Donald Trump for President Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
dandydan said:
Hilary is literally crapping all over America.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/gwi...mping-raw-sewage-in-gwinnett-county/458464327
Click to expand...
o-OBAMA-LAUGHING-570.jpg
 


kithnou said:
I can't laugh at anythng humerous against Hillary in this thread anymore without risk of the Hillary crew going on the attack?
Good Lord help us all in here if she was behind in the polls.
Let's not lose put humour shall we?
Click to expand...
Post funny stuff then. Not a pathetic news article about how a charter bus used by the campaign did something like that.

Post up her appearance on Between Two Ferns, or one of the numerous satire pieces on her.

And just FYI, I am not part of the Hillary crew. She isn't the best candidate that was on offer, but she is by far the best left standing. For me, it is more about not letting the deranged fool that is Donald Trump getting into office, just so he can grow his brand.
 
Dylan said:
Post funny stuff then. Not a pathetic news article about how a charter bus used by the campaign did something like that.

Post up her appearance on Between Two Ferns, or one of the numerous satire pieces on her.

And just FYI, I am not part of the Hillary crew. She isn't the best candidate that was on offer, but she is by far the best left standing. For me, it is more about not letting the deranged fool that is Donald Trump getting into office, just so he can grow his brand.
Click to expand...
Didn't even read the article. I liked @dandydan's desciption

"Hillary is literally crapping all over America."
 

Dylan said:
Hang on, it is your candidate who is threatening his political rival with imprisonment if he wins.
Click to expand...

He said he would appoint special prosecutor to look into this case. Normal laws and procedures dont apply or reach Hillary Clinton. But I think it's clear you dont have to worry about that.
 
TheFinnFan said:
He said he would appoint special prosecutor to look into this case. Normal laws and procedures dont apply or reach Hillary Clinton. But I think it's clear you dont have to worry about that.
Click to expand...
My comment was specifically regarding the ignorant claim that republicans would be unjustly incarcerated. When you state that your candidate "you'd be in jail" then "But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation" that is highly abnormal in the political arena and a slippery slope to something much worse.

BTW, the last AG ordered to do something by the President resigned in protest. You can't just make up laws as you go along.

But don't let me try to sway you, lets get it from someone who actually knows something on the subject:

Laurence Tribe, Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School:

Under the laws and Justice Department regulations governing federal prosecution, a President Trump would not have legal authority to direct the Attorney General to appoint a special prosecutor to ‘look into’ Hillary Clinton’s email situation or the Clinton Foundation or anything else. That’s not within a President’s power.

The only precedents for the kind of vow Trump made in last night’s debate are to be found in dictatorships and banana republics, not the United States. The closest parallel may be what [Viktor] Yanukovych (a former Paul Manafort client) did to [Yulia] Tymoshenko in Ukraine.

Making threats or vows to use a nation’s criminal justice system against one’s vanquished political opponent is worse than terrible policy: it’s incompatible with the survival of a stable constitutional republic and, under our Constitution, would represent an abuse of power so grave that it would be an impeachable offense—one reminiscent of Richard Nixon’s deliberate use of the IRS to go after his political enemies.”

Some of the political leaders who’ve jailed their political opponents [in the past] have been Hugo Chávez, Recep Erdoğan, Robert Mugabe, Manuel Noriega, Augusto Pinochet and, of course, Vladimir Putin.”
Click to expand...

Judge Michael Mukasey (former US Attorney General, 2007-2009 under George W Bush; US District Judge, 1987-2006, appointed by Ronald Reagan):

Asked in a telephone interview whether Trump could order that a special prosecutor be appointed, “No, that’s not within his powers. I think he said, ‘I would direct my attorney general’ to exercise the power to appoint a special counsel. “The AG’s proper answer would then be, ‘I’ll think about it.’ Or ‘I’ll review the facts,'” Mukasey said. [His point is that the attorney general must exercise independent discretion—not merely carry out the President’s whims.]

Were there any precedents for such an action? “Not as far as I know. The only thing close, ironically, is Eric Holder having said during the 2008 campaign, speaking of [C.I.A. officers’ treatment of terrorism detainees], ‘There has to be a reckoning.” Holder, Mukasey said, though a private citizen at the time, was obviously a likely nominee to head the Justice Department in the event then-candidate Barack Obama won, as he did.

When Holder became A.G., he did, in fact, open an inquiry into the conduct of several C.I.A. officers, according to Mukasey, although the Justice Department had already opened and closed investigations into them. “Which I thought was stunning,” he adds. The new inquiries were ultimately closed without prosecutions also, however. [Holder did not respond to Fortune‘s inquiry seeking comment.]

Would it be wise policy for Trump to reopen an inquiry into Clinton’s emails? “I would think you wouldn’t want to create the impression that this is a banana republic,” Mukasey said. “But that’s not to say it’s inappropriate to reinvestigate. There are lots of serious questions about it.”

“An easy way to moot all this,” he added, “is if Trump were elected, then President Obama could simply pardon her.”
Click to expand...

Jim Jacobs, professor at New York University School of Law, specializing in criminal law and procedure:

(In a phone interview he said: ) “That’s very contrary to the way the Justice Department operates. It is essential that the Department be apolitical with respect to its choice of law enforcement targets and to its exercise of prosecutorial discretion. And very improper if the president were to be making phone calls to the attorney general with respect to a particular target of investigation. I don’t know of any president who has done that. If it had been revealed to have happened in the past it would have been a scandal.

The same with respect to U.S. Attorneys [the top federal prosecutors around the country]. They wouldn’t expect to be called by the White House, and be told by the president, ‘I want you to investigate someone.’ I think that would be grounds for resignation. That would call into question the independence of the law enforcement wing, and put a grave cloud over it.”
Click to expand...

Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School professor, emeritus, of constitutional and criminal law:

The president is not supposed to influence prosecutorial policies by the Justice Department, which should be independent. It is bad policy to mix politics with law enforcement.
Click to expand...

But hey, what do they know??!?!
 
Dylan said:
My comment was specifically regarding the ignorant claim that republicans would be unjustly incarcerated. When you state that your candidate "you'd be in jail" then "But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation" that is highly abnormal in the political arena and a slippery slope to something much worse.

BTW, the last AG ordered to do something by the President resigned in protest. You can't just make up laws as you go along.

But don't let me try to sway you, lets get it from someone who actually knows something on the subject:

Laurence Tribe, Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School:



Judge Michael Mukasey (former US Attorney General, 2007-2009 under George W Bush; US District Judge, 1987-2006, appointed by Ronald Reagan):



Jim Jacobs, professor at New York University School of Law, specializing in criminal law and procedure:



Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School professor, emeritus, of constitutional and criminal law:



But hey, what do they know??!?!
Click to expand...

You cling to that information that Trump couldnt even appoint that special attorney? Did I understand you right? That wasnt the point. Point was that some see the wrong in the fact that Clinton doesnt have to take responsibility out of anything she has done.
What do you actually think about these emails? What do you actually think about the fact that they(Clinton and her staff + FBI ))- please watch Congressional hearings where FBI director is questioned) destroyed amazing amounts of evidence? Simple question.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top