“If your “pardon Hillary” scenario occurred, that would mean the first witness to be called, (Obama), he would be the one that pardoned her. But that would be after an indictment or trial.”
Oh, I don’t doubt you. I’m just trying to apply a bit of reasoning and (humble) insight to the events that are transpiring.
As to Obama being the first witness called, I highly doubt he would be. More likely, he’d be the very last witness called. The White House and their sycophants and toadies throughout the federal apparatus, would do everything in their power to shield him from testifying.
But even that’s a problem, isn’t it?
If you’re Obama, you don’t want the process to advance that far to begin with. What to do? Pardon Cankles before Comey even delivers his recommendation? Have Lynch fall on her sword and refuse to indict? Either one of those choices would bring catastrophic consequences upon them and the democrat party.
If you read the comments sections of websites where left and right are allowed to post, sentiments run overwhelmingly in the direction of Hillary being guilty of out-security with our national secrets, if not outright espionage. There isn’t a clean way out of this for the Dems, except to allow justice to follow the law and it’s natural course, but I believe they feel the cost of that is too great, and that their globalist agenda is far too important to allow that outcome.
They’re going to wind up pushing the American people to the absolute limit over this.
The 30 year DA who appears on faux also believed this would be the case, he'd be #1 on the stand. Btw, how do you pardon someone who has yet be to charged or indicted? Is that possible?