Donald Trump on Wednesday fired back at Hillary Clinton, remarking that he would likely nominate Supreme Court justices who “would look very seriously at her email disaster.”
The former secretary of state has been under fire over her use of a private email server during her time at the State Department and called out the Republican front-runner in a speech Monday highlighting the impact the Supreme Court should have on this election. Clinton invoked Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. and asked Wisconsin voters what kind of justice a President Trump would nominate.
“Well, I’d probably appoint people that would look very seriously at her email disaster because it’s a criminal activity, and I would appoint people that would look very seriously at that to start off with,” Trump said in a phone interview with ABC's “Good Morning America.” “What she’s getting away with is absolutely murder. You talk about a case — now that’s a real case.”
The New York billionaire added, “If she’s able to get away with that, you can get away with anything.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/trump-supreme-court-clinton-email-221377
Thoughts on this statement, /pol/?
>>69351022
Why bother having thoughts of my own when the media fills the heads of the majority with what they want and it works every fucking time.
I am done and it is depressing, the nation is fucked and there is not where left to go.
Isn't that outside of SCOTUS' competence?
>>69351022
Makes me ask why he wasn't saying things like this from the very beginning.
>>69352846
Didn't stop them on gay marriage.
Don't forget. Trump isn't a constitutionalist.
>>69352846
>Isn't that outside of SCOTUS' competence?
Pretty much. The SCOTUS does not do anything like this. The point is that Trump has no fucking clue what the SCOTUS even does.
>>69353099
>Didn't stop them on gay marriage.
Don't be stupid. The SCOTUS has been ruling on the constitutionality of state and federal laws for a long time. In this case, the SCOTUS determined that state and federal laws banning gay marriage were unconstitutional. It was well within their ability to do.
>>69351022
What would the Supreme Court have to do with an investigation and law enforcement generally? How are these two things supposed to be related?
For the record, I like both Trump and Cruz, and will happily vote for whichever one wins the nomination (I live in New York, so it's not like my vote fucking matters in this primary anyway). But this...
Just... what?
>>69353290
May be just a jab to Hillary though. Trump isn't new to these "I was only pretending to be retarded" moments.
>>69353639
>May be just a jab to Hillary though
Hard to take that seriously. How many times does this guy need to be forgiven for saying dumb ass shit? How many times can he get away with it before people start realizing he isn't fit to be President?
>>69353778
His dyed-in-the-wool supporters have already demonstrated that they're willing to forgive pretty much anything he has to say.
>>69353099
This
They can just find a reason in the Constitution and various amendments
I reckon that's half the shit they look at nowadays anyway (loopholes and such)
>>69353375
Just find a clause that can be subjectively interpreted quite easily
>>69353778
This idea that simple sound bytes should prevent you from being president is a problem and it is a mentality that needs to be removed.
>>69351022
Sometimes, it's like he's playing madlibs.
>>69353392
Nothing but that doesn't really matter
If you have a single judge calling her actions unconstitutional that's all you really need
The Supreme Court is a meme machine of the highest order
They have no power yet all the power
>>69352839
>sigh
I know bro, I know...
