It's Trump's trial. What Hillary, or anybody else did doesn't matter.

[The Duke]

Poor you. Ad hominem does not replace argument. Your tacit concession is accepted. Better luck next time.

LOL

By "fizzling," you mean steaming ahead. The August 12th date is still is place.

Imbecile...

Because Huma Abedin had a security clearance.

You seem triggered.

 

[LeftofLeft]

It has become a Republican mantra that Hillary got away with something so therefore, it is unfair to charge Trump for what he did. I personally disagree that she got away with anything, but either way, trump's case is based on his actions, and anything Hillary did or didn't do does not matter. What Biden did or didn't do with documants doesn't matter. What Mike Pence, Obama, GW Bush, or anybody else did doesn't matter. Trump is charged with breaking laws, and his case will be determined on his actions alone. The Artificial Intellegence site ChatGPT seems to agree with me,

Introducing ChatGPT
As an AI language model, I can provide information on the topic, but it's important to note that I cannot provide real-time legal analysis or information. However, I can give you a general perspective on the matter.


The legal case against former President Donald Trump would typically be based on specific charges or allegations brought against him, and it would be determined by the relevant laws, evidence, and legal procedures. The legal process is typically focused on the specific case at hand and is not directly influenced by unrelated matters or individuals who may or may not have faced legal issues in the past.


Whether Hillary Clinton "got away with something" or not is a separate matter from any legal case involving Donald Trump. Each case is evaluated based on its own merits, evidence, and applicable laws. Previous legal matters or perceptions about other individuals do not automatically impact the outcome of a different case.


In the United States, the legal system operates on the principle of due process, which means that each person is entitled to a fair and impartial legal proceeding that considers the specific facts and circumstances of their case. Legal cases are typically judged on their individual merits and are not influenced by unrelated matters.


It's important to consult legal experts or stay updated on current news from reputable sources for accurate and timely information regarding specific legal cases or ongoing proceedings involving Donald Trump or any other individuals.

Does the word “precedent” resonate with you at all? The “WhatAboutisms” mockery means little to citizens when they see inconsistent interpretations and enforcement of laws.

 

[progressive hunter]

So, there are no precedents that were decided - Pro Constitution?

Surely that cannot be.

(But that conversation was centered around treating President Trump differently than any other person in a similar position).

I do understand that every significant lurch to the left has come from the Judiciary siding against the will of the people, They do what they could not do legislatively.

the prblem is it can go either way,,

each case should be judged on the law and the persons intent,,

intent has been pretty much thrown out,,

hilarys intent was to hide her actions which were illegal,, trumps was to preserve his,, not illegal

 

[The Duke]

the prblem is it can go either way,,

each case should be judged on the law and the persons intent,,

intent has been pretty much thrown out,,

hilarys intent was to hide her actions which were illegal,, trumps was to preserve his,, not illegal

That's not what the now corrupt government is claiming.

 

[BackAgain]

It’s amusing to see our resident libturds all saluting the same false flag. They have all gotten their talking point memo. They very urgently seek to have us buy their canard. That is: that we aren’t to concern ourselves with a dual system of the corrupted “justice” system.

No sale, you goobers.

 

[Blaster]

It has become a Republican mantra that Hillary got away with something so therefore, it is unfair to charge Trump for what he did. I personally disagree that she got away with anything, but either way, trump's case is based on his actions, and anything Hillary did or didn't do does not matter. What Biden did or didn't do with documants doesn't matter. What Mike Pence, Obama, GW Bush, or anybody else did doesn't matter. Trump is charged with breaking laws, and his case will be determined on his actions alone. The Artificial Intellegence site ChatGPT seems to agree with me,

Introducing ChatGPT
As an AI language model, I can provide information on the topic, but it's important to note that I cannot provide real-time legal analysis or information. However, I can give you a general perspective on the matter.


The legal case against former President Donald Trump would typically be based on specific charges or allegations brought against him, and it would be determined by the relevant laws, evidence, and legal procedures. The legal process is typically focused on the specific case at hand and is not directly influenced by unrelated matters or individuals who may or may not have faced legal issues in the past.


Whether Hillary Clinton "got away with something" or not is a separate matter from any legal case involving Donald Trump. Each case is evaluated based on its own merits, evidence, and applicable laws. Previous legal matters or perceptions about other individuals do not automatically impact the outcome of a different case.


In the United States, the legal system operates on the principle of due process, which means that each person is entitled to a fair and impartial legal proceeding that considers the specific facts and circumstances of their case. Legal cases are typically judged on their individual merits and are not influenced by unrelated matters.


It's important to consult legal experts or stay updated on current news from reputable sources for accurate and timely information regarding specific legal cases or ongoing proceedings involving Donald Trump or any other individuals.

What Hillary did does matter if we want to believe in the fair application of law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Whataboutism" is the foundation of our justice system: Equal treatment under the law. Leftists thought they could obfuscate it by inventing a clever word to dismiss us with.

Once again, Leftist were wrong

He's correct, nothing but failed attempts to deflect from the dishonest right.

Trump's indictment is perfectly appropriate, warranted, and lawful.

 

[progressive hunter]

That's not what the now corrupt government is claiming.

the system has gotten so corrupt and discombobulated its hard to understand any part of it or even have a rational discussion on it,,

almost like thats been the plan all along

 

[progressive hunter]

He's correct, nothing but failed attempts to deflect from the dishonest right.

Trump's indictment is perfectly appropriate, warranted, and lawful.

your premise is a lie,,

we all know why the prgs/dems are going after trump,, and it aint about truth

 

[SeaMajor7]

He's correct, nothing but failed attempts to deflect from the dishonest right.

Trump's indictment is perfectly appropriate, warranted, and lawful.

Says the Stalinist piglet.

 

[Faun]

Poor Fawny
Her "husband" didn't.

That woukd be on Huma, not Hillary. Just how rightarded are you?

 

[Faun]

You seem triggered.

Why would I need a tissue? I refuted your nonsense.

 

[Billiejeens]

That woukd be on Huma, not Hillary. Just how rightarded are you?

You love her, don't you?

 

[Marener]

What Hillary did does matter if we want to believe in the fair application of law.

I see no evidence the right is interested in fair application of law. I see lots of evidence that the right wants to use the law for their own political purposes.

 

[Billiejeens]

I see no evidence the right is interested in fair application of law. I see lots of evidence that the right wants to use the law for their own political purposes.

Bizzaro World.

 

[whitehall]

Isn't this an admission by the left that old Joe and Hillary are guilty of the same thing?

 

[Marener]

Bizzaro World.

“Lock her up” was the mantra of the 2016 Trump faithful.

People like you revealed your intention long ago.

 

[BackAgain]

Isn't this an admission by the left that old Joe and Hillary are guilty of the same thing?

Shhh. They are conceding that point but don’t want their acknowledgment to be recognized.

 

[BackAgain]

“Lock her up” was the mantra of the 2016 Trump faithful.

People like you revealed your intention long ago.

Actual criminals may deserve to be locked up.

 

[progressive hunter]

I see no evidence the right is interested in fair application of law. I see lots of evidence that the right wants to use the law for their own political purposes.

and here we have it people,,
a perfect example of the lefts projection,,