Why Trump should not pursue prosecution of hillary clinton

By 37 Comments 1,509 views



We learn today that Wikileaks continues to release emails related to hillary clinton and it’s not getting any better for her:

Judicial Watch recently received 508 pages of documents, including emails, that the conservative group says shows possible conflicts of interest between Hillary Clinton’s State Department and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Realistically, no one doubts that the Clinton’s used their positions to enrich themselves and their Foundation while the Foundation achieved little in the way of real accomplishments and at times caused more harm than good. Prosecuting Hiillary might seem to be an attractive consideration but Donald Trump has apparently thrown some cold water on that idea:

President-elect Donald Trump will not follow through on his campaign pledge to pursue an investigation into Hillary Clinton, one of his top aides told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
“I think when the President-elect, who’s also the head of your party, tells you before he’s even inaugurated that he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone, and content” to other Republicans, former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway said Tuesday.

“I think Hillary Clinton still has to face the fact that a majority of Americans don’t find her to be honest or trustworthy,” she added. “But if Donald Trump can help her heal then perhaps that’s a good thing.”

Donald Trump should not attempt to prosecute Hillary Clinton. Here’s why:

  1. It would look like political revenge

Donald Trump stirred controversy yet again in the second presidential debate when he threatened, if elected, to send his opponent to prison. Hillary Clinton’s defenders immediately fumed that this was another piece of evidence that Trump’s temperament was unsuited for the vast powers of the presidency. What he was advocating, they charged, was typical of the politics of third-world dictatorships. America should not be a banana republic where the loser of an election has to fear such vengeance from political opponents.

It would appear to be a dictatorial move and it would alienate moderates and those on the left with whom he is trying to gain traction- and he is gaining some.

2. It would look mean to prosecute her

Trump is astutely developing a message of inclusion and efforts at prosecution would be unhelpful. It would only further divide the country. Trump wants to appear to be a uniter.

3. It makes him look magnanimous

Letting her off the hook makes Trump look like the kind and considerate leader. Now for the most important one.

4. People already think she’s not honest or trustworthy. Why take a chance on vindicating her?

The Clinton’s have a remarkable ability to escape the noose, from the Rose Law firm records to cattlefuturesgate to Whitewater to impeachment to where we are now. Should the Trump administration decide it wants to bring charges against Clinton and she is acquitted, she is vindicated and Trump looks like a chump. It’s best to leave it alone, to let people continue to believe she is dishonest and corrupt rather than take the chance she could once again dodge the hangman. This way Clinton will never fully be able to shower away the stench of corruption and Trump can rise above all of it and run with the roses.

Author’s note: I forget to add- if obama chooses to “pardon” hillary, let him do so. All that will do is concrete the belief that she is a criminal and continue obama’s destruction of the democrat party.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

37 Responses to “Why Trump should not pursue prosecution of hillary clinton”

  1. 1

    Spurwing Plover

    Well at least Hillary isnt in the whitehouse and did’nt drag the whole election out for days like that spoiled little wank Al Gore did in 2000

  2. 2


    It isn’t Trump prosecuting it would be the FBI and DOJ. Just as this President shouldn’t interfere with justice nor should the next. Let the wheels turn be guarded that it is a fair process, evidence if found presented to a prosecutor and as if she is a regular person decide what to do. There is nothing special about Hillary R Clinton she shouldn’t be treated any differently than Joe the plumber.

  3. 4

    Bill… Deplorable Me

    I am smart enough to know Hillary would have never seen the inside of a cell, but I think it is important to establish the fact that anyone that acts with gross negligence in handling classified information, no matter how high up the liberal totem pole they reside, must pay the price. Perhaps Hillary has paid the price, but it needs to be in writing. For instance, look how many of our resident liberals rely on the excuse that, despite the evidence and the perjury, there has been no conviction.

    Politically, this can be played many different ways. It will be interesting to see what Obama will do. Will Obama trust Trump not to prosecute? Actually, does Obama even care about Hillary being prosecuted? However, if Trump had not revealed his hand, would Obama have issued a pardon for the most qualified person to ever have run for President?

    Perhaps Trump did this so Obama WOULDN’T pardon her. Just because Trump said HE won’t pursue charges does not mean anything to Congress. With information continuing to leak out, there may be something new and unforeseen that must be prosecuted.

    Already, leftists are throwing this up as nothing but an example of Trump lying and playing his supporters for fools. That is who he is trying to show his softer side to. Like Pence going to a sappy liberal play to reach out and show his appreciation of their art, we see how they repay an open hand; about as appreciative of a peace offering as the Iranians were when Obama begged them for consideration.

    I don’t think Trump has gone soft by any means; I think he’s playing a slick gambit. His other plays have worked out pretty well. The reaction of Democrats will be interesting.

    I didn’t vote for Trump to prosecute Hillary. I voted for him to keep her grimy, corrupt hands off the Supreme Court.

  4. 6


    @DrJohn: I certainly remember Nixon, a decent guy that covered for over zealous aides that simply spied on the DNC, he carried that loyalty to his guys too far way too far, no national secrets exposed only minutes of tapes missing, not thousands of government owned documents stolen and or destroyed. He would have been impeached and convicted so resigned, it was his VP not that pardoned him a bud a pal a fellow republican. Did any money change hands for access to the president or favors? Did men die because he knew they were under attack and he couldn’t decide how they should be dressed? Did he destroy thousands of government documents? Expose spies? There is no comparison at all not even close. My dog poops in your yard so you think to get even you pour gallons of bleach in my veggie garden , thats how close this comparison is.

  5. 7


    Haven’t we had enough of decisions made by “looks” and “feelings”?
    Investigate. If she violated the law, prosecute. If found guilty, imprison.
    To do otherwise continues the message that if you are wealthy, powerful, or famous enough, you are above the law.
    For the encouragement of those who would otherwise follow her path, if nothing else.

  6. 9


    How about a No. 5?

    5. It would reveal that there was, in fact, insufficient evidence to support any charges, as was previously determined after a $20 million FBI investigation, leading to the realization that the GOP knowingly promoted a lie to win an election.

    Why do you think they investigated Benghazi 7 times, ending without any findings or conclusions that differed from those of the previous 6 investigations?

  7. 10

    Nathan Blue


    5. It would reveal that there was, in fact, insufficient evidence to support any charges, as was previously determined after a $20 million FBI investigation, leading to the realization that the GOP knowingly promoted a lie to win an election.

    The above is merely your fantasy as a defeated and biased Democrat/liberal. Clinton can easily be indicted and perhaps convicted.

    And the DNC knowingly promoted a lie to keep Hillary as the candidate, even though they’re electorate chose otherwise.

    When Assange and Snowden are revealing dirt on your party, to the global community, you are not the good guys.

    Trump won because the Democratic Party is all but dead.

  8. 11

    Nanny G

    Obama will certainly wait til the last minute to pardon Hillary…..if he does.
    It is not up to the president to butt in and stop wheels of justice any more than it is up to him to target prosecutions.
    The DOJ and, perhaps an independent council will take point.
    They will uncover whatever they do and let the facts lead them from there.
    Although it isn’t getting any mainstream media coverage, that ”Pizzagate” scandal that ties many of the Clinton buddies and them, too into some pretty hinky child-love activities.
    Even the CEO of Twitter (a homosexual who usually sticks to adult males) deleted his entire Twitter account for a few hours today to SCRUB it clean of things he feared would be copied, cached.
    Too late, I hear.
    Podesta’s emails are a treasure trove of filth.
    Hillary might skate in one area only to be ensnared by her actions in other areas.
    Unless…..a full pardon.

  9. 12


    @Nathan Blue, #9:

    Trump won because the Democratic Party is all but dead.

    I’m entirely clear on how Donald Trump came to be elected, and fully aware of the amount of utter bullshit that had to be shoveled to make that happen. Even after all that, over one-and-three-quarters million more people voted for Clinton than Trump. By the time California’s remaining two million votes are counted, that margin will be even higher.

    We’ll see how dead the Democratic Party is after two years of The GOP Gone Wild—assuming Donald Trump doesn’t surprise the hell out of you with his veto pen. He likes the spotlight and he likes an approving audience. Your audience is smaller. There’s also the possibility that he might at some point decide that he’s a democrat again. It would make for an excellent surprise plot twist.

  10. 13

    John hardesty

    Greg you are still harping on the popular vote. The elector college is all that matters. Hillary could get 5 million more votes in California and it will mean nothing as she had already has the elector votes for California 55 – 2 for the state and 53 for the population with California.
    The election of the president is fine by the 50 nation states that make up the United States..to which the majority selected trump.
    You can whinge and moan about trump as is your right if not your obligation. But leave the popular vote meme out as it is specious and it make you look like a spiteful loser

  11. 14




    The first thing I’d demand would be a vetting to filter our illegal alien votes. That would certainly change the outcome.


    Do you really want to live in a pure democracy? Historically, they always commit suicide

  12. 15

    July 4th American

    I believe she should be fully investigated and charged for every crime committed. Then upon conviction she should be incarcerated, period end of story. There are consequences for breaking a law or laws and mrs clinton is no different, she puts her pants on like the rest of us, one leg at a time.

    In the end she will be convicted by a court not Trump. In the administration of equal justice she will be found to have violated numerous laws that have put other persons in prison. She is no different that the common criminal except that she has committed far more crimes than most and has not yet been held accountable.


  13. 17

    Bill… Deplorable Me


    How about a No. 5?

    Isn’t that what you believe? Haven’t I asked why you do not support the investigations to prove Hillary’s obvious innocence? You are aware, aren’t you, that the Benghazi investigations showed Obama and Hillary lies extensively, don’t you? We still don’t know WHY they lied, though some evidence shows they were running weapons to questionable rebel groups, who eventually turn these weapons on us.

    I’m entirely clear on how Donald Trump came to be elected, and fully aware of the amount of utter bullshit that had to be shoveled to make that happen.

    Maybe, but I don’t think you are aware of the fact that your people (and you) did most of the shoveling. It just got brushed away by the facts.

  14. 18

    July 4th American

    @DrJohn: #16

    Do you think that will help the country?

    Yes I do from the standpoint that she irresponsibly acted in a way that has jeopardized the secure interests of this nation and there must be a consequence. We are a nation of laws that must be applied indiscriminately.

    I get it that the snowflakes and Uber left will vehemently opposed any effort to hold her accountable. That being said, I feel it far more important to lay down a marker that law and order will be upheld. Sometimes it is necessary to do that which may be unpopular initially in order to earn the respect for having made the difficult choice instead of one that is easy.

    Do you think that will help Trump achieve his goals?

    Trump will achieve his goals in irrespective of the department of Justice doing what it is constitutionally bound to do.

    What is your end game?

    My end game, interesting. I believe as a country we would be far better off if we embraced and followed the Constitution.

  15. 19


    @DrJohn: “Remember Nixon?”

    Not even close. Clinton committed actual crimes and got people killed.

    But I do think Trump should keep his distance and let ‘the law and justice’ prevail.

  16. 21



    By the time California’s remaining two million votes are counted, that margin will be even higher.

    If they remove all the illegal aliens votes and all the dead voters, the Repubs would have a nice margin.

  17. 22


    Here are a few until they get restored:
    – Bold text
    – Important text
    – Italic text
    – Emphasized text
    – Marked text
    – Small text
    – Deleted text
    – Inserted text
    – Subscript text
    – Superscript text

    Quoted text

  18. 23


    @DrJohn, #14:

    The first thing I’d demand would be a vetting to filter our illegal alien votes.

    No evidence has ever been presented showing that any significant number of aliens have been voting. If it were happening, it shouldn’t be difficult to prove, and there’s no shortage of those who are strongly motivated to prove it.

    Every study done has failed to find evidence of significant levels of voter fraud, by aliens or anyone else. There are only random instances that are presented as anecdotal evidence.

  19. 24


    @Greg: It will be fun to listen to the pissing and bitching and moaning of the Hillaryites when they recount, deduct illegal aliens and dead voters and Trump’s lead increases.

  20. 25


    “If I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation, because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it, and we’re going to have a special prosecutor.” Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, October 9, 2016

    That performance, before a live television audience, will likely go down in presidential campaign history as one of the most brazen lies ever uttered. The look on Clinton’s face says it all. People still don’t seem to have figured out that this guy will say whatever he calculates it’s useful to say. Whether it’s true or false doesn’t really enter in; only whether it will be believed.

  21. 26


    @Greg: It wasn’t a lie. When he said it, he meant it. He decided to change his mind. Do you think it would be better if he never changed his mind on anything? I think the justice dept should handle it as they would any potential crime. If evidence is against her, prosecute. If not, then don’t. Aren’t you proud that he decided to let the law take it’s course?

  22. 27

    July 4th American

    For the good of the Country a thorough investigation needs to be completed. James comey in July laid out a case where any reasonable prosecutor would take the case and then abruptly made the claim that one would not.

    Establishment of law and order starts at the top and mrs clinton is not immune from prosecution.

  23. 28

    Bill… Deplorable Me

    @Greg: “That performance, before a live television audience, will likely go down in presidential campaign history as one of the most brazen lies ever uttered. ” No, “the most transparent administration in history” would be the most brazen lie, based on the absolute 180deg from truth it was, followed very, very closely by, “If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. PERIOD!”

    I think Trump is floating that out there to see how the cry-baby, anti-Constitution left reacts. If they don’t start to behave, he is going to recommend prosecution.

    Note that yesterday, Thanksgiving, before he has even taken office, he was working, trying to convince Carrier not to move more jobs to Mexico. Before that, he called the VICTIMS of a BLM-inspired shooting of a cop, NOT the perpetrators and co-conspirators. He has not even sworn in yet and already he is twice the President Obama has been for 8 years.

  24. 29


    @Bill… Deplorable Me, #28:

    Trump will never push for the prosecution of Hillary Clinton. He pandered to the right’s prejudices and goofball conspiracy theories by repeating a handful of their favorite propaganda memes over and over, and by repeatedly promising he will make them his highest priority the moment he takes office. Now he’s backing off on each of them one by one, and a corporate-fascist administration with white nationalist overtones is slowly emerging.

    His minority picks are being inserted into interface positions calculated to diminish that perception domestically and internationally: Nikki R Halley as U.N. ambassador, and Ben Carson as the likely head of Housing and Urban Development. Important cabinet positions such as the EPA and Education will be headed by fellow billionaires who are philosophically opposed to the very agencies or departments they’ll be in charge of. The new Attorney General will be the greatest thing that ever happened to America’s corporate prisons-for-profit. The new CIA director favors the resumption of “enhanced interrogation.” The new National Security Adviser is a Vladimir Putin fan and seems to have difficulty distinguishing Islam from Islamic extremism, which is worrisome given Trump’s geopolitical cluelessness. The chairman of the RNC will be the White House Chief of Staff—hey, we have a single party in charge now—and we have an alt-right media executive who will become Trump’s Chief Strategist. (Minister of Propaganda?)

    This may all reflect your views, but it doesn’t reflect majority views or mainstream American values. There will be consequences. And there will be more lies and distractions, calculated to keep the public’s attention off of them for as long as possible. The first distraction will likely be tax cuts. Everybody’s happier with a lower tax bill; the short-term effects of having more money to spend will be positive, and the negative consequences of running up a lot more debt than you need to won’t come until later. Much can be accomplished under the cover that brief economic boom provides, by attributing the economic upswing to other policy changes. The question is what America will look like after four years.

  25. 30

    Bill… Deplorable Me

    @Greg: I can recall when Obama had an all-male administration and when he received criticism, he picked a couple of females. You know, there’s nothing that says positions have to be filled by a random sampling of races and genders; the goal is the most qualified. Obama picked solely on ideological grounds.

  26. 31



    The new CIA director favors the resumption of “enhanced interrogation.”

    Actually Greg, you are in favor of enhanced interrogation also, you just want to be politically dishonest and say you are against it. Suppose a kidnapper kidnapped your 10 year old daughter and buried her underground with a 12 hour air supply. You have the kidnapper in your custody and he refuses to tell you her location. Two choices, you can tell him; A “well, Thanks for telling me she would die in about 12 hours and I understand you don’t want to tell me her location. Would you like to be invited to her funeral? or B: You could lay his penis on a chopping block and hold a hatchet above it and tell him you’ll give him 30 seconds to tell you the location or the hatchet will fall, and it won’t miss”. So do you choose A or B? I know you’re going to insist you will choose A, but I don’t believe you. Then you’ll say, well that’s different, it’s personal. Everytime someone’s child dies because someone would not use enhanced interrogation, it was ‘personal’ to someone.
    So get down off your high horse and admit you’re human.

    Footnote: When you see those Muslims chopping off heads, that’s ‘enhanced’ enhanced interrogation. They are going to continue to practice it. It’s very effective.

  27. 32


    @Greg: One other note Greg, maybe Trump will give you a job as his personal advisor since you seem to have such an insightful view of all of Trumps future failures. I’m quite sure you could pass on what Hillary would have done and he’ll jump at the opportunity to be able to institute Hillary’s plans for the future. I’m sure that’s what Trumps voters were hoping, is that he could get into office and implement Hillary’s plans at an escalated rate. On the other hand…………

  28. 33


    @RedTeam, #31:

    Such personal and specific hypothetical scenarios can’t be used as valid arguments for or against the setting of a general national policy, because they can be used to argue in favor of virtually any extreme act. In such a situation a distraught parent might be willing to do virtually anything to anyone to save a child, with no regard whatsoever for the morality of the act or the scale of the consequences.

  29. 34

    July 4th American

    Trump admin to pressure foreign states to probe Clinton Foundation (targeting Haiti and Columbia)

    MOBILIZE THE WAY BACK MACHINE—all aspects of Bill Clinton’s presidency and his foreign aid proclivities must be explored. Massive amounts of Clinton foreign aid to Colombia my have paved the way for Clinton Foundation buck-raking. News outlets reported: Clinton Foundation charity setup a money-making private equity fund in the corrupt Central American country of Colombia.
    Why Colombia?

    WIKI REFERENCE—In 2000, the Clinton administration committed $1.3 billion in foreign aid to the corrupt country of Colombia…… and up to five hundred military personnel to train local forces. An additional three hundred civilian personnel were allowed to assist in the eradication of coca.

    The Clinton deal was an addition to $330 million of previously approved US aid to Colombia. $818 million was earmarked for 2000, with $256 million for 2001.

    The Clinton-era appropriations for his Colombia Plan made Colombia the third largest recipient of foreign aid from the United States at the time.


    As of 2008, the U.S. has provided nearly $1.3 billion to Colombia through Clinton Plan Colombia nonmilitary aid programs:

    Alternative Development (2000-2008 cost: $500 million)

    Internally Displaced Persons (2000-2008 cost: $247 million)

    Demobilization and Reintegration (2000-2008 cost: $44 million)

    Democracy and Human Rights (2000-2008 cost: $158 million)

    Promote the Rule of Law (2000-2008 cost: $238 million)

    LONG READ–REST AT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Colombia


    04/16/2008—-Former President Bill Clinton has earned hundreds of thousands of dollars speaking on behalf of a Colombia-based group pushing the trade pact, and representatives of that organization tell The Huffington Post that the former president shared their sentiment.

    In June 2005, Clinton was paid $800,000 by the Colombia-based Gold Service International to give four speeches throughout Latin America. The organization is, ostensibly, a development group tasked with bringing investment to the country and educating world leaders about the Colombia’s business opportunities.

    The group’s chief operating officer, Andres Franco, said in an interview that the group supports the congressional ratification of the free trade agreement and that, when Clinton was on his speaking tour, he expressed similar opinions. “He was supportive of the trade agreement at the time that he came, but that was several years ago.

    In the present context, I don’t know what his position would be. It is not only about union trade rights. It is about what benefit or damage it can do to the US economy,” said Franco. “Events with the Clinton campaign [concerning Mark Penn] are not good at all for the trade agreement… Right now it became a campaign issues and that is sad, because it needs to go through.”

    The comments were supported by a June 23, 2005 article from the news portal Terra (uncovered by Ben Smith at Politico) in which Clinton offered unambiguous support for the free trade agreement with Colombia.

    They appear to be the first public indication that Clinton has, at least in the past, supported the trade deal. But evidence that the former president has been sympathetic to Colombia’s position is widely known. In 2007, Clinton met personally with and accepted an award from Colombia’s controversial president, Alvaro Uribe, during a time when the country was attempting to improve its image within the United States.

    Subsequently, Clinton urged Congress to view the country in a more favorable light.

    Moreover, Clinton has helped Frank Giustra, one of the biggest donors to the Clinton Global Initiative, score meetings with high-ranking Colombian officials. Giustra has several business interests in the country, and both he and Clinton have collaborated on an effort to (cough) “fight poverty in developing world by partnering up with mining companies in Colombia and elsewhere.” SOURCE: http://nypost.com/2008/12/19/bubba-sheik-ing-the-money-tree/

  30. 35


    @Greg: #33 how hypocritical. In almost 100% of cases where torture is used, it involved someone dying or the potential for someone to die. The fact that you, or anyone, would think it a useful tool in a personal situation just proves that it is, a useful tool. In a situation such as I described, I wouldn’t hesitate one second to use ‘torture’. You would not either. Those muslims that are chopping off heads are doing it for political reasons, not for personal reasons. Do you think they would hesitate to use torture to get information. It may sound all nice and friendly to ‘preach to the choir’ about how noble you are and that ‘torture’ is wrong, but let the circumstance be right and you would be one standing there with the hatchet in hand. Basically you are saying torture would be okay if it were your child involved, but not if it were your neighbors child. LOL. Now, deny it.

  31. 36


    In almost 100% of cases where torture is used, it involved someone dying or the potential for someone to die.

    You don’t know that. At least you’re using the word “torture,” which I suppose is one step closer to reality that most “enhanced interrogation” advocates are willing to go. I suspect it was an accidental slip.

    I’m not going to discuss this further. America shouldn’t torture captives, as a matter of policy. Because we’re better than that. If you want to wear an “I support torture” tee-shirt with your “Make America Great Again” hat, feel free.

  32. 37


    The FBI and DOJ need to follow the evidence, and do what the evidence dictates.
    If you advocate otherwise, then you are just another elitist POS or a fawning tool of the elitist POS’s. Sit in the corner twiddling your bow tie trying to convince people how above the fray you are. I call you coward and complicit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *