Hillary Clinton is currently leading in the Democratic presidential race, but that does not mean the road to becoming the Democratic presidential nominee is a shoo-in. One issue that has repeatedly weighed down her campaign is her use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State.
Clinton’s use of a private email server is the target of an ongoing FBI investigation, and it poses a threat to her political aspirations. In fact, Judge Andrew Napolitano said the agency has solid evidence to indict and convict her.
Napolitano said on The O’Reilly Factor that the “FBI knows a lot more about it than I do.” He said the “evidence of her guilt is overwhelming.”
The judge predicted that if the Justice Department protects Clinton from an indictment, Clinton’s candidacy will suffer and President Barrack Obama will have to face a crisis similar to one that former President Richard Nixon had experienced.
Napolitano further said he thinks FBI director James Comey will step down from his position and Obama will be confronted “with a crisis not unlike Richard Nixon’s during the so-called ‘Saturday Night Massacre’ in Watergate where people resigned rather than doing what the President asked them to do.” (link)
19 comments:
So?
Won't happen, the fix is in. Hillary is one of those that the rules of law don't apply. But, go ahead everyone, don't vote for Trump, because, who knows.
The political will to prosecute doesn't exist.
If she were a Republican, a special prosecutor would have been on the case long ago.
ST, there's a good possibility that if she were a Republican, she'd be in jail now.
If you have an AG and President covering your back and a media that is in cahoots with the Democrats, you can get away with a lot.
You don't think they are stupid enough to appoint an independent prosecutor like Bush did?
Stop teasing us and DO IT.
I think all here are forgetting the FBI can only offer the evidence to the Powers That Are, they can't take it to a grand jury themselves. that's what they're demanding.
Comey and the G-men want it. Apparently, this has consumed a lot of man-hours and they want something to show for it. The politicos - Pissy and Lynch - don't want to do it.
Giving them their presentment might be better than having the details leaked to Trump-friendly media.
If it looks like the Hildabeast is getting ready to go down at the polls (remember, it's a dead heat now, Trump has gained on her) like a B-17 over Regensburg, she may become expendable enough for the Choom Gang to cut its losses. There is very little they owe her (party loyalty cuts in only one direction for them) and there are scores to be settled.
Indicting her in June and nominating Fauxcahontas in August may be their way out.
You have to believe one of the reasons Sanders is still plugging away is he hopes what all us normal people do, that is for an indictment. However, the spit mouthed guy doesn't realize the Dem power brokers would step in @ the convention and anoint Biden.
The most likely scenario is a couple of the underlings get indicted and the Queen walks. But, the wildcard is Comey. In a towm w/ no integrity, he has shown to have much. I could see him resigning and that will mean a lot to people who don't obsess on politics and are independent. There's a lot of those people out there. I know those obsessed don't realize that, but there are.
We are becoming like a Latin Kleptocracy. So there is no way Hillary gets indicted even though she should be in prison.
One point about Trump catching and passing Hillary - usually the republican starts out way in the rear and has to catch and pass the Demo, usually by doing well in the debates. This is how Reagan did it.
As we all know, Trump has come from double digits down to a statistical dead heat after turning around what started as a very bad month.
Last night, he repeated his showing in NY and won every county and every congressional district in all 5 states. Like him or not, he has become quite the powerhouse and is turning his guns on Hillary. If it looks like he's beginning to pull away, the Demos would probably not want to be stuck with a legacy candidate nobody really likes anyway.
And everything nd just said, except for Biden. I don't think Crazy Joe is their GoTo guy. He's a year younger than Bernie and Trump would have him for lunch in a debate.
My bet would be Fauxcahontas.
It's amazing to watch this all unfold. Untold amounts of vast corruption, illegality, and downright treason from this administration and all we get is punditry saying that the evidence is all there, smoking gun and all, and yet nothing will happen.
As long as Urkel is president, with AG Lynch in his pocket, Maoist Pantsuit Cankles is protected. Even if he wanted to indict her, he couldn't. She knows were all the bodies are buried and he knows it. Also, he doesn't want to have one of his lackeys to stain and sully his 'legacy' with an indictment.
Sixty beat me to it. There's been solid evidence for quite awhile now, if you actually read the law she violated. I know people have tried to pretend the particular law is like any other law, where you can pretend ignorance and thus cast doubt to willful violation of the law. However, to gain the privilege of reviewing classified information, you have to acknowledge the law, and therefore cannot feign ignorance of it. The only question, which Meth mentions, was there also treason involved.
I used to work in a facility that had a secure room. That stuff was taken very seriously, with frequent audits by federal officials. You did not mess with it, you did not play around or joke around or even pretend to be flippant about the seriousness of the data or the rules. One slip and you were gone.
But then again, I was just an employee, not a cackling power-mad harpie.
"Cackling power-mad harpie" I'm stealing that one!
You were referencing Trump, right? Just bustin' balls.
I wonder why that Hillary acknowledgement document has not been FOIA requested. It would be funny to see her signature below the State Dept’s electronic communication policy that she violated. Perhaps there is a privacy issue with releasing personnel documents?
Leland said...
The only question, which Meth mentions, was there also treason involved.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
In her heart and soul (this assumes she has them), she doubtless is guilty, but, according to the Constitution, no way.
Incompetent, venal, bungling, megalomaniacal, yes, but none are a felony.
If she were a Republican she would already have been executed.
edutcher said...
Leland said...
The only question, which Meth mentions, was there also treason involved.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
In her heart and soul (this assumes she has them), she doubtless is guilty, but, according to the Constitution, no way.
Incompetent, venal, bungling, megalomaniacal, yes, but none are a felony.
Is it provable treason? I think it is, but the insiders would all laugh it off, but everyone knows it is. Obama and the shrill harpy have been aiding and abetting and comforting terrorists since this administration started. Obama has been trying to empty Gitmo so he can say, "Well, it's empty now, we can shut it down." I could probably make a compelling case and a provable one that they both have committed treason.
Post a Comment