Posted on 03/19/2016 11:48:59 AM PDT by 20yearsofinternet
It’s the scenario that Republicans dream of and Democrats believe is all but impossible: Hillary Clinton being forced to drop out of the presidential race due to criminal charges over her email server.
Any bombshell findings in the FBI’s investigation of Clinton could plunge the Democratic race into chaos.
Bernie Sanders could stand to gain. As the only other candidate in the Democratic race, the party could quickly coalesce around him in an effort to halt the bedlam. But that’s far from a sure thing, with many in the party fearful he would be a weak general election candidate. Democrats insist there’s virtually no chance that Clinton will be indicted over her server. The candidate has said repeatedly that no laws were broken, and that classified information was never sent over the server. Asked about an indictment at the last Democratic debate, Clinton responded: “That's not going to happen.”
In the event that Clinton stepped aside after winning the nomination at the convention, the Democratic National Committee could decide on the replacement on its own.
If an indictment came before the convention, the path would be more difficult.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
No. The scenario that Republicans dream of is Hillary being forced to drop out of the presidential race because she has been indicted, tried, and convicted of murder and treason, and has been sentenced to hang prior to Inauguration Day 2017.
I wonder how they will find a reason to blame it on Bush?
It would only be good for the GOP if it happens after she’s already nominated.
Maybe its an Obama final FU to the Clintons.
A Hillary indictment will never happen. As I have often written; Hillary could cut the head off of Pope Francis on Television with a dull knife. She would never be indicted and would win the election even garnering 52% of the Catholic vote. Look what the American people elected as President in 2008 and AGAIN in 2012 all in spite of the great damage he has done to our economy, political life, race relations, the Christian religion, and foreign relations and any other action involving our nation and culture. The current creature and Hillary are pure malice and many Americans share that malicious hatred for their own country and civilization.
Hillary has certainly broken the law. Her emphatic arrogant denial is a reflection of her belief that her personal power and the total corruption of the current Administration and the Democrat Party makes her indictment impossible. Of course, this is not the first time that she has broken the law and continues to do it every day with the operation of the Clinton Foundation. But, she has always gotten away with it and is confident that she will again. But, there will be an indictment, if nothing else on our political system, the rule of law, and the open flaunting of honesty in government.
If I were Hillary, I wouldn’t trust Obama for a second and with her future in his hands, she is going to be even more flawed than she ever was. If she is not indicted, that will be a sign that she has agreed to a corrupt deal with Obama that will put our country even at more peril. If she is not indicted, I believe that career leaders in the FBI will leak the details of not only the email server scam, but the Clinton Foundation conspiracy and that will be the more damaging of the two.
Been saying since the day Uncle Joe announced his non-announcement that they knew something and were waiting for HRC to go down under her own weight.
My opinion has not changed.
Obama will protect Hillary as she has made a deal with him to cement his legacy.
Forget about an indictment. Plus, he’ll pardon her during his final days after the election and before he leaves.
I firmly believe that Trump will have a much easier time beating Hitlary than Bernie. Not only will it be fun to watch Trump tear her a new one, Trump stands to draw many disaffected Bernie voters. Many Bernie voters are simply dems who hate and don’t trust Hillary and are just as anti establishment.
Once Trump wins then we can enjoy him unleashing the dogs of justice upon Hillary.
Stock up on the popcorn!
IMHO, it is not interesting. A Clinton indictment is, in all likelihood, the wet dream of people who have trouble with reality (e.g., a good portion of people in the stupid party).
I believe she has to be convicted of a crime before she can be pardoned.
Absent an Act of Congress which I am sure was never even proposed, it is no more legal for Hillary as Secretary of State to accept foreign government presents to the Clinton Foundation (of which she was/is a principal) or for Hillary’s marriage and joint checking account (of which she is/was obviously a principal) to accept huge honoraria ("emoluments”) than it is, famously, for a president to accept a gift from a foreign head of state. Even if the 111th Congress implicitly approved of such when it confirmed Hillary to be SoS, it could not approve them in perpetuity without amending the Constitution. The 112th Congress did not vote to enact any such provision, and certainly each contribution and each honorarium should have been considered separately by Congress.
- Article 1 Section 9:
- No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
If Hillary can elide that obvious rule, it seems unlikely that even a minor degree of pettifoggery will be necessary to slip away from accountability one more time.
Speaking of obvious disabilities, “Who Hired Craig Livingstone?” By declining to identify who hired Craig Livingstone or who fired him, President Clinton left everyone in his administration under a cloud of suspicion. And the more influential, the greater the legitimate suspicion. And Hillary had said, “You get two for the price of one.” Nothing indicates that Hillary did not hire Craig Livingstone, and did not treat over 500 sensitive FBI files as cavalierly - or more so, if possible - as she treated the sensitive State Department information on her insecure server. And if there is an intelligence service in any country in the world which did not detect and penetrate that server, I am confident that heads have rolled because of it.
In Hard Choices, Hillary was at pains to indicate that she was not a security babe-in-the-woods:
Like other sensitive government agencies the State Department was frequently target and increasingly sophisticated phishing attempts. When we first arrived at State, these attempts were similar to the fraudulent emails many Americans experience at home on their personal computers. The often sloppy early attempts to penetrate our secure systems were easy to spot. But by 2012, the sophistication and fluency had advanced considerably, with the attackers impersonating State Department officials in an attempt to dupe their colleagues into opening legitimate looking attachments.When we traveled to sensitive places like Russia, we often received warnings from the Department security officials to leave our BlackBerries, laptops—anything that communicated with the outside world—on the plane, with their batteries removed to prevent foreign intelligence services from compromising them. Even in friendly settings we conducted business under strict security precautions, taking care where and how we read secret material and used our technology. One means of protecting material was to read it inside an opaque tent in a hotel room. In less well equipped settings we were told to improvise by reading sensitive material with a blanket over our head. I felt like I was 10 years old again, reading covertly by flashlight under the covers after bedtime. On more than one occasion I was cautioned not to speak freely in my own hotel room.
And it wasn't just US government agencies and officials who were targets. American companies were also in the crosshairs. I fielded calls from frustrated CEOs complaining about aggressive theft of an intellectual property and trade secrets, even breaches of their home computers. To better focus our efforts against this increasingly serious threat, I appointed the Department’s first Coordinator for Cyber Issues in February 2011.
Nixon was pardoned without a conviction...
There are several scenarios to consider. What if she wins the elecation but is indicated before the Electoral College meets, or is indicted after that but before she is sworn in, or after being sworn in?
It’s a preemptive pardon.
I’m with you . Whenever I mention that I think the FBI will recommend indictment to my colleagues or even on thus board......it doesn’t matter if they’re conservative or liberal.....I get a viceral reaction of NO WAY..... Well I still believe that FBI agents aren’t on board with the whole she’s to big to indict meme.
This won't happen while Obola's in office so we need to get this out of heads!!!!!
no, the republican dream is Hillary being indicted and refusing to drop out, saying she will fight the charges in court.
that would be quintessentially clintonian; greedy, hopelessly self centered, and destructive to everything around them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.