Donald Trump threatened to put Hillary Clinton in jail if he got elected President.:eek:
Is this something that is allowed in our political system?:dubious: Is it not illegal?
No, the Donald can’t throw Hillary in jail.
How is that illegal? What law did he break? He has claimed for many months that she broke the law and was saved only by her power and influence. He is saying nothing more than when he is president she will be prosecuted the way she should have been. Sure he’s wrong and even if he is president it won’t change things but he isn’t breaking a law.
It is not entirely well-settled, but it is probably unconstitutional for the President to order any particular prosecution, much less a prosecution of his political opponents.
In this case, since the purported crime in question has already been fully investigated and it was determined that no reasonable prosecutor could bring charges, there’s a pretty good argument that ordering additional prosecution would both create a separation of powers problem and a First Amendment / due process problem. Additionally, under current law, Presidents do not have the power to appoint special prosecutors or independent counsels–nor are such special prosecutors used to investigate former officials.
And that’s giving Trump the benefit of the doubt that when he talked about putting her in jail he was merely talking about re-opening an independent prosecution. Obviously, anything more than that would be even more obviously unconstitutional.
Why not? A lot of presidents in South America lock up their opponents all the time!
The only guy to really try it (Nixon) was a low-energy quitter. Sad!
We might have gotten to the bottom of whether it was unconstitutional if he hadn’t surrendered to the liberal media.
When it was discussed on MSNBC, the term “Banana Republican” came up.
I’m surprised more isn’t being made of this. Virtually all the commentators on Politico this morning zeroed right in on the outrageousness of Trump threatening his not-even-elected-yet opponent with a Special Prosecutor.
It is yet more evidence of how this crap is the new normal.
Give it a bit. It was the main or a main story on every “real” news site I checked this morning; I think it’s just taking time to get traction. It’s not going to sway Trumps supporters, deplorable or otherwise, but if I were somehow an undecided, that would have ended my indecision…
Glad to hear it. I’ve been away from the news all day. (It was nice…)
Whitewater had been investigated and people jailed. Never the less, it still got reopened a few years later and Ken Starr was the special prosecutor.
Absolutely, a Special Prosecutor could independently investigate Hillary.
I doubt she’ll appoint one. 
She’ll skate by as usual. The scandal safely buried after a partisan, election year investigation. The Clintons are Teflon. Nothing sticks for long.
Yes but the president does not appoint special prosecutors. Yeah sure the Attorney General is part of the executive branch and Christie will most likely do what the president tells him to do but officially the SP will not be appointed by the president. Trump probably doesn’t know that.
With everything Trump has said will get done the instant he takes office, I doubt he knows the difference between a “President” and an “Emperor”.
Orange Republican, Banana Republican, we’re certainly getting the whole fruit basket out of this election.
The deplorables ate that line up, I’m sure.
Or between “president” and “dictator”. His unprincipled ruthlessness on one hand and the demagoguery on the other makes him sort of a cross between a dictator staging a coup in a banana republic and a duly elected Fuehrer who conspires to make himself Chancellor and then ultimate dictator. Trump has no concept of law (except bankruptcy law), the constitution, or even the rudiments of how government works.
I don’t think people fully appreciate the kind of fire that Donald Trump and his bag of deplorables are playing with. It’s extremely toxic and dangerous even to suggest that such a step ought to be taken. It’s consistent with his 2nd amendment comments and his calls for “monitors” to go to the polls to “observe” the voters. Many of these “observers” will be in states that allow people to carry firearms, concealed or openly. It’s consistent with his dire warnings that the election will be rigged. He’s laying out a case for election day violence and post-election day protest and unrest, and there are millions of voters out there who sympathize with him. This is no different than a radical cleric preaching violent jihad to millions of impressionable young men over the Internet.
Until even a few weeks ago, I was of the opinion that Trump was throwing it out there almost the way that some teenager tweets out a threat of mass violence as a kind of sick prank. But I think that things have changed a lot over the past week. Donald doesn’t just feel attacked as a candidate by these scandals – he feels attacked as a person. These scandals are threatening his financial empire (however fake it is in fact) and the cold, heartless narcissist is going to go full on sociopath from now until the end. I think he has decided that he is fighting not only for the survival of his campaign but for the survival of his brand and his family name – self inflicted, absolutely, but still, it is what it is: a wounded lion lashing out in rage against any perceived attacker.
Ahh, the “Hillary is rubber, Trump is glue” argument! 
Will people be allowed to carry their guns (open or concealed) into the voting sites (and into the booths, I guess)?
Funny thing is that it is Trump who is more likely to prosecuted by a not so special prosecutor. The AG of the State of New York. Once his foundation gets properly audited, which it must since he never filed the correct paperwork to start up a foundation in the first place (what smart lawyers he has!) some real dirt almost definitly be uncovered. And Clinton wont have to lift a finger to make it happen.