July 4, 2016

"... Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say she may decide to retain Ms. Lynch, the nation’s first black woman to be attorney general..."

Oh?!

Sometimes the prosecutor offers the accused a deal and, on rare occasions, the accused offers the prosecutor a deal.

But offering it right out in the open like that? It's as ballsy as a former President strutting across a tarmac in 107° heat, fueled by a raging desire to talk about his grandchildren.

152 comments:

coupe said...

Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say...

Oh boy, now there's a reference your Professor will laugh at, as she marks 20 points off your paper in red ink.

David Begley said...

Insurance and payback at the same time. Insurance so that nothing leaks. Payback for letting the guilty go free.

People need to understand that if Hillary gets elected, she will be completely unchecked. She will have escaped jail. The Clinton Foundation bribery scheme really ramps up. Fabulous favors and official acts for foreign governments. Historic first woman president and the so-called spouse of the second impeached president. Immune from impeachment. Media in her pocket. She will do anything she damn well pleases.

traditionalguy said...

Newt slipped up yesterday when he said that Hillary is a perfect POTUS candidate for the voters who want a totally corrupt government...a free market in government power.

Hillary is bragging that Gingrich is right. She does it better.

harrogate said...

Coupe,

True, but in this board it will be taken as authoritative.

Jeff Teal said...

Loretta for VEEP.

Unknown said...

"Having women make up half of her cabinet would be historic (in recent years, a quarter to a third of cabinet positions have been held by women), and Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say she may decide to retain Ms. Lynch, the nation’s first black woman to be attorney general, who took office in April 2015."

Bad idea, very bad optic, if true. I doubt this will happen, especially now.

The Bergall said...

The Clinton's give the word corruption a bad name..........

Michael K said...

"Loretta for VEEP."

They are that arrogant. She is the right color and already has shown her subservience. What else is necessary >

Comanche Voter said...

Retain Loretta Lynch? No, Hillary will conclude that what the Supreme Court needs is a wise black woman. A Supreme Court seat dangled in front of Loretta's eyes? It's true she has no judicial experience, but she had the good judgment to allow Billy Jeff to get off a 107F tarmac and into her air conditioned plane.

traditionalguy said...

Trump says the system is Rigged. The Clinton's say, " Yes and we rig it the best."

So we know the stakes. A Trump win would be a Revolution. Send for the Presbyterians.

The Cracker Unknown said...

That Clinton is corrupt is a given, so there's nothing terribly surprising about this. The staggering thing is that the media isn't howling about it. Yes, I understand that they're grotesquely biased partisan hacks, but this is so egregious it's almost beyond belief.

AlbertAnonymous said...

...stinks to high heaven.

In anticipation of the conclusion of the FBI investigation there's been a run on pitchforks at the local Home Depot.

glenn said...

The only people keeping the Clintons corruption secret are the WAPONYTABCBSCNNBC. The Clintons do it right out in the open and thumb their noses at the few who complain.

The Drill SGT said...

OMG, the arrogance of this crime family. They put the Gambinos to shame...

I'm actually serious. The Clinton Foundation deserves a RICO look.

reminds me about that that great Michener line about Hawaiian Missionaries as applied to the Clintons.

"The Clintons came to Washington to do good, and they did very very well... :)

Bill R said...

I have a question.

Did our leaders demonstrate their commitment to a sustainable future by turning off the engines in their flying palaces while they were having their little meeting? You know, the engines that burn 200 gallons per hour at idle?

How hot did it get in the airplane? They must have suffered so.

hombre said...

"Whaddaya mean? What's wrong with that?" Bray the HillBillies. "It's just bad optics."

"Bad optics," the successor to "What difference does it make." It's what Dems and their apologists say when all is just as bad as it looks.

Post election iteration: "Piss off, America. It's our country now." (Historically, "We won.").

Hagar said...

NYT smoking and dreaming.

The NYT should realize that if Hillary! is elected, they no longer have any hold on her either.

YoungHegelian said...

It really is a big Clintonian "Fuck YOU!" to the rest of the planet, isn't it?

And they say Trump has fascist tendencies! As much as it will pain me to do so, I'm going to click that box for The Donald, & at the end, make double-damn sure that it stayed clicked on the ballot. I'd walk a mile barefoot over hot coals to vote against that woman. The Donald is simply insane. The Clintons are insane & absolutely corrupt.

Nonapod said...

It's pretty amazing. It's like the Clintons are brazenly mocking all their opponents. They're basically saying that yeah... we've bought and sold any semblance of Rule of Law in the United States of America and there's not a damn thing that you or anyone else can do about it. You can try, but we currently own or will own pretty much every institution and person that could do anything about it. And what's more, there's enough extremely stupid voters combined with the fact that our opponent's candidate is suitably questionable enough that we are assured full victory.

Sebastian said...

"But offering it right out in the open like that? It's as ballsy as" Why? Dems don't care, MSM don't care, Hill donors don't care, blacks don't care, UW law prof how-Trump-lost-me won't care. Who, exactly, cares anymore?

mikee said...

Corrupt Hillary will be our next president. The entire world, many of whom have enough emails hacked from her server to blackmail her successfully, and many others who have paid her millions and expect billions in return, demand it. And her evil minions will ensure it, with enough votes created to swamp however many the Donald reports.

I, for one, look forward to the post-Hillary election of a currently unrecognized person - probably a true brute, actually as bad as the Dems always say the Republican is, who will "fundamentally transform" the nation and the world yet again. Because as benign as we currently remember the Carter era, recovery from the Hillary era will require most likely a world war.

Michael K said...

What nonapod said. Could not put it better,

coupe said...

Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say that her husband threatened Loretta with a cigar, but then she dropped her pants and said, sorry, I already have one...

Sweet Loretta Martin thought she was a woman
But she was another man
All the girls around her say she's got it coming
But she gets it while she can

Get back, get back
Get back to where you once belonged

Big Mike said...

Question for the GOP senators who voted to confirm Loretta Lynch. In the immortal words of Jay Leno, "What in the HELL were you thinking?"

David said...

The hidden prize in that box--U.S. Supreme Court nomination. You gotta read the code. Dangle, dangle, dangle.

David said...

The whole article is Clinton spin, btw.

Mattman26 said...

So I don't know jack about Loretta Lynch. But is it too much to hope that maybe she'll look at what's happened over the last several days, and say: To hell with the Clintons. They've made the rule of law look like a joke, and they've made me look like a corrupt fool. Let's indict on ever charge we think we can prove.

Hey, a guy can dream . . . .

TCom said...

Donald isn't insane, how ridiculous. His life's work proves it. He just wants to win and knows perfectly well how little reason matters in winning an election. He learned that watching Republicans get thrashed by rhetoric spewing Dems for years.

He knows the stakes, too. If he has to get a little wild to beat the Democrat crime family, he will. Be glad we have someone perfectly willing to gouge eyeballs and kick nuts. It's not pretty, but it's not Don's fault we aren't in Kansas anymore. He's just playing the hand he is dealt. In a boxing match with no referee, playing by the rules against a thug is suicide.

robother said...

"It's like the Clintons are brazenly mocking all their opponents." At some point in every decline and fall of a republic, the dictators consolidate power by openly demonstrating that the rule of law doesn't apply to them.

The message is, if we can get away with THIS, imagine what we could do to you, if you oppose us. Lois Lerner? We got an army of Lois Lerners just waiting to be turned loose on Trump donors.

YoungHegelian said...

@TCom,

Donald isn't insane, how ridiculous.

Yeah, he is. But I say that with the qualification that, having lived & worked in DC for 35 years & having rubbed elbows with some of our ruling class, that many of them are insane. You kind of have to be a wee bit insane to think that YOU are called upon to rule over your fellow men.

Look, I'll vote for Trump, but there have been far, far too many unforced errors in the Trump campaign for me to take them seriously as political players. Who knows? The Obama team could campaign like virtuosi but they can't govern for shit. Maybe the Trumpsters aren't great campaigners but actually can govern. To quote Judy Tenuta "Hey, it could happen....".

tim in vermont said...

"It's not what it looks like!"

That's from the Clinton family crest.

HT said...

Why does Trump think Hillary is behind this and not Bill?

Marc Puckett said...

I am about as 'never' as you can get in terms of the GOP nomination while not absolutely ruling out voting for that fellow in November but this sort of Clintonian nonsense makes that general election vote a less awful prospect.

Darrell said...

She should start using Felony Clinton as her name, just to reinforce the point.

Darrell said...

Joni Kay Ernst as VP.

Ray said...

Obama's determined to keep his legacy intact. Obama's staying in D.C. Obama has an indictment over Hillary's head. Obama insists Ms. Lynch remain as AG. If Hillary at anytime deviates from Obama's agenda, Ms. Lynch brings forth evidence before Hillary can fire her. Then rest of us are f...ed.

Birkel said...

I look forward to the "How Donald Trump Lost Me" post.

Michael K said...

Joni Ernst is interesting as VP, but probably not enough experience.

Corker or Sessions or Pence is probably better in governing and helping him govern. Ernst would help get him elected but that is going to be a binary thing. If his message clicks, he will probably win big. If not, I doubt she could be the difference.

Interesting year. That is certain.

Jim said...

I'm sure Bill said something like, "you read how much money we give Sidney Blumenthal? Think how much we'd pay a smart lawyer." Or, "don't believe a thing you read about Vince Foster."

pm317 said...

@Ray haas it. It is more about Obama keeping his skeletons in tact.

Gretchen said...

While I am not wild about Trump, at least anything he does will be scrutinized by the media. Clinton will have a completely unchecked presidency, even worse than Obama.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Oh?!

I love the insight from Althouse commentators that she acts surprised every time the the left practices corruption, thuggery or media bias.

She knows that is what they do but she always coyly turns away.

It's just another way she trolls her readers. It does get tiresome.

cubanbob said...

Ray said...
Obama's determined to keep his legacy intact. Obama's staying in D.C. Obama has an indictment over Hillary's head. Obama insists Ms. Lynch remain as AG. If Hillary at anytime deviates from Obama's agenda, Ms. Lynch brings forth evidence before Hillary can fire her. Then rest of us are f...ed.

7/4/16, 12:29 PM"

Obama is every bit as guilty as both Clinton's. This happened on his watch with his tacit approval. Why he was this stupid is inexplicable but he isn't doing what he is doing as a favor to the party never mind the Clinton's. He is saving his own stupid and corrupt ass.

Mark said...

It profits us nothing to gain the whole world, yet lose our souls. And are you Dems and progressives really going to throw away all your self-respect, prostitute all your principles, and sell your soul for the likes of Hilary Clinton???

eric said...

Remember, these sorts of releases are coordinated with the media.

While we are all shocked and outraged at the Clintons for so brazenly being corrupt, remember, it's our media that enables them.

Mark said...

Remember Dems and progressives, it is not simply a matter of a few seconds in the voting booth for you. Elect Hilary Clinton and you will be obligating yourself to make a whore of your soul for the next four years. You really want to go through all that again??

eric said...

Blogger Gretchen said...
While I am not wild about Trump, at least anything he does will be scrutinized by the media. Clinton will have a completely unchecked presidency, even worse than Obama.


This is an excellent point.

All things being equal between the Republican and Democrat candidate, one should always vote for the Republican, if they care about a 4th estate.

Otherwise we end up with not only a corrupt government, but a compliant and corrupt media.

HT said...

I didn't vote for her in the Democratic primary, Mark. November is not tomorrow. I was wrong about Clinton even running (I said she would not), but still, there is a long time between now and November, and anything can happen. I expect there will be some huge shake ups between now and then.

CWJ said...

Mark,

Too late.

America's Politico said...

Read Amy C. story from Sat. 7/2 about FBI interview HRC. Team Queen Hillary knew weeks in advance. So, why Bill met with Lynch? They really take us voters as incredibly stupid. Why is Press so gullible? Why they do not ask hard question: How far in advance did know. What did they know. Etc.

Fabi said...

cubanbob makes an interesting point -- Obama knew of the private server and email long ago. There were a few dozen emails between the two whose contents can't be disclosed while he's in office. I suspect -- but can't be positive -- that communications between the president and SoS are sensitive, which is another rarely discussed issue.

Bruce Hayden said...

I wasn't surprised about the possibility of the offer of the AG position to Lynch, because I figured that it was always on the table. My surprise is how blatant it is. Lynch always had connections to the Clintons (Bill appointed her USA for the NY ED, before Obama did). She just needed to show she realized who was buttering her bread.

Fabi said...

People had been trying to track down their jets using the tail numbers, but there was an easier way. Bill's had the 'Let me tell you about my grandchildren!' bumper sticker.

AJ Lynch said...

I interpret this very differently. Hillary now knows she is getting indicted and this is a desperation Hail Mary pass to try and get Loretta to let her go scot free.

Larry J said...

"Blogger Bill R said...
I have a question.

Did our leaders demonstrate their commitment to a sustainable future by turning off the engines in their flying palaces while they were having their little meeting? You know, the engines that burn 200 gallons per hour at idle?

How hot did it get in the airplane? They must have suffered so."

No, they wouldn't run the engines because that would be dangerous for people entering or leaving the plane. The pilots would use the auxillary power units or ground power to run the air conditioners. No need for them to be uncomfortable while being corrupt.

TCom said...

YoungHegelian, please point us to the mythical perfect campaigner you are comparing Trump to.

All those 'unforced errors' and an amateur politician won the Republican nomination, practically spending no money at all. Maybe what you see as 'errors' aren't errors at all. For example, all the 'errors' that Politically Correct idiots claim are 'errors'. Are they really errors?

If those are errors, I'd hate to see successes. Do yourself a favor and drop your ego in the garbage can, it's just making you ignorant.

TCom said...

How does an 'insane' man raise perfectly sane kids and run a fantastic business where his employees love him, by the way?

Isn't it funny how Republicans only become obviously insane once they start running for office? It's almost like it's just a media narrative, repeated so much that some chuckleheads start to parrot it.

"Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from insanity."

Rhythm and Balls said...

Definitely reaching new heights in the annals of corruption.

If Lynch accepts, that speaks volumes about her. We're all screwed. And maybe we have been in the past.

But never this openly.

Time to crash the convention.

Joe said...

The Clintons are attempting to poison the investigation. Lynch is just a convenient way to do it. So, how will Lynch react to being stabbed in the back?

Yancey Ward said...

AJ Lynch,

I was thinking the same thing. I thought about that possibility being the reason behind the ham-handed meeting in Phoenix- a meeting that one can be 100% sure the Clintons thought would not be revealed publicly. It might well be the case that the weekend deposition/interview has convinced them that there is real danger. At a certain point, desperation makes you do things you wouldn't otherwise do.

I mean, the Clintons could be rubbing their opponents' noses in it with this out-in-the-open bribe offer because they know they are going to get away with it. I am having a hard time believing this- it just feeds the Crooked Hillary image for what is apparently no gain. Desperation makes more sense as a motivation, but what do I know?

Michael K said...

We still have to get through the conventions and the riots that will accompany them.

I expect an assassination attempt on Trump. I hope his security guys are well vetted. Remember that Indira Gandhi did not vet hers enough.

Hillary may have a health crisis, in which case we will know that the FBI is about to leak her treason.

Wild year and plenty more to go.

dda6ga dda6ga said...

"If the money is right,
we don't indict"

wise old Chicago States Attorney

Bob Ellison said...

Why would she want that appointment?

Hagar said...

I think I feel sorry for Loretta Lynch. Her name is now mud regardless of what she does or does not do.
This can, and often does, happen to people who pass within splashing distance of the Clintons.

traditionalguy said...

You're damned right, I ordered that code red, Cappy.

And Hillary delivers on her corrupt bargains with the Bankers. She can be trusted if the cash is paid.

Tom said...

At some point, Emperor Palpatine dropped the pretense and ruled as an open tyrant. It appears 2016 is the year we're dropping the pretense as a country.

eric said...

I don't know why anyone thinks the FBI is going to indict anymore.

I thought for sure they were going to and the Clintons were just blind to it. Too many years of doing whatever they wanted without repercussions.

But then CNN announced that the FBI would announce within the next few weeks that no charges would be filed.

Why would CNN announce that if they didn't have an inside source telling them that?

YoungHegelian said...

@Tcom,

All those 'unforced errors' and an amateur politician won the Republican nomination, practically spending no money at all. Maybe what you see as 'errors' aren't errors at all.

Sigh. Tcom, have you come here to be the anti-Chuck or something?

Do you think that the latest snafu with the Star of David in red on a pile of money was a "good idea". Do you think that the Trump insulting every woman he came up against in the primaries in the most personal of terms was a good idea? Have you seen Trump's numbers among women voters? You think that's "success"? Has the Trump campaign been able to bridge the gap with the Republican Party machine, whose help he will most definitely need for the ground game to gin up turnout? No, not yet. That's not "success" either.

Spending no money at all

You mean, aside from $50 million of his own money? That "no money"?

Tcom, nobody comes to this forum to drink the candidate's kool-aid, no matter who the candidate is. Do you see wondrous enthusiasm for Trump here, aside from me playing Doubting Thomas? No, & frankly you won't see it in most forums where Republicans or Conservatives gather. We all know this year we have a grim duty to perform in November, & we will do it to the best of our conscience. But, don't ask me to be happy about it.

wholelottasplainin' said...

But then CNN announced that the FBI would announce within the next few weeks that no charges would be filed.

Why would CNN announce that if they didn't have an inside source telling them that?

&&&&&&&&

Here's why:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/what-we-know-about-hillarys-server/article/2595547

"Nobody who knows the status of the investigation into Clinton's server is talking, and those who are talking as if they do — well, they simply do not know what is truly going on but have some incentive to pretend to do so. They cannot know, in fact, unless they know (1) what has been recovered from the server by the forensic specialists working on the server and (2) the precise details of what Secretary Clinton said in her interview. That is because 18 USC 1001 makes it a crime to make false statements to federal agents. Unless someone was in the room with Secretary Clinton who knew exactly what had been deleted, the CNN "source" would have no idea — none — of whether the investigation is close to wrapping up. CNN's Perez should never have reported such spin. Either it came very close to tipping his source or it was pure spin and he should have known that."

cubanbob said...

Blogger Fabi said...
cubanbob makes an interesting point -- Obama knew of the private server and email long ago. There were a few dozen emails between the two whose contents can't be disclosed while he's in office. I suspect -- but can't be positive -- that communications between the president and SoS are sensitive, which is another rarely discussed issue.

7/4/16, 1:01 PM"

I'm baffled why this 800lb Gorilla goes unseen and unmentioned. How many emails did the president get from her server and how many did he reply to? And the same for every other official throughout the executive branch as well a members of Congress? Sensitive and nonsensitive they are all party to the violations of records laws and the sensitive ones to the national securities laws. Her server guy who was given immunity by the DoJ was also vetted by the White House. There is no possible way for Obama to disclaim Clinton. This occurred not over a four day period or a four week period or even a four month period of time but it happened over a four year period of time. If he didn't know he is probably the dumbest president ever and if did know then he is a party to the crime. As was said back during Watergate "what did the president know and when did he know it?" I suspect the one thing holding back the FBI is the number of people who could be subject to prosecution would fill an entire federal prison and that would include Obama as well. The Bureau may simply be overwhelmed and shell-shocked at the prospect of referring most of the Federal Government for criminal indictment. That may well be the genius aspect of the Clinton's, making everyone dirty so no one would dare take them down. I fear they are going to be proven right.

Original Mike said...

"We all know this year we have a grim duty to perform in November,.."

It turns out I will be out of the country on election day. Darn.

Michael K said...

"I will be out of the country on election day. Darn."

Absentee. If the dead can vote...

Original Mike said...

" I suspect the one thing holding back the FBI is the number of people who could be subject to prosecution would fill an entire federal prison and that would include Obama as well. The Bureau may simply be overwhelmed and shell-shocked at the prospect of referring most of the Federal Government for criminal indictment. That may well be the genius aspect of the Clinton's, making everyone dirty so no one would dare take them down."

Yeah.

Saint Croix said...

If Hillary is indicted...

Gary Johnson is our next president.

Original Mike said...

I tried to vote absentee in the primary (I was out of the country then too) and it appeared that it wasn't available by my departure date. I must admit I didn't try very hard, so I may have misunderstood the rules.

coupe said...

I voted absentee a couple times. The problem is they just throw them away unless there is a tie. No tie, your ticky no licky...

Original Mike said...

On second thought, regarding "everyone knowing" that Clinton wasn't using a government account, how often do you look at the actual address of a correspondent? In addition, nowadays, they are likely to be presented as an alias. It's an aspect of modern emIl software I detest.

YoungHegelian said...

@Original Mike, Cuban Bob:

That may well be the genius aspect of the Clinton's, making everyone dirty so no one would dare take them down.

Hey, it worked for the Bolsheviks --- make sure everyone has blood on their hands, so when their turn comes you can tell them "But, you knew that the Party dispenses harsh justice, but how else can it be under the dictatorship of the proletariat, comrade?".

Eric said...

Bill Clinton is reported to know the nmaes of both of his grandchildren. They are very impotant to him.

Original Mike said...

"I voted absentee a couple times. The problem is they just throw them away unless there is a tie. No tie, your ticky no licky..."

In my jurisdiction, they probably throw them away if you haven't voted for the correct candidate.

eric said...

"Nobody who knows the status of the investigation into Clinton's server is talking, and those who are talking as if they do — well, they simply do not know what is truly going on but have some incentive to pretend to do so. They cannot know, in fact, unless they know (1) what has been recovered from the server by the forensic specialists working on the server and (2) the precise details of what Secretary Clinton said in her interview. That is because 18 USC 1001 makes it a crime to make false statements to federal agents. Unless someone was in the room with Secretary Clinton who knew exactly what had been deleted, the CNN "source" would have no idea — none — of whether the investigation is close to wrapping up. CNN's Perez should never have reported such spin. Either it came very close to tipping his source or it was pure spin and he should have known that."

I read this yesterday. I think Hewitt is naive.

Normally in investigations lot's of people in the upper echelon know where the investigation is at. Usually the Supervisory Agent, his boss, and his bosses boss. Plus constant updates to whoever the prosecutor is that's in charge.

Often times, we know ahead of time where the investigation is going. We know when there is less than a 1% chance the US Attorneys Office will take it because every time we come to them with more they say, "What else you got?" and send us back out to get more, and we know there isn't more to get but we try because we believe we have a good case.

I imagine someone at CNN knows someone who is privy to these discussions. And someone at the US Attorneys Office or in the upper echelon of the FBI knows this case is going no where.

Therefore, the CNN reporter felt comfortable reporting that there won't be anything happening except an announcement in the next two weeks.

I suppose we'll know soon enough.

Joe said...

This needs to be repeated from David Bagley:

"People need to understand that if Hillary gets elected, she will be completely unchecked. She will have escaped jail. The Clinton Foundation bribery scheme really ramps up. Fabulous favors and official acts for foreign governments. Historic first woman president and the so-called spouse of the second impeached president. Immune from impeachment. Media in her pocket. She will do anything she damn well pleases. "

All those who fear Trump for what it MIGHT do, need to realize what Clinton HAS done and WILL do.

Fabi said...

I concur, cubanbob. Did no republican member of congress ever receive an email from her during that period? Did it go to their spam folder? None of it makes sense -- but our incurious media and opposition party couldn't care less.

Original Mike said...

"The Clinton Foundation bribery scheme really ramps up."

They're already worth $80 million plus access to the Foundation monies. At some point, haven't they made enough money?

tim in vermont said...

Lynch can deliver America from this foul choic.

The Drill SGT said...

I'm baffled why this 800lb Gorilla goes unseen and unmentioned. How many emails did the president get from her server and how many did he reply to? And the same for every other official throughout the executive branch as well a members of Congress? Sensitive and nonsensitive they are all party to the violations of records laws and the sensitive ones to the national securities laws.

IIRC, a FOIA request results in the agency having to produce a log, noting some summary info on every responsive document, noting whether the agency intends to redact in part or withhold completely along with the grounds for withholding. If State withheld a record because it was "pre-decisional" or the WH directed it was withheld because of Executive Privilege, we might not know the contents, but we would have a count of the to and from between the secState and the POTUS

coupe said...

My problem with Mrs Clinton is that she surrounds herself with bad people. Can you imagine the little mice who were wringing their hands over what to do about her illegal server?

In the end they bowed and ran around in circles.

That's what lies ahead if the corrupt Democrats let her win.

Lynch would be smart to indict her, as whoever replaces her at the convention will be someone she could work for. She would never serve in a white house with those two sex fiends.

Anthony Weiner would probably want to f'ck her in the ass.

Saint Croix said...

Petraeus pleaded guilty to mishandling classified information, a misdemeanor.

Isn't it obvious that she's guilty of that?

It's not uncommon for workers with access to classified material to mishandle it, and by far the bulk of those cases don't attract the attention of federal prosecutors.

But when the Justice Department does pursue a case, it often relies on a statute that bars the unlawful removal and retention of classified documents. That low-level charge, meant for cases in which defendants improperly hold onto information that they know to be classified, carries a fine and maximum yearlong prison sentence and is reserved for people who have "really, really screwed up"


The Obama administration has used the 1917 Espionage Act more than all previous presidents combined to prosecute whistleblower cases. Of course, Hillary isn't a whistleblower, she's more like the person you blow the whistle on. But it would look really bad to send Jeffrey Sterling to prison while you wave at Hillary for sharing our intel with terrorists, China, Russia, and all the other hackers in the world.

"This administration has been very aggressive about prosecuting classified information cases."

ndspinelli said...

Hillary may retain Lynch just to make her look good. Lynch has cankles that make Hillary look like Taylor Swift. And, Lynch actually wears dresses. She looks like Robert "Tank" Holmes outside daughter.

Ken B said...

Tribute must be public, must be seen as tribute.

richardsson said...

Well, some of these conspiracies become very circuitous but I tend to avoid the "grassy knolls" in these situations. I do however believe in Karma. The Kennedys had bad Karma, They read Ian Fleming novels as how to books instead of novels and discovered the hard way that when you plot the murder of foreign leaders, you might have chosen your own fate. Castro is still alive, they are long since dead.

I really don't think Bill or Hillary intended that his meeting with Lynch become news. I can't believe that even they thought they would be better off with this meeting becoming public than if it had been kept secret. Lynch would have to be pretty stupid to think this becoming news was a good thing. Ditto Obama. But I think this became a story because the Clintons ignored a very simple fact: they treat their security people like dogshit. When you treat "the little people" like dogshit, they get even whenever and wherever they can. This goes all the way back to Troopergate.
Now the "grassy knoll" folks might have a point; hey, look at all they've gotten away with! why wouldn't they be so brazen? Maybe, but Karma awaits on her own time schedule.

Big Mike said...

@Fabi, an Email from Clinton on her private server would not necessarily indicate that she was doing official Department of State business on the same server.

Bay Area Guy said...

Any Conservative Fence-sitters out there who can't yet gel with Trump? If so, please, baby, please, baby, please, baby, please, baby, please,baby.

Yes, Hillary is that bad.

PB said...

I'll bet that was an item in the purely social discussion. After all, who doesn't offer jobs in administration that will never be? Bill was sent to negotiate a very special deal.

PB said...

the air temperature in Phoenix might have been 107, but it was surely a LOT hotter on that tarmac. The effect of man-made objects on temperature stations is widely known, except when you want to ignore it to inflate the temperature record to prove something else...

The Drill SGT said...

It's not uncommon for workers with access to classified material to mishandle it, and by far the bulk of those cases don't attract the attention of federal prosecutors.

That's because those cases are accidental and small. Somebody leaves a safe open, but inside a secure building. A classified file gets mixed up among other docs and is left unattended. The "security incident" is investigated and the agency employee or contractor is disciplined. Happens again in a short period and either employee loses their clearance. The contractor gets fired by his firm and the agency employee gets reassigned. Somebody gets caught once, accidentally mixing a classified doc into their brief case, they get fired. If it was thought to be intentional, the FBI is called.

Send a thousand classified files to an outside server and you are in Snowdon/Clinton/Ames/Walker/Pollard territory. They should put you away for life and the J.E. Hoover building gets a new exhibit in their first floor museum. Course you need a clearance these days to see the exhibits.

PS: I've held a TS clearance for the last 46 years.

rehajm said...

Hillary Clinton would quickly try to find common ground with Republicans on an immigration overhaul and infrastructure spending

Lefites are OBSESSED with infrastructure money. They want you to believe they're borrowing money to build roads and bridges and it's easy to convince you of that. What they really want it for is to prop up failing leftie strongholds like Illinois, and munis in California. They'll spend it on making payroll. Rinse. Repeat.

The Drill SGT said...

What they really want it for is to prop up failing leftie strongholds like Illinois, and munis in California. They'll spend it on making payroll. Rinse. Repeat.

LOL,

try and pass an amendment to some highway bill adding $10B to the maintenance budget to fix the worst 200 unfunded bridges in the country with the provision that every penny needs to be spent on the outside contractors actually doing the repairs. The Dems will filibuster and Obama veto, because: "no bike lanes",

Chuck said...

Bay Area Guy said...
Any Conservative Fence-sitters out there who can't yet gel with Trump? If so, please, baby, please, baby, please, baby, please, baby, please,baby.


Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump, and the electorate is distracted with Trump's random unforced Twitter outrages (the Star of David, and recollections of Trump's quoted comment about "little guys with yarmulkes counting my money") instead of the Clinton scandal machine.

cyrus83 said...

Even if this move is planned, it makes no sense to put it out there until after the general election is won, when there aren't any consequences for the next 2-4 years. It's the kind of assurance that gets made in private...say in an impromptu meeting on a plane.

I don't get the motive for putting this out there in a normally friendly venue like the NYT. If there's already knowledge that Lynch won't move to indict, all this manages to do is undermine Lynch's integrity further. If the Clinton campaign is still in doubt about what Lynch will do or is worried she will indict...how does this help nudge her toward declining to indict, given how strongly it smells of corruption?

eric said...

Blogger Chuck said...
Bay Area Guy said...
Any Conservative Fence-sitters out there who can't yet gel with Trump? If so, please, baby, please, baby, please, baby, please, baby, please,baby.


Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump, and the electorate is distracted with Trump's random unforced Twitter outrages (the Star of David, and recollections of Trump's quoted comment about "little guys with yarmulkes counting my money") instead of the Clinton scandal machine.


It doesn't matter who the candidate is, we'd have weekends exactly like this. Whether it's the 47%, or dogs on the roof, or being a bully in highschool.

You can literally be a boy scout and the media will still make you into a racist, sexist, homophobic, bigot, and racist. Did I already say racist?

eric said...

Blogger Joe said...
This needs to be repeated from David Bagley:

"People need to understand that if Hillary gets elected, she will be completely unchecked. She will have escaped jail. The Clinton Foundation bribery scheme really ramps up. Fabulous favors and official acts for foreign governments. Historic first woman president and the so-called spouse of the second impeached president. Immune from impeachment. Media in her pocket. She will do anything she damn well pleases. "

All those who fear Trump for what it MIGHT do, need to realize what Clinton HAS done and WILL do.


And every criticism of Clinton, every scandal, every illegal thing she does will be scoffed at as just another Republican Right Wing Conspiracy. Misogyny at it's worst.

hombre said...

@cyrus83: This isn't about making sense. It is about unbridled arrogance. Did the NYT even note the implications? (I don't read their blather.)

See eric at 5:57.

Chuck said...

Blogger eric said...
...
...

It doesn't matter who the candidate is, we'd have weekends exactly like this. Whether it's the 47%, or dogs on the roof, or being a bully in highschool.

You can literally be a boy scout and the media will still make you into a racist, sexist, homophobic, bigot, and racist. Did I already say racist?


Your saying that implies that Trump is just like any other Republican. And that therefore, Republicans could make the same clear-eyed arguments, that the Republican candidate is not an ignoramus who says idiotic racist, sexist, bigoted crap. (I left out "homophobic." I don't actually recall Trump saying anything "homophobic." Trump's problem there is like his problem with abortion, guns and a host of other social issues; Trump is more Democrat, than Republican.)

But Donald Trump, unlike Mitt Romney, really is an ignoramus who has uttered a book-sized string of idiotic racist, sexist, bigoted crap.

And that makes it harder for Republicans to counter. The easiest counter -- my personal favorite -- is that Trump isn't a Republican.

hombre said...

I do like to (wishfully) think that Lynch and Obama are sandbagging the Clintons and DOJ will hit Hillary with a doozy of an indictment.

Trouble is, we would get Uncle Joe and Fauxcahontas in the WH and a politically tainted SCOTUS for a generation.

Gahrie said...

Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump

You had your chance to back Cruz, but hated him more.

Gahrie said...

Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump

Now you know how I felt...with Dole, and McCain, and Romney and to a lesser extent the Bushes.

Chuck said...

Gahrie said...
Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump

You had your chance to back Cruz, but hated him more.

That is purely false. I nearly voted for Ted Cruz in my state's Republican primary. I don't think I've ever had an unkind thought about Ted Cruz, although I disagree with some of his Senate tactics. I know I've never written an unfavorable word about Cruz.

I dare you to prove otherwise.


Gahrie said...

I know I've never written an unfavorable word about Cruz.

So?

What did you do to help him become the nominee? He was the only choice acceptable to the Republican base, and he was rejected by the Establishment and their lackeys.

Chuck said...

Gahrie said...
Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump

Now you know how I felt...with Dole, and McCain, and Romney and to a lesser extent the Bushes.

I've played this game before; who did you like more than Dole in 1996? More than McCain in 2008? Better than Romney in 2012?

1996 - Pat Buchanan? Steve Forbes? Lamar Alexander? Alan Keyes? Dick Lugar? (I can tell you that the one other name, who wasn't close, was Phil Gramm. I've been a Phil Gramm fan, but his campaign wasn't even close to contending.)

2008 - McCain's primary opponents were Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, Ron Paul and, again, Alan Keyes.

2012 - Romney's main primary opponent was Rick Santorum. There was also Newt Gingrich, and of course Ron Paul.

So who is the obvious better Republican, to beat the mid-term Bill Clinton, or the Barack Obama Historic Voter Turnout Phenomenon?



Original Mike said...

"Trouble is, we would get Uncle Joe and Fauxcahontas in the WH and a politically tainted SCOTUS for a generation."

Yeah, I hope Hillary is indicted because she should be and laws need to be enforced (or they won't be followed). But I don't see Trump beating Biden. Hillary stinks so much he has a chance with her.

Michael K said...

"who is the obvious better Republican, to beat the mid-term Bill Clinton,"

Colin Powell who I would have supported.

Chuck said...

Michael K said...
"who is the obvious better Republican, to beat the mid-term Bill Clinton,"

Colin Powell who I would have supported.


LMFAO! That same Colin Powell who endorsed Obama?

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/powell-endorses-obama/

I fricking dream of attending a dinner engagement with Colin Powell. So I can ask him for the three essential reasons why he remains a Republican. It would not be an easy question for him.

And just think; Powell endorsed Obama, over a fellow U.S. military officer and a notable political moderate, John McCain.

I don't think Colin Powell will ever be forgiven by his party for that offense. He should not be forgiven.

Harold said...

Michael K said...
Joni Ernst is interesting as VP, but probably not enough experience.

Yep. Because being a community organizer is much better qualification then serving as a lieutenant colonel in the Iowa Army National Guard prior to retiring from the military in 2015. And, she was valedictorian of her class at Stanton High School. The current White House occupant has sealed academic records from everywhere he was. And she spent 14 months in Kuwait in 2003–04 as a company commander during the Iraq War. Yep, unqualified all over the place compared to Monica Lewinsky's ex-boyfriend's wife who hasn't driven a car in over 20 years, who was elected to the senate because of who her husband was, not because of anything she had accomplished, and who made disastrous decisions as SECSTATE that led to American deaths. Yep, completely not enough experience.

Gahrie said...

So who is the obvious better Republican, to beat the mid-term Bill Clinton, or the Barack Obama Historic Voter Turnout Phenomenon?

The start should have been in 1988, when Jack Kemp should have been the nominee, with Laxalt as his VP and successor....

Michael K said...

"Yep, completely not enough experience."

Oh, I agree with you that she is a good candidate but Trump probably needs more DC and Congress experience.

I will enthusiastically support her if she is chosen.

"That same Colin Powell who endorsed Obama?"

Powell reacted as many blacks did with a racial solidarity reaction. Charles Payne, whose investment show on radio I used to listen to before I knew he was black, also said he was going to vote for Obama. I didn't blame him.

Think how different things would be if the first black president had been the well qualified Powell and not the community organizer.

But I guess you can't. Narrow minded doesn't cover it.

Original Mike said...

Charles Payne voted for Obama? I bet he wishes he could have that vote back.

Chuck said...

Wow. I just dawned on me, Michael K. The reason that you now support Trump. "Racial solidarity." Your quote, that. "Racial solidarity."

tim in vermont said...

"White identity politics!"

Notice that all of these same Nazi hunters have no problem with every other species of "identity politics," none whatsoever. I think identity politics is poison full stop.

khesanh0802 said...

And besides Joni knows how to castrate hogs - a talent that would come in very handy on K street and its environs!

Gahrie said...

Wow. I just dawned on me, Michael K. The reason that you now support Trump. "Racial solidarity." Your quote, that. "Racial solidarity."

What is wrong with racial solidarity?

Oh..it is White racial solidarity...well of course that's wrong!

Chuck said...

Don't tell me about it, Gahrie. I'm not into any flavor of "racial solidarity." Talk to Michael K about it. "Racial solidarity" is his idea. I don't think "racial solidarity" is an excuse, whether your name is Colin Powell, or David Duke, or Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton... or Michael K.

narciso said...

well powell has not learned from the experience sadly, evince support for red queen as his wingman armitage,

Michael K said...

" "Racial solidarity." Your quote, that. "Racial solidarity."

Chuck, please tell me you are not that much of a fool.

You don't believe that intelligent blacks who are not Democrats voted for Obama because he was the first black presidential candidate of a major party ?

Please tell me you are not that stupid or foolish.

tim in vermont said...

Wow that was a reach even for you, Chuck. Blogger Chuck, the Nazi hunter!

Michael K said...

Powell was clearly better qualified to be president than Obama and Dole was a very weak candidate.

Would Powell have been worse than Billy C ?

I don't know but I doubt it and he might even have done something about the al Qeada attacks that led to 9/11.

I guess chuck disagrees. Why chuck ? His race ?

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Saint Croix said...

Wikileaks just published 1000+ Hillary emails about the Iraq war, taken off her damn stupid server.

Fireworks!

n.n said...

eric:

racist, sexist, homophobic, bigot, and racist. Did I already say racist?

Yes. Opposition to [class] diversity, female chauvinism, selective exclusion (e.g. "="), rape culture (e.g. dysfunctional revolution, reproductive prostitution), etc. are mortal sins second only to supporting human rights that include rejecting the "final solution" (e.g. abortion rites) and channeling Mengele (e.g. Planned Parenthood).

Also, criticizing progressive wars, opportunistic regime changes, sexual harassment (e.g. rape and sodomy of natives, enemies (e.g. Gaddafi), of citizens (e.g. Stevens)), mass exodus/emigration (e.g. refugee crises, illegal immigration), and other anti-native, anti-human policies will have you branded as xenophobic, or worse, pro-life.

n.n said...

And then there are the modern scapegoats. For example, after a majority Democrat vote, including Black Protestants and Hispanic Catholics, to reject selective exclusion ("=") was overridden by a transgender/homosexual judge, the bigots (i.e. sanctimonious hypocrites) brought their circus to Utah in order to attack Mormons for the sins committed by cosmopolitan Democrats, blacks, Hispanics, and Catholics.

Chuck said...

Michael, I am a Republican. I don't understand anybody who votes for a Democrat.

God damn it, for all of the attacks aimed at me for being somehow less than a good Republican for criticizing our least-Republican Republican nominee in the history of the Party, you sure are soft on one of the least reliable Republicans in a generation, Colin Powell.

Knowing that Powell supported Obama, I would NEVER trust his judgment on federal judicial nominations. Powell endorsed same sex marriage, and his son Michael, former FCC chairman and current lobbyist, signed onto an amicus brief in support of same sex marriage in Hollingsworth v. Perry. The Powells are the Rockefeller Republicans of the 21st century.

I asked just above about what Colin Powell might think are his core reasons for being a Republican. I'll open it up to anyone who wishes to speak on behalf of General Powell; what makes him a Republican? What big Republican issue has he spoken up on? When was the last time he was of some significant service to the Party?

tim in vermont said...

Saint Croix, that is not hacked email, those are the same emails that Hillary produced herself, in the form of printed pages. What Wikileaks has done, which is great, is put them back into searchable form. It took them a while, which is what Hillary wanted and why she released them as printed pages. She didn't want any of the metadata to be available for analysis, which might have tipped people off to deletions.

Paul said...

Hillary and Lynch say what that say cause, well what else can they say. So they say it in your face knowing there is no way you can impeach or arrest them. By holding the White House, a strong enough minority in Congress to stop an impeachment, and the DOJ so no charges are filed... well what can the public do?

So they have no reason to hide it. Now that it's out, they will act like 'everybody does it'.

mockturtle said...

Golly, Chuck! I think you are right about Powell. In fact, I KNOW you are.

Michael K said...

"Knowing that Powell supported Obama, I would NEVER trust his judgment on federal judicial nominations."

Powell supported Obama later and as the first black presidential candidate of a major party,

How many judicial nominations did Clinton have and are they better than what Powell might have done?

I am tired of debating people who have no sense of history. What might have Powell done if he, instead of Obama, had been the first black president? I leave that for an exercise for those smart enough to think about it.

What if he had been elected as a Republican? Does any thought occur to you ?

Big Mike said...

Has anyone besides me noticed that every female cabinet member in the Obama Administration (with the lone exception of Penny Pritzker) has had one or more major screw-ups on her watch? Every single one. Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton after failing to appoint an independent counsel in the case of his wife is part of a pattern.

Saint Croix said...

Saint Croix, that is not hacked email, those are the same emails that Hillary produced herself, in the form of printed pages.

you're right, Tim, my bad!

I think they got them from a FOIA request

narciso said...

well it's possible he might have been a rockefeller type republican, and a combat veteran who made it up the ranks would have been an inspiration, then again he might have listened to his tennis partner bandar a little to credulously, his behavior in the iraq matter, shapes my perspective about him.

Fabi said...

Big Mike -- that is true, but my point was geared toward a member of congress who may have received an email covering any type of State correspondence.

chickelit said...

It's as ballsy as a former President strutting across a tarmac in 107° heat, fueled by a raging desire to talk about his grandchildren.

Imagine if you will how uncomfortable the ex-Presidential balls must have been -- especially in briefs with no downward escape route.

tim in vermont said...

Is "Felony" the female version of the name "Felonious"? I think that she should just go with Felonious Clinton. Except nobody would be able to tell her from her husband.

tim in vermont said...

Abedin to Clinton: “We should talk about putting you on State email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam.”

Holy Crap! So they wouldn't even tell State's tech people what her email address was?


Clinton’s reply to Abedin’s get-a-State-account email was to offer to get a “separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

Yes, because imagine if her Yoga lessons made the Drudge Report. The context of this was missing a call with a foreign leader due to her emails falling in the spam folder.

Huma Abedin might be the one who does her in. I am now convinced that Hillary is gay (not that there's anything wrong with that!) and she is showing some male weakness for a pretty face. It's actually sort of endearing. But as George Clooney's character cried out in the movie O Brother Where Art Thou? "Never trust a female!"

tim in vermont said...

Clinton has admitted to destroying “private personal emails” as secretary of state. But Abedin’s admission that she used so-called “burn bags” — a container that material is placed in before it is destroyed — for some of her schedules is the first time anyone close to her has disclosed destroying public records.

The exact circumstances surrounding those destroyed records will likely come under intense scrutiny, critics said.

A former State Department official told The Post it was unprecedented for a diplomat to destroy a schedule like this.

“I spent eight years at the State Department and watched as four US ambassadors and two secretaries of state shared their daily schedules with a variety of State Department employees and US officials,” said Richard Grenell, former diplomat and US spokesman at the United Nations.

“I’ve never seen anyone put their schedule in the burn bag — because every one of them had a state.gov email address and therefore their daily schedules became public records, as required by law.”
- AP

Jeezum. How are they going to explain this one? Shiloh, Unknown, anybody?

tim in vermont said...

Maybe all of this stuff is desperation? I am sure that the Clintons have friends in the FBI. One of the stages of grief is bargaining.

damikesc said...

. The staggering thing is that the media isn't howling about it. Yes, I understand that they're grotesquely biased partisan hacks, but this is so egregious it's almost beyond belief.

You'd think so, especially after the stories in early 2001 where the press discussed how sleazy the Clintons were.

Until one realizes that they find the sleaze charming.

If this is true, this is more corrupt than anything Nixon could've even contemplated.

Did no republican member of congress ever receive an email from her during that period?

I assumed the Secretary directly would primarily deal with the President and all emails with State would go through people with State emails. I honestly doubt the GOP had any idea she did this.

We're going to see the oncoming Middle Class Anarchy. We've seen that the rules do not apply, at all, to the elites. That is poison for the country.

Weekends like this just make me weep, that we are stuck with Trump, and the electorate is distracted with Trump's random unforced Twitter outrages (the Star of David, and recollections of Trump's quoted comment about "little guys with yarmulkes counting my money") instead of the Clinton scandal machine.

...because the press wouldn't do the same with ANY Republican candidate. No Republican could do anything inoffensive enough to not have the press obsess over a tiny slight instead of a Democrat committing mass treason.

Your saying that implies that Trump is just like any other Republican. And that therefore, Republicans could make the same clear-eyed arguments, that the Republican candidate is not an ignoramus who says idiotic racist, sexist, bigoted crap. (I left out "homophobic." I don't actually recall Trump saying anything "homophobic." Trump's problem there is like his problem with abortion, guns and a host of other social issues; Trump is more Democrat, than Republican.)

But Donald Trump, unlike Mitt Romney, really is an ignoramus who has uttered a book-sized string of idiotic racist, sexist, bigoted crap.

And that makes it harder for Republicans to counter. The easiest counter -- my personal favorite -- is that Trump isn't a Republican.


Romney couldn't counter this. Mitt Romney.

John McCain had the NYT reporting a thoroughly false claim about an affair.

WHAT REPUBLICAN WOULDN'T HAVE THIS DONE TO THEM?

Answer: none. Not one.

Trump is hardly my favorite, but let's be realistic.

That is purely false. I nearly voted for Ted Cruz in my state's Republican primary. I don't think I've ever had an unkind thought about Ted Cruz, although I disagree with some of his Senate tactics. I know I've never written an unfavorable word about Cruz.

So you didn't back Cruz.

Colin Powell who I would have supported.

Colin in a Democrat. Let's be honest here. He's said he stays a Republican to annoy the party. He is voting for Hillary. No matter whom the GOP ran, he'd STILL vote Hillary.

Jeezum. How are they going to explain this one? Shiloh, Unknown, anybody?

Conservatives believed Democrats actually supported those laws.

damikesc said...

The exact circumstances surrounding those destroyed records will likely come under intense scrutiny, critics said.

That's adorable.

Unlike what Trump said months ago, Hillary could LEGITIMATELY murder somebody while being recorded by a camera and not get punished or seriously investigated.

No law applies to her in the slightest.

People might want to remind the Secret Service that I doubt they will have felonies excused because they're protecting her.

Michael K said...

"Colin in a Democrat. Let's be honest here. He's said he stays a Republican to annoy the party. He is voting for Hillary. No matter whom the GOP ran, he'd STILL vote Hillary."

I think Powell was affected by the Bush/Iraq thing and it probably pushed him left.

In 1996, I still consider him to be a superior candidate to Dole and a much better president than Clinton.

That is what counts, not what he says 20 years later.

damikesc said...

In 1996, I still consider him to be a superior candidate to Dole and a much better president than Clinton.

Better than Dole? Who, honestly, wasn't better than Dole? Forbes was better than Dole.

He'd have gone left regardless. Moment anybody attacked affirmative action, he was ready to jump.

It's just annoying watching "conservatives" taking such glee calling other conservatives "racist". Been happening for years. Powell is as bad as most.

TCom said...

a six-pointed figure consisting of two interlaced equilateral triangles, used as a Jewish and Israeli symbol.

Hegelian, stop while you're ahead. It's not a star of David.

Oh, and Hillary isn't Jewish. But keep on comparing me to Shouting Thomas, as if that makes any sense at all. I simply don't shoot my own side for ridiculous nonsense. You do, that's why nobody cares if you're on their team. You're worthless.

I Callahan said...

...because the press wouldn't do the same with ANY Republican candidate. No Republican could do anything inoffensive enough to not have the press obsess over a tiny slight instead of a Democrat committing mass treason.

Yes, Yes, and Yes. This is key to understanding the situation we're in today. I'm starting to think that the press actually carried Trump to the nomination for the sole reason that they thought he'd be the easiest to beat by whoever the Dem candidate is. It certainly explains all of the free press he got during primary season, and the dearth of the coverage he's getting now. The difference is that Trump at least is trying to fight back - all any other GOP candidate would do (except Cruz) is sit back and take it.

Sammy Finkelman said...

This is more actually to create the appearance of corruption (very important to the Clintons) rather than a sign of actual corruption. And actually, it might make sense to retain her if she will take the job. Unlike a replacement, she would not need to go through a confirmation process, and she hasn't served all that long, anyway.

richardsson said...

Yes, and while all this is happening, that silly minded propeller head Paul Ryan is talking about Anti-Semitic Sheriff's badges...or something. I'll bet he's still trying to figure out how Joe Biden got the best of him in that hilarious VP debate.