Former AG: It’s time to charge Hillary

posted at 2:31 pm on January 23, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

Hey kids, what time is it?* According to former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, it’s time for Loretta Lynch and the Department of Justice to do their jobs and charge Hillary Clinton with mishandling classified information — at the least. Nodding to the expansion of the FBI’s probe into areas of corruption, Mukasey argued in Friday’s Wall Street Journal that the 1300-plus pieces of evidence already on hand more than justifies initial charges — and cites David Petraeus as a precedent:

No criminality can be charged against Mrs. Clinton in connection with any of this absent proof that she had what the law regards as a guilty state of mind—a standard that may differ from one statute to another, depending on what criminal act is charged.

Yet—from her direction that classification rules be disregarded, to the presence on her personal email server of information at the highest level of classification, to her repeated falsehoods of a sort that juries are told every day may be treated as evidence of guilty knowledge—it is nearly impossible to draw any conclusion other than that she knew enough to support a conviction at the least for mishandling classified information.

This is the same charge brought against Gen. David Petraeus for disclosing classified information in his personal notebooks to his biographer and mistress, who was herself an Army Reserve military intelligence officer cleared to see top secret information.

Actually, under 18 USC 793, prosecutors don’t necessarily need to show a “guilty state of mind” (or mens rea) for a conviction, or even show that information had previously been classified. It would be easier to get a conviction if they could show both, but nothing in this statute requires information to have been classified — only that its exposure would do damage to national security. Subsection (f) only requires “gross negligence,” not malice of purpose. Mukasey more than makes a case for gross negligence in the second paragraph of the excerpt.

But prior to this excerpt, Mukasey’s already made a pretty good case for mens rea, or at least eliminated the argument that Grandma Clinton thought comms security involved wiping things with cloths:

Further, Mrs. Clinton’s own memoir, “Hard Choices” (2014), apparently written at a time when she wished to stress how delicate were the secrets she knew, and how carefully she handled them, reports that she “often received warnings from Department security officials to leave our [BlackBerrys], laptops—anything that communicated with the outside world—on the plane with their batteries removed to prevent foreign intelligence services from compromising them.

“Even in friendly settings we conducted business under strict security precautions, taking care where and how we read secret material and used our technology,” Mrs. Clinton tells readers. She even read classified material “inside an opaque tent in a hotel room. In less well-equipped settings, we were told to improvise by reading sensitive material with a blanket over our head.”

Try to square this with the 1,300-plus transmissions of classified information through an unsecured, home-brew server. The same woman who bragged about her adept compliance with classified access under unusual circumstances also forced her aides to send information based on Top Secret/Compartmented programs through an e-mail server located at one time in a bathroom in an unsecured and unauthorized location. Note too that Mukasey and the WSJ published this before news broke that the Inspector General informed Congress that at least one e-mail involved extremely sensitive human intelligence classified at the SCI/HCS level — information that conceivably get intelligence sources killed if exposed. Hillary knew full well about the need to secure this information, but she wanted to evade legitimate Congressional oversight more than she wanted to comply with the law. And that is a case for criminal intent, even if prosecutors don’t actually have to make one.

The question isn’t just why charges haven’t already been filed against Hillary Clinton. It’s also why no charges have been filed with the expanding universe of people who were aware of this system and yet did nothing to alert authorities to its use, people such as Stephen Mull, who warned Huma Abedin of the issue in 2011. There are a number of legitimate targets for prosecution. And it’s time that the Department of Justice began lining them up.

 * – This opening is nothing more than a naked bid to get into James Taranto’s BotW column on Monday. Also, for those of you who are too young to recall, it’s the opening of The Howdy Doody Show.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

For the dimwits like Tialoc, the information does not need to be marked classified…but you keep fluffing that chicken, Tialoc.

CWforFreedom on January 23, 2016 at 2:34 PM

And it’s time that the Department of Justice began lining them up.

Come on, Ed. Or do you mean the next DOJ?

Cindy Munford on January 23, 2016 at 2:38 PM

Hillary only gets indicted by the DOJ if Obama plans to cancel the elections.

ConstantineXI on January 23, 2016 at 2:40 PM

5 year statute of limitations. If the GOP wins, the next AG would have a year to bring charges.

rbj on January 23, 2016 at 2:45 PM

Nothing will happen to her

WhatsRight on January 23, 2016 at 2:46 PM

In the Obama administration, democrats could commit murder and not be charged.

sadatoni on January 23, 2016 at 2:46 PM

Her prison cell may have a different type of server.

docflash on January 23, 2016 at 2:48 PM

Yes, she should be charged. The higher the voltage, the better.

86 on January 23, 2016 at 2:51 PM

Good Lord. Just indict this creature already.

Saverio on January 23, 2016 at 2:51 PM

Perhaps Hillary could have Vera Wang design for her a new series of pantsuits in black and white stripes and detainee orange.

Brian1972 on January 23, 2016 at 2:53 PM

Never happen GI.

bluesdoc70 on January 23, 2016 at 2:53 PM

Barrack’s DOJ will somehow find a way to get Clinton off the hook. BHO will do anything, absolutely anything, to make sure Hillary carries forward an Obama 3.0 legacy as she recently promised to do.

Dan333 on January 23, 2016 at 2:53 PM

Accessorize with brilliantly bejeweled handcuffs.

Brian1972 on January 23, 2016 at 2:54 PM

She likely will never be charged, because if she is, she’ll be obliged to start singing, and if that happens, the Mormon Tab Choir won’t be able drown out the noise. They’ll have to re-open Gitmo just to house the suits.

Skip2014 on January 23, 2016 at 2:57 PM

There will be no indictment before the election … it’s delusional to think otherwise.

The only way HRC faces justice is if she looses and President Sanders needs her out of the way. IMHO a GOP president will be less likely to take action for fear of the optics.

darkpixel on January 23, 2016 at 2:58 PM

As Glenn Harlan Reynolds has pointed out, the server itself is the smoking gun. Everything else is just corroborating evidence.

Fortyback on January 23, 2016 at 2:58 PM

It won’t be just Hillary and her underlings- people throughout the government absolutely knew the SecState was communicating exclusively outside of authorized channels, and somehow sensitive info still made it to and through that bathroom server.

Too many careers are at risk here; this is all headed nowhere.

Dolce Far Niente on January 23, 2016 at 3:03 PM

Looking forward to the forthcoming 35-author manifesto from National Review speaking out against politicians who break the law and place our national security at risk.

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 3:05 PM

Looking forward to the forthcoming 35-author manifesto from National Review speaking out against politicians who break the law and place our national security at risk.

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 3:05 PM

Like John McCain, they’re just too “nice”….to win.

CWforFreedom on January 23, 2016 at 3:08 PM

Stop dreaming. No one is going to run with this ball.

MT on January 23, 2016 at 3:10 PM

I think they are waiting until the primaries are at least partly played out. If she loses to ‘The Bern’, she’s toast as soon as hat becomes obvious. If Bernie wins, he’ll have to be replaced at the Convention and they will want time to work out how to do that.

If she wins, I’m not sure. The dems may just say fukit and run her all the way. They never have cared about criminality amongst their own as much as they care about winning and power. Of course, they may, at some point, think that she’s too damaged to win even after getting the nomination. At that point, they could indict her or even arrange for an ‘accident’. Then, they’ll just make it up as they go along with whatever replacement they feel is most likely to win.

They and their Presstitutes will be more than happy to play up the sheer wonderfulness and self-sacrifice of whomever steps in after the terrible ‘tragedy’ of Hillary. Fauxcahontas would fit that bill wonderfully.

trigon on January 23, 2016 at 3:17 PM

That’ll be the day….that Hillary gets indicted. Really, anyone seriously think obama’s DOJ will do anything.

jaywemm on January 23, 2016 at 3:18 PM

Obama will fire Lynch if she tries to indict. As a last resort he will pardon Hillary.

Meremortal on January 23, 2016 at 3:21 PM

It won’t be just Hillary and her underlings- people throughout the government absolutely knew the SecState was communicating exclusively outside of authorized channels, and somehow sensitive info still made it to and through that bathroom server.

Too many careers are at risk here; this is all headed nowhere.

Dolce Far Niente on January 23, 2016 at 3:03 PM

A lot of White House staff had to know. Given that the act requires you to report when classified information has gotten out of the classified system, a lot of people in the White House must have failed to do this and could be indicted.

There could be dozens, if not hundreds of people involved.

talkingpoints on January 23, 2016 at 3:26 PM

She’s guilty as sin, but so is Loretta.

“Department of Justice”……they’ve taken the term and changed it into something contemptible.

itsspideyman on January 23, 2016 at 3:26 PM

Maybe it’s time for Hillary to play “Let’s Make a Deal”.

talkingpoints on January 23, 2016 at 3:27 PM

A lot of White House staff had to know. Given that the act requires you to report when classified information has gotten out of the classified system, a lot of people in the White House must have failed to do this and could be indicted.

There could be dozens, if not hundreds of people involved.

talkingpoints on January 23, 2016 at 3:26 PM

Absolutely.

“Plausible denialability” is impossible under these circumstances.

itsspideyman on January 23, 2016 at 3:28 PM

the expanding universe of people who were aware of this system and yet did nothing to alert authorities to its use

Even more important than that, Ed, is the circle of people required to get that classified information off of classified systems and sneaker-netted over to an unclassified machine. I guarantee there were military/intel systems that were compromised by this. THOSE people need to be in jail, too.

GWB on January 23, 2016 at 3:29 PM

Hillario and her Meal Ticket Slick have had 8+ years now to dig up dirt on O’bama. They’re very good at that sort of thing.

And those 900+ FBI files they stole back in 1993 don’t have a shelf life, and not all of those files they pilfered had (R) names on them. After all, Clinton aide Sandy Burglar was willing to let himself get caught stealing classified documents from the National Archives. He didn’t think that crime up on his own or do it of his own volition. He was obviously being blackmailed.

Watch for the Clinton Crime Syndicate to go Nuclear with their dirt when she is backed into a corner.

Del Dolemonte on January 23, 2016 at 3:32 PM

GOPe says nothing, cuz they would rather have her prez than an R outsider. gravy train continues.

Senator Philip Bluster on January 23, 2016 at 3:33 PM

She’s guilty as sin, but so is Loretta.

“Department of Justice”……they’ve taken the term and changed it into something contemptible.

itsspideyman on January 23, 2016 at 3:26 PM

Loretta Lynch owes her entire career to Hillario’s Meal Ticket. That should be all you need to know.

Del Dolemonte on January 23, 2016 at 3:35 PM

dept of Justusdemocraps

Senator Philip Bluster on January 23, 2016 at 3:35 PM

Cankles for Prison 2016
Hillary for Prison 2016
Killary for Prison 2016

Hey, one can hope.

skanter on January 23, 2016 at 3:36 PM

Appealing to leftists to show integrity and impartiality.

Good luck with that.

22044 on January 23, 2016 at 3:39 PM

Charge away. The DOJ will never prosecute Her Royal Thighness. I have no doubt that Ms. Ft. Marcy Park has enough dirt to guarantee that.

ghostwalker1 on January 23, 2016 at 3:45 PM

5 year statute of limitations. If the GOP wins, the next AG would have a year to bring charges.

[rbj on January 23, 2016 at 2:45 PM]

Lacking a iron clad assessment of the width and breadth of reach with respect of a president’s pardoning power, my preference is to vociferously recommend waiting until 21 January 2017 for charging her. This is based on the understanding that a pardon cannot be given to someone not yet indicted on charges.

I might, however, be amenable to the risk of pardon for charges brought before that time on the national security issue if it was shown the pardon wouldn’t, by connection, somehow cover later public corruption charges.

By the way, on the statute of limitations, how does that work with respect to those acts which took place from 2009 to 2011? Oh, I did look up the definition, which included this possibility for affecting the the deadline,

In some instances a statute of limitations can be extended (“tolled”) based on delay in discovery of the injury or on reasonable reliance on a trusted person (a fiduciary or confidential adviser who has hidden his/her own misuse of someone else’s funds or failure to pay).

I wonder this means one could start the 5 year countdown from the time authorities began an investigation into a “trusted” person who was hiding, lying about, and obfuscating the existence of, a home-brew server.

Dusty on January 23, 2016 at 3:49 PM

Ms. Clinton is not going to be indicted, Mr. Morrissey’s assertions to the contrary. It ain’t happening. Period.
Much as I would like to see her candidacy sent to a crash-and-burn, I’m afraid that the wheels of justice (such as it may exist in the Obama presidency) aren’t going to turn fast enough (or at all) to bring any charge prior to the second Tuesday in November, or even prior to 20 January 2017. If (perish the thought) she becomes president, it’s pretty clear that charges won’t be brought against her at all. The Clintons have shown themselves to be layered with teflon. Improprieties, misdemeanors, and felonies that have been committed by Billary have not resulted in one iota of imposed justice. Face it; they know their way around and are just too crafty (and know too many power players) to ever have to face the music.

oakland on January 23, 2016 at 3:51 PM

Long long past time for Cankles to be in jail.

How can you possibly trust someone to be CinC of the military, with the nuclear launch codes and authority, if they’ve already proven they don’t know how or don’t care to properly handle TS level classified information?

dentarthurdent on January 23, 2016 at 3:52 PM

To me, this is just another spying for money case. Foreign governments give millions, and sometimes 10’s of millions, to the Clinton Foundation. Hilliary then puts information of a top secret/SAP nature on her server which the donor countries can hack and retrieve. They have a name for this. It’s called TREASON.

Zoltan on January 23, 2016 at 3:52 PM

trigon on January 23, 2016 at 3:17 PM

I’ve said it’s the opposite. If she hangs in there, they’ll indict. If she bows out they’ll drop it. 0bama would *really* like to not have HRC as the Dem nominee. I’m not sure who 0bama’s handlers really want in there, though. Unless they drop Biden in as “controllable”, I don’t see anyone in the race who would fit their mold.

GWB on January 23, 2016 at 3:54 PM

Looking forward to the forthcoming 35-author manifesto from National Review speaking out against politicians who break the law and place our national security at risk.

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 3:05 PM

Like John McCain, they’re just too “nice”….to win.

CWforFreedom on January 23, 2016 at 3:08 PM

Here’s the list of authors. The next time you read or hear anything from them, remember what they stand for, and what they don’t.

Glenn Beck
David Boaz
L. Brent Bozwell III
Mona Charen
Ben Domenech
Erick Erickson
Steven F. Hayward
Mark Helprin
William Kristol
Yuval Levin
Dana Loesch
Andrew C. McCarthy
David M. McIntosh
Michael Medved
Edwin Meese III
Russel Moore
Michael B. Mukasey
Katie Pavlich
John Podhoretz
R. R. Reno
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas

I’m saving this to my hard drive.

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 3:57 PM

The only way she gets indicted is if its in the best of interest of Obama and the Party that she gets indicted. Her being guilty has nothing to do with it.

PackerBronco on January 23, 2016 at 4:00 PM

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 3:57 PM

Hey, I got a shorter list for you.

The following is what Donald Trump stands for:

Donald Trump

End of List

PackerBronco on January 23, 2016 at 4:02 PM

[talkingpoints on January 23, 2016 at 3:26 PM]

Pretty much all the talk has been about what was on the server, a little about who sent the documents and very, very little about who received the documents, particularly whether any were received by people with the addy, @whitehouse.gov.

It would be a real bummer for a lot of people if that SAP related e-mail thread included a few with that addy.

Dusty on January 23, 2016 at 4:03 PM

In the Obama administration, democrats could commit murder and not be charged.

sadatoni on January 23, 2016 at 2:46 PM

Leave Vince Foster out of this.

mankai on January 23, 2016 at 4:05 PM

If the FBI recommends prosecution – and I believe they will – there’s no way the DoJ is then going to ignore such a request.

Will there be a plea bargain? I suspect they’d offer Hillary the same deal they offered Petraeus. Whether or not she takes it is anyone’s guess. Either way, her candidacy will be over.

Even the Democrats aren’t going to nominate someone who’s either under indictment or who has just accepted a plea to a lesser charge in lieu of trial.

Bernie Sanders or possibly Joe Biden will be the nominee.

Atlantian on January 23, 2016 at 4:06 PM

Hey, I got a shorter list for you.

The following is what Donald Trump stands for:

Donald Trump

End of List

PackerBronco on January 23, 2016 at 4:02 PM

Right. After Trump gets the nomination, he’ll crucify Hillary with these calls for indictment. The clowns in the GOPe won’t do diddly.

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 4:07 PM

But, but, but……lena dunham just endorsed her……

Indiana Jim on January 23, 2016 at 4:10 PM

Bill Ayres.= “Guilty as sin…free as a bird”…….so far.

Indiana Jim on January 23, 2016 at 4:12 PM

Hillary is just giving us a sneak preview of how our criminal justice system will work when she’s president–a lot like Mexico’s. What’s my punishment? Well, what punishment can you afford to avoid?

RBMN on January 23, 2016 at 4:12 PM

Expanding the list to include where they work…

Glenn Beck – Premiere Radio Networks, TheBlaze
David Boaz – Cato Institute
L. Brent Bozwell III – Media Research Center, the Conservative Communications Center, and the Cybercast News Service
Mona Charen – N/A (formerly CNN)
Ben Domenech – RedState group blog, The Heartland Institute
Erick Erickson – Atlanta’s Evening News with Erick Erickson
Steven F. Hayward – Misc. articles.
Mark Helprin – Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy, Fellow of the American Academy in Rome, and Member of the Council on Foreign Relations
William Kristol – Weekly Standard , Fox News
Yuval Levin – National Affairs
Dana Loesch – TheBlaze
Andrew C. McCarthy – National Review
David M. McIntosh – Republican Party politician
Michael Medved – The Michael Medved Show on Salem Radio Network
Edwin Meese III – N/A
Russel Moore – President of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
Michael B. Mukasey – N/A
Katie Pavlich – Townhall.com
John Podhoretz – Commentary magazine, New York Post
R. R. Reno – First Things magazine.
Thomas Sowell – Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Cal Thomas – Tribune Media Services, Fox News

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 4:33 PM

It’s time to charge Hillary

Hillary:

“What? Like a battery?”

Tlaloc:

“Hillary doesn’t have a battery, therefore can’t be charged”

Huma:

“Hillary doesn’t need batteries; she has me”

LegendHasIt on January 23, 2016 at 4:33 PM

Going to be hard to ignore Hillary’s guilt and charge the underlings and associates who either knew or were actively involved. Too many of them to insure silence and who would be willing to take a plea, especially with the Foundation sepsis still swirling around. Hillary is going down. Biden/Castro waiting offstage.

butch on January 23, 2016 at 4:42 PM

The Obama administration wouldn’t prosecute Bush and Cheney for war crimes so I doubt they will pursue Hillary either.

proverbs427 on January 23, 2016 at 4:48 PM

The Obama administration wouldn’t prosecute Bush and Cheney for war crimes so I doubt they will pursue Hillary either.

The difference being of course, that neither Bush nor Cheney committed any war crimes, whereas the evidence is that your idol H>illary!™ has committed federal crimes.

F X Muldoon on January 23, 2016 at 4:56 PM

For the dimwits like Tialoc, the information does not need to be marked classified…but you keep fluffing that chicken, Tialoc.

CWforFreedom on January 23, 2016 at 2:34 PM

And just to clarify, it’s a word game.

No communication is marked “classified”, it doesn’t exist in their world.

The word “classified” is a general description, it’s like saying I never drove a car whose name is automobile…while they are driving a Ford.

Here are the classifications, and she should be asked has she ever sent or received “Top Secret” or “Secret”. or even “Confidential”.

From the “strongest” to the weakest:
Top Secret
Secret
Confidential (the lowest of government information)
Public Trust
Unclassified
***
Controlled Unclassified Information (from the 9/11 commission)

right2bright on January 23, 2016 at 5:05 PM

A case can be made that once she loses Iowa and NH to Bernie, she is spent goods. Obama would be positioned to make her a deal. Drop out of the race and no prosecution. A deal that she has to take. Joe Biden jumps in and promises to be a one term president, with Warren as VP. Biden/Warren 2016. Indict or not, after the next email batch isvreleased, she is going to be radioactive. Dropping out will be preferable to prison time. I do not see how she can win with so much baggage, if she does not, she would go well to pull 40%.

Techster64 on January 23, 2016 at 5:06 PM

In the Obamaa Democrat administration, democrats could commit murder and not be charged like Ted Kennedy.

sadatoni on January 23, 2016 at 2:46 PM

FIFY…

g2825m on January 23, 2016 at 5:09 PM

A case can be made that once she loses Iowa and NH to Bernie, she is spent goods. Obama would be positioned to make her a deal. Drop out of the race and no prosecution. A deal that she has to take. Joe Biden jumps in and promises to be a one term president, with Warren as VP. Biden/Warren 2016. Indict or not, after the next email batch is released, she is going to be radioactive. Dropping out will be preferable to prison time. I do not see how she can win with so much baggage, if she does not, she would go well to pull 40%.

Techster64 on January 23, 2016 at 5:06 PM

Techster…totally agree with your assessment EXCEPT she has been wanting to rule the world…errrrr…be POTUS since her days in the ’70’s and I don’t know if she will go quietly.

g2825m on January 23, 2016 at 5:13 PM

Glenn Beck
David Boaz
L. Brent Bozwell III
Mona Charen
Ben Domenech
Erick Erickson
Steven F. Hayward
Mark Helprin
William Kristol
Yuval Levin
Dana Loesch
Andrew C. McCarthy
David M. McIntosh
Michael Medved
Edwin Meese III
Russel Moore
Michael B. Mukasey
Katie Pavlich
John Podhoretz
R. R. Reno
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas

I’m saving this to my hard drive.

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 3:57 PM

McCarthy and Sowell are disappointments to me. The others don’t surprise me a bit. What will they do? How will they earn when they can’t pretend they care about conservative principles all the while backing bigger govt, lawless wars, illegal immigration, NSA warrantless surveillance, pork/budget busting non-budget CRs, Fed money printing, Ex-Im bank, Iran nukes, etc etc etc. F-THEM.
They are part of the problem.

MistyLane on January 23, 2016 at 5:17 PM

Don’t do the crime if you can’t buy the judge Attorney General…

“Will that be check or credit card, Cankles?”

“Cash, Loretta. Small unmarked bills just like Janet used to take…”

viking01 on January 23, 2016 at 5:29 PM

Former AG: It’s time to charge Hillary

Pity then he’s not a current AG, huh?

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:32 PM

Magicjava on January 23, 2016 at 4:33 PM

Oh no! A list!!

Seriously, if Trump turns people into witch hunting fascists then I ain’t voting for him. So perhaps you should reconsider your nonsense. There are lots of excellent thinking individuals on that list who I agree with most of the time. However I am willing to vote for Trump because the current GOP needs to be destroyed, but not if Trumpsters start making enemies lists all fascist like. The last thing in the world I am interested in is someone to worship. That’s how we get people like Obama. Principles matter, and worshiping character over principle is a recipe for disaster.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:33 PM

Pity then he’s not a current AG, huh?

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:32 PM

Pity you’re dumber than a rock.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:34 PM

The Obama administration wouldn’t prosecute Bush and Cheney for war crimes

proverbs427 on January 23, 2016 at 4:48 PM

What “war crimes” would those be, Skippy?

Del Dolemonte on January 23, 2016 at 5:34 PM

McCarthy and Sowell are disappointments to me. The others don’t surprise me a bit. What will they do? How will they earn when they can’t pretend they care about conservative principles all the while backing bigger govt, lawless wars, illegal immigration, NSA warrantless surveillance, pork/budget busting non-budget CRs, Fed money printing, Ex-Im bank, Iran nukes, etc etc etc. F-THEM.
They are part of the problem.

MistyLane on January 23, 2016 at 5:17 PM

Trump isn’t a conservative. He is a useful wrecking ball.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:35 PM

Oh, look !

Hillary’s whore is back already!

viking01 on January 23, 2016 at 5:35 PM

She will srill have the support of 50 million soldiers in the FSA ( Free Stuff Army)

Exninja on January 23, 2016 at 5:37 PM

In the Obama administration, democrats could commit murder and not be charged.

sadatoni on January 23, 2016 at 2:46 PM

Ironic you say that given that Trump literally just announced he could shoot a random person on the street and not lose any supporters.

Really.

It remains to be seen if his supporters actually approve of this.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:41 PM

Pity you’re dumber than a rock.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:34 PM

I told you a year ago this ‘scandal’ was very unlikely to go anywhere. I was right.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM

I told you a year ago this ‘scandal’ was very unlikely to go anywhere. I was right.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM

A full blown FBI investigation involving 100s of FBI agents is nowhere?

Move along skippy. Your momma says dinner is ready.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:44 PM

A full blown FBI investigation involving 100s of FBI agents is nowhere?

Move along skippy. Your momma says dinner is ready.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:44 PM

Read the thread, even your fellow conservatives have clued in.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:47 PM

Read the thread, even your fellow conservatives have clued in.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:47 PM

They have clued in to the fact that the rule of law is dead under Obama. And I have clued in on the fact that you have no principles to go along with your pathetic ignorance. Now run along before your weenies and mac and cheese gets cold.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:48 PM

“Cash, Loretta. Small unmarked bills just like Janet used to take…”

viking01 on January 23, 2016 at 5:29 PM

haha Your comment made me think back to when we didn’t have POLITICAL Attorney’s General (for the most part). I know they are political appointee’s. Think of everyone that Dems put in there: Reno, Holder, Lynch, et al are all political hacks and not Constitutional friendly…something they are sworn to uphold.

g2825m on January 23, 2016 at 5:52 PM

Michael Mukasey, a GOPe political Hack who, I am sure, would have never indicted a GOPe scumbag frontrunner for the GOPe POTUS. The GOPe always backs their front runner, no matter who or what.
s.

they lie on January 23, 2016 at 6:00 PM

Trump isn’t a conservative. He is a useful wrecking ball.

NotCoach on January 23, 2016 at 5:35 PM

I think I understand what Trump is and is not. The point is, those who signed on to the NR post against Trump specifically cite that Trump is not conservative. You know, like the all the policies they support which I listed quite clearly. Try to keep up.

That is the appeal of Trump. He will shut down the illegal immigration and he’ll prevent USA from being a doormat. Most importantly, it is my hope that he will decapitate the federal govt goliath and its rent-seekers.

MistyLane on January 23, 2016 at 6:04 PM

Hillary claimed again today that she never sent or received secret emails on that server.

So, how the hell DID she receive secret information, Pony Express?

Meremortal on January 23, 2016 at 6:06 PM

Pity then he’s not a current AG, huh?

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:32 PM

Very true.

The Obama- years. The most corrupt administration ever.

talkingpoints on January 23, 2016 at 6:27 PM

Pity then he’s not a current AG, huh?

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:32 PM

Very true.

The Obama- years. The most corrupt administration ever.

talkingpoints on January 23, 2016 at 6:27 PM

On the bright side the corruption, collusion and perversion has made Tlaloc feel less of a freak….

viking01 on January 23, 2016 at 6:32 PM

Guess who was the Original Classification Authority (OCA) for the Department of State, the official who determines the Classification level of Intelligence, like TS/SCI and TS/SAP?

IcePilot on January 23, 2016 at 6:53 PM

Tlaloc’s sole reason: She won’t be indicted by a corrupt Democrat administration, so nothing to see here!

Just because we have people who hate the rule of law at the Justice Department doesn’t mean Hillary did nothing wrong. Despite your arguments, Tlaloc.

Somehow, if say Cruz wins and appoints Rush Limbaugh as Attorney General, and he charges Hillary, I don’t think you will be all “Oh, ok. Now she’s guilty, because she’s been indicted!”

I do agree though, that she shouldn’t be indicted. Just hung from the nearest lamppost; along with Bill. Ask some of the fathers of the women Bill has raped to do it. The Mussolini option, or the Ceaucesea option.

Vanceone on January 23, 2016 at 6:54 PM

I told you a year ago this ‘scandal’ was very unlikely to go anywhere. I was right.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM

Uh, buddy? It’s still being investigated.

We don’t know what–if anything–Loretta Lynch will end up doing. Lynch could ignore it, she could call for a Special Prosecutor, or she could bring an indictment. The FBI itself hasn’t finished its inquiry and what else might come out is anyone’s guess.

It seems apparent enough that this is being used as leverage against Missus Clinton. The White House can hold it over her head throughout 2016, if it wanted to.

Aizen on January 23, 2016 at 6:56 PM

Meremortal – In typical Clinton style, Hillary is quite careful to say, “I never sent material marked classified”, demonstrating either complete ignorance, or a preference for falsehood.

IcePilot on January 23, 2016 at 6:58 PM

I told you a year ago this ‘scandal’ was very unlikely to go anywhere. I was right.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM

And yet here you are, still claiming there is no “there” there….

Der Hildebeast has too much dirt on the people with the authority to indict her. I’m pretty sure Slick Willie clued in Barry Soetoro to this fact when they played golf last summer.

wytshus on January 23, 2016 at 7:18 PM

Never. Gonna. Happen.

HiJack on January 23, 2016 at 7:23 PM

The Obama administration wouldn’t prosecute Bush and Cheney for war crimes

proverbs427 on January 23, 2016 at 4:48 PM

What “war crimes” would those be, Skippy?

Del Dolemonte on January 23, 2016 at 5:34 PM

Answering is going to require he step into tinfoil-hat territory.

itsspideyman on January 23, 2016 at 7:30 PM

I told you a year ago this ‘scandal’ was very unlikely to go anywhere. I was right.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:42 PM

Of course not.

And I answered why…..

She’s guilty as sin, but so is Loretta.

“Department of Justice”……they’ve taken the term and changed it into something contemptible.

itsspideyman on January 23, 2016 at 3:26 PM

itsspideyman on January 23, 2016 at 7:31 PM

Yes, she should be charged. The higher the voltage, the better.

86 on January 23, 2016 at 2:51 PM

….I sorta like that one!

JugEarsButtHurt on January 23, 2016 at 7:41 PM

Last week I said that there was no chance that she would be indited,. Things change. This week I think that there is no way that she will not be charged. When?? If there is enough out cry from the public, a corrupt bias minion like the DOJ will be forced into doing their job, especially if the party no longer sees any value in Hillary. So when will be a good time?? why not at the announcement of the nominee at the convention. If she gets the nomination ( looking less likely by the day) just picture this she walks up to the podium, raise her hand and before she says the first word the federal marshals take her away and no speech made. If she looses the picture of her as her lost is announced followed immediately with her arrest. Either set of pictures would be worth millions.

jpcpt03 on January 23, 2016 at 7:46 PM

This DOJ? Not gonna happen.

TfromV on January 23, 2016 at 7:47 PM

Really.
Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:41 PM

Well, not Really, Really. Only ‘Really’ if you take it out of context, completely.

Which is interesting. The leftists, the Establishment and the Cruz Toolz are uniting to hop on any inaccurately reported meme to try to bring down Trump.

It is like they don’t realize that guys like Walter Cronkite and Walter Duranty and Walter Reuther no longer control what the peasants get to be informed about.

LegendHasIt on January 23, 2016 at 8:01 PM

Leftists with integrity……
blink on January 23, 2016 at 8:20 PM

Wait… are you telling me that such a thing exists?

LegendHasIt on January 23, 2016 at 8:40 PM

If it starts to kinda “chokey” on her, she’ll have a “health episode” hoping it’ll all get lost in the coming collapse.

Mimzey on January 23, 2016 at 9:34 PM

Don’t know if this is the place for this but the you tube video that caused all the storm “The innocents of Mohammad” is still on you tube. and still no one but Obama, Rice and Hillary seemed to care enough to put their careers and reputations on the line. Blessed are those who lie there asses off on cue, for the shall for ever be know as Democrats.

jpcpt03 on January 23, 2016 at 9:44 PM

Last week I said that there was no chance that she would be indited,. Things change. This week I think that there is no way that she will not be charged. When?? If there is enough out cry from the public, a corrupt bias minion like the DOJ will be forced into doing their job, especially if the party no longer sees any value in Hillary. So when will be a good time?? why not at the announcement of the nominee at the convention. If she gets the nomination ( looking less likely by the day) just picture this she walks up to the podium, raise her hand and before she says the first word the federal marshals take her away and no speech made. If she looses the picture of her as her lost is announced followed immediately with her arrest. Either set of pictures would be worth millions.

jpcpt03 on January 23, 2016 at 7:46 PM

She doesn’t even have to be charged with a crime to be damaged in her attempt to claim her Rightful Prize.

If the FBI issues a criminal referral to Clinton Stooge DOJ Head Loretta Lynch, and said Stooge refuses to appoint an independent counsel or special prosecutor, the FBI head will, as many others have predicted, resign in disgust. That can’t be covered up by the Democrat Media, but they will spin it as “partisan”, even though said FBI head wasn’t fired by O’bama.

In addition, there are still more than a few folks in the FBI who would not blush at leaking what the FBI found, and what Lynch’s DOJ failed to prosecute.

If Clinton Stooge Loretta Lynch does in fact appoint an independent counsel or special prosecutor, that can’t be covered up by the Democrat Media either.

Speaking of this week’s “leaked emails”, it’s important in this case to remember that they weren’t really “leaked”, as the Democrat Media desperately want their sub-college-graduate voter base to believe.

No, those emails were released this week 2 years after the FOIA requests for their releases were filed.

900+ stolen FBI files…..

Del Dolemonte on January 23, 2016 at 10:33 PM

Read the thread, even your fellow conservatives have clued in.

Tlaloc on January 23, 2016 at 5:47 PM

Thanks ever so much for the illustration of your smug satisfaction with your corrupt regime. Holder’s DOJ dropped an open and shut case against the polling place Black Panther intimidation. Ms. Loretta’s DOJ will follow suit for your corrupt Hillary and you are proud of them. I hope you will be similarly pleased with any Republican admin. hijinks in turn.

Del Dolemonte on January 23, 2016 at 10:33 PM

Thanks Del, for saving me all that typing.

ghostwalker1 on January 24, 2016 at 1:22 AM

So I understand about Clinton being the main target of the investigation, but what about the rest of the email distribution list. Emails don’t just appear on a server – they come from someone else and/or they go to someone else. Any of these classified emails had to follow some unusual route to get to her. I promise you that they were not sent directly from JWICS to her server on the public internet. So were they sneaker netted by some other soon to be felon?

a097005 on January 24, 2016 at 2:43 PM