The Clinton email indictment nonsense is a red herring.

[MineralMan]

All one has to do is consider who benefits from promoting the idea that Hillary Clinton will be indicted for crimes by the Department of Justice to understand what is going on. Throughout the process of promoting this story, those pushing it on the news and internet have relied on the public's misunderstanding of the process by which someone who held the office of Secretary of State might be charged with a crime. Instead of approaching the story by actually describing the process that would have to ensue, the promoters of this noxious theory have done the following:

1. They have ignored that the FBI cannot indict anyone. It is an investigatory agency, and has no powers whatsoever of indictment.
2. They have ignored the Constitutional requirement that any indictment must be issued by a federal Grand Jury, impaneled specifically to consider the evidence. Such a Grand Jury would be called only after an additional investigation by the Department of Justice. That process would take at least one year, based on past investigations of the scope this one would require.
3. They have put forward the idea that the FBI investigation had Hillary Clinton as a target. No such announcement was ever made by the FBI, which regularly names people as "persons of interest" in investigations.
4. They have ignored history, because it demonstrates that indicting a cabinet member for actions taken while serving in that role is something that has only very rarely happened, except in relation to corruption. (Thanks for the correction below.)
5. They have ignored the fact that no actual laws have been shown to have been broken, instead relying on nebulous statements about "classified emails," despite the fact that all of those identified were classified after the fact and sent TO the Secretary of State, not BY the secretary of state.
6. They have constantly used rumor-mongering and "hints" of illegal behavior, rather than evidence to promote this meme.
7. Most of the allegations have come from right-wing sources, pundits and publications. Those have been picked up by other opponents of Hillary Clinton's campaign to become President, and distributed further.

Having watched this entire process unfold, and after studying all of the information presented, I have come to the conclusion that there is no possibly justified cause to issue an indictment against Hillary Clinton for any criminal activity. No such activity took place, as far as I can determine. Clinton was serving as Secretary of State, after being appointed to that position and confirmed by the Senate. She was doing her job in good faith. Her unusual handling of emails was, perhaps, ill-advised, but not criminal in any way.

My Conclusions:
No indictment will be issued. No Grand Jury will be called. The FBI will not recommend any criminal charges when they issue their report, which will not name Hillary Clinton as a culpable individual at all.

In my opinion, this entire issue is a manufactured attack on a candidate for President, purely for political purposes. It should simply be ignored by Democrats. The FBI will issue their report, and that should end this entire line of nonsense. It has all been a waste of time.

[Arkansas Granny]

1. Thanks, MM. Yours is the most rational opinion I've heard on this matter.

[MineralMan]

3. Thank you! I've been annoyed by this whole spectacle

from the very beginning. I never could see any way this business would result in any indictable offense, and know that indicting a cabinet officer for doing his or her job would be unprecedented. It was always bullshit. I've posted many of the points I raised in this OP many times before, but people seem to be unwilling or unable to look at this from a logical perspective.

It is a right-wing attack on Hillary Clinton that has been picked up and extended by some others who did not like her as a candidate for President. Soon, I hope, everyone will recognize that it was all a red herring from the start, designed to prevent Hillary Clinton from being nominated for that office. Like most such things, it has failed to work, thank goodness.

[DemonGoddess]

2. K&R!

Well said!

[MineralMan]

4. Thank you so much!

[leftofcool]

5. K&R

[MineralMan]

6. Thanks. I'm sick of the whole thing.

It's time to elect our Democratic nominee and drop all of this nonsense.

[Satch59]

7. Perfect!

Well done assessment...and so true that it's yet another red herring on Hillary. Her judge of character and stamina should be based on the many attacks and hearings and millions of dollars wasted on taking her down... She's still standing and doesn't even seem bitter...go Hillary!

[MineralMan]

9. Attacks on Hillary Clinton will continue, of course.

As Democrats, we simply need to campaign for her and help her win in November. She's doing a great job of shrugging off bogus attacks, and we should be doing the same. Every piece of nonsense that has ever been put forward about the Clintons will be back in the news going forward. We shouldn't waste our time on any of that, but should point out the complete incompetence and unsuitability of the Republican candidate for any elected office.

This should be very easy to do, since the Republicans are making it so easy.

[DemonGoddess]

13. Of course

but we all KNOW this.

[Mike Nelson]

8. That all makes...

...perfect sense! But the media won't like it because it does not promote the wicked Hillary narrative.

[MineralMan]

10. I'll leave the media to their own devices.

Hillary will win because we'll help her win. That is what matters. The media will attack anyone if it sells advertising. They don't care.

[charlyvi]

41. The "Clinton Rules" narrative

Go to hell, Chuck Todd.

[cosmicone]

11. Precisely!! n/t

[MineralMan]

12. Well, I wish that were enough.

I'm sure this will crap still be put forward by some. That's too damned bad, since we have an election to win.

[cosmicone]

21. One can rarely unconvince the convinced

Your post works well on people with open minds.

[OnDoutside]

14. Great post.

[MADem]

15. They have ignored that sources inside the investigation have dropped the

word to CNN and NBC franchises that there's no "there" there, and this little foolishness is over.

[MineralMan]

18. That too, of course.

As far as I have been concerned, it has always been over. We have wasted a great deal of time on this silliness. I hope we will stop doing that very soon.

[sheshe2]

16. Thanks MM.

Nicely done.

[MineralMan]

19. That means a lot to me. Thanks!

[FSogol]

17. K&R. n/t

[MineralMan]

20. I appreciate it.

[stopbush]

22. Agreed.

Sadly, the "e-mail scandal" will live on with the other non-scandal scandals that the Clintons have endured over the decades.

Anyone who has ever operated a smoke machine knows that you don't need a fire to produce smoke. The same applies to political attacks.

[lapucelle]

23. Thank you!

We no longer have a press that reports facts. Thanks for stepping up and doing the job.

[Surya Gayatri]

24. Massive K & R. Thanks for posting. So spot on.

[MineralMan]

29. Many thanks!

[cojoel]

25. Correction on #4

During the Harding Administration, Secretary of Interior Albert B. Fall was well-entangled in the Teapot Dome scandal. He had accepted a $100,000 interest-free "loan" from Edward Doheny, and had accepted $300,000 worth of in government bonds and cash from Harry Sinclair of the Mammoth Oil Company. He was convicted of bribery in 1929. http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/cabinet-member-guilty-in-teapot-dome-scandal

There have been a few others since then. For example, Maurice Stans, secretary of commerce during the Nixon Administration, was indicted (but acquitted) in 1973 for obstruction of justice and perjury. He pled guilty to campaign law violations in 1975. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Stans

So I would have to conclude it actually has happened, but perhaps rarely. I do not disagree with your final conclusions.

[Wellstone ruled]

26. Stans paid a 5k fine and walked away.

And Sinclair spent a few days in the slammer for Jury tampering as well as contempt of Congress.

When it comes to Hillary,as Mineral Man has posted,this was a major Red Herring contrived by the Republican Party and other outside Moneyed Interests. Have to say,it would be a stretch to do a comparable story.

Remember,Sinclair passed out envelopes filled with cash on the Senate floor as bribes. Stan's was a GOP fixer go to guy.

[MineralMan]

30. I edited the OP. Thanks

Both of those cases had to do with corruption, rather than mistakes made in performing actual duties. But, you're correct.

[BlueCaliDem]

27. An illuminating and necessary post, MM. Thank you! I hope everyone at DU reads it

so we can stop the nonsense of a supposed indictment fairy. It might dash their hopes and dreams, but it's high-time to face reality and focus all that energy in getting Hillary Clinton elected as our 45th president.

[jcgoldie]

28. Well that won't drive the news cycle!

Nice argument.

[MineralMan]

31. Oh, there's plenty to drive the news cycle, still.

This was just easy to run. Maybe the media should do some work, for a change.

[Peacetrain]

32. Hats off MM!!! very well stated reasoning

and you are right.. it has been a waste of time

[MineralMan]

33. Thanks very much. I appreciate it.

[Warren Stupidity]

34. Oh, I see. So it is a distraction to lead us away from the real Clinton scandal?

Or perhaps you do not know what that phrase actually means?

[MineralMan]

35. It's a distraction to lead us away from the fact that there

IS no scandal and that the Republicans have no viable candidate for the office of President. Your definition is far too narrow. Seeya...

[mcar]

36. K&R

[MineralMan]

37. Thanks.

[Scruffy1]

38. You are so right.

It's all been ignorant nonsense from the beginning. I worked hard for Bernie knowing he had little choice and was far from perfect.
I think this was just wishful thinking on the part of some. All in all, the campaign was successful and may have widened the tent in the Democratic Party. Of course, many of the young ones have no real experience of how politics works. Electing a candidate is only the beginning of a process.

[MineralMan]

39. But it was deliberate nonsense, designed

to draw attention away from the worthlessness of what the Republicans had to offer. They can't field a worthwhile candidate, so they had to try to pull the Democratic candidate down. It's just a shame that so many in the Democratic fold were drawn into the scheme. We should be smarter than that, I think.

[PatSeg]

40. You know

I keep hearing people on the right say that Hillary should be in prison, but I haven't heard any of them say what the so-called crime is. Evidently her crime is the fact that they don't like her.

[ismnotwasm]

42. This has been clear from the beginning as far as I'm concerned

It doesn't take much to clear the debris of nonsense talk surrounding this issue, and I appreciate your point by point analysis.

[MineralMan]

51. It's been clear to me, too.

And yet, we've kept hearing otherwise from some. Closure on this is coming soon.

[mercuryblues]

43. Thanks

These all are things that someone who has followed this nontroversy has said, ad nauseam. When finally giving up, and just calling it the indictment fairy, heads exploded.

[MineralMan]

48. Oh, I'm not dreaming.

I'm thinking. I prefer that.

[lapucelle]

53. It's amazing that anyone's definition of "do justice"

might involve prosecuting someone who committed no crime to advance the candidacy of a second place finisher.

[charlyvi]

55. Yes Indeed eom

[Gothmog]

45. Great post

There was no laws broken and there will be no indictment

[MineralMan]

50. Exactly.

[AgadorSparticus]

46. Great post. Thank you for laying it out all nice and neat. Nt.

[MineralMan]

52. My pleasure.

[NastyRiffraff]

47. BRAVO!

I didn't know some of that info you laid out so thoroughly. Even though I've always thought the whole email thing was bullshit, your post really helps when talking to people who believe everything the media says (even when it's contradictory). Thanks so much for this, MM!

[MineralMan]

49. You're more than welcome.

[Zorro]

54. I think it's been flogged as cover for justifying not voting for Clinton

to hide the more puritanical reason -- that Hillary didn't divorce Bill over the Lewinsky affair.

[DemonGoddess]

57. I think you definitely have something there.

Now, were it me or plenty of other women in that situation, he would've been kicked to the curb. Hillary, on the other hand, worked with her husband to repair her marriage, because of the kind of person she is. Something many of us younger than her tend to forget, is that divorce wasn't usually the answer in this instance for many, many years.

She certainly didn't take the way that would've been easier, meaning divorce. Instead, she took the harder road, which involves forgiveness, and much hard work.

[Separation]

56. I agree with everything except number 5.

I will say that this is going to be an obvious talking point for republicans and other who don't want her to be president. However, Clinton was told that she was not to use her personal email server for use of State Department emails for several reasons. One that most don't think of is recording for public record. The second is sending and receiving classified emails. To say that emails that she sent were classified after the fact I think is a bit dishonest. Certain subjects are classified/secret/top secret no matter when they are classified as such. Such emails for instance would be talking about drone strikes, targeting/targets of drone strikes, personnel who are stationed overseas in "diplomatic" positions, etc.

I will say that I am totally ignorant of any of her emails. To be quite honest, until the decision of this whole investigation comes out, it is nothing more than a talking point by people who don't want her to be president. I'm in the camp of, "I'll wait till the investigation is over", before I hold my judgement.

[apcalc]

58. Thank you, MM. Very nicely explained.

[DCBob]

59. Excellent overall analysis and summary.

This is exactly how I feel as well but you have explained so clearly.

[MineralMan]

60. Thanks very much.

[Hoyt]

61. Wouldn't care if it were just GOPers promoting this nonsense, but a bunch of Dems are/did too.

I guess that's politics and an indication of why it's so ugly.

[Scurrilous]

62. K & R