cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/41968573
On Wednesday, nine Democrats voted with Republicans to hold Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress, while three Democrats voted to hold Hillary Clinton in contempt.
If the full House votes in favour, the Department of Justice would decide whether to prosecute the charges, which is a misdemeanour offence punishable by a fine up to $100,000 (£74,500) and imprisonment up to a year.
In a statement, Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer urged the full House to hold the Clintons in contempt, saying his committee had sent a “clear message” that “no one is above the law, and justice must be applied equally—regardless of position, pedigree, or prestige”.
The Clintons had contended the subpoenas - a legal orders to provide testimony - were “nothing more than a ploy to attempt to embarrass political rivals, as President Trump has directed”.
We don’t have to choose one or the other. We should be trying everyone who was on that island.
No offense, but seeing as Trump is literally the only one preventing the release of the Epstein Files, now illegally against the will of Congress, yes you do have to choose one over the other if you actually want justice.
Instead, our tax dollars are going towards arresting Bill Clinton. If you want to try everyone on the Island, that literally MUST start with the person illegally stopping that from happening. Or it will literally never happen. Just like Trumps Tax returns, Wall, and Health Plan.
No, you don’t. Trying Clinton won’t prevent trump from being tried. If Bill Clinton never existed Trump would still be interfering in the release of the files to protect himself. If you’re suggesting that trying no one at all serves justice better than trying Clinton I vehemently disagree.