Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Kalamata
Q very clearly said: NO DEALS. So this is curious:

Ex-Dem IT aide Imran Awan poised for plea deal, after months of mysterious delays Well what I think in general is meant by Q and his interpreters when they say "NO DEALS" is that people who are guilty of crimes will have to answer for them. No body is going to get, for instance, the kind of treatment that Hillary got with her emails. THAT was a real deal.

On the other hand every criminal indictment always begins with an offer for the person indicted to admit that they did the crime. Entering a guilty plea is a deal of a sort, but not the kind that I think people object to.

Mueller's entire case is built upon deals: all these low level fish who plead guilty but (presumably, or hopefully) give information on the higher ups.

I won't speculate what Q meant, but I will say that it's extremely unlikely that any government prosecution is going to remove the ability of the prosecutors to accept guilty pleas and promise reduced sentences for cooperation. That would be self defeating, particularly when you are dealing with a large organized conspiracy, such as we see with the Democrats in DC.

170 posted on 06/09/2018 2:15:49 PM PDT by Jack Black (Redemption of our fallen Republic requires blood atonement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]


To: Jack Black

Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Jack.


181 posted on 06/09/2018 2:47:55 PM PDT by Kalamata (bibleresearchtools.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: Jack Black

Jack approaches our threads with respect. I don’t mind his posts because I don’t recall he’s been rude to anyone. He is a very tough grader, however.


193 posted on 06/09/2018 3:23:46 PM PDT by Melian (Patriots fight!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: Jack Black

“Nobody is going to get, for instance, the kind of treatment that Hillary got with her emails. THAT was a real deal.”
********************
Is there a statute of limitations on Hillary’s crimes?

If not, then why then is the DOJ ignoring the elephant in the room and not bringing indictments?

Or are they waiting to make sure the time clock runs out and Hillary cannot be charged?

Why not a mass gathering at the DOJ demanding Hillary’s arrest?


229 posted on 06/09/2018 5:20:59 PM PDT by Yulee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

To: Jack Black

It’s obvious you put alot of effort and thought into your discussions. I appreciate your inquisitive process. When we are challenged to think it makes us better.


350 posted on 06/09/2018 9:56:37 PM PDT by outinyellowdogcountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson