Posted on Apr 15, 2016
Republicans know Hillary Clinton is not going to be indicted. They just can’t say so.
4.22K
51
32
8
8
0
I hadn't seen a new Hillary email thread in a few hours so figured we needed another one. ;)
But this one expresses a different point of view than most. I wonder if in the end it will make any difference if she is found to have not committed any crimes and is not indicted. I suspect this has already moved into the realm of the mythology of the far right, where she will be considered forever guilty no matter what facts and conclusions the FBI comes to. There will be charges of favoritism, conspiracy theories of the fix being in, and supposed key questions the investigation missed. If not indicted there will be urgent calls for further investigations. But those will end the day after election day, as will the so called Benghazi investigation. Just the same way all but the most extreme birthers stopped pressing that issue the day after President Obama's reelection.
But this one expresses a different point of view than most. I wonder if in the end it will make any difference if she is found to have not committed any crimes and is not indicted. I suspect this has already moved into the realm of the mythology of the far right, where she will be considered forever guilty no matter what facts and conclusions the FBI comes to. There will be charges of favoritism, conspiracy theories of the fix being in, and supposed key questions the investigation missed. If not indicted there will be urgent calls for further investigations. But those will end the day after election day, as will the so called Benghazi investigation. Just the same way all but the most extreme birthers stopped pressing that issue the day after President Obama's reelection.
Republicans know Hillary Clinton is not going to be indicted. They just can’t say so.
Posted from washingtonpost.com
Politics
Election 2016
Hillary Clinton
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 17
5
5
0
A comment from the article:
"This is obviously a political article and not a factual article. Firstly, the part about retroactive classification he uses as an excuse for Clinton's scandal is straight from the mouths of Clinton herself and her campaign spokesman. Then the part about intent. There need not be any intent. It's called gross negligence as stated in 18 U.S. Code § 793(d). The server was not authorized to be used for transmission of classified material or retention. Obama said the word "careless" to describe her actions. That is the same as gross negligence. As for retroactive classification, some of it was born classified, like the North Korean missile intel, drone mission, and CIA operative/informer. She had the obligation as SOS to know certain things were classified and it doesn't matter if she says she's ignorant of it.
She's already committed perjury a few times at her hearing before congress. The Blumenthal business was especially the worst. The Romanian hacker that was brought here to the US was reading what she wrote back and forth to Blumenthal since he figured out his password. As for comparing it to Petraeus, he didn't have a server that was unencrypted for two months, open to the internet for 4 years like Clinton did. We don't know who had access to this system at all. Good hackers leave no evidence. For that matter, everything that she had on there could have been downloaded after the fact, at the end of her tenure or it could have been compromised at the beginning and accessed over and over again. I should also add that investigators will not believe what people say, even if they have a good track record. People will lie to save themselves and Clinton is notorious for lying and changing her story so she has no credibility to defend herself. The evidence must speak for itself."
"This is obviously a political article and not a factual article. Firstly, the part about retroactive classification he uses as an excuse for Clinton's scandal is straight from the mouths of Clinton herself and her campaign spokesman. Then the part about intent. There need not be any intent. It's called gross negligence as stated in 18 U.S. Code § 793(d). The server was not authorized to be used for transmission of classified material or retention. Obama said the word "careless" to describe her actions. That is the same as gross negligence. As for retroactive classification, some of it was born classified, like the North Korean missile intel, drone mission, and CIA operative/informer. She had the obligation as SOS to know certain things were classified and it doesn't matter if she says she's ignorant of it.
She's already committed perjury a few times at her hearing before congress. The Blumenthal business was especially the worst. The Romanian hacker that was brought here to the US was reading what she wrote back and forth to Blumenthal since he figured out his password. As for comparing it to Petraeus, he didn't have a server that was unencrypted for two months, open to the internet for 4 years like Clinton did. We don't know who had access to this system at all. Good hackers leave no evidence. For that matter, everything that she had on there could have been downloaded after the fact, at the end of her tenure or it could have been compromised at the beginning and accessed over and over again. I should also add that investigators will not believe what people say, even if they have a good track record. People will lie to save themselves and Clinton is notorious for lying and changing her story so she has no credibility to defend herself. The evidence must speak for itself."
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
In the comments on this article is being amply pointed out that HRC's explanations are not germane. She broke the law.
Walt
Walt
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
If the FBI does not recommend indictment, I will lose a lot of faith in the fairness and integrity of the justice system of this country. However, I would not be surprised if the DOJ decides not to accept the FBI's recommendation, but that's the difference between political appointees and those who serve in apolitical positions.
There will not be any conspiracy theories to think Clinton is guilty of mishandling classified information and failed to appropriately store and maintain official records.
There will not be any conspiracy theories to think Clinton is guilty of mishandling classified information and failed to appropriately store and maintain official records.
(5)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
The fairness and integrity of this nations justice system went out the window long ago. OJ Simpson anyone? Lindsey Lohan? In jail for what - her fourth DUI? The legal system has had everything it needs to push a conviction/arrest by now. It chooses not to for many expedients; one of which being self-protection. Hilary's a force they all hope someone else will tackle. They won't take her on themselves. They're not that stupid.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google