Posted on 04/13/2016 6:30:11 AM PDT by HomerBohn
Hillary Clinton recently demonstrated just how arrogant and corrupt she really is by mocking the ongoing FBI investigation into her criminal activities regarding her illegal personal email server. On top of that, she may be exposing just how corrupt the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice is as well.
Appearing on the Today show, Hillary was asked by Matt Lauer, "They are clinging to the hope that the way they will be able to deal with that, is that at some point between now and the election… that they will get to see Hillary Clinton in handcuffs… that there will be some kind of political perp walk based on your private email server."
(Watch Hillary's Video at the link)
Laughing like she did about getting child rapists off the hook, Hillary literally cackled at the thought. "Oh my goodness!" she bellowed.
"That is not going to happen," Clinton boasted. "There is not even the remotest chance that is going to happen."
She then went on to downplay the investigation into her crimes.
"It's a security review and there are lots of those that are conducted in our government all the time," said Clinton. "And you don't hear about most of them. You'll only hear about this one because, you know, it does, uh, involve me. So, that's why it gets so much attention."
Well, of course! You were a former Secretary of State who could not follow federal law and makes sure your emails were secure! Now you have your hand out asking the American people for the White House! Of course, it's going to get attention.
Judge Andrew Napolitano weighed in on Mrs. Clinton's mockery of the seriousness of the crimes that she has committed.
"It is a perfect storm of legal misery for Mrs. Clinton," he told FOX News. "What she has done for the umpteenth time in public is sent a dog whistle to the FBI – a signal to the FBI. She forgot they were watching. She knows it's a criminal investigation. She knows she is the target of the criminal investigation. She knows the government has an extraordinary amount of resources investigating her and she's laughing at them."
"Not a good thing to do," said Napolitano.
Unless, of course, you know that the corrupt people in DC are going to have your back, right?
One could hope that the FBI and the DOJ would prove me wrong and do what is right under the law. I'm not holding my breath on this one considering the lawless one that heads up the DOJ.
I’m tired of this shi’ite. Come on Comey, make the recommendation or close the investigation.
Those handcuffs are the same as yours Miz Krinton...
except there is no mink lining.
Not only should she be prosecuted, she should be persecuted!
“The way she confidently plays down the investigation and firmly states she won’t get indicted is just proof to me she’s already been told she’s in the clear.”
I don’t think she would be mocking them if that were the case. Instead, she would be praising the FBI for conducting a professional and thorough investigation that will show no wrongdoing.
Hillary had best be careful. Obama may eat her.
No. That would never happen. Where’s Bill?
“You are ensuring HRC is above the law by perpetuating this negative stuff. Start fighting.”
Right on. Thanks for posting that. I’m tired of reading posts that say “she’ll never be indicted”, “she’s going to skate”, etc. People that roll over like that are part of the problem.
If the facts don’t support a recommendation for indictment then fine. I think that if the public is informed about what the investigation finds then it’ll be pretty obvious whether or not a crime was committed (if it isn’t already.
I don’t need to see her in cuffs, if they just take her out back and hand her a loaded .45 with the choice: you do it or we will.
Truly, then one can be hoisted upon their own petard to levels above the law!
H proves it.
The only way we'll get back to the idea of public service is to make it impossible to become fabulously wealthy in public office. TERM LIMITS is a start; two terms in any one office, then out. The cream will rise to the top, as the congresscritter who serves well may become the senator for two terms, then maybe his state's governor (or in the other order, gov-cong-sen). But that will eliminate 95+% of career politicians. And no special perks; they have to abide by the laws they pass. SS, Medicare, Obamacare, no exemptions from labor laws for their staffs, no pensions except those they choose to fund, like the rest of us.
And all political contributions must be ANONYMOUS. They can't sell influence if they don't know who is buying. Americans should be permitted to donate any amount to any candidate or party they choose; that's FREEDOM. But any "pay to play", tit-for-tat arrangements are BRIBERY, and that's a crime.
“The way she confidently plays down the investigation and firmly states she won’t get indicted is just proof to me she’s already been told she’s in the clear.”
I thinks it’s just bravado.
She could just be trying to get the nomination locked up as quickly as possible to make it politically impossible, or at least much more difficult.
“The fact that she mocks the FBI in an angered manner shows that she’s concerned.”
Exactly. If she’d been assured she’d be protected, those same people would have told her to be respectful and calm when answering questions about the investigation. From the time this story broke thirteen months ago, HRC obviously has been ticked off by it, which is not how she’d react if she really knew it were under control.
I prefer they post their thoughts so I can disabuse them.
What many are missing is that Sander’s success and Hillary’s steadily dropping approval rating means she’s getting to the point she will no longer be regarded as viable by the party elite. Obama had to coerce the big donors to help her.
With the upcoming FBI revelations detailing her racketeering, she’s essentially a zombie candidate. The demographic she’s still appealing to won’t be enough to get her over the top even with vote fraud.
“Top of the world, Ma! Top of the world!”
“Hussein is gonna have to preemptively pardon her ...”
Does a pardon mean the accused has been found innocent, or does it mean there is no judgment of innocence or guilt?
Or can a pardon be bestowed only on someone that has been convicted?
Maybe the immediate question is, can someone be pardoned before they have had charges brought against them?
From title “(They’ll never take me alive!)”
*****************************
Well, if that’s the case, let’s hope they at least try. /s
ping
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.
