Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: achilles2000
1. All prosecution is selective. You obviously know nothing about law enforcement.

No, I know nothing about law enforcement, despite having multiple cops, lawyers and other law enforcement professionals in my family. [/sarcasm] The point is that you are advocating selective prosecution based on a person's company's association with a political opponent for the primary purpose of putting political pressure on the opposition. As I said, sounds a lot like the mob or Obama: "That's a nice company your brother has; it'd be a shame if something happened to it..." That is an abuse of power and corruption on a grand scale, and the fact that you can't see that and continue to advocate for such actions should concern everyone.

If you are going to prosecute violations of the law because they are violations of the law, well and good. But if you are going to target specific people because they oppose you or because they give money to your opponents, that is political corruption, and no amount of rationalization on your part can change that.

As for the media narrative, Limbaugh disagrees with you,

Is that supposed to end the discussion? I have a great deal of respect for Rush, but he is not always right. So he and I will disagree on this one.

61 posted on 01/11/2016 7:05:40 AM PST by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: CA Conservative

Wonderful, you aren’t a lawyer or a cop, but you know one, so you understand. What you are describing is not what I said. Prosecute (based on real violations of the law), convict, jail. Let the others think about it. It is called deterrence. Someone is always going to whine about it being “political”. So, should the Hildabeast get a pass on that basis even though there is no question she is a felon (on many counts, but the email scandal is indisputable)? The Bushes let the Clintons and other Ds get away with a lot of crimes for fear of being called names. That is also selective (non) prosecution. As for Rush, of course you don’t have to agree. But Trump is taking the “War on Women” theme and destroying Hilary with it. The MSM certainly doesn’t want that, but they are having to report it anyway. Who else has shown the ability to do that? Even if Trump flames out, he will have done a service by severely damaging Hillary.


63 posted on 01/11/2016 7:18:06 AM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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