Posted on 11/03/2016 12:14:45 AM PDT by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
The 2016 Presidential election is rapidly approaching, and the FBI just announced that they are reopening their investigation into Hillary Clinton‘s private email system. With the Democratic candidate once again the subject of a criminal investigation, it raises many questions as to what happens if she is indicted or relinquishes her candidacy before the election, or even after. The law is hazy in some of these situations, so let’s tackle them one by one.
1. If Clinton is indicted before the election
The FBI merely said that they are reopening their investigation to examine new emails that came to light. They have yet to even determine whether the emails are actually evidence of criminal activity, let alone decide whether or not to prosecute. Therefore, it’s highly unlikely that an indictment would come before November 8. If it did, the indictment itself wouldn’t mean that Clinton could no longer run, as an indictment is only an accusation, not a conviction.
.... Clinton could theoretically hope that voters hate Trump enough that they still vote for her (and hope that she isn’t convicted before taking office).Of course, even if she wins on November 8, the nature of our electoral system makes it so that the members of the Electoral College could theoretically go rogue and not vote for Clinton, even if their states tell them to. George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf wrote recently that only 30 states have laws on the books prohibiting this from happening, and that those laws have never been enforced and might be unconstitutional.
More likely, however, is that she would be pressured — by herself, the public, or the Democratic party — to give up her candidacy.
2. If Clinton steps down before the election
Should Clinton relinquish her candidacy before the election, the Democratic National Committee has rules in place for what happens next. Article 2, Section 7 of the DNC Bylaws says that if there is a vacancy on the national ticket, a special meeting of the Committee “shall be held on the call of the Chairperson,” where they would choose a new candidate. Such meetings make decisions based on a majority of those in attendance. Since we are exactly so close to election, there is one major problem: The ballot deadlines have passed in nearly every state. For example, in West Virginia, the law says a candidate must withdraw “no later than eighty-four days before the general election.” So the Democratic leadership would likely have to wage a public campaign to tell voters that if you vote for Clinton/Kaine, you are really voting for Biden (or whoever it maybe)/Kaine. Then the electors would have to change their vote for the new ticket when they meet on December 19th, 2016.
3. If Clinton wins the election and is indicted before the inauguration
Here’s where it starts getting tricky.
As mentioned earlier, an indictment is far different from a conviction. An indictment does not disqualify a person from being eligible for the presidency (neither does a conviction, technically, but being in jail would probably get in the way). Should Clinton be indicted after winning the election but before officially taking office, she could try to play beat-the-clock and hope to take office before her case concludes. Once a person is in office as President, it gets even more complicated, as we’ll see later. Should Clinton be indicted and convicted prior to her inauguration, and end up in jail, she may be deemed incapacitated, in which case Section 3 of the 20th Amendment kicks in and the Vice President-Elect, in this case Tim Kaine, would become President. (though that seems unlikely as the wheels of justice do not turn that fast)
4. If Clinton wins the election and steps down before the inauguration
If Clinton becomes President-Elect and decides to step down before her inauguration, either due to being indicted or out of fear that an indictment may be imminent, it would be similar to the situation just described, and Kaine would become President. However in a situation where a candidate steps down after the general election, but before the Electoral College chooses the winner, federal law says the electors would be able to vote for whomever they want, although states may pass their own laws controlling this situation.
5. If the investigation continues after the election and Clinton wins and is inaugurated before a decision is made. Could Clinton be indicted when she becomes President?
The law is unsettled when it comes to this situation, but most opinions tend to believe Clinton would luck out, due to the philosophy that Presidents — and only Presidents — are immune from prosecution while in office..............[snip]
......Long story short, the Department of Justice can very well affect who our next President is. If they move swiftly to indict, or if Clinton believes she’s in trouble, she could drop out before November 8. Alternatively, if an indictment comes soon after Clinton wins the election, she could still feel pressure to step down before she takes office. It all depends on what the FBI finds in these emails, what they decide to do about it, and when. But the clock’s ticking.
Obama will pardon her if Trump wins.
Traficant
Sounds like he may need a pardon himself.
Exactly. Best case = Trumps wins big league, indictment comes on or after 1/20/17, 0bama is served along with Hillary.
the first thing I would do is get hammered and call in sick for two days...
http://www.heritage.org/constitution/articles/1/essays/26/privilege-from-arrest
I said “while in session”. The Constitution article cited in the link basically means they are not subject to civil arrest while they are “in session” or going to/from but it does not keep them from being subject to civil processes. The exceptions cited are treason, felony and breach of peace.
Elections matter, Trump must win.
What if Obama is implicated in this?
Like I said, Obama pardons Hillary, then Hillary pardons Obama .... if she wins.
Another answer is I don’t think Congress and the Party would agree with prosecuting Obama whether guilty or not.
Maybe the reason Trump and Pence have been giddy and all smiley for the last week is Obama has been sending him feelers for a pardon.
Hatred of America and unquenchable greed are two a prime motivations for committing treason, and Hillary combines them in one neat package. Aldrich Ames went to prison for selling national secrets for money. Yet Hillary has done far worse than Ames. She should not be "rewarded" with the presidency, and if (God forbid) she should be elected, the old practice of letting the president get away with anything and everything needs to stop. With a Hillary president, every traitor currently in prison would be able to file appeals on the basis that they should not be in prison for something for which the president routinely commits. They could all request pardons on that basis.
The Clintons have been a stench on politics since they first emerged in Arkansas. The Democrat party showed itself to be a vile, corrupt organization when it embraced them and others like them.
We all read this and scream VOTE FOR TRUMP but look at CNN this morning. Zero mention of any of this. Nothing, nada. I have Fox on and they’ve barely mentioned the World Series last night, actually, I don’t think they have. No, it is pretty much all Clinton. Yet, looking at the CNN Web site, COMPLETE SILENCE. So, what about the non-engaged American public that does not watch Fox, that has not been wrapped up in the election like us on FR? Do they go about the day oblivious to it all and vote for Clinton? That is my biggest fear today, that they do.
The Clintons are the Antibiotic-resistant
Syphilis on the Body Politic
She will stay no matter IF she is elected simply because she is whom she is, AND no matter the Democrat party has once again retained the presidency, and we are screwed.
Her jump suit is the new orange
Case in point about how the “elite” exist under different rules is Sandy Berger,National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton.
“The documents he took detailed how the Clinton administration had responded to the threat of terrorist attacks at the end of 1999. Berger removed a total of five copies of the same document without authorization and later used scissors to destroy three before placing them in his office trash, the National Archives inspector general concluded in a Nov. 4, 2005, report.
After archives officials accused him of taking the documents, Berger told investigators, he “tried to find the trash collector but had no luck.” But instead of admitting he had removed them deliberately — by stuffing them in his suit pockets on multiple occasions — Berger initially said he had removed them by mistake.
The fact that Berger, one of President Bill Clinton’s closest aides from 1997 to 2001, illicitly removed the documents is well-known: A federal judge in September 2005 ordered him to pay a $50,000 fine for his actions and forfeit his security clearance for three years.
What Berger did, and the ham-handed and comical methods by which he did it, are freshly detailed in the National Archives report, which the Associated Press obtained first under a Freedom of Information Act request.
Although the report reiterates that Berger’s main motive was to prepare himself for testifying before a commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, it makes clear that he not only sought to study the documents but also destroyed some copies and — when initially confronted — denied he had done so.”
Forgot the link.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122001968.html
“She may indeed die”
I WISH Everyday!!!!!!!!
I was raised to be a good little liberal Koolaid drinker. The fact that the Democrat party put forth Bill Clinton as the nominee really opened my eyes about that party. I have not voted for a Democrat since, and I will not vote for a Democrat until that party roots out the rot and corruption that have infested it for decades (since long before the Clintons came along; they were only the symptom of the deep putrefaction of that party.)
Even if she gets indicted and pardoned after Trump wins. Obama could pardon her if I am reading things right.
There are so many crimes though maybe she could be indicted again for something else after Trump is in office.
I don’t really see her being indicted yet unless Obama says enough already. I am not going to hold my breath for that though.
The Bi_ch is going to get away with it all!
One way or another.
Too many people are invested in her.
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.