Emails: State Dept. scrambled on trouble on Clinton's server
bigstory.ap.org
bigstory.ap.org
1) frankly, it would probably also raise a ruckus if an Attorney General issued an indictment against the other party's presumptive nominee for President
Any Democratic nominee that would replace HRC if this scandal moves forward would not only have to fight their baggage but HRC's baggage also because being classified as the "nominee not currently in prison" is not really a good starting point going into the national elections.
My twitter timeline would disagree, and frankly I don't think it would really hurt Senator Sanders. It might help in the I'm an honest man category. His main worry is his wife at that point.
Trump is a very different situation. Its Jesse Ventura writ larger, and the polling wasn't very effective at showing his voting. I'm not convinced an HRC indictment guarantees a victory. Do remember its pretty much the party elite that wants him out (well, and a lot of died in the wool conservatives who aren't happy with the party elite either).
To show how messed up this election is: a recycled Libertarian is polling at 9%. That's not normal at all.
"Crooked hillary go indicted how long until X gets in trouble too?"
OTOH, if there is no first-ballot majority, all bets are off.
I really couldn't see that happening. If, and I really mean if, an indictment happens, it will be before the convention.
(I don't think it would give the election away, but others disagree)
The problem is that this has been dragged for so long that it would kill the democratic party at this point, HRC is the nominee this whole thing should've been cleared way before the primaries.
If Hillary was "smart" she should've pushed for a full investigation before that she could've survived it then, at this point if any indictment would be pushed forward it's game over for for HRC and for Democratic Party.
On the other hand, I think the Democratic Party has a more than reasonable out with Senator Sanders. I get the feeling the party leaders would want to select his VP for him as part of any deal. He is, after all, not their favorite.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-...
http://static.politico.com/f3/9b/19d29ab14abeb4a30ca2975f1e6...
From the 2nd link:
What OIG Recommends:
OIG makes eight recommendations. They include issuing enhanced and more frequent guidance on the permissible use of personal email accounts to conduct official business, amending Departmental policies to provide for administrative penalties for failure to comply with records preservation and cybersecurity requirements, and developing a quality assurance plan to address vulnerabilities in records management and preservation. The Department concurred with all of OIG’s recommendations.
The OIG report is recommending system changes and doesn't opinion on the criminal. That's what the FBI is doing.
> I think she honestly believes she can survive and nothing will come of it. She is probably right.
Stop projecting on people what will disappoint us.
cwkoss seems to be referring to Hillary running her own personal email server, though. That's absolutely not unintentional. It's not what the article is talking about, though.
Of whom, for what specific offense?
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-prosec...
That did not result in any prosecution - nobody even bothered splitting hairs as to which of these e-mails were classified, and how classified they were. A few fall people did get fired, though.
The AP initially reported Wednesday that the emails described security features being turned off on Clinton's own private server, but State Department spokesman John Kirby clarified hours later that the emails described "a series of troubleshooting measures to the department's system — not Secretary Clinton's system — to attempt to remedy the problem."