I think it’s funny that when you have 60 million people wanting to lock her up, and 60 million people urging restraint - you are calling the latter “mob rule”! It’s usually the lynching party that is referred to as a “mob” - not those urging restraint!
Our justice system should place the burden of proof entirely on the prosecution. When it comes to locking people up, or hanging them, restraint is a good thing - it’s built into our system - it’s called presumption of innocence.
Our justice system has profoundly failed us over the last four years, NOT by its failure to lock up Hillary Clinton, but by it’s systematic failure to afford President Trump and other political targets the presumption of innocence.
Our justice system has profoundly failed us over the last four years, NOT by its failure to lock up Hillary Clinton, but by it’s systematic failure to afford President Trump and other political targets the presumption of innocence. The inversion is also true:
Our justice system has profoundly failed us over the last four years when it systematically failed to afford president Trump and other political targets the presumption of innocence because it got away with failing to lock Hillary Clinton up.
New evidence is expected today or tomorrow concerning further atrocities committed by the FBI in the Mueller prosecution of General Flynn and before. If that evidence is released to the public will you condone failing to prosecute those FBI agents and Department of Justice prosecutors for criminality as and when it is shown?
If your answer is "no, of course such illegality must be prosecuted," do you agree that it must be done in order to deter further criminality?
