Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton's False Hopes

There's been a relentless barrage of bad legal news for Clinton lately.

|

Hillary Clinton/Instagram

Surely, Hillary Clinton hopes for the happy conclusion to the maddening string of primaries and caucuses that have exhausted her. Surely, she hopes to be the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party this year. And surely, she hopes to be elected president. These hopes are realistic probabilities in her own mind. But if she is hoping for the end to her legal woes, that is a false hope—and she knows it.

The relentless barrage of bad legal news for Clinton, which has been relegated to below-the-fold stories because of the primary news position of the presidential primary contests, must keep her and her lawyers up late at night. While her husband has been arguing with military veterans at her political rallies and while Marco Rubio and Donald Trump have been mocking each other's body parts, a series of curious developments has occurred in the Clinton email scandal.

It is fair to call this a scandal because it consists of the public revelation of the private and probably criminal misdeeds of the nation's chief diplomat during President Barack Obama's first term in office. Clinton's job as secretary of state was to keep secrets. Instead, she exposed them to friend and foe. The exposure of state secrets, either intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage. For the secretary of state to have committed espionage is, quite simply, scandalous.

We are not addressing just a handful of emails. To date, the State Department has revealed the presence of more than 2,000 emails on her private server that contained state secrets—and four that were select access privilege, or SAP. The SAP emails require special codes in order to access them. The codes change continually, and very few people in the government have the codes. SAP is a sub-category of "top secret," and it constitutes the highest level of protected secrecy, for the utmost protection of the government's gravest secrets. It is unheard of for SAP-level data to reside in a non-secure, vulnerable venue—yet that is where Clinton caused four SAPs to reside.

Clinton's allies in the State Department have perpetrated the myth that the 2,000 emails were recently upgraded to reflect their secret contents. That is untrue. The emails possess secret status by virtue of their contents, not because of any markings on them. Clinton had a legal obligation to recognize state secrets when she saw them, no matter their markings or non-markings. On her first day on the job, she swore under oath that she recognized and understood that legal obligation and she promised to comply with it. She did not comply.

This past weekend, the newly revealed emails showed that Clinton emailed about the location of drone strikes. By their very nature, such emails contain state secrets. They contained state secrets when she received them; they contained them when she sent them; and they contain state secrets today.

Also this past weekend, Gen. Michael Hayden, formerly director of the CIA and of the National Security Agency (NSA), stated on CNN that it is a near certainty that the Russian government and others had access to Clinton's non-secure server and all it contained.

Lawyers familiar with the terminology of state secrets will refrain from using the word "classified" to describe the emails that contained state secrets, even though Clinton repeatedly does that. The word "classified" is not a legal term; rather, it is derived from the verb "to classify," and it means that the classification process has been completed.

Since nothing is marked "classified"—the legal markings are "confidential," "secret" and "top secret"—Clinton has been materially misleading the public and the FBI when she claims that she never sent or received anything "marked classified."

By saying that, she wants us to believe that in more than 2,000 instances, she failed to ascertain the presence of state secrets in emails she received or sent. No voter but the most hardened supporter, no federal prosecutor, no FBI agent, and no juror will believe that.

The FBI investigation process is coming to its logical conclusion, and the judge who ordered the State Department to release all of Clinton's emails also has ordered that her top State Department aides submit to oral depositions—examinations under oath before trial—in the Freedom of Information Act litigation brought by Judicial Watch against the State Department.

He directed the Judicial Watch lawyers to ascertain whether there was a conspiracy in the secretary of state's office to violate federal law. If those lawyers find evidence of such a conspiracy, they may then seek the oral examination of Clinton herself.

This search for a conspiracy will take Clinton down the road to perdition—to the end of her hopes. Along that road are instructions to a subordinate to divert all her government emails through her private server. On the side of that road are emails instructing her aides to remove "secret" markings from documents and resend the documents to her via a non-secure fax machine.

On that road are emails revealing the names of secret undercover intelligence assets, the locations of North Korean nuclear facilities, the transcripts of telephone conversations among foreign intelligence agents, and the travel plans of then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens in the days before he was murdered.

Democrats who indulge in Clinton's false hopes will do so at their peril. Don't they want to know of her potential status as a criminal defendant before they complete their nominating process? Or do they, like her, think that they can just hope that all this will go away?

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO | DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

170 responses to “Hillary Clinton's False Hopes

  1. Holey moley this guy does not give up. Actually the 4 emails that the FBI cannot release are not ‘special access program’. They are from the FBI itself – meaning the FBI knew about this server all along! They are such hypocrites. Though I admit I’d rather they spend years reading her emails than all the other mischief they could get into.

    1. Yeah, excuse me if we all don’t bow down in lieu of your “insider information” which is a crock. She violated federal statutes and she should be prosecuted. end of story.

    2. The FBI KNEW she was breaking the Law, that makes it TOTALLY OK!!

      1. Yeah, they gave her the wink and the secret nod, so everything’s perfectly legal at this point.

  2. Drag the investigation out seven more months… she wins, she’s untouchable. She loses, she’s irrelevant. She won’t be indicted.

    1. ^This. I will be completely shocked if she is actually held accountable for her malfeasance.

      1. If they go after her, they should also go after everyone who conspired with her. As much as I’d love to clean house, I don’t see how the gov can afford to expose just how bad this was.

        1. I think the writing is on the wall.
          They won’t go after “everyone who conspired with her”, they’ll go after everyone who conspired except her.
          Poor HiLIARy was kept out of the loop as to this conspiracy. She was too focused on her duties to be aware of what her underlings were doing, though they thought they were doing the right thing. They were simply incompetent and incompetence is no crime.
          This is how all the 0blama administration scandals have played out.
          Lower level employees have made serious policy decisions, unbeknownst to the real culprits, above, and these lower-on-the-food-chain workers can’t be expected to know they can’t do that – maybe under Bush they got away with it – and no one, least of all the real policy-makers, who we all know orchestrated these scandals, can be expected to pay any price.

  3. A?f?ter be????in??g fir??ed from my old job 6 months ago, i’ve had luck to learn about this great company online that was a lifesaver for me… They offer online home-based w0rk. My last month payment after working with them for 6months was 9000 bucks…ZM, Great thi?ng ab?out it wa?s th?at only requirement for the job is basic typing and reliable int?ernet…If you th?ink this co?uld b?e for you th?en find o?ut more he?re?….

    ?????? http://www.alpha-careers.com

  4. A?f?ter be????in??g fir??ed from my old job 6 months ago, i’ve had luck to learn about this great company online that was a lifesaver for me… They offer online home-based w0rk. My last month payment after working with them for 6months was 9000 bucks…ZM, Great thi?ng ab?out it wa?s th?at only requirement for the job is basic typing and reliable int?ernet…If you th?ink this co?uld b?e for you th?en find o?ut more he?re?….

    ?????? http://www.alpha-careers.com

  5. Well thank god they finally put out a piece about the crook and her illegal email setup.

    By the way, check this bit of retardation out.

    Trigger Warning: the comments are dumber than the article

    1. Example:

      trimark 5 hours ago
      @JulesMN Feminists have already won??? Are kidding? The GOP war on women has devastating.

      1. Republicans have been shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics across the country. Didn’t you watch the GOP committee hearings against Planned parenthood??? Didn’t you hear about the lies & doctored videos by conservatives?

      2. A woman’s right to choose is under constant assault from conservatives. They’re in state legislatures and Congress!

      3. The Supreme Court should consist of 6 women. It’s time for a change. There are 157 million females in America & 151.8 males. Take a look at the proportion of women to men in powerful positions.

      4. The double standard is alive & well in North America. The religious nuts on the right not only treat women like property but they don’t tolerate any woman who asserts her constitutional rights.

      Bernie isn’t focused on women. He’s focused on Wall St. Hillary Clinton is also talking about other issues like gun violence. Did you know that when Bernie visited Flint, Michigan, he never bothered to meet with the mayor. Hillary met with the mayor and she talked to the residents. Call the mayor’s office if you don’t believe me. She was on MSNBC last night.

      1. Doesn’t trimark need to get back on the front of her Cocoa Puffs box before she’s missed? It’s almost breakfast time.

      2. I know she won’t read any of this but, I feel compelled to respond:

        1. When you rally behind an organization that illegally sells body parts, you make yourself look like a fruitcake.

        2. More women than men vote, women chose these legislators.

        3. Again, little miss fruitcake, more women than men vote, so it’s women voting men into positions of power.

        4. Constitutional rights include freedom of religeon. Those women of faith are there by choice.

        1. Let me have a go at it:

          1: supply and demand. When people want/need fewer abortions, abortion providers close down.

          2: so you want to outlaw political opposition? Or do you hate democracy that doesn’t end in reaffirming your personal beliefs?

          3: you support quotas? Then you shouldn’t mind a perpetual conservative majority, since a lot more people self-identify as conservative than progressive.

          4: citation fucking required, you idiotic harpie.

        2. “There are 157 million females in America & 151.8 males.”

          One reason for this is because for every woman who dies in a job-related accident, thirteen men do the same.

          1. She needs to revisit her middle school class on ratios, because I’m pretty fucking sure 157/151.8 does not roughly equal 6/3.*

            *Unless I haven’t been properly exposed to the textbook for “Math For Social Justice Majors 101” wherein it is femsplained to me in a way that would make Euclid and Pythagoras vomit.

            1. You’re just proving that women are discouraged from studying the sciences.

              On topic:
              Isn’t planned parenthood a non-profit organization. How do republicans shut down clinics across the country?

              1. I haven’t followed this closely so I might be wrong about something, but I think Republican legislatures pass laws including onerous and unnecessary requirements for clinics that provide abortions, even though abortion procedures are quite safe. The goal behind these laws isn’t to improve the safety of providing abortions–it’s to make getting an abortion more difficult, which might mean fewer abortions, which is what people who are pro-life want.

                1. So, you say it’s the pro-choice people that want less governmental regulation? Is that across the board, or only in those cases where it impacts what they want?

                  1. So, you say it’s the pro-choice people that want less governmental regulation?

                    No, I didn’t say that at all. I simply explained that Republican legislatures have passed onerous safety regulations to try and lower the number of abortions that happen.

                    Although it’s a different topic, I think it’s also worth mentioning that many people who are pro-life don’t seem very happy about smaller government in reality since your comment somewhat alluded to that (or at least the flip-side of people who are pro-choice not wanting fewer government regulations). How many people who are pro-life oppose changes to entitlements or cuts in military spending for example on the spending side? Would they support getting rid of OSHA? The reason I say it is that some people think the Republican party and other Republicans (who are predominately pro-life) are supposed to be palatable for those who want to decrease government spending and regulations, but when it gets down to it I don’t think that’s the case. If the data shows otherwise, then I’ll change my perspective. Again, this goes somewhat beyond what you mentioned.

                2. “…even though abortion procedures are quite safe.”
                  Dr Kermit Gosnell was unavailable for comment.

                  1. If you think abortions are relatively unsafe in the U.S., provide reliable data to support that claim. I’ve seen data that indicates the opposite. I have to go so I don’t have time to provide links, but do a search either way.

              2. They vote to stop giving them money!! Which is the same as closing them!!

                1. No, it’s not about money. Let me say it again. Republican legislatures have passed laws with onerous safety regulations to close clinics that provide abortions, or force them to stop offering the service. The purpose isn’t to improve safety of the operations–it’s to try to decrease the number of abortions.

                  For what it’s worth, I support not giving government money to Planned Parenthood.

              3. You don’t understand. There is a twisted mindset that by not subsidizing something you are shutting it down.

            2. *Unless I haven’t been properly exposed to the textbook for “Math For Social Justice Majors 101” wherein it is femsplained to me in a way that would make Euclid and Pythagoras vomit.

              There is a programming language for exactly this.

            3. That textbook has three pages. Two are author credits.

          2. I call for equal access to dying on the job!!!11!!!

            1. Indeed. It is time to close the death-on-the-job gender gap. You can decrease the number on one side or increase the number on the other side, either one. Just get it done!

              1. More dead women! More dead women! More dead women!

                1. More dead ugly women! More dead ugly women! More dead ugly women!

                  FIFY

                  Let’s leave the hot women out of this worthy cause until they are no longer in danger of extinction.

                  I have taken sexual harassment classes so I am officially trained.

                  /sarc

      3. Why is the federal government giving ANY funding for ANY reason to a private, nonprofit organization????

        Oh, yeah, because that crazy “far right wing” republican, Richard Nixon, signed it into law.

      4. Uh, 157/308.8 * 9 is 4.58. Where the fuck does she get 6? Oh, right, math is hard.

        1. Because 4.58 rounds up to 5, and 5 always rounds up so you get 6. Duh.

          1. There are more women than men in the U.S. ergo the majority of Americans are bad at math…as this article states.

      5. Wait, can we bring up that hilarious insurance commercial where the woman complains about being stereotyped as a bad driver by failing to understand math?

      6. I’ll mark her down as “Vote Vagina 2016”.

    2. Technically, you did put a trigger warning…but I don’t know that it was enough.

      1. ‘Salon’ should have been enough of a warning all by itself. It’s like saying ‘abandon all sense, ye who enter here’.

  6. No mention of the offer of immunity to the guy who was tasked with setting up the server who plead the 5th last time he was on the stand?

    1. Napolitano wrote it, so it was probably done before that news hit late yesterday.

      But don’t worry, I expect nine articles about it by today’s PM Links hit.*

      *replace “it” with “something trump said that we will draw inferences from”

  7. do they still hang traitors in the local town square?

    1. Traitors are supposed to be drawn and quartered, “Sir” Chips Alot. Any real knight would know that.

      1. Quartered? I like many, many more pieces. More souvenirs for the kids.

        Vote Woodchipper 2016!

    2. No. That’s where they now swear them into office.

      1. Treason doth never prosper.

    3. Vote Woodchipper 2016!

      Because merely hanging traitorous scum just won’t do!

  8. She’s granted herself impunity.

  9. On her first day on the job, she swore under oath that she recognized and understood that legal obligation and she promised to comply with it. She did not comply.

    Well, that seems pretty straightforward. Where’s the indictment?

    1. Shut the fuck up, sexist. And not only are you a sexist, you have a first name that triggers poor people too. Hell, your full name is probably Rich “Whitey” Lynch.

      You’re what’s wrong with America.

      -college dean of cultural equality

      1. Rich “Whitey” Lynch

        Dammit, sloopy — You were supposed to kept that to yourself!

        *** ponders new handle ***

  10. Clinton has been materially misleading the public and the FBI when she claims that she never sent or received anything “marked classified.”

    Oh, the FBI is not *misled* by her disingenity. One hopes, however, it is not complicit.

    1. *disingenuity*

      *** gets coffee ***

    2. She also references the FBI investigation as a “security review” when she is forced to talk about it.

      The FBI doesn’t do reviews. It does investigations.

      1. Meh. She refers to Bill as her “husband”.

        1. “co-conspirator” is self incrimination, so she uses coded terminology.

        2. Are you saying she should refer to Bill as her “wife” because she is the one in the relationship with balls?

          1. No. Perhaps “significant other”, though.

          2. I’m going to go with “partner” so that she doesn’t offend the LGBTQ+ crowd.

        3. And Chelsea as Bill’s daughter.

          1. And that mass of clotted cheese as her vagina.

              1. Welcome to the Thunderdome.

      2. The “never sent classified info” morphing to “never sent info marked as classified” but is the best of her spinning.

        Especially since any reporter could ask her “in at least one instance, you requested all classification markings to be removed and an email sent by unsecured fax. So why wouldn’t we assume that it was standard policy going forward to send classified information that way since you ordered a subordinate to violate policy and law in that manner?”

        She’d have that deer-in-the-headlights look we all expect to happen when she’s asked an unscripted question.

        1. Trump will ask her in the debates. It’ll be ‘UUUUGE!

          1. ^^this^^

            He will destroy her in the debates, without a doubt. Because he doesn’t give a shit about being nice to an adversary.

            And I don’t understand why that causes such an uproar here.

            Sure, Trump is a crony capitalist that’s used political connections for favorable business help. But Clinton voted for every war she could, sought out the job that ended up with her heading a gun-running operation that destabilized a region, sat by her boss and cheered when he ordered the extra-judicial assassination of American citizens, did everything she could to violate FOIA laws to keep records of her from the hoi polloi, and got rich as fuck peddling interest to the highest bidders while on the job.

            Trump is a Mr Hankey-sized piece of shit compared to Hillary’s Bono-sized turd.

            1. “Bono-sized”?

              1. Do try to keep up?

                BTW, Bono WAS the record.

        2. It also doesn’t matter if it’s marked classified or not, but I doubt they’ll go after that fact either.

        3. “What, like with a cloth?”
          “HA HA HA HA HA HA HA “

      3. The FBI doesn’t do reviews. It does investigations.

        Sure they do. It’s sort of a “community outreach” thing. It’s like yesterday when a dozen fire trucks converged on my house to do a fire-safety check of the premises.

  11. Criminals to the left of me.
    Criminals to the right.
    And her I am stuck in the middle with who??

    1. Sheldon would say you’re “Stuck in the middle with Joos”.

  12. RE Server guy getting immunity from Feds: Nothing to see here folks.

    What does immunity represent? Does it mean that either Pagliano (or Clinton) are accused of offenses? Quite the opposite. Pagliano first invoked his Fifth Amendment rights because a House Republican-majority committee was hauling him in. I was General Counsel (Acting) for the U.S. House of Representatives, and continue to remain informed of its practices. Confronted with one of those committees, I think a witness like Pagliano would be very well advised to invoke the Fifth Amendment, because the committees act in a blatantly and aggressively partisan way and do not behave at all fairly with witnesses. He would be well advised to do what he did, and eventually give a full account, not to such a committee, but to the FBI and DOJ.

    But, doesn’t the fact that he received immunity mean that he is involved in offenses? Hardly. Immunity just means the Justice Department must forego bringing a case against him. If the Justice Department thought they had a case against Pagliano, they would not grant him immunity. They would prosecute that case, or else make a plea deal which could include the grant of immunity. They are granting him immunity because there is no case they are foregoing, so, this way, he can and will give them evidence.

    1. Popehat tweets:

      When DoJ gives someone immunity in an investigation involving my client I generally ask for a large increase in the fee deposit.

    2. I know if I were Huma, I’d be price-shopping flights to Cairo about now…

  13. Just like ending the war on drugs, this is something that no sitting prosecutor will even consider touching until they’re out of office and lack the power to do anything.

    1. I don’t understand this at all. With all the book and movie deals you’d be set for life. Not to mention the eternal fame!

      1. More likely you’d be found dead of an “apparent suicide” within a week of bringing up the indictments, and that would be the end of it.

        1. +1 Vince Foster

        2. Sheesh, I thought I said that!

  14. I understand they would nail any mere mundane to the wall for what she did but why don’t they go after her for what the content in the emails reveal, not just the emails as well?? Like when she was notified al Qaeda guys still loyal to Zawahiri, a perp in 9/11, was receiving training and funding on her orders in Libya and Syria and she was like, “meh”. It is for more a crime to provide material support to real enemies of the American people like al Qaeda..

    1. That wasn’t marked classified, so no problemo.

  15. Pretty hot topic around the water cooler. How am I supposed to take orders from a felon, especially one that failed her cyberawareness computer-based training?

    1. Via email?

      1. *gets napkin to wipe coffee and snot off keyboard*

        1. Sorry. 😎

        2. Like with a cloth?

          1. It snot unusual

    2. I just took my annual training, and every time it said the FBI would come calling if I compromised sensitive (not even classified) information, or the three times it mentioned Bradley with photo, I thought about Hillary and the legion of other conspirators who should be rooming with Bradley right now.

  16. I can’t decide if conservatives who believe that Clinton will ever suffer legal consequences for breaking the law are precious or kinda sad.

    1. What about libertarians that believe she will suffer consequences? Or principled liberals?

      Oh yeah, I forgot everybody that everybody critical of Hillary is a closet Trump supporting xenophobic sexist asshole conservative.

      1. Who said anything about a closet?

        1. You’re right Hugh. Me and a bunch of others on here that have been pretty principled and consistent libertarians are open Trump supporters now because we want a criminal piece of shit like Hillary to face real justice.

          What the fuck is wrong with you? Have your doctors got the dosage so wrong that you’ve completely lost your mind?

      2. I want to believe she will suffer consequences, and even I think that’s sad.

    2. As a conservative, I don’t think anything is actually going to happen to her. It’s just a type of conservative porn.

      (sort of like New Jack City….’I want to shoot you so bad, my dick’s hard’).
      —-rhetorically of course, always rhetorically—-

  17. What part of “Clinton is not a target of this investigation” did you fail to understand? The Director of the FBI says so! He even referenced the President of the United States saying that he doesn’t see anything wrong with what Secretary Clinton did.

    There is NOTHING TO SEE HERE! Move along, people. Move along.

  18. I’d like to know more about this “near certainty” that Russia had access to the server. I keep thinking she will walk away from this with little more than a slap on the wrist because her supporters will say that while she maybe broke some rules, it was inconsequential in the end. But if there is evidence that Russia was reading her email, then it is going to be really hard for her to brush this under the rug.

    1. I would like to think you are right, because this represents such a massive breach of security. But I have largely given up on that hope, because so much of her wrongdoing has already been exposed and yet nothing has happened to her. What would it take to actually bring her down? Is there anything, anything at all, that would “make a difference at this point?”

      1. It’d be a great way for Putin to help his friend Trump.

    2. But if there is evidence that Russia was reading her email, then it is going to be really hard for her to brush this under the rug.

      And I would like to think that even if she does manage to brush this under the rug, the FBI will go public with revelations that yes, her server was in fact hacked by the Russians.

    3. You are missing the main point. Eventually, an email will surface about her love for Huma and this episode will be “just about sex” and that we should all just “Move ON”.

      Oh yeah, it is all just old news.

      Hey, it worked before.

    4. The assertion is that infiltration of non-secure government systems is so aggressively (and successfully) pursued by Russia and China that we must assume Clinton’s non-secure server was compromised. Which is a totally fair assumption.

      In fact, all these agencies operate under the general assumption that everything they say and do online is being watched, unless very specific steps are taken to secure the data. Clinton disregarded this protocol entirely, and therefore the assumption must be made that the Russians, Chinese (and others) all had unfettered access to her data.

      As for actual evidence? Unless some of that data shows up on Wikileaks or Russia/China comes right out and says they infiltrated her server, the odds are against anything concrete coming to light. Sure, the FBI or NSA could do a forensic analysis and determine that the data was compromised, but that is unlikely to convince the general public — and especially Clinton supporters — who are invested in the belief that she did nothing wrong.

  19. WHYCOME HITTERRUN ONRY BAD TALK ABOTUT TRUMP?!?

    1. Really? This is the first email story since the final dump on Monday. And it took Napolitano to write it.

      Do you really think the criticism has been remotely close to equal for the two leading candidates, one of which talks like a buffoon and the other which is under FBI investigation, has the DoJ granting immunity to the guy that set her server up and has a judge about to issue subpoenas for her staff to testify as to her email setup?

      You’re smarter than that, SF.

      1. Trump keeps giving them new material to work with. Clinton is a crook and the email stuff hasn’t really changed in a year. Everyone who is going to ever admit she is a crook already knows.

        You’re smarter than that, SF.

        I think we both know the answer to that.

        1. Trump keeps giving them new material, sure. But that’s chicken feed to what Clinton has done. Hell, it’s as much about the slush fund as it is about the email. Or about the gun running op her DoS ran in Libya and Syria that destabilized the region and armed our enemies.

          But you guys rail against the guy that has not once implemented a policy, voted for a war or acted in a way that has violated your rights or caused the immediate death of innocent people around the world, including the deliberate deaths of Americans not granted due process. And why? Because he’s a crass opportunist that acts like a bully when in front of a camera. Well, her actions are a lot worse than his rhetoric. But too many of you guys miss that for some odd reason.

          1. It’s not even new material. It’s the same old schtik re-packaged about 20 times now. Just because the guy knows 20 different ways to fart in a crowded elevator doesn’t mean we need to act surprised every time.

          2. This is actually a great point. Reason’s supposed to be a journalism mag, spiced with commentary, all delivered from a libertarian perspective. Hell, fucking GAWKER did more to crawl up Hillary’s ass with their FOIA lawsuit than Reason’s ever bothered. When you’re getting outworked by Gawker, it might be time to re-examine your mission.

        2. All you’re saying is that both Trump and Clinton are playing Reason like fiddles with their respective tactics.

  20. Consider:

    “The presidency is extremely important, of course. But there are also thousands of critically important offices all the way down the ballot. And the vast majority ? 70 percent of state legislatures, more than 60 percent of governors, 55 percent of attorneys general and secretaries of state ? are in Republicans hands. And, of course, Republicans control both chambers of Congress.” “Democrats are in denial. Their party is actually in deep trouble.”
    -“Democrats in deep trouble” at Vox.com

    Democrats can’t afford a Hillary indictment. She reflects on them. Her prosecution might doom the Democrats for years.

    Hence, Obama has probably already met privately with Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Lynch runs the Department of Justice. The FBI, investigating Clinton’s emails, is an agency under the DOJ and is ultimately beholden to Lynch.

    The FBI will be under tremendous pressure to find “evidence” that doesn’t derail Clinton. Its agents who don’t toe the line will be privately threatened and smeared as fanatical right-wing conspirators. At a minimum, the FBI will be thwarted long enough to get Clinton elected, at which point Clinton will have her own power to avert a Nixonesque outcome.

    Watch Clinton closely. She campaigns with the utmost confidence that she has nothing to worry about. She knows Obama and Lynch have her back (not to mention most of the mainstream liberal media), just as the IRS personnel knew they were covered during their scandal.

    1. Hillary’s utter confidence is the evidence I’ve been watching, too. We all know, and Hillary knows, that the decisive factor here will be politics, not law or justice. And her performance is amazing. The more egregious her lies, the more breezily she repeats them. She moves with the assurance of someone who knows she holds the winning hand. This, not anything I read about the magnitude of her crimes, is what’s forming my projection of the probable outcome.

      1. You said it better than I did and in fewer words.

      2. If she wins the election, Obama will issue a pardon the next day. ‘To end our long national nightmare”, and “to bring us all together”.

    2. But there are supposedly 150 FBI agents working on this. At least some of them will not roll over for political purposes.

      1. They’re obviously nothing more than crazed wingnuts engineering a political conspiracy against the great Hillary. As evidenced by the fact that one of them once commented on Breitbart, and another one is an NRA member.

        Vast right wing conspiracy!

    3. Her prosecution might doom the Democrats for years

      I doubt this. Assuming Trump wins, four years from now, whoever wins the democratic nomination will have the full backing of the mainstream media and will be regarded as the smartest, most qualified candidate for president in a generation and will be fully supported by the democratic base.

      1. whoever wins the democratic nomination will have the full backing of the mainstream media and will be regarded as the smartest, most qualified candidate for president in a generation and will be fully supported by the democratic base.

        So then, no different than normal MSM behavior…?

        1. You gave the appropriate reply.

  21. Scooter Libby was fined big time – almost went to jail – brought in before the FBI for being accused of doing something they KNEW he did not do.
    Does anyone on the planet actually believe that Clinton
    1) did not set up her private server intentionally
    2) do it so she could hide all her correspondence with everything especially dealings with the Clinton Foundation
    3) does anyone really believe she did not use her position to extort or funnel money to her foundation from foreign governments?
    4) did not have her entire staff follow the same illegal / unsafe practice.
    5) are we to believe that no one knew about this until the Benghazi committee found out? if no one in government knew she was doing this then a lot of people should be fired for not doing their job.

  22. MISPRISION OF FELONY:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misprision_of_felony

    Title 18 of the United States Code

    A large number of Federal employees may have been aware of felonious activity (Hillary’s email setup) but did nothing to stop it. Elected, appointed, hired, subcontracted, anybody who gets a paycheck courtesy of American taxpayers. My reading of Title 18 Section 4 U.S.C. suggests “Misprision” which in Hillary’s case might help send her to prison!

    Last, I pray for our Republic.

  23. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Click This Link inYour Browser…

    ????[] http://www.HomeSalary10.Com

  24. I predict the investigation will drag out until after the election.

  25. Neapolitans is optimistic bordering on delusional if he really thinks that Hillary is going to have felony charges brought against her for this.

  26. “…Also this past weekend, Gen. Michael Hayden, formerly director of the CIA and of the National Security Agency (NSA), stated on CNN that it is a near certainty that the Russian government and others had access to Clinton’s non-secure server and all it contained….”

    And if her emails were granted clearance into other supposedly secure servers, well…

  27. I find it hard to believe that she will be indicted, let alone prosecuted, because the Administration and Party will protect their own. In their eyes, particularly the numerous Democratic women in positions of authority for this, she has the right beliefs and is too-big-to-fail and so the law being malleable must bend to that. But at the same time, an obvious refusal to indict and sweeping under the rug will redound to the benefit of Trump and all American voters who are tired and enraged by a government above the law. So, the investigation, etc., etc., will be slow-walked until some less damaging time. Officlal response as shown by Lynch already in her interview with Fox – the review/investigation goes forward but no details can be discussed and the timeline is not determined. It’s the only way for them politically to move forward on this and all the suckers who believe in rule of law will just have to suck it. This is all so clear – standard playbook operation. And a quiescent press won’t do jack about it. But Trump in a debate situation should – perhaps that is their weak point.

    1. Of course Trump will hammer her with this. “She’s under FBI investigation for felonies right now!”

      1. Yeah, and the Hilbots will say ‘leaver her alone; it’s just some old stuff about emails!’

      2. Yeah, his line about Ted Cruz, and the prospects of having a President tied up in court… sort of multipurpose.

      3. He’d already be doing it if this were true. There’s nothing stopping him, and showing the base that he’d keep the gloves off in the general would do nothing but help him in the primaries. Probably a lot, since he turns my stomach, but I know I’d be less interested in shaming his supporters if he offered any evidence that he intends to help justice find Hillary Rodham Clinton.

        It may make me an Alex Jones-type conspiracy nut but – at this point – I think I’d genuinely be more surprised to see him win the nom and actually go after Hillary like the ‘narcissist desperate for victory’ persona suggests he might than I would be if we witness him pinch off the huge loaf he’s squeezing into the conservative punch-bowl by torpedoing himself after securing the nomination to ensure a Clinton victory.

        So much so, in fact, that the optimist in me is now actually hoping that they accidentally made him too bullet-proof, and that the more outrageous he gets trying to sink his own campaign, the more support he’ll garner. It seems more probable than the notion of him being genuine, to me.

        The pessimist/realist in me suspects that his perceived invincibility is largely a product of the MSM narrative, and he will crumble with stunning rapidity after he is done making a mockery of the republican primaries.

  28. “On that road are emails revealing the names of secret undercover intelligence assets, the locations of North Korean nuclear facilities, the transcripts of telephone conversations among foreign intelligence agents, and the travel plans of then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens in the days before he was murdered.”

    This is new to me. If true, this could have been the underlying cause of at least the timing of the Benghazi attack. An actual person getting killed because of her actions.

    1. I had also not heard that. I think this is conjecture on his part.

      1. Politifact rates it half-true:

        http://www.politifact.com/pund…..n-ambassa/

        1. Politifact is hugely biased towards Democrats.

  29. I don’t think Clinton, Inc., is going to get indicted for many of the reasons stated above. If she is elected, of course she won’t be prosecuted by the DOJ. But couldn’t she still be impeached? Imagine if the stupid party had enough balls to impeach this cunt the day of her swearing in (assuming they could have enough numbers to do it) . But, they won’t because they are stupid and Hillary has bigger balls than all the Republican congressmen put together. Whether they succeeded in a conviction or not. An president impeached shortly after taking office is never going to accomplish much (which might be a good thing). At least it would be bad optics.

    Secondly. Trump is a focal point for a lot of anger out there in flyover country. That anger is not going to dissipate if she is elected. And her not receiving justice for violating the law will just be salt in the wound. That anger can now be channeled through Trump. But if Clinton, Inc., is elected that will serve as nothing more than a dam for that anger. Who knows what the consequences are.

  30. It’s the only way for them politically to move forward on this and all the suckers who believe in rule of law will just have to suck it

    Amen. Laws only apply to little people and those who can’t afford good attorneys like Popehat.

  31. “The exposure of state secrets, either intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage.” Espionage is what traitors do.

  32. Thought: Russia has her emails. Putin likes Trump. So, sometime before the election, damaging information about Hillary leaks out of Russia…?

    1. I was actually wondering the same thing a few weeks back in an aside with Sevo. He seemed to think Putin would not risk it.

      1. A guy who would risk invading Ukraine and intervening in Syria wouldn’t risk an anonymous leak…?

  33. Long, long ago, in the time of Emperor B. Obama II, the people were tricked into believing in a chimera called “hope and change”. Many people, notwithstanding reality, continued to believe in such foolishness even as the reign of Emperor Obama drew to a close. Most notable among these was the concubine of a former Emperor (himself disgraced for toying with servants in the royal household) who, as her world crumbled about her insisted that all was right and just, and that the People should redouble their efforts, and hope even more fervently and believe in the imminent arrival of even more change. This the People did not believe; and so the concubine was imprisoned, never to be heard from again.

  34. Why were there only two question marks in this whole article? Were there not enough questions to be asked?

  35. She is going to loose, I hope she can cook for her husband. That is all she is worth. O course unless she goes to Jail.

  36. Hitlery is a career criminal. Anybody that doesn’t know this doesn’t deserve to vote.

    1. Deserve isn’t a qualification and never has been.

  37. the judge really believes they’re going to indict her doesn’t he? that’s cute.

  38. If Hillary is referred for possible prosecution, Lynch will not seek a grand jury indictment until after the election. At which point, whether she wins or loses, Obama will pardon her.

    1. She’ll pardon herself.

      1. She won’t need to. Her career can be summarized as basically learning from Nixon’s mistakes and getting in and out of legal trouble while accumulating money and influence.

  39. Anyone ever heard of a pardon? If not, just wait and see, the clinton arkansas mafia are rubber.

    1. The Arkansas mafia was replaced by the I-95 corridor-beltway mafia twenty years ago.

  40. Server guy granted immunity will be found shot five times in head, ruled a suicide.

    1. hahaha yep

  41. Clinton has been materially misleading the public and the FBI when she claims that she never sent or received anything “marked classified.”

    “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

    This kind of lawyerly prevarication is the closest these treacherous scumbags will ever come to honesty. Honesty is whatever you can get away with.

    How I *loathe* them.

    Hillary for Prison 2016!

  42. HRC may bankrupt all of her donors and get impeached a couple months after she’s elected, but she will beat the rap.

  43. Pretty simple situation. An employee was trying to send her classified information over a secure fax but was having problems. Hillary directed the employee to strip the document of its classification and send it by insecure fax. She willfully instructed the breaking of multiple laws and the count only goes up from there. Petraeus was prosecuted for breaking just one.

  44. Bad news for Hillary Clinton is good news for the USA.

  45. It takes a series of conscious steps to over-ride the gov’t e-mail protections which absolutely prevent classified material from being transmitted from the gov’t system to a private server such as the one owned by Mrs. Clinton. She can say she never sent or received any classified material because those steps make the material received unclassified. Similarly, she can claim certain ones are being classified after receipt when in fact they were being restored to their original condition. Motive probably was to ease preparation of HRC’s memoirs for which she made millions. Too much intent was needed to excuse these actions which more likely than not damaged US security.

  46. Home income source by collider.. I’m making over $5k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they ZA can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.
    This is what I do, http://www.payability70.com

  47. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.workpost30.com

  48. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Click This Link inYour Browser…

    ????[] http://www.HomeSalary10.Com

  49. Democrats don’t give a flip. With Trump, they don’t have to. As long as their guy has control of the courts, the bureaucracy, the budget, their agenda is secure. Democrats aren’t running out of time. The country is however.

  50. before I saw the paycheck that said $8517 , I didn’t believe that my mother in law woz like realy bringing in money in their spare time from their computer. . there uncles cousin started doing this 4 only ten months and as of now cleard the mortgage on there villa and bourt a gorgeous Saab 99 Turbo . learn this here now…

    Click This Link inYour Browser…

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~[] http://www.workreport30.com

  51. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Click This Link inYour Browser…

    ????[] http://www.HomeSalary10.Com

  52. their ace in the hole is Biden.

    1. More like their ass in the hole is Biden.
      correction completed.

  53. RE:
    Hillary Clinton’s False Hopes – There’s been a relentless barrage of bad legal news for Clinton lately.

    We must not question Comrade Clinton’s motives for such breaches of the law.
    The end justifies the means.
    Just ask Stalin, Hitler or Pol Pot.
    What could possibly go wrong?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.