Is There Enough Evidence to Indict Hillary Clinton?

Townhall.com ^ | January 25, 2016 | Guy Benson

[GreenHornet]

Something else that needs to be clearly explained to the American people: When Hillary Clinton says that she “never sent or received information marked “Classified” while she was Secretary of State, she’s playing word games. She’s choosing her words very carefully. There is no distinct category of secure information called “Classified” (except in the movies or on TV.) It’s a generic term that encompasses information marked as “Confidential”, “Secret”, “Top Secret”, etc. Most people do not realize this, and therefore are more inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt when they here her make that statement. This is her version of “it depends on what the definition of the word “is” is.”

[bert]

while the focus is on damaging evidence contained in various e mails, in addition to spending time in cubicles analyzing them, agents can go into the field and question witnesses. These would be those that know of the day to day office procedure of both at Hillary’s right hand and those perhaps at some distance

If witnesses become targets then there will be offers for testimony that dare not be refused. After all, 2017 is right around the corner and guilty is guilty. within the state department there are probably an endless list og folks that actually have some knowledge of the lawless scandal that reflects poorly and even very badly on them personally.

The emails have revealed enough for even the lowest of the low secretaries to be questioned. Fear will permeate their being. The truth will out in all its horror. The whole State Department is in a state of disgrace

Obama can’t pardon one that is not convicted while he is in office

[AFreeBird]

There’s probably dump trucks - a convoy of semis full of evidence against her. Will it ever see the light of day? Not in this corrupt administration.

[1Old Pro]

The FBI cannot convene a grand jury and present an indictment. But you'd best believe the FBI can make the Obama administration look very bad if it shrinks from doing so." And then, there's the separate but highly relevant matter of the court of public opinion.

Let the sun shine in - do what is right.

[hal ogen]

To answer the question...does a bear...?

[Boojum]

AG will not convene Grand Jury. Thus no indictment. Thus no conviction.

OTOH, there’s still the concept of Citizens’ Arrest, Kangaroo Court, Telegraph Pole. All over and done before the authorities realize what’s happening.

[kagnew]

“I hope they do, (prosecute Hillary) but most of the press will probably ignore it though.”

I seriously have my doubts...her name is clinton, she’s a democrat, and a women which does not bode well for any prosecuting no matter how much evidence there is. JMHO.

[Texas resident]

Remember when slick willy got himself in trouble? The party’s media went after Ken Star while ignoring the charges against slick. IF this case moves forward, I would expect the media to attack the prosecutors and defend the hildabeast.

[kagnew]

“Remember when slick willy got himself in trouble? The party’s media went after Ken Star while ignoring the charges against slick. IF this case moves forward, I would expect the media to attack the prosecutors and defend the hildabeast.”

You are probably right, but I wonder what will happen if there is mass resignations from the FBI for failure to indict??? I do know one thing, every gutless republican who voted for Lynch’s confirmation should be drummed out of congress. Anyone with an IQ of 10 could figure on Lynch doing Obama’s bidding.

[Texas resident]

And back in the day, Hillary had hundreds of FBI files on key people in DC. Fast forward to today, I would bet she has a LOT more dirt on lots more people. And those who have been there long enough remember what happened to Vince Foster. How did that investigation go?

[bert]

I would argue there is more to this than the lame duck and Hillary. There are communications channels beyond those within the White House or the MSM. There can be direct talks with the AG outside the White House com channels

There is some semblance of life beyond the lame duck and the aging swan to be considered. If real, that life would require looking down the road rather than just down the block.

When calculating damages and risk, it is possible that the damage of a Hillary to the Party is far greater than the risks associated with throwing her under the bulldozer.

Lynch is black. She is the creation of the party. Her base loyalty is to the black establishment and the party not to the black man in the White House. If loyalty is the active force rather than the law, Hillary might get Lynched

[JimSEA]

The continuing question is, “What was the information used for, who benefited, and what risk specifically did this use subject us to?” This is, perhaps, what would be the final nail in Hillary’s coffin as far as the general public is concerned.