
That's the entire conclusion of this summary, and i still think they're both criminals. In fact, I'm sure of it. Individual 1 is an unindicted coconspirator in financial fraud scheme that people are going to jail for. Hillary at least had the malfeasance and financial violations as well. Stop picking one criminal and recognize this report does nothing to say they aren't both career criminals. They just didnt help russia meddle in our election, which is fine. Would you prefer all investigations into both people be thorough or just be looked thru the small lens of whether or not they helped russia tamper?
It is so confusing to me that everyone to wants thorough investigations of the other side but not of their own. When one party gets accused of crimes, they undermine repeatedly the DOJ, talk fluff about the prosecutors, and their supporters are like YEAH GO fluff THE OTHER SIDE NOW. That isnt how this is supposed to work. We should all be demanding thorough investigations into any potential criminal activity by anyone who may have committed a crime. It shouldnt be political. We should want all criminals in politics properly vetted.
My point is based on the special councils outline, no one would have been indicted because there was no collusion with the 2016 election. As noted by special council, all russian meddling was investigated and neither Hillary nor Trump had direct contact with russians to seek influence. Meaning it would exonerate both of them.
Again, it's bad there was clearly russian meddling in the election to help trump win, as the report indicates thru the dozens of russian nationals and organizations indicted, but the president did not conspire to make it happen which is good. Nor did hillary pay russians to screw trump. Also good.
That's the entire conclusion of this summary, and i still think they're both criminals. In fact, I'm sure of it. Individual 1 is an unindicted coconspirator in financial fraud scheme that people are going to jail for. Hillary at least had the malfeasance and financial violations as well. Stop picking one criminal and recognize this report does nothing to say they aren't both career criminals. They just didnt help russia meddle in our election, which is fine. Would you prefer all investigations into both people be thorough or just be looked thru the small lens of whether or not they helped russia tamper?
It is so confusing to me that everyone to wants thorough investigations of the other side but not of their own. When one party gets accused of crimes, they undermine repeatedly the DOJ, talk fluff about the prosecutors, and their supporters are like YEAH GO fluff THE OTHER SIDE NOW. That isnt how this is supposed to work. We should all be demanding thorough investigations into any potential criminal activity by anyone who may have committed a crime. It shouldnt be political. We should want all criminals in politics properly vetted.