Game Changer Alert/CNN: Judge inches toward subpoenas in Clinton email server case

[99th_Monkey]

Judge inches toward subpoenas in Clinton email server case
By Laura Koran * CNN * Tue February 23, 2016

Washington (CNN)A federal judge paved the way Tuesday for possible future subpoenas by the State Department against Hillary Clinton and her longtime aide Huma Abedin.

Judge Emmet Sullivan granted a motion in a lawsuit against the State Department Tuesday that could pave the way for future action including, potentially, an order that the State Department subpoena Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin to obtain personal emails they withheld from the State Department.

The case is seeking answers to lingering questions about Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her time as secretary of state.

Sullivan appeared at times to be leaning towards ordering the subpoenas, but ultimately said he would wait to see what the order for discovery yields before making that ruling.

"This is the atypical case," Sullivan said, who emphasized earlier in the hearing that discovery is rare in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) cases, which pertain to information requests to the government.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-subpoena/index.html?sr=fbpol022316hillary-clinton-emails-subpoena0902PMVODtopLink&linkId=21558965

[HooptieWagon]

1. The risk of an indicted candidate is high.

And the State Dept investigation into the Foundation's pay to play is just getting started.

[99th_Monkey]

3. Exactly! But Hillarians are all like .. "La-La-La-La!! - Can't Hear You!!"

[reformist2]

69. Even worse, they're more likely to blame it all on the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

[PatrynXX]

87. of which they are a part of

smh

[yourpaljoey]

4. I do not want to see a brokered Primary

I'll bet there is a shit storm in the DNC smoking rooms even as we speak.

[HooptieWagon]

6. That's why the DNC's effort to knock out Sanders early.

Then if Clinton is indicted, an establishment replacement like Kerry or Biden can be nominated without the awkward problem of Sanders being there with many pledged delegates.
The problem with their plan is that with apportioned delegates mean a candidate can hang around a long time collecting delegates, unless they run out of money. There is no 'knockout' blow.

[bvf]

48. This is why Sanders has said he's in this

for the long haul.

[A Simple Game]

83. Like Hillary always says; you never know, something may happen to the other candidate. n/t

[840high]

86. heehee - so true.

[roguevalley]

59. its just amazing that they believe

we would accept someone else. Its contempt times infinity to believe that we would embrace anyone corrupt enough to just step in. Biden and anyone else would be ruined forever.

[restorefreedom]

98. yes, this is what i have been screaming for weeks

they are trying to drive him out before the convention so that when criminal charges are brought, they can stick in their demE candidate of choice.

NO WAY. i believe bernie is aware of this desire on their part and he WILL be at the convention with many, many delegates.

[bvar22]

115. If the DNC even suggests something like that,

it WILL destroy what passes for the Democratic Party today.
That would be a solid justification for either a 3rd Party of a clean sweep of what calls itself the Democratic Party....
you remember (if you are over 55)..the Party that used to represent The Poor, Working People, Unions, Civil Rights, Equal Protection and Equal Opportunity...yes, THAT Party.

[Skwmom]

26. The state dept investigating the state dept

[HooptieWagon]

30. Sort of.

They're investigating Clinton's activity in the State Dept visa vie the State Dept rules in place. So it's like an internal investigation. If anything criminal turns up, it'll get turned over to FBI I imagine.
What's funny here is that both the FBI/email and State Depr/pay to play investigations are headed up by agencies Obama appoints the heads to. He could stop them with a phone call. That leads me to believe there's something there, and Obama isn't willing to risk his legacy of integrity by covering up for her.

[Kentonio]

77. He can't stop an active investigation without risking indictment himself

Unless I'm missing something. The president isn't above the law.

[Skwmom]

101. That or it's a whitewash they will roll out with their "findings."

[TheBlackAdder]

2. Young man, what's wrong? You act as though the sword of Damocles hanging over your head!

.


Sooner or later, that hair will break!

.

[Wednesdays]

54. Moe Howard: "Lady, you must be psychic!"

nt

[nashville_brook]

5. this right here is bad enough...

this is what is so maddening about Clinton-World(tm). With all the crap they've put their supporters thru over the years, you'd think they'd do their best to avoid the appearance of impropriety, b/c they KNOW the GOP is going to come after them. why make it easy? why make it appear dirty? why appear so entitled?

"This particular case -- one of a number filed by conservative groups about Clinton's time as secretary of state --was originally filed by the private watchdog group Judicial Watch in 2013 over a document request related to Abedin was allowed her to simultaneously work for a foundation run by the Clintons and a private firm, while still consulting with the State Department."

REALLY? you're going to do both? solicit donations and work for the state dept? as if Dems wouldn't lose our minds if the Bush Admin had people trading favors like this.

[HooptieWagon]

8. "Simultaneously"

It sounds like she was the person coordinating the bribes.

[nashville_brook]

15. AND, it sounds like they know exactly what they're looking for.

[Merryland]

28. wow - that would be something. there is such a cloud around Hillary & Huma.

[cali]

9. So in your face corrupt it's impressive.

[peacebird]

29. Sounds like Huma was the one coordinating the donations perhaps? There is definitely the appearance

of corruption here. Massive donations to Clinton Foundation while she is SecState from countries that she approved weapons sales to?

[HooptieWagon]

34. That's how it looks to me.

She was in charge of handling the 'donations' and creating the documentation to make it look legit.

Also, I looked through a Foundation IRS report the other day, there were checks made to the William J Clinton Foundation and other family 'projects', plus to Dolores Huerta Foundation ($100,000), so it appears the Foundation wasn't a charity as was claimed, but a money-laundering operation to steer funds to themselves, Hillary's campaign, and buying up political allies and endorsements. Whole thing has the appearance of being corrupt as hell.

[peacebird]

35. It does, doesn't it? Corrupt to the very core.

[appalachiablue]

79. That's just incredible...

[xloadiex]

80. It just gets better and better

This is really who they want for their nominee?

[840high]

88. .+10

[Arazi]

7. It's not a right wing smear. It's real and it's not going away

its a fucking time bomb

[Jester Messiah]

31. John Edwards mk II. n/t

[Arazi]

33. Agreed and worse, a possible federal indictment

[TTUBatfan2008]

10. It's not a game changer...

...if the media continues to treat it like a minor inconvenience instead of a serious issue. Posting an article on their website doesn't cut it either. How about Chris Matthews start ranting and raving about this in the same manner that he rants and raves about socialism?

[99th_Monkey]

13. If Clinton's subpoenaed, it won't matter what Chris Matthews says ..

.. it WILL be a YUuuge game-changer. and it won't be in Hillary's
or the Democratic Party's favor.

Besides, Chris In-the-tank-for-Hillary Matthews is not the only news
commentator on M$M.

[shawn703]

14. The Republican nominee will make it an issue

It's not going to be ignored.

[TTUBatfan2008]

17. I agree...

I just wish the rest of the people on our side of the fence realized that it's not something you sweep under the rug. It will be a problem for our party in the general election if/when she becomes the nominee.

[grasswire]

93. Matthews' wife is getting money from Hillary donors.

Chris isn't going to tip that apple cart.

[NWCorona]

11. I bet there's zero mention of it tonight.

[nxylas]

44. I still say any indictment etc comes after the primaries

It sure as hell won't be timed to benefit Bernie.

[NWCorona]

46. If this was the Republicans I'd agree

But this is Obama's house so I'm not sure about that just let.

[CrispyQ]

51. This.

[speaktruthtopower]

92. No indictment unless there's an independent counsel or something really serious leaks

[Politicalboi]

104. Gee isn't that grand

I hope the indictments come ASAP! The GOP actually think Bernie is the easier one to beat. We all know the GOP are dumb.

[EdwardBernays]

12. Trump has vowed

that if he wins he will look into prosecuting her:

[840high]

89. Yes. Big headline on

many sites.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. And the drip continues

I understand why most people do not care, or get the story. It is highly technical... but if there is any kind of actual real legal maneuvering, this will change the nature of the race. (And no, the medial will have no choice but report on it)

[Dragonfli]

20. I respect fully your expertise in these matters, but we are talking national (paid off media)

Not the local honest sort of media you are known for and work in. I think they will ignore it unless, and until, the owners decide to go GOP all the way and then only to help the GOP, not report real news as they are supposed to. Just to play the hunder dogs that their owners want them to play, if they decide that is what they want.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. No they will not, you see...

let's take this to they actually issue a subpoena. Madam Secretary you have to go on Monday to talk to the DOJ... for a moment imagine they actually go there. Do you think Trump, Rubio or Cruz are not going to make this an issue? Trump calls Morning Joe every morning, well it seems. What do you think Trump will raise?

That is why they will be forced to actually cover it. Not because they want to. Every republican still in the race the Speaker of the House, and the Senate Leader will make it part of their daily talking points.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. This is silly

you think that if she managed, worst case, to get indicted that would not change the nature of the race?

And you think if she actually gets a subpoena, and yes I know what one is. that will not become the topic du jour for media and talking point for Republicans? I think that is naive.

No subpoena has yet been issued. When one is... you'll see

And I fully understand why (you are a HRC supporter) you are trying to minimize this. I hate to say it, but this reminds me of Watergate... it started really with four crooks getting arraigned, and a couple reporters asking a few questions.

We are at the asking some questions stage.

[99th_Monkey]

19. Judge says he'll "wait to see what the order for discovery yields before making that ruling"

That certainly sounds like "leaning" to me.

drip, drip, drip.

[NWCorona]

21. Yup! This isn't ending any time soon and

This isn't even the FBI investigation.

[840high]

91. It should not end. I want

to know the truth.

[Merryland]

27. and the Clinton Foundation has already been subpoenaed

- this doesn't bode well at all for Clinton & - if "selected" - for the Democratic Party.

[BreakfastClub]

32. This is just right wing silliness. There's nothing in those emails. It's just another Benghazi. nt

[Nuclear Unicorn]

37. Then why the fight that is so protracted it's spanning years into election season?

Assuming your point is correct than yours is an admission of epic mishandling of trivial matters.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

36. This is what America is looking for in a candidate!

[Tarc]

38. Camp Sanders, devoid of actual policies to discuss, turn to carrying the Free Republic's water

It's funny, in a sad sorta way, when you see threads about Benghazi, e-mail servers, and Monica Lewinsky in the Democratic Underground.

[magical thyme]

47. Do you think that if Democratics put their fingers in their ears and sing "LA!LA!LA!" the 40% of the

voting public that is Independent won't notice this in the news? Or that the GOP won't run with it in the general?

Or do you think that Clinton can win an election with her at best 30% of the voting public that are Democratic Party die-hard Hillary-can-do-no-wrong supporters?

Are you aware that the judge that made this decision was a Clinton appointee?

[Tarc]

100. Do you think I have an abundance of fucks to give?

You've lost the debate on substance, trail in virtually every state coming up in the next week, so I get it; desperate times, desperate measures.

Let me know in a few weeks how that worked for ya...

[magical thyme]

113. and if Hillary survives to the general, let us know how that works for you.

[Politicalboi]

105. Do you think that's going away?

The GOP WILL use those tactics. And why not see that in DU. Like we should hide all of Hillary's mistakes and only see sunshine and lollipops. This is why she is not the best choice for us at this time, or anytime. She's damaged beyond repair. Ignoring reality is not going to win us the WH.

[Jarqui]

39. What is Hillary likely to do if she is subpoenaed?

Like the guy that put in her servers, Pagliano, plead the 5th ... because she could incriminate herself answering these questions?

So how does the American public look on a candidate for President who cannot testify because she might incriminate herself? Like someone who has done something wrong and is trying to avoid a conviction?

This isn't like Benghazi - a manufactured allegation without proof. They have evidence material classified at the time of transmission happened from her server. Somebody broke the law. That debate is over. The questions now are how much damage did they do? Who is responsible? etc

If Hillary gets subpoenaed, she's in a very tough spot.

Huma or Cheryl may have to fall on their sword to try to save her.

I was thinking about why the DNC would be going along with this charade. What if they're like Hillary's followers who cannot contemplate her lying even in the face of harsh, irrefutable evidence? What if Hillary lied to the DNC about this stuff and the Clinton Foundation and they believed her? How else can one reconcile their actions?

Can't have a Clinton in public office without a good scandal going. Break out the popcorn. This could get entertaining.

[AtomicKitten]

40. It's stunning the party elite promote such a flawed candidate.

An indictment is a distinct possibility. Any other candidate with that hanging over their head would have been kicked to the curb. In addition, she would bring along her husband who was impeached (acquitted by Senate) for lying about diddling an intern in the WH. Both Clintons are deeply flawed, corrupt Third Way "Democrats." People will crawl over glass to keep them from getting back in the White House. As I note in my sig line, she would see the country (and party) burn if she could be queen of the ashes.

[magical thyme]

43. the Clintons are the party elite

who in the party is going to dare to shut them down? Only Bernie and O'Malley dared run against them. Very few have dared to not endorse them; most did so right out of the park.

[AtomicKitten]

49. I agree they have a stranglehold on the party.

They keep score and hold grudges. If she gets the nomination, all evidence points to her losing the general election. That faction isn't really the Democratic Party, it's the Clinton Party, and we all know how nicely that worked out for Alison L. Grimes.

[SciDude]

72. There really is no "party" they are all simply "Oligarchs"

[madville]

41. What happens to these drawn-out investigations

if Hillary wins? Would she be able to just shut all this down once she is sworn in?

[99th_Monkey]

50. Well, ask Obama. If O is so "in Hillary's corner" why isn't he shutting it down?

Unless of course POTUS can't do that, OR it would look too unseemly.

[madville]

63. The neutral thing to do

would be to appoint a special prosecutor to follow-up on whatever the FBI recommends/refers to DOJ. Let it fall on them to take it before a grand jury if the want to seek an indictment, that way it removes Obama and the AG's influence from the investigation.

[99th_Monkey]

65. We're talking here about a current 'front-running' candidate for the Democratic nomination ..

it boggles the mind how anyone imagines that this will end well, either for the Democratic Party,
or for the nation as a whole.

[840high]

94. I feel we've been had by

Hillary.

[magical thyme]

42. note that Judge Sullivan was appointed by Bill Clinton. nt

[SheenaR]

53. This ^^

All day... "blah blah Right Wing Conspiracy!"

But Mr Mook, the judge was appointed by Bill Clinton.

"The right wing obviously wants to take Sec Clinton down etc etc...

There's something here. And people are panicking. Rightfully so

[jillan]

81. Wow. How ironic is that?

[erlewyne]

45. Abedin and Hillary have personal matters I do not want to hear about,

I say lets drop this personal scenario and get
back to the great work Bernie is doing.

[99th_Monkey]

55. For me this is not about emails & servers

It's about this, and how it dovetails with Hillary's habit of "appearing" to be corrupt,
regardless of whether that is true or not. It's been her fatal flaw from day one, and
it just keeps getting worse as it compounds. over time.

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

[DonCoquixote]

52. We all know that the people behind this suit

Are hoping for a president Trump or Rubio. Despite my antipathy towards Hillary, I know 2 and 2 equals 4.

That being said, if Hillary turns out to be half guilty over this, she was stupid. There was no reason to risk anything with this private server.

[SDJay]

56. If It Even Gets To This Point

They will pick out an underling to dive onto the grenade and move on. It's not as if we're ever going to see HRC doing the frog march, much as the Fox News ilk dream about it every night.

[Helen Borg]

57. Hillary should exit the race and endorse Sanders.

It's the only responsible thing to do at this point.

[Karma13612]

61. agree 1000%. NT

[Duval]

76. I agree. nt

[bvf]

110. True, but you're assuming she feels any responsibility

to anyone except Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The way she probably sees it, she'll take her chances, and fuck the collateral damage.

[CoffeeCat]

58. But this woman has been thoroughly and completely vetted!!!!!!!!

The vetting will never end with Hilary.

She's most likely committing some kind of crimes RIGHT NOW, that will have to be vetted by some kind of investigative authority in the next 6-9 months.

Reason 23,945 why she should not be the Democratic nominee!

[basselope]

60. This is the one issue that honestly carries 0 weight with me.

I have 1 million and 1 reasons why I will not vote for Clinton.

This e-mail thing just isn't one of them.

It just REEKS of Monicagate all over again. Yes, Bill Clinton technically broke the law and committed perjury when he denied outside relationships during a deposition... but WHO THE FUCK CARES.

I'm sorry.. but whether she used her private server vs the state department server may be a law, but it just isn't an important enough law to ruin someone's career.

She voted for the Iraq war THAT should be the thing that ruins her career!!!

[99th_Monkey]

64. On one level I agree with you, however

Many observers (not just Republicans) are certain where this is all headed ...
yet another iteration of pay-to-play corruption at work in the political arena,
and Hilary's in it up to her eyeballs.

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

[basselope]

84. I run with you on the Clinton Foundation BS

The Clinton's have been using the Foundation as a tax shelter for years. Every year you read how they give such a large % of their income to charity, but in reality it is going into their own foundation. The foundation is also an easy way to gain access to them.

I'm not saying it doesn't do some good work.. however, the quid pro quo possibilities are far too much.

Things like this (http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.profile&ein=311580204#.Vsz5CvkrKUk) concern me and are very easy to attack her own.

But... I don't think we need to get into the e-mails to find the quid pro quos and I doubt very highly there is a "dress" in her e-mails where she said "make X contribution to my charity and I will get you that weapons deal.

I don't think much of her.. but I do know she isn't an idiot.

[99th_Monkey]

90. Thanks for your thoughts on the matter

and thanks for that link.. kinda illustrates how convoluted and bewildering the Clinton Foundations
books must look to someone skilled in evaluating & certifying a charity's above-boardness.

[DemocraticWing]

62. There's probably nothing in those emails, but if she gets indicted we can't nominate her.

If Clinton gets indicted and gets the nomination, we better dump her or the Republicans will win 49 states.

I don't think it's likely but this investigation isn't going away for whatever reason. I feel sorry for her because this reeks of desperation, but I've been around races where a candidate got indicted before. Voters don't care if you're guilty or not, they'll turn on you.

[AwakeAtLast]

99. Unfortunately I agree with you

I cannot believe it has come to this.

[amborin]

66. Hillary needs to withdraw from the primary process

[99th_Monkey]

71. In your dreams.

I have a pretty expansive imagination, but it's sorely challenged in trying to imagine
Hillary making such a decisions, i.e. to voluntarily withdraw from the race.

[DCBob]

67. You wish. The truth is this case will likely drag on well beyond the election in Nov...

and its still much ado about nothing.

From the Wash Post..

Sullivan’s decision will almost certainly extend through Election Day an inquiry that has dogged Clinton’s campaign, frustrating allies and providing fodder to Republican opponents.

FOIA law generally gives agencies the benefit of the doubt and sets a high bar for plaintiffs’ requests for discovery. However, one similar public records battle during Bill Clinton’s presidency lasted 14 years and led to depositions of the president’s White House counsel and chief of staff.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/us-judge-weighs-deeper-probe-into-clintons-private-email-system/2016/02/23/9c27412a-d997-11e5-81ae-7491b9b9e7df_story.html

[99th_Monkey]

68. IMHO this isn't just about emails and servers

because I suspect (as do others, not just Republicans) that this is going to lead
inexorably to much more serious issues, related to Hill's SoS conflict of interests
re: the Clinton Foundation. ...wbich in turn leads right back to the money-in-
politics corruption, which IS an valid & relevant campaign issue.

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

[DCBob]

73. Get back to me when something significant happens.

[JonLeibowitz]

103. Were you forced to comment on this thread? I doubt it. n/t

[DCBob]

114. When someone posts bullshit..

I do feel compelled to respond.

[LiberalLovinLug]

70. Enough with the damn emails!!! I stand with Bernie

I don't see why any Democratic party supporter should egg this story on. Because even IF she did not use secure servers for some of her private conversations, what is the worst crime? I found this site when I Googled "why clinton emails important". Sorry if this is a right wing site link. I really can't tell either way, but I'd like to provide a source for someone who may be her worst critic:

http://www.justice-integrity.org/faq/808-what-s-important-about-hillary-clinton-s-emails

These are his 3 main arguments:

Her critics claim she used her personal system to hide:

1) State Department’s laxity in the 2012 deaths of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and three support personnel in Benghazi;

2) Steps she and her team have taken to leverage her State Department post into support for the Clinton Foundation and her prospective 2016 presidential run; and

3) Suppression of other emails that might prove embarrassing to her or former President Bill Clinton.


1. Any complicity or laxity with regards to the Benghazi attacks has been already thoroughly been proven as balderdash. This is supported by even the Republican darling David Petraeus.

2. Yes this is a serious charge. But my gawd, in the light of all the shenanigans and Citizens United, and other backdoor politics in Washington, and the fact that it is the GOP that is "outraged' more than Bernie Sanders, who has the most to lose by unfair fund raising is telling. Yes in an ideal world, if she misused her position to gain favour or money it should be prosecuted. But if you did that almost every Washington politician would be found guilty if they held them all to such a standard......especially the two-faced Republicans.

3. Conjecture

Basically, I guess I'm saying that sadly I and others almost expect a certain level of corruption on the highest levels. It is built into the system. It is highly cynical and hypocritical of the GOP to be crowing about influence peddling. Maybe that's what my main point is. Same deal as Benghazi. Where was the investigations and outrage when under the Bush admin, there were 3x those kinds of attacks. IF she is the winner of the primary, we Bernie supporters, will HAVE to stand with her. And make no mistake, the words Emails, and Benghazi will pop up every day until November, and probably after. Sorry, I just don't think piling on helps the parties' chances of winning the general. If the winner is: Bernie it will be awe inspiring. If Clinton it will be depressing but acceptable as a stop gap, not to mention the upcoming appointment in the SCOTUS. If it is Trump, it would be a crippling disaster.

I just think that compared to War Crimes, ignoring warnings about 9/11 before that. Not to mention all the other duplicitous BS like No child left behind, and the Clean Air Act to name a couple. All the racist, sexist, gun worshiping crap oozing out of the GOP camp they are scandalously hypocritical. But you just know that with the help of the MSM (not just Fox) they will keep this story cooking as some kind of benchmark for the ability to be President. WTF? Sorry, but email management is not high on my priority list for being Commander in Chief.



Now all that said, without harping on Clinton, who is no better or worse than other establishment politicians who are just behaving as every other Washington politician has before them, trying to suck $ out of every hole they can find, Sanders seems like a different animal. And someone that may just put an end to that $ reliance that forces otherwise decent politicians to push the envelope in ethics. I will not be one that worships the ground he walks on and I will be understanding if he cannot push through all the platforms he has put forth. But he at least will try. Try to fight the machine that Hillary may have just felt compelled to be a part of in order to level the playing field.

[99th_Monkey]

75. "expect a certain level of corruption on the highest levels. It is built into the system." <- Huh?

Did you really just say that? We're supposed to "just get used to it" i.e. look the other way when
we see corruption, because everybody is doing it?

Wow.

BTW - As I've said numerous times upstring, I don't believe this is just about Hillary's "damn emails" or
her servers, it's where this all appears to be headed, and it's not just Republicans saying so...

Many observers think that this is going to lead inexorably to much more serious issues, related to Hill's
SoS conflict of interests re: the Clinton Foundation. ...wbich in turn leads right back to the money-in-
politics corruption, which IS an valid & relevant campaign issue.

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

[LiberalLovinLug]

95. Saying nobody cheats on taxes or speed on the highway doesn't make it so

If you actually read the whole post, you see that I share your concerns with this insidious democracy killing corruption, and that I welcome a Sanders administration and his pledge to do something about money in politics.

Admitting there is a problem is not an endorsement. You are leaping to conclusions to the point of actually inventing what I said and then quoting it in Straw Man fashion to argue against it. We should definately NOT get used to it, but the fact is we are. That is why Bernie is such a breath of fresh air. He came out of left field (literally). He had the balls to call out the Matrix.

All I am saying is that Hillary is no worse, and probably better (if you include the hypocritical Repukes) than any Washington politician, even if the worst of what she is accused of is proven. It should NOT be tolerated in an ideal world. But that is the world we live in. Sad but I do not see how you can believe...what?...that every other Washington politician has never engaged in equivocal money grubbing behaviour in their desperate attempts to get the $ needed to simply run for office? Even the liberal hallowed Grayson has been accused of breaking federal campaign finance laws.

The point is two fold: The first is that it is imperative that we elect Sanders to STOP this kind of abuse. That it is more than just Hillary, it is the way the whole system corrupts. But it is a kind of sanctimonious crusade to expect all Washington politicians to not stoop to unethical behaviour when it comes to raising $....when the whole system itself is corrupt.

The second point is that if Hillary is the Presidential nominee....all this hysteria about present day typical Washington behaviour, even though it is ingrained, will only help an even more corrupt person be in charge.

That is why I said I will be "depressed" if Hillary wins, and she will only be a "stopgap". But to act like taking advantage of a position in order to gain $ for a future campaign (when the other side has billions of sleazy Koch Bros and other influence peddling $ themselves), by playing the game in place, and then crowing about it as some kind of unique shocking TMZ story to the point of helping Trump become President instead is ludicrous.

[99th_Monkey]

107. Since Bernie succeeded in making Wall St. one of (if not THE) central issue(s) in the primary race

along with corrupt campaign financing ... then it's probably true that Hillary simply didn't
see this coming, i.e. assumed all candidates would be "using the existing system" of fund
raising for their campaigns, i.e. they'd "all be doing it".

Is this ^ part of your concern?

I agree totally that it's "not just Hillary" who's taking legalized bribery, it's most (if not all
- sans Sanders) DC politicians; which is precisely why it IS such a big fucking deal -- DC's
rotten to the core.

Personally, I don't see much hope at all for turning this shit around unless Sanders wins
both primary & GE elections. Candidates like him don't come along very often. He's a
brilliant statesman and campaign strategist whose put it all on the line for his country, and
we all need him to win this thing, this election.

The TPP is lurking in the shadows, waiting to be ratified, and if Citizens United survives
Bernie's challenge I fear it will become even more solidly ensconced into the public woodwork.
If Hillary manages to win the primary and GE (which I doubt) and if she's not indicted before
she's sworn-in (do we really want this spectacle?) .. then her role as "stop-gap" will be
minimal .. because this nation will quickly become even more thoroughly "owned" by nefarious
corporate interests.

We all need Sanders to win this primary, and to win the GE. Anything short of that leaves us
quibbling over crumbs.

[LiberalLovinLug]

112. I agree

I remain cautiously optimistic, but I have to be prepared for Bernie not winning.

I also think that Bernie's message is that he doesn't want to use inflated news created scandals, and GOP faux outrage over things like Benghazi and a misused email account to cloud the actual issues surrounding inequalities in how the wealth is distributed in America. And the possibilities available to the country if this were brought more in line. Even if the worst case scenario...a politician was caught cheating trying to get a leg up, there are so many more important and larger issues facing the country.

The impending TPP is another important reason to have Bernie win the Whitehouse. Trade agreements themselves, in principle, are not a bad thing. But that deal is so too-big-to-fail weighed in favour of corporate interests over labour, evironment, and is a recipe for each nation "out-austeritying" the other to attract business. And if a country, after an election changed governments, ever dared to go the other way....enact new healthcare requirements for corporations, or ban fracking, or enact union friendly labour laws, or any other thing that may curtail profits from a corporation, they can sue for loss of profits, which comes out of the pockets of the citizens of that country ultimately. Its evil.

But part of me thinks this all must be too good to be true. Or another cliche...I'll see it to believe it. So my heart wants to celebrate already, but my head says be prepared to have to work with the Third Way Queen who hopefully got the message loud and clear, and will at least be forewarned by a large new Democratic base on what we really want. I think she won't have such an easy time as Barrack in thumbing her nose at the Dem base and appointing a Goldman Sachs stooge to run the finance department.

A guest on the Stephanie Miller show, I forget who, was saying that instead of many Bernie supporters criticizing Hillary for switching so many positions more to the left they should celebrate that Bernie has made her move to the left on those issues. I think even she never saw this liberal revolution coming and if she would have only known sooner?......I just hope she now understands the changing face of the Democratic party...back to the roots and FDR, and making it more possible for a chance for anyone to make things better for themselves and families.

[appalachiablue]

116. Very similar thinking about this election and Sanders to mine. DC is rotten to

the core. Bernie is exceptional, if he doesn't make it now another candidate with like views will be barred by the 2 corporate parties, Bank on it.

With TPP coming, climate change and unprecedented job disruption from robotics and AI, the challenges are immense.

[Generic Brad]

74. But no actual subpoenas have been issued

Unless they are, this is nothing more than a continuation of the steady decades long smear on Clinton's integrity. It's the same crap as the White House travel office. The same crap as Whitewater. The same crap as Vince Foster. The same crap as Benghazi.

Possible future subpoenas? Until there are actual ones, this is nothing but unsubstantiated rumor. It's not like the enemies of the Clintons have never spread false rumors before.

[99th_Monkey]

82. This is not simply about emails, servers & such..

it leads back to a central issue in this primary campaign, i.e. the corrupting
influence of money in politics, in this case an apparent pay-to-play arrangement
Hills had as SoS, with donors to the Clinton Foundation.

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At press conferences in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.
http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187
[/div class="excerpt"]

[AzDar]

78. Jeebus. Hillary and the Dem Establishment are gonna drive this bus right over the cliff...

[YOHABLO]

85. I tell you what, run for President and boy don't the bugs come out of the woodwork.

Hypothetically speaking, what would happen if she were indicted? What if she had to suspend her candidacy? This could get very very nasty. The Repubs are licking their chops.

[Jefferson23]

96. Do we know the law firm representing Hillary? n/t

[ChiciB1]

97. Very Interesting, Very Disturbing And For Me...

Been around a long time and am seeing a Democratic Party that's been OBVIOUSLY doing all they can to rid itself of Bernie Sanders. Still, there are many people "inside the Beltway" who DO NOT like the Clintons, but will do what's needed because they FEAR what may happen.

They too are in a precarious position because it's like walking on ice that may or may not be "THIN." How much of a gamble are people willing to take? How much is the Democratic Party willing to put on the line for her?

Getting everyone corralled in one place isn't going to be easy. But hey, TPTB have been hard at work for so long now and so far TPTB have WON every single battle!

We The People seem to have lost every battle so maybe the Clintons ARE holding all the ACES!

All I know is that I've never trusted her and I DO NOT believe her as she shifts her message almost every week that sounds so much like Bernie's, and the one HE'S ALWAYS advocated. The fact that she's shifting and people aren't clearly seeing it OR MSM is reporting it is offensive enough for me.

[NowSam]

102. I predict they will drag their heels and drag their heels

Everyone knows... "The emperor has no clothes" - so sayeth the great Dick Van Dyke.

[Gothmog]

108. ANALYSIS: No, Hillary Clinton Did Not Commit a Crime ... at Least Based on What We Know Today

There was not crime committed here. Dan Abrams (son of Floyd Abrams) has some good analysis here http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/analysis-hillary-clinton-commit-crime-based-today/story?id=36626499

In the Wall Street Journal, Judge Michael Mukasey seems to be arguing that because this all just feels wrong and even criminal-y, Clinton should at least be charged with a misdemeanor. That is, of course, not how the law can or should work. In fact, Judge Mukasey learned the hard way that misstating the law when discussing the case against Clinton can be hazardous. Judge Mukasey also echoed the conservative talking point that the case against Clinton is eerily similar to the charges against former general David Petraeus: "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." Except that it is nothing like that case. Apart from the possible charge, there are actually few or no similarities from a factual perspective as the lead prosecutor in the Petreaus case explained in an op-ed in USA Today:

"During his tenure as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, Petraeus recorded handwritten notes in personal journals, including information he knew was classified at the very highest level. . .

Both the law and his oath required Petraeus to mark these books as 'top secret' and to store them in a Secured Compartmented Information Facility. He did neither. Rather, Petraeus allowed his biographer to take possession of the journals in order to use them as source material for his biography.

Importantly, Petraeus was well aware of the classified contents in his journals, saying to his biographer, Paula Broadwell on tape, 'I mean, they are highly classified, some of them. They don't have it on it, but I mean there's code word stuff in there.' When questioned by the FBI, Petraeus lied to agents in responding that he had neither improperly stored nor improperly provided classified information to his biographer. Petraeus knew at that time that there was classified information in the journals, and he knew they were stored improperly."

In the law, intent can be everything. Petraeus clearly knew he was violating the law, but based on what we know today, there is no evidence - not suppositions or partisan allegations but actual evidence - that Clinton knew that using a private email server was criminal or even improper at the time. Even assuming for argument's sake she created the server to keep her emails out of the public eye, that is in no way remotely comparable to the Petraeus case. Efforts to contrast the two cases fall flat factually and legally....

To be clear, none of this means Clinton won't be charged. There may be a trove of non-public evidence against her about which we simply do not know. It's also possible that the FBI recommends charges and federal prosecutors decide not to move forward as occurs in many cases. No question, that could create an explosive and politicized showdown. But based on what we do know from what has been made public, there doesn't seem to be a legitimate basis for any sort of criminal charge against her. I fear many commentators are allowing their analysis to become clouded by a long standing distrust, or even hatred of Hillary Clinton.

Dan is a good lawyer and this is a good analysis of the law on this issue

[99th_Monkey]

111. That's a fine analysis, but as I say upstring: for me this isn't really about emails or servers

as much as it's about where this whole investigation appears to be headed: i.e. it's more about
questionable goings-on with what appears to be "pay-to-play" arms deals involving the Clinton
Foundation and the SoS's office, which David Sirota has written about.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1321851

[Warren DeMontague]

109. We've been promised over and over what an indestructible candidate she is, she's the "smart" choice

I really am gonna get no pleasure out of watching those people be very very wrong if she's indicted in the next several months. I fear by then it will be too late, though.