Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse

[JusticeHammer]

All you’ve done is prove how ignorant YOU are.

You idiots prove constantly how ignorant You are.

 

[konradv]

You idiots prove constantly how ignorant You are.

How so? After years of “Lock her up” who’s liable to be locked up? If Hillary really was a criminal, why didn’t Trump take care of business when they held the House and Senate, 2017-8. It couldn’t be because the no one with any legal acumen wanted anything to do with their bullshit, could it?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Privilege is broken when asking one’s attorneys to commit crimes.

It’s in the indictment.
Read it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Was the information top secret or not? They claim Trump had important classified documents, which Trump didn't release, the DOJ released the classified info. It's amazing that they are trying to hold Trump "accountable" for a classified document that Trump didn't release, the DOJ did. We wouldn't even know about it but for the DOJ.

The DOJ released the subject of the document. Not the information contained within.

 

[Winco]

So, we've got numerous people

Just what I guessed.
A guy that claims to be an Independent Thinker......fails again.

I read the thread title, and wondered, is Independentthinker actually gonna say something that criticizes a (R)....... Answer...Hell No.

 

[Winco]

You idiots prove constantly how ignorant You are.

Yes, we are the ignorant ones that defend trump, even with the evidence against him...........oh wait..........That would be you....The cult member.

You RWI's are in a whole class by yourself.
Feel proud cult boy, then remember to protest again.

 

[merrill]

So, we've got numerous people, with Hillary Clinton being the very worst offender, who have not been charged with any crimes related to the mishandling of classified documents. Joe Biden was found to have classified documents against law and they kept it hush, hush because the election was right around the corner and, he continued having classified documents against the law months after that. He knowingly had classified documents in violation of the law and he and his lawyers and others purposely obstructed justice by keeping it quiet instead of returning them to the National Archives. They kept it all quiet until they knew it was coming out in the media and then decided to come clean.

Hillary had set up an illegal server in her basement where numerous classified documents were funneled through and could be hacked (some by Wikileaks), with some of them winding up on Anthony Wiener's laptop and Huma Abedin (a person with ties to radical Islam) had access to many classified documents. Did she or Anthony Weiner have clearance to see those classified documents? After receiving a subpoena to keep records for an investigation, Hillary obstructed justice and had 30,000 emails deleted.

And yet the DOJ is trying to claim that these people didn't intend on breaking the law so were not charged while claiming that Trump intended to break the law by not returning "classified" documents when ordered to do so. Apparently just the fact of having classified documents illegally was OK with the DOJ just as long as you returned them when asked or ordered to do so. If not, then, all of a sudden, having classified documents is not OK, even though it was OK beforehand.

Hillary certainly wasn't ignorant of the law (hell, she's a lawyer) at least when she had 30,000 emails deleted against a subpoena (and probably other aspects of her case as well). Why should Trump be held accountable for merely having documents in his possession that were OK to have before as well as numerous other people, including Biden, and why should Trump be held accountable for obstruction of justice when others weren't? Why can Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner and Wikileaks have access to classified documents and everyone who came in and out of Biden's garage and other places but Trump must be held accountable for others seeing classified documents? So, what happened to ignorance of the law is no excuse? The others should be charged even if the DOJ claims they were ignorant of the laws. Otherwise, it looks like weaponized law enforcement doing a political hit job.

Face it when Trump is involved it is pre-meditated criminal activity........

 

[whitehall]

"Classic authoritarian maneuver"? You gotta be kidding. Why are lefties so hysterical these days? FDR's E.O. 9066 was a classic authoritarian maneuver. Everything else is politics as usual.

 

[JusticeHammer]

Yes, we are the ignorant ones that defend trump, even with the evidence against him...........oh wait..........That would be you....The cult member.

You RWI's are in a whole class by yourself.
Feel proud cult boy, then remember to protest again.

Still smarter than you scumbags.

 

[Winco]

Still smarter than you scumbags.

Such Hatred.
True like a trump cultist.

 

[OKTexas]

View attachment 794734

So exactly how are we to go about pointing out inequities in the system?

.

 

[OKTexas]

So we are only allowed to prosecute crimes that cause out country to “go down the toilet”?

How about we uses the comey standard and only prosecute people with the intent to do the country harm. That's not even alleged with Trump.

.

 

[konradv]

So exactly how are we to go about pointing out inequities in the system?

.

Well first you need an actual inequity. The two situations aren’t the same, so to equate would be a false attribution.

 

[The Duke]

I guess Trump's DOJ didn't see anything either.

Or were they "corrupt" too?

Yes.

 

[The Duke]

No, I'm saying my car wasn't searched because I don't look like I'd be trafficking narcotics, illegal aliens, or state secrets.

But if they asked to see my trunk, I wouldn't have said "no". If they asked again, I wouldn't have told my attorney to deny there is even a trunk to my car. If they started jimmying the latch on the trunk, I wouldn't have tweeted that they are "raiding my car" needlessly.

Apparently you don't know your 4th Amendment rights.

Good advice is to never let them search your car or home without a warrant.

I learned that one the hard way.

 

[Woodznutz]

So we are only allowed to prosecute crimes that cause out country to “go down the toilet”?

They should be at the top of the list. If there are resources left over then prosecute frivolous cases.

 

[OKTexas]

Well first you need an actual inequity. The two situations aren’t the same, so to equate would be a false attribution.

Wrong again, the hildabitch deleted 33,000 emails that were under subpoena, wiped her server with bleachbit and physically destroyed devices. Lied to congress about only using one device and a multitude of other crap. All of which could be used to prosecute her for obstruction at a minimum. Oh, and there was her telling a subordinate to remove classified markings and transmit the document unsecure. So just carry on hypocrite

.

 

[The Duke]

LOL…
It shows exactly the opposite, dope.
There’s a great deal of testimony from Trump’s own lawyers.

It’s duh Dems, boff. Dey is weaponizin!

Obama did the weaponizing for 8 years. Not much of the corruption was cleaned out during the Trump years.

 

[The Duke]

Okay. So it’s not a priority but we will still prosecute Trump.

You in the DOJ now?

 

[konradv]

Wrong again, the hildabitch deleted 33,000 emails that were under subpoena, wiped her server with bleachbit and physically destroyed devices. Lied to congress about only using one device and a multitude of other crap. All of which could be used to prosecute her for obstruction at a minimum. Oh, and there was her telling a subordinate to remove classified markings and transmit the document unsecure. So just carry on hypocrite

.

If all that’s true, why didn’t Trump charge her when he had the chance? God knows he said “Lock her up” enough times.