Posted on Jul 16, 2016
From 2009-2013, Hillary Clinton sent emails containing classified government information from a private server. So why wasn't she indicted? ?
3.51K
25
14
1
0
1
Posted in these groups: 
Hillary Clinton
Election 2016
Hillary Clinton Election 2016
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 10
4
4
0
3
3
0
What a dead horse question!!
No matter how it is asked its still, the same.
No matter how it is asked its still, the same.
(3)
(0)
Sgt Tom Cunnally
True but this question is now being talked about by the average Joe and Jane ...so stay tuned to see how they all react in November
And voters have a tough decision to choose between two habitual liars and frauds ...which is important for most of us average voters
And voters have a tough decision to choose between two habitual liars and frauds ...which is important for most of us average voters
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
She will never be indicted for anything because our laws do not apply to the Clintons. Sad fact but we may as well accept it and move on. And what pissed off most of us is she knows she can get away with just about anything and never be held accountable.
This subject is now starting to filter down to us common folks and we don't like it and will not vote for her in November.
This subject is now starting to filter down to us common folks and we don't like it and will not vote for her in November.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
Comey and Lynch let her off because they just got a new delivery of body bags at the Clinton Foundation, and if we learned anything about how the Clinton's operate. They like the idea of converting oxygen into carbondioxide.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Two reasons really.
First, if you have political influence and can afford the best lawyers... the lines that you have to cross to be prosecuted are substantially different than what it take to prosecute you or me. The less political and socioeconomic power you have, the more likely you are to be locked up. It has always been that way.
http://www.units.miamioh.edu/psybersite/stereo/crime.shtml
Second, Given that Clinton is politically connected and wealthy enough to afford the best lawyers... there really wasn't enough evidence available to convict her. More than enough to convict you or me, not enough to convict someone half as powerful as Clinton.
First, if you have political influence and can afford the best lawyers... the lines that you have to cross to be prosecuted are substantially different than what it take to prosecute you or me. The less political and socioeconomic power you have, the more likely you are to be locked up. It has always been that way.
http://www.units.miamioh.edu/psybersite/stereo/crime.shtml
Second, Given that Clinton is politically connected and wealthy enough to afford the best lawyers... there really wasn't enough evidence available to convict her. More than enough to convict you or me, not enough to convict someone half as powerful as Clinton.
P324 Spring 1998 -- SES & Crime
The perception of the average criminal that many Americans hold,is someone who is male, a minority and a member of a low socioeconomic class. Peopledevelop this stereotype of criminals by examining those that are currently incarcerated(Ruby & Bringham, 1996). However the image of the criminal population one sees in ournations jails and prisons is distorted by the shape of the criminal justice systemitself. That is, in the United States...
(1)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
Considering the majority of left-leaning constituents rail against those that have power and wealth, I find it hypocritical of those same people who would support someone who has definitely gained under questionable circumstances. Haiti comes to mind with the wealth accumulated after "disaster aid" reached their shores. Not to mention, bill speaking engagements never broke 500k until hrc became speaker which screams quid-pro-quo cronyism. Those who support her should follow the trail of money and their travels which just happened to be parallel while watching some sort of "deal" being made at every stop.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Clinton is no more left than George Bush was left, she is a Wall Street owned centerist. She is both Neoconservative and Neoliberal, she supports free trade agreements and banks over working people, she supports intervening in the internal affairs of other states, she supports war over diplomacy and fracking over environment. The only thing even remotely left about her is support women's and gay rights and IMO those are no longer left issues but centrist issues.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Ultimately it's because she's the 1%, she's made so many friends she can kill people and not had to deal with the consequences. Oh wait ...already has happened numerous times.
Now I ask myself how this different than gen Petraeus? He admitted to it and wa removed. She kept the same story going, slightly changing it and even after there are tons of emails that shouldn't have been posted she still feigned ignorance and got off. That should tell everyone how much power she has. I don't look forward to what may or may not happen if she's our next president...then again, I don't see why people want that job anyway, too much stress.
Now I ask myself how this different than gen Petraeus? He admitted to it and wa removed. She kept the same story going, slightly changing it and even after there are tons of emails that shouldn't have been posted she still feigned ignorance and got off. That should tell everyone how much power she has. I don't look forward to what may or may not happen if she's our next president...then again, I don't see why people want that job anyway, too much stress.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Hillary was not indicted because she is the Democratic Party's nominee for the Presidency. Simple. Guilty as hell but beyond any punishment. To be held accountable has become, in this country, only for the "Little Guy"!
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google