Posted on 04/01/2016 6:31:40 AM PDT by G Larry
Good grief. Doesn't the fbi have sufficient facilities and resources to conduct these interviews simultaneously? Preferably in different cities ...
good idea kit, however they all have the same attorney who can't be in 4 places at one time
In her case, I think Obama better move the date up to this summer at the latest.
Well said.
Egads!! Poor dear. At least get your teeth whitened/fixed....that’s something you CAN control, Chels!!
Cruz is NOT “more of same”.
Trump is just “different” with no hint of “better”.
You raise an interesting question. Have they retained an individual or a firm? Lawyers seldom operate in a vacuum. There have to be others in the office who would welcome a few billable hours to toss at the Lambo payments.
You may have missed the point.
You introduced a larger issue in this discussion when you abandoned the niceties of civil discourse and accused us of pissing on each other’s shoes.
As others argue upthread, the larger issue is the potential corruption of our primary election which approaches very quickly, Arguing that Hillary, who is frozen in her position and can be dealt as time provides, is the greater enemy almost sounds like a diversion.
no, such disillusion got us Obama
trying to teach the GOPe a lesson by not voting was a disaster
the enemy was and always will be the utopians in the left wing democrat party
Sure they will have a common strategy during their interviews (which apparently will not be taken under oath according to press reports):
To every question they will answer: “I have no specific recollection or memory of that [document, email, conversation, etc]”
It avoids usiing the 5th Amendment which is bad optics—and has been proven to completely stall any prosecution based on testimony. Reference: Eric Holder and Hillary Clinton. I believe she used that formulation or some variant over 250 times in the investigation of her various activities conducted in the 90s by Special Prosecutors.
Basically, it works.
re: Possible endings
I was thinking of this yesterday when I saw a snippet about how WH wants to allow Iran some kind of trading concessions regarding the dollar. End of term Valerie Jarret gift? So,,maybe WH does a trade - Hillary for Most favored Nation status for Iran from US Senate? Hillary for Supreme Court nominee? Obama/Lynch would give Hillary up for the right prize don’t you think?
Nope. They will use a proven strategy that works to avoid taking the 5th.
“I have no specific recollection of that [document, email, conversation, etc.]”
Worked for Eric Holder recently and protected Hillary from 3 special prosecutors in the 90s.
These folks are very smart about legal defenses and can quibble over the meaning of “is” without shame.
Well, that’s where having the same lawyer helps - the lawyer would know what went on in interview #1 & could assure #’a 2, 3, & 4 that everyone is sticking to the story, etc. ... or whatever. It will be harder for the FBI to turn the 4 against each other with the same attorney sitting in the room with each one.
This also shows the arrogance of the Clintonistas .... they’ve put a story/narrative together & I would bet money it’s not the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth so this means they are going to try to lie their way out of it. Mills can lie and stick to it - she’s got plenty of past experience & ice water in her veins. The rest of them ... not so sure.
No doubt. But it's also possible that Obama would protect Hillary for the right prize. There's millions of dollars just sitting in the Clinton foundation, and some of it could be transferred to a future Obama Foundation.
Or Hillary could promise Obama a seat on the Supreme Court (a 'Justice Obama' would complete the farce).
But Obama would have to be careful here. The Clintons have zero morality. I could see a President Hillary going back on every last thing she promised to Obama.
You seem to have taken your comment in such an off-topic direction, that I cannot even comprehend your point. Just density on my part, I expect.
“I could see a President Hillary going back on every last thing she promised to Obama.”
What a state of things as Obama can’t be trusted on his promises either.
Do you think Sanders’ strengthening poll numbers and campaign donations could very well be a part of an Obama behind the scenes strategy?
I hope I’m around in 8-10 years as it usually takes that long for writers and investigating journalists to get to the bottom of the muck — you know after the “suicides” and death-bed revelations surface.
From the article:
“If it’s a serious case, you don’t run the risk of having all sorts of collusion between people — it’s just not done,” said diGenova. “If the department has accepted that, that tells me they’re walking down the line of not bringing a case, because they’re not serious if they have accepted that arrangement … They’ve thrown in the towel.”
Not really, in the first post the OP tells the membership IMO that there isn’t a reason to be caught up in the GOP election shenanigans but that we should instead just focus on techniques Hillary might use to avoid prosecution.
I responded that this topic is nothing compared to the GOPe trying to steal our vote away.
So I countered to the post #1 presented.
The witnesses’ defense attorney involved, Beth Wilkinson, is described as “... The 53-year-old wife of former “Meet the Press” host David Gregory is a Clinton donor and Democratic contributor, according to Federal Election Commission filings.”
I’m sure this will ensure fair and balanced coverage in the media-—NOT!
Lew
If only the emails were involved, Obama could do that. With the bribery, money laundering and racketeering, Obama’s decision isn’t that clear cut. Clinton’s criminality is going to end up as the biggest incidence of corruption in the country’s history.
And that will be Obama’s historical legacy if he tries to sweep it under the rug with a pardon. There’s no rug in the universe that big.
When you read the linked article for detail, there’s some extraordinary info when you look at the Wilkinson’s creation of her own law firm (January) and the letter to Congress that was also dated. This means there’s been some serious scrambling going on within the Clinton camp. Those are not the actions of innocent people.
What they’ve done is provide the FBI with advance notice to prepare a counter strategy. I suspect they’ll move to place the aides in conflicting positions which in turn creates issues for the lawyer.
I was curious who was footing the bill for the legal fees the aides would face.
All of it screams GUILTY!
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.