• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Will Not Pursue Clinton Investigations

I mean there is the small matter that going after Hillary, a private citizen that opposed him politically, is more than likely an illegal and impeachable offense. As POTUS you have a little bit of leeway as to the types of crimes you focus on, but not the targets.

The IT guy who failed to do what he was required to, and then used bleach bit to cover his tracks could have been prosecuted....had he not been given immunity. Also there are probably a lot of prosecutable people floating around from The Bush Administrations private email server run by the RNC that deliberally destroyed 22 million emails.

But the notion that anyone was going to prosecute a 70 year old grandma that couldn't make email work on a computer for orchestrating some crazy cartoon villenesque cyber conspiracy was always laughable.

LOL!!

So...Hillary, in your mind, has gone from being the most qualified person to EVER run for President...according to Obama...to being a "70 year old grandma that couldn't make email work".

My...but she has fallen far.
 
I'm not trying to argue with you but...how do you start a thread by accident? Like how do you accidentally press the "Start New Thread" button?

Do you mean you posted it and didn't realize it was fake when you posted it? Again, not trying to be an ass, just don't understand what you mean.

Something definitely worthy of respect and something far too lacking around here.

Trump aide: No plan to pursue charges against Clinton - CNNPolitics.com

I posted that link in an earlier post of mine in this thread. You can read CNN's writeup of it at that link though. They might even have a video, not sure.

I did not verify the source. I didn't purposefully post a crap link. I failed to check it. Now if you're done playing NIGYYSOB, perhaps we can move on...;)

Your link is much stronger than the OPs. It's not lost on me that I need to take my own advice, though.
 
So I saw this on Morning Joe today, and already found a link for it. Kelly Ann goes into detail about it while visiting Morning Joe as well.

BREAKING: Trump Will Not Pursue Clinton Investigations; She’s ‘Been Through Enough’ | Mediaite

So there goes one of his selling points.

I know I said it before, that I didn't believe anything Trump said. Well he's not even President yet and he has changed so much from his campaign rhetoric. At this point Trump is nothing but a RINO. Where'd that term go btw?
 
Sorry, but that is not conclusive. She didn't say Trump was dropping it.
He can't drop something he hasn't started. But she clearly said he doesn't wish to pursue it. That's pretty solid evidence. Could she be mistaken? Sure. Could Trump change his mind? Sure. But it's still pretty good evidence Trump isn't going to pursue it.

Exactly what evidence are you waiting for? Canadian Free Press to report it? I know you like getting information from there.
 
so you are saying we had to elect him to find out what he really will do. Hmmmm where have I heard something like that before, oh yeah, the ACA. Since that turned out ****ty, I guess we can expect a Trump presidency to be ****ty to. Thanks for the reminder.

No...that's not what I'm saying. You elected him because of what he said he was going to do.

But now...before he's been sworn in...everyone and their mother, brother and cat are coming out with stuff about what he "won't" do. I'm saying to treat all those people as nothing more than speculators...some quite biased speculators...and wait until he's inaugurated.
 
Nope, not if they hold (or held) high positions in the DC swamp. Trump, IMHO, is making a wise decision to trade the expensive prosecuting of Hillary for some much needed demorat support among congress critters.

Could be...but, if he's making deals with the Democrats I suggest he get it in writing. Those guys have been known to favor back-stabbing.
 
No...that's not what I'm saying. You elected him because of what he said he was going to do.

But now...before he's been sworn in...everyone and their mother, brother and cat are coming out with stuff about what he "won't" do. I'm saying to treat all those people as nothing more than speculators...some quite biased speculators...and wait until he's inaugurated.

How is his former campaign manager a "biased speculator"? you can believe what you want, but it is clear he is going soft on a lot of issues and now it seems pursuing Clinton is just yet another thing he is going soft on.
 
Yeah KellyAnn Conway, the person that managed his campaign and transition team is very unreliable. You're right.

Conway said yesterday that Trump's meeting with the media went very well. The media doesn't seem to agree. I suppose it depends on one's viewpoint. Perhaps in Conway's view the meeting achieved what was intended.
 
He can't drop something he hasn't started. But she clearly said he doesn't wish to pursue it. That's pretty solid evidence. Could she be mistaken? Sure. Could Trump change his mind? Sure. But it's still pretty good evidence Trump isn't going to pursue it.

So far, I've heard nothing more than what I would expect from any politician...inconclusive rhetoric...and the usual "sources" from the media. Just like I wouldn't take this kind of gobbledygook seriously from Hillary or Obama...I won't take it seriously from Trump. But hey...if you want to, well then, run with it.

Exactly what evidence are you waiting for? Canadian Free Press to report it? I know you like getting information from there.

Actually, I'd never heard of them until you just mentioned them. I had to look them up. And thanks...I'll add them to the variety of news sources I use. You know, like Drudge, CTH, GP, Mediaite, HuffPo (I can only take that one in small doses) and a few others.
 
How is his former campaign manager a "biased speculator"? you can believe what you want, but it is clear he is going soft on a lot of issues and now it seems pursuing Clinton is just yet another thing he is going soft on.

LOL!!

Sorry, I should have mentioned names so you didn't get confused. I didn't mean Conway (she would be more accurately referred to as a biased insider)...I was referring to the media and their talking potato heads.
 
Good, it was a dumb rallying cry to begin with.
Why, where is there any reasoning to that statement?

Are you against prosecuting known criminals? Should we, based on that ideal... and equal protection under the laws, just open up the prisons, let everyone free?

AND, did it or did it not help him get elected? Dumb my ass, it worked AND I hope she is in an orange jump suit sometime soon... as soon as they can locate a jumpsuit with cankle openings big enough to fit.
 
Why, where is there any reasoning to that statement?

Are you against prosecuting known criminals? Should we, based on that ideal... and equal protection under the laws, just open up the prisons, let everyone free?

AND, did it or did it not help him get elected? Dumb my ass, it worked AND I hope she is in an orange jump suit sometime soon... as soon as they can locate a jumpsuit with cankle openings big enough to fit.

It may not seem unusual to one who fled to one of the old banana republics, but in the United States it's quite unusual to issue a campaign promise to jail one's political opponent.
 
very unreliable sources. she will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. criminials who commit high treason are prosecuted.

Don't bet on that.

Another one of those "sources"...talking to the biased media...and we are supposed to give this credibility? Yeah...right. :roll: I'll wait till I see Trump or one of his people...on camera...say it.

But hey...who knows? One thing for sure is that we won't know for sure until after Trump is sworn in.

The delusion of Trump supporters his hilarious :lamo
 
One of his only good ones.

She deserves to have a special prosecutor investigation followed by her day in court.

But Trump has bigger fish to fry than one greedy incompetent old lady
 
Changes are a com'in that BOTH side will disagree with. "One and done"!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
She deserves to have a special prosecutor investigation followed by her day in court.

But Trump has bigger fish to fry than one greedy incompetent old lady

Goes to show your boy is the ultimate liar. Spin it!
 
On the other hand, maybe Trump is just being smart about the battles he gets into. For example, there's this:

After pay-to-play allegations, being put on a charity watchdog’s “watch list” last year, and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, it’s not surprising that donations to the Clinton Foundation have suffered a steep decline.

According to the group’s most recent tax filing, contributions dropped 37 percent to $108 million, which is down from $172 million in 2014.

~

Not only did contributions drop, but so did revenue the Clintons brought in from speeches. That income fell to $357,500 from $3.6 million in 2014.

Donations to Clinton Foundation Nosedive - Leah Barkoukis

I mean, why kick a dying horse, eh?

And, from the same article, it seems the House is still on Hillary's ass...

Chairman of the House Oversight Committee Jason Chaffetz vowed to continue an ongoing investigation of pay-to-play allegations between the Clinton Foundation and State Department.

"It’s this huge, massive mess that has to be cleaned up. So we would be remiss if we just dismissed it and moved on," Chaffetz told Fox News in a recent interview. "We have a lot of things that we have to fix, so it never ever happens again."

Just a speculation on my part, but perhaps Trump is content to let others kick the poor horse.
 
Back
Top Bottom