Uglysasquatch wrote:
gbaji wrote:
she's too prominent a (Democrat) politician to indict
Are the Republicans really that impotent that if a Democrat breaks a law, they cant get charges brought on them?
It's not about Republicans. It's the FBI. It's the Justice Department. I'm sorry, I forgot. Who does those agencies ultimately report to? You have one of our political parties that holds a strong "ends justifies the means" mentality, and that party is currently in power in the executive branch of the government. Which is how you get things like the IRS putting conservative groups on eternal hold when applying for non profit status. And you get things like investigations into gun walking programs that go nowhere. And you get things like blaming an attack on a consulate building on a video made by a guy in California instead of the people who actually engaged in the attack. And you get the justice department swooping into local cases involving police shootings for politically motivated reasons having nothing to do with actual justice. And you get an immigration service that is told not to actually do their jobs of enforcing immigration law. And frankly, you get a very long list of executive actions designed to bypass the actual legal processes that our nation is supposed to follow, because the "end" is justified.
In the context of how the Obama administration has wielded executive power, do you honestly think they're going to go forward with indictment of Clinton if they have any means to prevent it? Remember this is the same administration that has blatantly chosen to just not enforce the law, arguing that it's not required to when and where it doesn't want to. Same deal here, right? Whether what she did was illegal isn't the issue in this mindset. It's whether they feel like actually applying the law to her. And that decision wont be based on the legality or illegality of her actions, but how the choice to indict may affect liberal policies. So unless Obama just really wants to ***** over the Clintons (which I'm not entirely convinced one way or the other), will almost certainly result in a decision not to pursue indictment.
Again, not because what she did wasn't illegal, but because the political ramifications to the liberal agenda would be harmful if they did. So they wont. It's really that simple and that corrupt on the left side of our politics.