• 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!

Voters oppose Clinton pardon by 3-1 margin [W:139]

Quazimodo said:
As the swamp is inevitably drained, no one will care whether it was by design or by ignorance. Like so many of the other turds before her, she, too, will be washed away to that great waste treatment plant in the sky where she will bake in the sun until she reverts to the fertilizer that she has always been.
Click to expand...

From where I'm sitting, Trump seems to be planning on draining the swamp only so he can expand it's size and refill it with his own special brand of swamp brew.
 
The Mark said:
Not ignorance of the law, ignorance of what was happening. I think?

I dunno.
Click to expand...
I could possibly accept that explination if she had not deliberately deystroyed gov reords before they were archived.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
Gaius46 said:
She hasn't broken the law until she's convicted.

Clinton never running for office again. The woman is 69. But even so barring her from holding elective office, even if she had been convicted would be wrong and probably raise Constitutional issues.

And I'd assume she's not privy to classified information any longer since she is a private citizen.
Click to expand...
Unless her security clearance was revoked i.would think she is still allowed to view and handle.any documents.shared with her


Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Unless her security clearance was revoked i.would think she is still allowed to view and handle.any documents.shared with her


Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Unless she also has the Need to Know the contents of said documents that goes with that clearance, she isn't allowed to view anything.
 
NonoBadDog said:
No idea. Can you tell the future? I can't. I hope they nail her ass.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know you do. Anyone who thinks that nine separate investigations that all conclusively found nothing illegal -- all at taxpayer dime, no less -- is not enough, then justice is NOT what you're after. Happy witch hunting!
 
NonoBadDog said:
Never count on Clinton being out of the picture. To me it isn't about destroying Clinton. It is about holding a person accountable. I honestly believe she totally screwed the pooch with her campaign coordinating with super PACs.
Click to expand...

She also ran a pedophile ring in a basement of a pizza joint, too.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Never count on Clinton being out of the picture. To me it isn't about destroying Clinton. It is about holding a person accountable. I honestly believe she totally screwed the pooch with her campaign coordinating with super PACs.
Click to expand...

We'll see what happens. If anybody else when it came to all those classified e-mails being on an unsecured sever, heads would have rolled big time. I understand that and it does give the appearance she is above the law. But I am not sure that going after her now would be beneficial. When it comes to politics, it is all about perceptions. The perception of the American public has. Perception has a nasty habit of over riding truth and fact in quite a lot of political events and happenings.
 
trouble13 said:
Unless her security clearance was revoked i.would think she is still allowed to view and handle.any documents.shared with her


Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't know how that works but I was assuming - maybe incorrectly - that she lost her security clearance when she left the State Department. As a private citizen she really has no need for one.
 
Middleground said:
Yeah, I know you do. Anyone who thinks that nine separate investigations that all conclusively found nothing illegal -- all at taxpayer dime, no less -- is not enough, then justice is NOT what you're after. Happy witch hunting!
Click to expand...

I can tell the whining is going to get thick if they start another investigation.
 
trouble13 said:
Unless her security clearance was revoked i.would think she is still allowed to view and handle.any documents.shared with her


Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Gaius46 said:
I don't know how that works but I was assuming - maybe incorrectly - that she lost her security clearance when she left the State Department. As a private citizen she really has no need for one.
Click to expand...
Security clearances have an expiration date. I think Clinton's expires every five years. They usually don't revoke clearances for people at that level in the govt.
 
Gaius46 said:
I don't know how that works but I was assuming - maybe incorrectly - that she lost her security clearance when she left the State Department. As a private citizen she really has no need for one.
Click to expand...
Im not sure how it works either but.i do recall bubba beimg sent on a sensitive mission and i do recall it being cited that one of the reasons he was asked is bevause he already the propper security clearance because he was a former potus

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
NonoBadDog said:
Security clearances have an expiration date. I think Clinton's expires every five years. They usually don't revoke clearances for people at that level in the govt.
Click to expand...

Okay thanks. She's been out of the State Department for 3 years so in worst case her clearance would expire in two more. Do they auto renew? Or would she lose it because she doesn't have a need any longer?
 
Gaius46 said:
Okay thanks. She's been out of the State Department for 3 years so in worst case her clearance would expire in two more. Do they auto renew? Or would she lose it because she doesn't have a need any longer?
Click to expand...

She would lose it. They don't automatically renew for someone that isn't employed.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I can tell the whining is going to get thick if they start another investigation.
Click to expand...

You love government waste? You like to flush taxpayer dime down a toilet again? Please tell me again why 9 different non-partisan investigations is not enough for you? Yes, she was guilty of being stupid.... but not criminally. These conclusions were found by people who wanted her drawn and quartered.
 
Middleground said:
You love government waste? You like to flush taxpayer dime down a toilet again? Please tell me again why 9 different non-partisan investigations is not enough for you? Yes, she was guilty of being stupid.... but not criminally. These conclusions were found by people who wanted her drawn and quartered.
Click to expand...

I'm curious.

Was that your answer when time and again they went after prominent republicans with similar results?
 
Perotista said:
Two different eras. Two different things. One could say the Republicans paid a price in the midterms. Its true the GOP lost only 3 house seats and remained even in the senate, no gain or net lost. But midterms usually are very good to the party out of power. The party out of power usually doesn't lose seats in the house during a midterm.
Click to expand...

This is where things may change in the next election. Congress and The Donald, need to take small positive stops if they don't want a repeat of 2006.
 
Middleground said:
You love government waste? You like to flush taxpayer dime down a toilet again? Please tell me again why 9 different non-partisan investigations is not enough for you? Yes, she was guilty of being stupid.... but not criminally. These conclusions were found by people who wanted her drawn and quartered.
Click to expand...

You weren't worried about the 6 billion Clinton lost in the State Department. You weren't worried about the millions wasted on the recount. Why should I believe you now? Have you ever expressed any concern about the waste in the VA budget? There are two issues that have not been investigated. It seems that Sessions is interested in those situations. Wikileaks provided a trove of reasons to look at the campaign and the foundation.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Not the purpose of this thread.

Typical... fey ignorance...

That was as good of an answer as any.
Click to expand...

I thought it was just hot air you were blowing.

Now defend 9 different non-partisan investigations, all coming to the same conclusion.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Why should I believe you now? There are two issues that have not been investigated. It seems that Sessions is interested in those situations. Wikileaks provided a trove of reasons to look at the campaign and the foundation.
Click to expand...

Seems to me -- based-on the links your copy and the arguments that you make -- that you're not really interested in actual facts. That you are indeed one of those who has fallen victim to false news and partisan websites.

For example,

You weren't worried about the 6 billion Clinton lost in the State Department.
Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton Lost $6 Billion at the State Department? : snopes.com


You weren't worried about the millions wasted on the recount.
Click to expand...

When the tallies are that close, yeah, I think a recount should be mandated/automatic. Here in Canada, it is. So yeah, I think anything to keep democracy in check is important. But I will agree with you if they decided to recount 9 times.


Have you ever expressed any concern about the waste in the VA budget?
Click to expand...

Yeah... sure. Add to that, the defence budget.
But yeah, waste sucks.
 
Last edited:
Lord of Planar said:
This is where things may change in the next election. Congress and The Donald, need to take small positive stops if they don't want a repeat of 2006.
Click to expand...

Exactly, my gut at this point and it certainly isn't scientific. That Trump will step on it and the Democrats make huge gains in 2018. Obama did that with the ACA which the majority of Americans didn't want and that majority bit back causing the Democrats to lose 63 house seats in 2010. Trump better listen to America and govern in a way that most Americans approve of or the same fate awaits the Republicans two years from now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom