They both belong in jail...

Poll - Total Votes: 34

They violated the law, they should be held accountable like anyone else. No special treatment.

Trump should be prosecuted, but Clinton deserves special treatment.

Clinton should be prosecuted, but Trump deserves special treatment.

Leave them both alone; there should be no government secrets.

Show Results

You can only vote on one answer.

I have a security clearance for my job. It is necessary every single day. Several hours of each day are spent in a room where the presence of my phone would be the military equivalent of a felony.

Classified information and documents are very heavily regulated and everyone with a security clearance is thoroughly trained on those regulations.

Both Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump violated our laws and, if not for their wealth and political status, would be in jail. I say lock 'em up.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

room101 · 51-55, M

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, in the Blue corner we have “The Email Lady” who should be locked up because………………….what did she do again?

Either, she used a government server for personal emails and refused to hand them over.

Easy, peasy, lemon squeezy, it’s a government server. Surely those clever government peeps can get them for themselves. No?

Or, she used a private server for government emails and refused to hand them over. Apparently, her argument was/is that they are personal emails and don’t belong to the government.

TFG chanted “lock her up” for a year. He even asked the Russians, in public, to give him said emails. He then infested the White House for four years. He and his minions are still bleating on about said emails.

That’s seven years and still no emails? That unequivocally show that The Email Lady committed any kind of wrong doing?

What with the NSA, the CIA and all of the other super duper freaky deaky intelligence services that can apparently tell you the colour of the boxer shorts I put on this morning, is it feasible to assume that these emails have never been found? After seven years!

Maybe, just maybe, the reality is that they have been found and are indeed personal emails. Maybe, just maybe, all of this nonsense is a distraction for what TFG got caught, red handed, actually doing.

In the red corner we have TFG. He took approx. 30 boxes of classified documents from the White House to his golf club, Merde-A-Lavatory, and refused to return them and/or denied having them. He was pressured into giving them back but only returned half of them. He and his minions denied having the rest of them and obstructed all efforts to have them returned. Until, after almost two years of said documents being in his possession, the FBI served a legal search warrant on him at Merde-A-Lavatory and guess what. They found and seized the remaining documents.

Going off on a bit of a tangent (or is it?) TFG’s son-in-law, one Jared Kushner, failed to obtain the required security clearance but TFG installed him, as a senior advisor no less, in the White House regardless. Mr Kushner, who is reportedly as an astute a businessman as is TFG, somewhat miraculously managed to obtain funding to the tune of $2.5billion (yeah, that’s BILLION…..with a B) from those lovely people in Saudi Arabia.

Coincidence? I doubt it.

So, in summation, we have The Email Lady who, after seven years of probing and chanting and screaming, nobody has seen anything that is even remotely damning. And we have TFG, who is currently being investigated under The Espionage Act.

But hey, they are both in the same ballpark and should both be locked up.

Sorry Sara but……

At worst, The Email Lady is a somewhat arrogant career politician who believes that normal procedures and protocols do not apply to her. Whereas TFG has sold out the country for his personal gain.

P.S sorry about the swearing in my meme🤷‍♂️

sarabee1995 · 26-30, FVIP

@room101 Sorry, such a long comment with an external link requires summation. If I read you and the article correctly, it seems that:

- both felt themselves above the law
- both crossed the line
- President Trump went further

Did I get that right?

Okay, so I may be an idealist, but I detest people who consider themselves to be above the law. Absolutely stomach wrenching detest. This includes both of these individuals. But let me be clear... I don't hate either of them personally; rather I detest their attitude of supremacy.

You and I have spoken often about the British Monarchy so you know my feelings on one class of people claiming supremacy over another. I believe that we, in America, have sprouted this political class who view themselves as a new American royalty. I have no patience for this. None.

Were Trump's crimes "greater" than Clinton's? Perhaps. I won't argue that they weren't. But both demonstrated callous disregard for violations of law that would land me in the brig pending court martial.

Yes, I know that the DOJ declined to prosecute Clinton because they believed her violations were not intentional. Wow. That's a lot of trust when it comes to hundreds of violations by her and her staff. But whatever, she's history.

I want our politicians, and most especially our presidents, held to a higher standard.

We do not elect temporary kings here. We elect servants for the People.

Our leaders should be held to a higher, stricter standard, not be given the benefit of the doubt on hundreds of violations.

Sorry for allowing this reply to drift into a rant, but I'm sick of all of this.

room101 · 51-55, M

@sarabee1995 First, the British Monarchy is completely irrelevant. They are bound by a very specific constitution. Furthermore, the first (and only) monarch who tried to go against Parliamentary law was arrested and beheaded. That was Charles I btw, it happened long before your Republic even existed.

Second, Hilary Clinton was investigated (as you have pointed out yourself) and no malicious intent was found. So no, they did not:
"- both felt themselves above the law
- both crossed the line"

Third, "hundreds of violations by her". Pray tell, what are these hundreds of violations.

Fourth, why not have trust in someone who has served her country, with distinction (I personally don't like Hilary Clinton very much - let's be fair, she's not especially likeable, BUT even I can concede that she has served her country well).

Fifth, you may not "elect temporary kings" however, you do appoint SCOTUS justices for life. Justices that can (and do) completely ignore the will of the people. Nothing temporary about them and sound pretty monarchical to me.

Sara, you're an intelligent and informed woman. I told you when all of this email nonsense first kicked off, that it was indeed nonsense. You seem to want to bring her before a judge and jury. On what charge? What would be your prosecutorial evidence? An investigation that concluded that there was "no deliberate mishandling of classified information"?

sarabee1995 · 26-30, FVIP

@room101
"First" - So the royalty don't consider themselves to be above commoners?

"Second" - Read the article you linked. Many violations were found, but they believed her or determined that the violations were not with criminal intent. That defence (not intended) would not save me at court martial.

"Third" - Read your linked article.

"Fourth" - Served her country with distinction? That's a whole other subject that goes too far afield from the topics at hand, but no, I would not say she served her country with distinction. Not by a long shot.

"Fifth" - I know you don't believe in written constitutions, but the role of the Supreme Court of the United States is to interpret the will of the People as written in their Constitution and it's amendments. The Court under John Roberts has done, in my opinion, a great job so far. The People, if in agreement, can always

Finally... "no deliberate mishandling of classified information" is not the same as "no mishandling of classified information".

The former involves a prosecutor who "believes" the accused who pleads ignorance.

room101 · 51-55, M

@sarabee1995 In legal terms, no the monarchy is not above the law or above commoners. And, don't forget, both William and Harry married "commoners", as did various other members of the Royal Family. So it seems that they don't consider themselves to be above "commoners" in everyday life either.

I did read both articles that I linked. Seems like you're counting all 33,000 emails "recovered" as separate violations. How many of those 33,000 emails were related to government business and how many were indeed personal?

On SCOTUS, "the people can always" what? They certainly can't vote them out. So overturning Roe, attacking gay marriages, attacking inter-racial marriages, all of these, and more, are commensurate with the will of the people? Seriously? They are doing a great job? WOW! Just WOW.

Regardless of the distinctions between intent and actual actions, I ask you again, what prosecutorial evidence would you provide to the judge and jury that you want to haul Hilary Clinton in front of?

Initially, I was going to open my first reply to your post thus:

Given your recent post about flying in a military helicopter, I would like to begin by paraphrasing a very famous quote from a very famous movie.

I Love the smell of distraction in the morning.

I didn't because I know that this isn't a distraction for you. I know how important the governance of your nation is to you and I know how important the conduct of your elected officials is to you.

However, your post falls straight into the narrative that the trumpettes have been peddling for seven years. Meanwhile, their guy has been caught with thousands of documents that are indeed highly classified and that he had no business in possessing.

Here's another link for you to peruse.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-nara/

Sorry Sara but intentional distraction or not, the closing meme in my initial reply stands. Again, sorry about the swearing.............those Pulp Fiction guys huh🤷‍♂️ Which is quite appropriate actually because this whole business about The Email Lady is indeed pulp fiction, of the most amateurish type!