This seems more devastating than I believed.

[PDittie]

I have been of the opinion that even though Hillary Clinton probably violated the law with respect to classified information passing through her personal server, that she would escape indictment. You know, just because. But I seem to be more generous than this guy.

More to the point, though, you fear that the most likely Democrat nominee, having just been seriously wounded by this week’s IG report, is manifestly vulnerable to a much greater wound in the form of a criminal indictment for misconduct that far transcends what the IG report dealt with. Specifically, as a sophisticated observer, you are aware that Former Secretary Clinton’s intent (known in criminal law as mens rea), or lack of same, is not what matters in this case. Rather, the applicable legal standard is a mere “gross negligence” one, as specified in the standard national security non-disclosure agreement that she signed and its underlying criminal statutes.

This guy, who worked at DOJ -- when now-FBI Director Comey served as deputy AG there during the W Bush admin. -- says that if the Bureau recommends indictment to a federal grand jury and they don't return one... that would still be a mortal blow to her presidential aspirations.

So what you must contemplate, as a leader of the Democratic Party, is the very real possibility of your likely presidential candidate actually being indicted, on criminal charges, sometime between now and, say, (a) the time of the convention at the end of July; (b) the time of the general election in early November; or (c) Inauguration Day in January. Which possibility would you prefer?

Obviously, the answer might well be possibility (d): No indictment at all. But if that were not a realistic possibility, and remembering that your absolute imperative in this election cycle is to avoid at all costs ending up with a President Donald Trump, your preference is clear: You want a Democrat other than either Clinton or Sanders to go up against Trump in November, unorthodox as that might now sound.

I'm not sure that I agree, especially when you consider the scenario for replacing her that he is suggesting (President Biden/Hillary's running mate, anyone?).

In short, you want a Biden/Kerry ticket, a Kerry/Biden one (less likely), or a ticket with either one of them (preferably Vice President Biden) together with whomever Hillary Clinton picks as her running mate in July.

What? An already-chosen running mate? Yes, her running mate, chosen by her as the presidential nominee — because you want Clinton to be replaced as your nominee (i.e., after the convention), but not with Senator Sanders, for all the reasons stated above.

Anyway, we'll wait and see what happens.

[BillZBubb]

1. On the point of an FBI recommendation for indictment, I agree.

The Hillary camp has been building a pre-emptive defense that she didn't "willfully" break securities laws and the only breaches were on items later re-classified as secrets.

For some of the statutes, those are usable defenses. But other statutes are much stricter and it is, given what is now known, very likely she violated the law. The writer of the article is absolutely correct on that.

After the devastating IG report, the chances of the FBI recommending indictment have gone way up.

[leveymg]

60. Actual indictment is not the trigger. A finding she violated her security oath disqualifies her.

There is no mandatory duty by the FBI to make a recommendation, one way or the other, whether to indict. That decision will be made by the Department of Justice, and that decision and the timing of it -- or, most likely a decision to simply put it off until the end of the term when the President can pardon her -- are purely within the prosecutorial discretion of the AG. That is, obviously, a political matter.

So, what is important about the FBI report is a finding of the facts and applicable laws. If the Comey Report finds she violated her Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, that means she broke the law. That should be enough in any sane world for the party bosses to deny Hillary the candidacy. All, hopefully, before the Convention so there isn't a pall of uncertainty hanging over the whole thing.

And, BTW, my gut tells me it's going to be Elizabeth Warren who can pull it back together again.

[Hortensis]

103. Of course you like what PDittie said. PDittie,

you don't fool anyone. You're busy trying to undermine support for the Democratic Party nominee.

7 more days. Churn it out because then you have to post it elsewhere.

[BillZBubb]

105. Uh, genius, I'm not PDittie. You got a beef with him/her, then reply to him/her.

Second, Hillary isn't the nominee. Even someone like you ought to know that.

Third I agreed with a part of what PDittie posted about Hillary being in violation of the law even if she didn't "willfully" break it. That's simply a fact. You don't like it, tough.

[One Black Sheep]

2. Director Comey seems like a stand-up guy, and I think if he finds anything fishy

that he will do the right thing and pursue charges, even against such a powerful and elite figure as Hillary Clinton...

[Demsrule86]

9. Strange attractions here...

Comey is a Republican and is not a stand up guy...there will be no indictment but he and his GOP buddies are dragging it out...for political purposes...and you guys write nice things about him...and some BSSERS even weep for poor Trump who has an unfair ad about how he wanted to profit from the 2008 housing debacle and showed no interest in how it affected Americans...aww to Bssers and right wing.

[brush]

56. Comey is somewhat rare for a repug, he's actually not a bad guy, which is why he won't . . .

recommend an indictment.

He's the one who rushed to then AG Ashcroft's hospital bedside to prevent White House counsel Gonzalez from forcing him to sign documents to reauthorize Bush's domestic surveillance program.

He prevented it, and he also came out years later, as FBI director, against the many killings of unarmed black men.

He'll probably just come out with a report on an unnoticed Friday afternoon news dump, after the election, that finds no criminal intent and therefore no recommendation, and that will be the end of it.

[CorporatistNation]

15. The Recommendation Will Be Forthcoming As The International Reputation Of The FBI (AS Well AS Comeys

IS ON THE LINE! This reputation will NOT be sacrificed to prop up ANY candidate much less one who due exclusively to her own words and actions is so lacking in personal and professional CHARACTER!

MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[azurnoir]

70. you do realize Comey was appointed Director of the FBI by President Obama?

In May 2013, it was reported, and in June 2013 it was made official, that President Barack Obama would nominate Comey to be the next Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, replacing outgoing director Robert Mueller. Comey was reportedly chosen over finalist Lisa Monaco, who had overseen national security issues at the Justice Department during the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.

Comey was confirmed by the Senate on July 29, 2013, for a full ten-year term running the Federal Bureau of Investigation.[42] He was sworn in as FBI director at 4:32 pm on September 4, 2013.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey

[laserhaas]

81. Yeah...so was Eric Holder

What did such...get...U.S.?

[azurnoir]

89. Holder the guy that says Snowden did the US a public Service? That Holder?

Eric Holder says Edward Snowden performed a 'public service'

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder says Edward Snowden performed a "public service" by triggering a debate over surveillance techniques, but still must pay a penalty for illegally leaking a trove of classified intelligence documents.

"We can certainly argue about the way in which Snowden did what he did, but I think that he actually performed a public service by raising the debate that we engaged in and by the changes that we made," Holder told David Axelrod on "The Axe Files," a podcast produced by CNN and the University of Chicago Institute of Politics.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/30/politics/axe-files-axelrod-eric-holder/index.html

[laserhaas]

92. Holder is a hero...hus trial should only be based on mens rea

I've been a whistle blower for 15 years, and know what Snowden claims, about the cover ups, deaf ears and chicken chit reporters/ federal agents ...is all true.

Also, I know, Eric Holder is a Wall Street tool.

Holders says he's pissed off that anyone would dare question his proper record against Wall Street ( record of zero cases lost because of zero cases being brought).

F...k him and his haughty arse

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Eight more days...

Star Member Skinner (61,708 posts)
1. When the voting is over the primary is over on DU.

This has gone on long enough. Once the voting is done I have no interest in pretending everyone doesn't already know the outcome.

My opinion is that Donald Trump represents an unprecedented threat to this country, and I have no interest in providing a platform for people to act like a Trump presidency isn't such a big deal. I have permitted it during primary season because many people seem determined to pretend we live in a fantasyland where Republicans don't exist -- but once the primary is over reality sets in and we can no longer afford to ignore our Republican opponent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910453

[Sunlei]

4. Thumbs up DU

Time to discuss what kind of personal relation$$hip Republican Trump had with terrorists like Gadafi.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. I am curious about Trump's ties to Paul Castellano

[amandabeech]

31. Castellano was shot in '85 or '86.

Donald was active at that time, and I have no doubt that Trump knew who these people were given the businesses that he was in. Are you suggesting that Trump is still involved with the various mobs?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Don't know but if you google "Trump Mafia" there is a wealth of information.

[amandabeech]

36. Thanks for the suggestion! n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. He bought concrete from them in NY and land from them in NJ.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/02/ted-cruz/yes-donald-trump-has-been-linked-mob/

[amandabeech]

43. Not that I was going to vote for him anyway,

but that will be good fodder for the Dem nominee.

There are quite a few "good government" types among independents and moderate R voters from the NE, Great Lakes and Pacific Northwest who will be appalled by this.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. The Politifact article makes it sound as if the Mob were the only source of concrete in NYC.

I read that Trump used them because they used ready quick cement which was cheaper.

[amandabeech]

113. Once upon a time, I practiced law in Manhattan.

Construction, waste hauling and transportation are totally mobbed up. There are simply no doubts. And I would say the same about New Jersey and Chris Christie.

[CorkySt.Clair]

7. Can't wait for the BoB rapture to begin

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. Hallelujah

[CorkySt.Clair]

18. I love your gifs

My favorite was the one of Vince McMahon a while back after a favorable poll for HRC AKA "shock poll". I giggled all day.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. This one

[CorkySt.Clair]

20. Yes!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. I rarely, rarely, rarely... watch the WWE but Vince is a character. Here is Trump being presidential

[CorkySt.Clair]

23. I don't watch it eithe. Just the hammed up expression on his face.

I've seen the Trump WWE stuff. I can't imagine what the rest of the world must be thinking right now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. They must think we lost our collective minds.

[CorkySt.Clair]

25. No doubt

They're probably even more befuddled that some can't see the what the stakes are.

Have you traveled much? What country would you like to visit most?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. I have traveled a lot of our great country. The only foreign country I visited was Canada.

What country would you like to visit most?

U K.


Trump said it would be a good thing if we "rattled" other nations.

Idiot...

[CorkySt.Clair]

28. I've been a couple of times

its a wonderful country. If you go try to see some of the countryside outside of London as well.

I've also been to France, Scotland and Ireland. I'd really like to go to South Africa someday.

His picking a fight with the mayor of London, and even Cameron who I am not a fan of, was an embarrassment to the country.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. David Cameron is a conservative but he's not a lunatic.

Isn't it interesting that the two foreign nations where Trump is most popular is Russia and China. That should tip any sentient person off.

[CorkySt.Clair]

32. Great point

I watch Prime Ministers Questions in the Parliament YouTube channel. That's a good description. His fiscal policies are not great but I do give him some credit for acknowledging climate change is real and man made. Their conservatives are a bit different than ours in many respects. I suspect there are many conservatives here who view Cameron as a leftist. The Ted Cruz's and Jim Inhofes of the world etc.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. The Conservatives in the U K have made peace with marriage equality.

If it was Cameron v Trump I would vote for Cameron in a minute.


I would vote Labour, of course... They are in a lot of trouble... Corbyn is leading them over the cliff...

[CorkySt.Clair]

42. I would be for Cameron as well

The other day I had a friend ask me if it was Trump vs. W Bush who would you take?

It's the ultimate quandary. I very reluctantly said W because Trump is so dangerous. Ugh.

I liked Ed Milliband. He was awkward but I think a genuinely good person who is right on the issues. Corbyn is an interesting character. It seems easy to draw the comparisons with Bernie. I think Corbyn is actually to the left of Bernie which is why he'll never be PM. My guess is he is ousted before the next election and replaced by someone more mainstream.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Bush the candidate in 00 or Trump the candidate in 016.

The former, every single time... He ran as a uniter and not a divider. He never gratuitously disrespected his rivals or other groups.
He was just misguided, imho. Trump is a bad guy.


But there's a paradox... After running a middle of the road campaign he governed as an uber hawk and got us into a unwinnable war. The war in Afghanistan was justified. The M E would be a lot more tranquil place if she just stuck to there.

As to Milibrand. You can have the best intentions but they are for naught if you cant get elected or implement them.

[CorkySt.Clair]

46. Yes, you have to cross the goal line

Milliband couldn't do that. His brother seems to have a bit more charisma. Labour needs someone more mainstream than Corbyn and sooner or later that will become clear I think.

Interesting point re: 2000 Bush vs. how he governed. I had sort of forgotten how he campaigned in 2000.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

58. I've been to the UK and all the Scandinavian countries. Most of them are befuddled by the U.S.

Some think we're an immature gun-toting country still sowing our wild oats. A lot of head-shaking was going on during the Bush era. "What has happened to that country?"

The have the same sentiment that many of us here have.....

It was a delight to be around so many sane people.

[B Calm]

11. The final vote is at the convention.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Eight more days per the owner of this site, fifteen on the outside.

Star Member Skinner (61,708 posts)
1. When the voting is over the primary is over on DU.

This has gone on long enough. Once the voting is done I have no interest in pretending everyone doesn't already know the outcome.

My opinion is that Donald Trump represents an unprecedented threat to this country, and I have no interest in providing a platform for people to act like a Trump presidency isn't such a big deal. I have permitted it during primary season because many people seem determined to pretend we live in a fantasyland where Republicans don't exist -- but once the primary is over reality sets in and we can no longer afford to ignore our Republican opponent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910453

[Fawke Em]

47. This is going to be a very quiet place.

Can we come back when she's indicted and has to step down?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. ""Wish in one hand, crap in the other. See which one gets filled first."

[upaloopa]

55. You could stay and help defeat Trump

But I never thought Bernie was your motivation all along

[grasswire]

49. the voting isn't over until June 14. nt

[B Calm]

66. Then the word underground loses all meaning. Should we rename it for the few Hillary supporters

here on du to democraticbeltway or democraticestablishment?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. Clinton Underground has a nice ring, yes?

[B Calm]

87. If you like it. I like democratic establishment.

[senz]

100. Oh yes, forget all those "other" Democrats

and start worshiping 24/7. Why, it could lead to a new religion. Imagine little chapels springing up across the country with a giant photo of the savior above the altar and a recording of one of the $250K speeches playing nonstop.

Yes, we could use a new religion in this country. Couldn't be any worse than L. Ron Hubbard.

Go for it: Clinton Underground!!

(Wait a minute. If you take the name literally, the visuals don't look so good. Eh, forget it.)

[jack_krass]

88. OnePercentWannabeesUnderground

[dchill]

96. +1

OPWU!

[senz]

101. Best suggestion yet.

[tokenlib]

109. They should just rename it "Clinton Third Way"...

makes it clear who they are at least, and who at least some of them want to exile...

Honestly any objective discussion on the DOJ, FBI and Hillary's server and the Foundation will have to be done elsewhere....probably about weeks ago.

[geek tragedy]

14. techinally DC votes on the 14th, so 15 more days at DU.

Outside DU, it will be Hillary vs the Republicans on June 8.

[leveymg]

63. That was penned before the State Dept IG report. Things are changing radically. Hill is unviable.

It makes no sense until we see what actually happens after the 1000 times more explosive FBI Report, and what actually transpires at the Convention, for Skinner to alienate 85% of the DU community, who are still not with Hillary.

Change often happens slowly, but when things do change, change flushes away all assumptions held by the status quo. Your "eight more days" until the Great DU Purge assumption is about to get flushed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. Please take it up with the administrator

Star Member Skinner (61,708 posts)
1. When the voting is over the primary is over on DU.

This has gone on long enough. Once the voting is done I have no interest in pretending everyone doesn't already know the outcome.

My opinion is that Donald Trump represents an unprecedented threat to this country, and I have no interest in providing a platform for people to act like a Trump presidency isn't such a big deal. I have permitted it during primary season because many people seem determined to pretend we live in a fantasyland where Republicans don't exist -- but once the primary is over reality sets in and we can no longer afford to ignore our Republican opponent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910453

[leveymg]

68. The outcome is now less known. Skinner is not bound by that. Things have changed.

Feel free to leave when that dawns on you.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

69. Please see Post 65

[leveymg]

72. Yes, that is where the dotted line connects to.

That statement isn't a binding commitment by Skinner to do anything specifically. Also, fast-moving events have rendered its premise obsolete. Don't hang any assumptions on that one.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

74. Please see Post 69

[leveymg]

76. I think we're in a Boolean Loop. Never liked that sitcom, anyway. See you later.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

79. Enjoy the rest of your Memorial Day.

[leveymg]

84. I still owe you a drink. Till then.

[senz]

102. I love people who say things like

Boolean Loop. Takes me back to a purer, more innocent time.

Thank you.

[frylock]

111. bookmarked

[Logical]

80. We can still call out Hillary and point out her flaws. Nothing against the TOS there. As long as...

we will vote for her.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. I doubt Skinner allows indictment pumping but I can't speak for him.

[Logical]

83. You must not have been here in 2012. Plenty of Obama complaints about how he ran campaign and.....

handled the debates.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

85. I was here...

Posters will be able to constructively criticize Secretary Clinton. They will not be able to call for her indictment.

[Logical]

90. I 100% agree. No one should want her arrested.......

But I understand the theory, even if wrong, that if they think Bernie can beat trump and hillary cannot then eliminating Hillary helps the dems.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

91. When everybodyhad their hair on fire after the first Rmoney-Obama debate I urged people to be calm.

The only time I felt uncertain about PBO's prospects was in the Fall/Winter of 011 when the market was tanking but he pulled ahead in the Spring and never really looked back.

[Logical]

93. I think Hillary will destroy Trump. But lets be honest, the american people are not too bright.....

and the reality TV mode of this country scares me.

When TV ads for for political campaigns it scares me.

[redStateBlueHeart]

112. +1

[asuhornets]

6. ...

[smiley]

35. Let's hope it wakes some people up the train wreck that is Hillary's campaign.

You can go back to sleep now.

[asuhornets]

39. There is no train wreck..Hillary has ran a positive campaign

unlike Sanders. Soon he will be a footnote.

[Demsrule86]

8. He is right winger appointed in 81 ...Reagan guy

and a Hillary hater...Not a credible source.

[IdaBriggs]

10. You don't have to make disproving your falsehoods so easy.

From the link, his bio:

Dan Metcalfe is a registered Democrat who has long said that he will vote for Hillary Clinton in November “if she escapes indictment and manages to become the Democratic presidential nominee.” He served as Director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy for more than 25 years, during which time he handled information-disclosure policy issues on the dozens of Clinton Administration scandals that arose within public view, as well as two that did not. Since retiring in 2007, he has taught secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law.

[Demsrule86]

26. I don't care what he claims...he supports the GOP and he was appointed in 81

And he is a longtime Clinton hater...you want to believe this guy do so...but it is BS.

[Fawke Em]

37. These people aren't and they've all had involvement with similar cases:

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/24/intel-vets-urge-fast-report-clintons-emails

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veteran_Intelligence_Professionals_for_Sanity

[Demsrule86]

29. one google search

One google search...I gave you one page -there is plenty more...See what Danny boy has written about Clinton...he can call himself a Democrat if he wants but he is no such thing...false hope Ida...he has no new info either...just constant bashing.




https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Daniel+J+metcalfe+hates+hillary+clinton

[thesquanderer]

12. It's a good article, also consistent with this one...

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/20160529_What_if_Clinton_were_indicted__post-DNC_.html

If Clinton runs into serious trouble, the way "the party" to most easily get what it wants is for her to voluntarily step aside, but to do so after she has the nomination, when there are no longer any delegates to deal with, and the decision can be made by just a handful of people at the top.

But it is unlikely that she would step aside unless she (a) sees serious legal problems for herself and (b) her stepping aside includes some kind of resolution to those issues (pardon, generous plea, etc.).

[senz]

107. It's hard to imagine her voluntarily stepping aside.

She has been running for president for at least 15 years and most likely fantasizing about it much longer. But if the alternative were to be something as dire as arrest and imprisonment, then perhaps.

I personally find her morally and ethically unsuitable for any position of power over others but I wouldn't want to know the details of how she would deal with a disappointment of this magnitude. I hope the news media would spare us that.

None of this should have happened. I can't believe I was so happy when Bill Clinton was elected president. I remember someone starting to warn me about him, and I wouldn't listen. It was the beginning of so much that went so very wrong. I recently watched a video of the young Bill and Hill in their Sixty Minutes interview when he was running for president, and even then there was something hard and artificial about her and also a sense that they were hiding something. What a horrible mistake it was for the Democratic Party to nominate him.

[geek tragedy]

13. 15 more days. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. The ironic thing is some on this board will be sadder than when Bush* beat John Kerry.

We won all the other big ones since this board was formed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. For the bunker to close

And your safe space. Did you inform the FBI and the media they need to stop? Because that is not going away

[geek tragedy]

61. Just like the media covered the Swiftvets and Jeremiah Wright.

People who attempted to pimp those stories in order to damage the presumptive Democratic nominee were shown the door.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. I know even the actual FBI report

Will be verboten here. Yup bunker mentality.

By the way. The Jeremiah right production was put out by HRC to hurt Obama. Don't worry. You will have a somewhat safe space, but I suspect reality will intrude. And I mean the safe space with the same exact contempt I have for the term in college campuses

[geek tragedy]

104. Sorry the idea of a partisan liberal/democratic website bothers you so much.

Plenty of other places for those rooting for Trump to go--they don't need to be here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

106. Nah what bothers me is the *willful ignorance* Not unlike Freepers during the Bush years.

and liberal spare me. You have no clue what the term means.

but if you insist, you will have your safe space, my goodness, what if she get indicted and in your bubble you never learn of it, and are surprised when she is not nominated. Yes that is possible, and I have heard a few democrats above your pay grade who are honestly starting to realize this might be a problem. and you know what? In my darkest moments I hope you guys never learn any of these twits and turns and are completely taken by surprise. So do me a favor, just stay here, DO NOT go to CNN, or the DOJ website, or Facebook, twitter, or even your local news. Make sure the bunker is completely closed off.

By the way, this will be a LOW TURNOUT election, which only helps Trump and you will field a weak, not natural political, that is presently wounded by an OIG report and things will get worst, If you insist in committing suicide in November, have the common decency not to blame the actual liberals that will watch this horror show in absolute terror. We tried to warn you.

http://www.sltrib.com/home/3948261-155/voters-feel-disconnected-helpless-in-2016

And since we are talking of safe spaces, would you like your gluten and nut free cookie with your Lactaid now or at bedtime? And do you prefer that lactose free milk warmed up or just plain cold?

[Fawke Em]

34. I've been telling people here for months that "intent," or "mens rea" is not necessary in this case.

Mishandling national defense data is mishandling national defense data. You either did it or you didn't. And people have been both stripped of their security clearances and prosecuted for unintentionally leaking said data.

Ask John Kiriakou or Thomas Drake, two people who were convicted of doing that very thing. They are also two people of 14 who have requested that the FBI finish up this probe and apply the same standards that befell them. http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/05/24/intel-vets-urge-fast-report-clintons-emails

Ironically, it has been the Obama Administration who has pushed for the tougher stance on leaks, which apparently, Hillary outwardly supported, while hypocritically violating these rules, regulation and laws, simultaneously.

[procon]

41. Its not helpful to your rant to mix up "rules" with "laws".

Intra-agency rules do not equate with actual laws passed by congress and signed by the president.

[Merryland]

51. the rules were based on laws.

[bigtree]

53. they carried ZERO penalty for refusing to follow them

[dana_b]

48. I still say that if Biden or Kerry or anyone else BUT Bernie is handpicked to be

the nominee, the Dems will lose. I agree with Bernie that it would be telling all of us who vote for him, who worked for him, that we don't matter. I would sit out the election for sure.

[nadinbrzezinski]

59. It depends

Before the convention you are correct. If the party goes with the veep pick after she is nominated,I give that a fifty fifty. Mostly due to Trump.

They are going to further fracture the party nevertheless. They already are. Me, I don't care who they nominate. But her, she is beyond wounded. And there is a beginning awareness of this, not with the base...where it matters

[highprincipleswork]

52. Has always sounded awful, now turning out to be awful. Let's not take this chance.

[rusty fender]

54. The "tell" is in "Democrat nominee"

So very transparent

[SheilaT]

64. A Biden/Kerry or a Kerry/Biden ticket? Really?

The last time I looked neither man is running. Someone else IS running, and that someone else already has nearly half of the pledged delegates.

Either Hillary or Bernie can with some credibly, once nominated, reach out and unite the Democratic party. But Biden and Kerry? "Look, guys, we know that not a single on of you voted for us in the primaries, but trust us, we have your best interests at heart.

The very best way to assure a President Trump is to completely ignore any aspect of the will of the people.

And they are both too old. Well, okay, Bernie is older than either of them, but to have *two* men on the ticket both over 70? Not such a fabulous idea.

[pnwmom]

71. Here's the opposite point of view from the same web site.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/hillary-clintons-emails-are-a-threat-to-life-as-we-know-it/

If the past two days have taught us anything, it is that Hillary Clinton‘s use of a personal email server during her tenure at the State Department is a threat to the American way, and even to all human life on Earth. The media’s sirens-a-blaring reaction to the State Department Office of the Inspector General’s report on email practices would lead any rational observer to conclude that the only crime greater than using personal email to conduct State business is the crime of ever believing a word that Hillary Clinton says.

The Washington Post excoriated Hillary in a blistering editorial about the OIG report, the same Washington Post that uncritically published the Republican lie that there were 147 FBI agents investigating Hillary, when the real number was about 12. Mainstream media figures like Wolf Blitzer, Chuck Todd, and even Jake Tapper got in on the act by attempting to paint the report as contradicting Hillary, or even proving her a liar.

Now, this OIG report is separate and apart from the ongoing FBI “investigation,” but it’s all the media really has to go on now, and given the alarm bells being raised, I figured I’d better take a look at the report for myself. One of the key areas that the media has focused on is the fact that while Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said that her use of personal email was “allowed,” the OIG report says it found no evidence she tried to get authorization for such a practice. Liar, amirite?

Page 37 of the report does say that “OIG found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server,” but then again, Secretary Clinton isn’t saying that she requested or obtained guidance or approval. She’s saying it was “allowed,” an assertion that is backed up by many instances in the report which recognize that personal email use, while generally discouraged, is permitted, as per a 2009 regulation which states “Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system,” and which is repeatedly cited in the report.

As the OIG report also states on page 5, it wasn’t until after Hillary Clinton left the State Department that personal email use was prohibited, and even then, not completely.

SNIP

[Gothmog]

94. That is a well done analaysis

[laserhaas]

73. The legal issue, paramount...that is being looked over (presently)

is the quid pro quo of the Clinton Foundation taking in, millions of dollars

While she was Sec. Of State

[pnwmom]

75. According to a Rethug's anonymous sources. nt

[laserhaas]

78. According to simple friggn ..Ethical.. common sense

Repugs are foaming at the mouth that she can get away with the quid pro quo..charitable contribution strategm

As the Koch brothers start buying up 503(c) s around the world

Including .Gimmie Gimmie Gimmie dot com

[nadinbrzezinski]

108. You mean unamed sources at the FBI

and anyway that is not even the email investigation. I am not sure where the quid pro quo is at, or if this is even being looked at. Though would not surprise me, but that is another story.

[MoonRiver]

77. Yes, we will see, and thank you for your concern.

[Buns_of_Fire]

86. Is the FBI under any obligation to release ANYTHING to the public?

Couldn't they make their findings and/or recommendations to the DoJ and just say "We've filed our report with Justice" and leave it at that? Toss the whole mess in THEIR laps?

Whatever they say will eventually leak out anyway, but I don't know that I'd want to willingly step in the middle of this.

[Duval]

95. Her actions have damaged her, period.

People who cannot understand this must not be paying attention.

[laserhaas]

98. Emotional haughtier subjugating common sense

If Bernie had done 1/10th of this stuff

They'd be calling for his head, on a platter.

[Gothmog]

97. Hillary Clinton is going to be exonerated on the email controversy

There is no intent found according to the FBI's latest leak and so there will be no indictment https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/06/hillary-clinton-is-going-to-be-exonerated-on-the-email-controversy-it-wont-matter/

The latest news on the Hillary Clinton email controversy reinforces everything we’ve heard so far on this subject:

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

That point about her intending to break classification rules is important, because in order to have broken the law, it isn’t enough for Clinton to have had classified information in a place where it was possible for it to be hacked. She would have had to intentionally given classified information to someone without authorization to have it, like David Petraeus did when he showed classified documents to his mistress (and then lied to the FBI about it, by the way). Despite the enormous manpower and time the Justice Department has devoted to this case, there has never been even a suggestion, let alone any evidence, that Clinton did any such thing.

So far no one has found evidence of intent.

[felix_numinous]

99. The US is waiting to see if money trumps justice

it's happened enough times already that it is difficult to tell. The question is, are there enough good people with enough influence that will do the right thing?

Because we know just where the Clinton path will lead the country, and it is very good to take a pause right here in our tracks and ask--CAN this country afford to go down this blind path of toxic greed any further than we are right now?

CAN we listen to an awakened, inspired and participatory population who do not want to continue being robbed and taken advantage of, who want to be given a chance to build a sustainable, safe and green future for all?

The decision couldn't be more clear, this is our chance to choose the most peaceful and safe future for America. Bernie Sanders is holding the door open.

[senz]

110. ^^ Exceptionally sane post ^^