Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What can the FBI do about Hillary Clinton without a grand jury?
Hot Air.com ^ | January 24, 2016 | JAZZ SHAW

Posted on 01/24/2016 12:58:03 PM PST by Kaslin

It almost seems like old news at this point, but the Hillary Clinton email server story arc continues to dump one damaging headline after another on the head of the presumptive Democrat nominee. We saw the recent revelation that some of the material stashed away in that bathroom closet contained data relating to human intelligence at the highest level. We then heard former Attorney General Michael Mukasey say it’s time to charge her with mishandling classified documents. And yet nothing seems to happen beyond scattered rumors from mostly nameless sources saying that the FBI is busily digging away. Why is that?

Andrew Mccarthy points out this weekend that there’s something important missing from the process at this point: a grand jury.

In an ordinary case, that would not be a point worth making. The FBI routinely conducts major investigations in collaboration with Justice Department prosecutors - usually from the U.S. attorney's office in the district where potential crimes occurred. That is because the FBI needs the assistance of a grand jury. The FBI does not have authority even to issue subpoenas, let alone to charge someone with a crime. Only federal prosecutors may issue subpoenas, on the lawful authority of the grand jury. Only prosecutors are empowered to present evidence or propose charges to the grand jury. And the Constitution vests only the grand jury with authority to indict - the formal accusation of a crime. In our system, the FBI can do none of these things.

No Justice Department, no grand jury. No grand jury, no case - period. As a technical matter, no matter how extensively the FBI pokes around on its own, no one can be a subject of a real investigation - i.e., one that can lead to criminal charges - unless and until there is a grand jury. That does not happen until the Justice Department hops on board.

Now, there’s nothing that Andrew is talking about at the 10,000 foot level which we haven’t noted here before. All the evidence in the world isn’t going to do any good if you can’t find someone to make an arrest and bring a case to trial. But he goes on from there to express a level of hope and confidence which I really haven’t been feeling thus far. The author’s main point is that the White House is currently hedging their bets by playing both sides of the fence, so to speak. Barack Obama, through the offices of his Attorney General, is allowing the FBI to move forward with the investigation, but Justice isn’t taking part in the process so there is no grand jury. In this way the President hopes to avoid the appearance of shielding Hillary from the long arm of the law while simultaneously protecting himself from the wolves in his own party who would be howling for blood if he brought Loretta Lynch in to make Clinton an “official target” of an investigation while she’s running for president.

All valid in my opinion, but then Andrew goes on to say that the President wouldn’t dare stand athwart the call of justice, and he’s placing his faith in the credentials of FBI Director James Comey.

Jim is tough, he is smart, and if there is a case to be made here, he will make it. And if he makes it, it will be bulletproof.

Of course, making the case would not mean the FBI could force attorney general Loretta Lynch - and the president to whom she answers - to pursue the case. 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. Then it will be a matter of how far Barack Obama is willing to stick his neck out for Hillary Clinton.

I'm betting: not that far.

Mccarthy clearly has a lot more faith in the system than I do. And to be clear, I’m not knocking James Comey here. I’ll take him at his word that he’s a conscientious servant of the law and that he’ll do his best to see any guilty parties brought before a judge and jury. But as Mccarthy freely admits, all Comey can really do is make the Obama administration look very bad if they fail to unleash the Justice Department on the case. But when has that stopped them before? As we’ve mentioned here more times than I can count, an IG brought forward a case against Huma Abedin on embezzlement charges and Attorney General simply passed on it. They didn’t care how bad anything looked. They simply weren’t going to go after anyone associated with Clinton or the White House inner circle.

Are we to believe that now Loretta Lynch would impanel a grand jury to go after Secretary Clinton over the classified information on her server? Andrew seems to think that failing to do so would require Barack Obama sticking his neck out on her behalf and that he would somehow balk at the idea. I’m not seeing it, though I’d love to be wrong.

Hillary Clinton Campigns In Iowa, Meeting With Small Business Owners


TOPICS: Canada; Crime/Corruption; Government; Russia; US: Arkansas; US: New York; US: South Carolina; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2016election; babyboomer; benghazi; blackberry; canada; classification; clinton; clintoncash; clintonfoundation; corruption; decay; decomposition; election2016; emailscandal; emailserver; fbi; hillary; hillaryclinton; hitlery; humaabedin; iran; libya; pages; peterschweizer; russia; southcarolina; treygowdy; uranium; waronterror; wipewater
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last
To: EnglishOnly

Well the FBI can only investigate her, nothing else


61 posted on 01/24/2016 2:46:09 PM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him. He got them and now we have to pay the consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
So all that has to be done to prevent an indictment is that the Attorney General just has to prevent the convening of a grand jury. This seems so easy to obstruct justice.
Another flaw in our system of justice. Reforms are needed in so many areas of government.
Somehow the States need to be involved in this process as a check. It is the people of each state that have been hurt by the Clinton security breaches.
62 posted on 01/24/2016 2:47:39 PM PST by orinoco (Orinoco)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt; Joan Kerrey
She can't be pardoned unless she is found guilty of a crime.

Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon, who had not been found guilty of any crime.

I guess we now have our answer.

:(

63 posted on 01/24/2016 2:51:50 PM PST by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I don’t want any chance of her being pardoned since her treasonous actions have put every American’s life at risk. She should be Ethel Rosenberg’ed. Bill should be Julius Rosenberg’ed for selling technological secrets to China for campaign contributions through Loral.


64 posted on 01/24/2016 2:54:03 PM PST by Old Yeller (Obama is winning the war on terror when you realize he is on the side of the enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Procyon

What if a U.S. attorney disregards the order from the AG and indicts anyway?


65 posted on 01/24/2016 2:55:45 PM PST by IDontLikeToPayTaxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Randall_S

Maybe she won’t actually be indicted till BO is out of office. These things can take time.


66 posted on 01/24/2016 2:56:46 PM PST by dandiegirl (BO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FreedBird
If Trump is elected, he will not let this Clinton thing go. Look how Trump has handled Cruz in the last couple weeks.

But if Iman Baraq gives her a blanket pardon, the charges cannot be brought up again.
67 posted on 01/24/2016 2:56:47 PM PST by Old Yeller (Obama is winning the war on terror when you realize he is on the side of the enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: IDontLikeToPayTaxes
The FBI can not indict her. The I in FBI stands for investigation, not indictment. That is a huge difference. The only one that indict her is the Attorney General and we all know that is not going to happen.
68 posted on 01/24/2016 2:57:50 PM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him. He got them and now we have to pay the consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The FBI can not indict her. The I in FBI stands for investigation, not indictment. That is a huge difference. The only one that indict her is the Attorney General and we all know that is not going to happen.

Exactly. Which is why this is all much ado about nothing in the end.
69 posted on 01/24/2016 3:01:43 PM PST by Oceander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: FreedBird

Obama is a loon. You might as well try to predict what a lunatic will do next. Except for destroying this country, I’ve yet to figure out the idiot’s agenda.

Everything he’s touched has turned to shit. I don’t think he cares about the Clinton’s one way or another. What is important is what big money wants. If they turn on Clinton, she may be looking at an indictment. I doubt that will happen because big money doesn’t want the behind the scenes deal exposed in a trial.

That will happen anyway when the FBI leaks the results of the investigation. While everyone’s called the endgame strategy of Lynch, they’ve forgotten that the IRS and Treasury may have a say.


70 posted on 01/24/2016 3:10:03 PM PST by meatloaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

71 posted on 01/24/2016 3:13:53 PM PST by doug from upland (Some of you keep telling yourself -- Romney would have been as bad or worse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: hadaclueonce

I agree. Hillary will not be indicted.


72 posted on 01/24/2016 3:26:55 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s, you weren't really there....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

“Anyone else would be in jail, no bail.”

And would have been there months ago...


73 posted on 01/24/2016 3:46:51 PM PST by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

There are many more agencies existentially reliant on keeping secrets secret.
What can, and might, some of those do? Wetwork.


74 posted on 01/24/2016 4:04:06 PM PST by ctdonath2 (History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the week or the timid. - Ike)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

So basically, if the Attorney General is corrupt, theoretically all Federal indictments in the entire country stop?

There's no check against this?

75 posted on 01/24/2016 4:28:17 PM PST by IDontLikeToPayTaxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: IDontLikeToPayTaxes

——check-—

of course there is but the constitution was written and adopted to prevent it


76 posted on 01/24/2016 4:31:27 PM PST by Thibodeaux (leading from behind is following)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
WHAT SHOULD BE HAPPENING is that our beloved Congress and Senate should impeach and convict Loretta Lynch for failing to uphold the law and for politicizing the agency.

Naturally, since Loretta is Democrat, black and a woman, this will never happen. Political correctness and spineless RINOs reign in DC.

77 posted on 01/24/2016 4:32:51 PM PST by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IDontLikeToPayTaxes

See post 77


78 posted on 01/24/2016 4:34:37 PM PST by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This is the Final Showdown, either were a nation of laws or not. If HRC doesn’t spend the rest of her days in Leavenworth or Colorado’s Supermax, there is no hope for this once civil society.


79 posted on 01/24/2016 6:44:37 PM PST by slouper (LWRC SPR 223)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joan Kerrey; 17th Miss Regt

What you are forgetting is that the rats wanted to impeach him, but he resigned instead. He did not commit a crime regardless what the left says


80 posted on 01/24/2016 7:01:03 PM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him. He got them and now we have to pay the consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson