Yeah I don't do ELE bets.
But Trump and Clinton were friends for years. He'd make up some bull about American unity and being compassionate and his base would swallow it whole just like the evangelicals did when they just stopped caring about character in their candidates in the last month.
I fully believe he'll follow through. My only worry is the FBI coming out with a recommendation before he's in office and Obama being able to pardon the .Yeah I don't do ELE bets.
But Trump and Clinton were friends for years. He'd make up some bull about American unity and being compassionate and his base would swallow it whole just like the evangelicals did when they just stopped caring about character in their candidates in the last month.
nixon was pardoned before being indicted. obama could do that anyway. ford gave him an unconditional pardon
True. But I don't think Obama wants to tarnish his legacy with a move like that. Plus he'd also have to give the entire foundation a blanket pardon, I don't think there is any way he does that.
I seriously doubt Trump will go after her. He's got bigger things to worry about than prosecuting her.
She's probably not going to jail. If they haven't found a smoking gun on pay to play by now I doubt they find one. If they find on the Clinton Foundation they probably will just fine them, make them pay back taxes, and revoke their 501c.
Trump's definitely got bigger problems now than locking up corrupt Hillary, he has to prepare and get ready to run this great nation and do it well. Not sure about the FBI, they could choose to go after her. It remains to be seen what happens or what Trump does, but one things sure America spoke and this criminal won't have a chance to run our great nation into the ground. Unity is important right now for both republicans, independents and democrats, can't have a divided nation any longer. Trump has to bring this country together!
They already had enough. FBI took it to the DOJ and was shot down.
You guys downplay it all you want, I'll continue to follow it closely and keep you updated
Trump administration could mean new life for Clinton Foundation probe
Washington (CNN)The FBI has spent more than a year looking into the Clinton Foundation without getting beyond the starting gates. That could soon change.
Investigators at the FBI's New York office, who unsuccessfully argued for months that they should be allowed to open a full-blown investigation of the foundation, could find a more friendly audience in a Donald Trump administration Justice Department.
The President-elect railed during the closing weeks of the campaign against the relationship between foundation donors and Hillary Clinton's work in government as "corrupt."
He promised there would more investigations of the Clintons if he were elected.
Soon, top officials he appoints at the Justice Department will have the power make that happen.
And the FBI investigators may have more ammunition to make their case with stolen emails from Clinton aides released in recent weeks by WikiLeaks.
The emails showed internal fights over the foundation between Chelsea Clinton and a top aide to her father, Doug Band, who helped run the foundation. Chelsea Clinton, according to the emails, was concerned about possible conflicts of interest and problems related to Bill Clinton's paid speech-making business, dubbed "Bill Clinton Inc." The dispute prompted the foundation to conduct an internal audit of its activities. Band hit back at Chelsea Clinton, according to the emails, suggesting she used the foundation to pay for her wedding.
Rudy Giuliani, considered a contender for attorney general or other top cabinet post, according to people familiar with Trump transition planning, said Thursday that the new president will have to make a decision on what to do about his promises to hire a special prosecutor to investigate matters related to Clinton.
"It's been a tradition in our politics to put things behind us," Giuliani said on CNN's "New Day." "On the other hand, you have to look at how bad was it? Because suppose somebody comes along a year from now and is alleged to have stolen $50,000 from a charity -- and (Clinton) was never investigated for hundreds of millions."
Messages left with the Clinton Foundation seeking comment were not returned.
Career prosecutors at the Justice Department's criminal division and the public integrity section, as well as lawyers at the FBI, reviewed the requests earlier this year from FBI investigators to launch a full probe of the Clinton Foundation, according to law enforcement officials briefed on the discussions. The agents were told that they didn't have enough evidence to use more overt investigative methods, including seeking subpoenas, to open a full probe, the officials said. They were also told they could continue to gather information and revisit their requests if they found more evidence.
The genesis of the FBI efforts date, in part, to allegations published in the 2015 book "Clinton Cash" by conservative writer Peter Schweizer.
Agents were unhappy at being told they didn't have enough evidence, and that fed some of the tensions over Clinton-related matters inside the FBI in recent months between the New York field office and FBI headquarters, law enforcement officials say.
Trump repeatedly referred to the WikiLeaks emails -- in particular the issues raised by Band -- as proof that investigators should take a deeper look.
"Mr. Band called the arrangement unorthodox. The rest of us call it outright corrupt," Trump told an October campaign rally. "In fact, the Clinton Foundation even hired a law firm to find out if their pay to play scheme would jeopardize their charitable status with the IRS."
Trying to use the stolen emails released by WikiLeaks to try to build probable cause for further investigation could present legal hurdles for the FBI and the Justice Department.
At least some of the emails are labeled as "attorney-client privileged," meaning they have the legal protection of confidential communications between lawyer and client.
And then there's the fact the US government has declared that the emails were stolen by Russian intelligence in a cyber-hack of the email account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.
Earlier this year, prosecutors in Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara's office used revelations from the Panama Papers, stolen and leaked legal do ents from a law firm in that country that helped the rich create offshore financial shelters, as cause to issue subpoenas to individuals and firms named in the do ents. Other lawyers at Justice Department headquarters debated whether the stolen materials could be used predicates for an investigation.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politi...ion/index.html
Only way he goes after the Clintons is if things are not going well for him and he needs a good ol partisan distraction.
Chaffetz is padding his career by continuing the investigation. You People are always behind, misinformed, uninformed.
that . No unity for 8 years and now Republicans expect it when they're in power? Time for the Democrats to filibuster every ing thing the Republicans do since that has been established as the new normal since 2009.
Won't work. Senate will change the rules.
Mob rules will be the new rules.
GOP will hate it when it happens to them.
Norms count. Change is overrated.
The Corruption Begins As VP Elect Mike Pence Goes To Court To Hide His Emails
By Jason Easley on Mon, Nov 14th, 2016 at 1:35 pm
Vice President-elect Mike Pence has gone to court to make sure that the American people never get to see the emails that he wrote as governor of Indiana.
According to the Indianapolis Star, Mike Pence is going to court to argue that all of his emails should not be made public:
Now that the presidential campaign and most of the furor over Hillary Clinton’s email scandal are behind us, the Pence administration is going to court to argue for its own brand of email secrecy.
The administration is fighting to conceal the contents of an email sent to Gov. Mike Pence by a political ally.
That email is being sought by a prominent Democratic labor lawyer who says he wants to expose waste in the Republican administration.
The Mike Pence who is going to court to argue that his emails should remain a secret is the same guy who just spent months on the presidential campaign trail campaigning against Hillary Clinton because she used a private email server.
Clinton also did something that Pence is fighting not to do.
She released her emails to the public.
Hypocrisy will be the norm in the Trump/Pence administration, but the bigger question is
what is Mike Pence hiding?
Why doesn’t Pence want the American people to see his emails?
Both Trump and Pence favor increasing spying on American citizens, and
less transparency for themselves.
The incoming administration is destined to be the least transparent in US history.
They are also going to going to not respect the privacy of the American people.
Mike Pence claimed that Hillary Clinton’s emails were criminal, but he won’t let you see what’s in his emails.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/...iticus+USA+%29
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN148213
The search warrant materials' release sought by Randol Schoenberg, a Los Angeles-based lawyer, who in court papers said transparency was crucial given the potential influence the probe had on the election's outcome.
Sources close to the investigation have said the emails were discovered during an unrelated probe into former Democratic U.S. Representative Anthony Weiner, the estranged husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin.
In his order, Castel said he would allow the redaction of the iden ies of two unnamed individuals, one of whom is subject to an "ongoing criminal investigation."
But he said the "strong presumption of access attached to the search warrant and related materials is not overcome by any remaining privacy interest of Secretary Clinton."
wonder who and what this is concerning
Did Bill Clinton’s Meeting With the Attorney General Force FBI to Issue Letter on Hillary’s Emails?
Had former President Bill Clinton not met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch at a Phoenix airport, FBI Director James Comey “would never have felt obliged to go public” with information that the bureau was again looking at emails related to then-candidate Hillary Clinton, writes Michael Daly at The Daily Beast.
Bill Clinton blames Comey for Hillary Clinton’s loss in the 2016 presidential election. “James Comey cost her the election,” he was quoted as telling a group of holiday shoppers in a Westchester County bookshop last week. But Clinton himself “bears considerably more responsibility” for his wife’s loss, Daly writes.
“His great fault is one he shares with his wife; they too often act as if rules that apply to you or me do not apply to them.” This time, the Clintonian fault made its decisive appearance when the former president met with Lynch on a tarmac at Sky Harbor airport in Phoenix, Ariz., in late June.
“One rule,” Daly explains, “holds that the husband of the target of a criminal investigation should not seek to meet privately with the law enforcement official ultimately in charge of that same investigation, no matter how innocent the talk.”
Daly argues that Clinton’s meeting with Lynch compelled Comey to make the FBI investigation into Clinton’s emails more public than it needed to be.
Word of the encounter […] left Comey in an untenable situation. He had essentially come to the end of the investigation. The usual protocol called for him then to refer the findings to Department of Justice and let the prosecutors make the official determination.
What was anything but usual was that the top prosecutor had just been sitting on a plane with Bill Clinton. And for Lynch now to announce that Hillary Clinton had been cleared would call into question the integrity of all involved, including Comey and the FBI.
Had he been looking to make it easy on himself and hard on Hillary, Comey could have simply said that there was sufficient probable cause to proceed with a criminal case. He would have needed only to point to the nearly two dozen secret emails that had passed through her server.
But, in the words of one former FBI agent, Comey is “a unicorn in Washington; somebody who actually has ethics.” And he had come to the conclusion that while Hillary’s conduct had been egregiously careless, it lacked the intent necessary to support criminal charges.
Comey decided that he had to present the results directly to the public along with an explanation to dispel the appearance of impropriety as much as was possible. He did just that, making clear that he felt Hillary Clinton had been reckless and irresponsible, and that she had shown terrible judgment.
With the case reopened, Comey couldn’t rule out the possibility that one of the FBI agents involved wouldn’t tip off the press. Public speculation about a cover-up on Clinton’s behalf would ensue, so “Comey apparently decided that the only thing for him to do was announce that the investigation had been reopened the very way that he had earlier announced that it had been closed.” ...
The result was the letter a fortnight before the election that Bill Clinton now blames for his wife’s defeat. He is right to say that Comey’s subsequent letter clearing Hillary Clinton on the Sunday before Election Day was too late to undo the damage.
But Bill Clinton fails to note that he himself is the one who made the initial letter—and therefore the others—necessary.
Comey would never have felt obliged to go public in the first place had the great man with the great fault not decided that he was above a rule such as should have kept him from striding across the tarmac and boarding Lynch’s plane.
“She got in trouble in the first place because she felt that the rules did not apply to her. She might still have won had her husband not felt the same.”
http://www.truthdig.com/eartothegrou...+the+Headlines
The Clintons thought the "rules" didn't apply to them?
Get ready for LAWLESS Don The Con and band of Merrily Corrupted criminals
The attorney general could have ordered FBI Director James Comey not to send his bombs letter on Clinton emails. Here’s why she didn’t.
Aides at Justice and the FBI — located in offices directly across the street from each other on Pennsylvania Avenue — began exchanging increasingly tense and heated phone calls, nearly a half-dozen throughout the afternoon and evening of Oct. 27 and into the next morning.
Justice officials laid out a number of arguments against releasing the letter. It violated two long-standing policies. Never publicly discuss an ongoing investigation. And never take an action affecting a candidate for office close to Election Day. Besides, they said, the FBI did not know yet what was in the emails or if they had anything to do with the Clinton case.
Remarkably, the country’s two top law enforcement officials never spoke.
As Comey’s boss, Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch could have given the FBI director an order to not send the letter.
But Lynch and her advisers feared that Comey would not listen.
He seemed to feel strongly about updating Congress on his sworn testimony about the Clinton investigation. Instead, they tried to relay their concerns through the Justice official whom the FBI had called.
An examination of how a single letter from the FBI became a political bombs reveals that it was the result of two law enforcement leaders failing over months to navigate the unusually ugly politics of 2016.
Having a presidential candidate under active criminal investigation was extraordinary.
But Comey and Lynch repeatedly underestimated how much their actions would reverberate in a closely contested presidential race.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...t-draw7&wpmm=1
iow, Repug 25 years of harassment and witch hunting paid off with Trash in the WH and establishment Repugs positioned to over Trash's voters, and the 95%.
They are clearly encouraged to continue their nastiness with even more vigor.
Will Pagliano rat out Hillary or fall on the sword?
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-conte...n-Contempt.pdf
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions today asking Sessions to consider convening a grand jury or bringing charges against Hillary Clinton’s former IT guy, Bryan Pagliano. Pagliano was subpoenaed to testify before the committee last year but refused to appear on two occasions. After the second refusal, the Oversight Committee voted to hold Pagliano in contempt. Chaffetz’ letter to AG Sessions reads in part, “Because Pagliano’s job functions included supporting mobile computing issues across the Department, he was uniquely positioned to answer questions regarding State Department policies and practices for preserving records, as well as the technological procedures utilized to do so.”
The letter concludes, “In light of Pagliano’s contumacious conduct in refusing to testify, the Department should bring the matter before a grand jury for its action or file an information charging Pagliano with violating 2 U.S.C. § 192.” In a statement released by the committee, Chaffetz says, “The authority to compel witnesses is integral to Congress’s and the Committee’s investigative powers. Allowing Mr. Pagliano’s conduct to go unaddressed would gravely harm Congress’s ability to conduct oversight.”
Pagliano was the person responsible for managing Hillary Clinton’s private email server. He worked for Clinton at the State Department while she was Secretary of State but also maintained her homebrew server in his off hours. Pagliano was subpoenaed to appear before the House Oversight Committee twice last September. Mark MacDougall, Pagliano’s attorney, argued his client should not have to appear since he would only be invoking his 5th Amendment right not to testify. Chaffetz insisted he would need to do so in person.
I see you're back on this fruitless horse.
Did you welch on the ELE bet in this thread or the other one?I see you're back on this fruitless horse.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
