I suspect it is difficult to build a case against a lawyer with hundreds of $millions to spend on covering up the evidence against her and a media that is hugely interested in making excuses for her. They couldn't get Capone for any of the egregious crimes he committed (murder, bribery, you name it). They had to get him on tax evasion. Even though they knew he committed those serious crimes. Just as we know Hillary did and has all along. That they need 100+ agents says a lot about the breadth and depth of the investigation. If it were 1 agent and a small support staff, there'd be smoke but no fire. But in this case, there is fire.
The FBI hasn't said how many agents are on the case. Denny is repeating what one guy claimed - probably either speculation or a lie. barfo
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/12/politics/hillary-clinton-michael-flynn-email-fbi-investigation/ Washington (CNN)President Barack Obama's former top military intelligence official said Hillary Clinton should pull out of the presidential race while the FBI investigate her use of a private email server for official government communication while secretary of state. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the retired chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, made the call in an interview with Jake Tapper on "The Lead." "If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail," said Flynn, who decried what he said was a "lack of accountability, frankly, in a person who should have been much more responsible in her actions as the secretary of state of the United States of America."
Democrats don't really, either. The one thing Trump has in his favor: you don't like him, thus he must be doing some things right.
I love this..this is just how the opposition should portray Trumpers...stupid fat with a worthless opinion..bunch of raciest Nazis..no way that will anger the base any further..
Charles Lipson? Charles Lipson (born February 1, 1948) is an American professor of political science at the University of Chicago.[1] His area of specialization includes international relations, international political economy and modern international history.[2] He is the co-founder and director of PIPES, the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security at the University of Chicago http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...lary_clintons_coming_legal_crisis_129293.html Hillary Clinton's Coming Legal Crisis By Charles Lipson January 13, 2016 The latest release of Hillary Clinton emails entails real risks for her, churning just beneath the surface of her successful primary campaign. True, Democratic voters have shown little interest, and the mainstream media only a bit more. Their focus, when they do look, is on the number of documents now considered classified, their foreign-policy revelations, and the political damage they might cause. These are vital issues, but Clinton faces a far bigger problem. She and her closest aides could be indicted criminally. Secretary Clinton is exposed twice over. First, she used an unsecured, home-brew server to send and store reams of classified materials. Second, in her official capacity, she worked closely with major donors to the Clinton Foundation. Each poses legal risks, with potential ramifications for the Democratic frontrunner, her party, and the Obama administration. To understand the gravity of these issues, it is important to recognize that this is not just an “email scandal.” It is an “email + server + foundation” scandal.” Secretary Clinton didn’t just send sensitive (and now-classified) emails over open lines, she stored them on private servers that didn’t meet the government’s cyber-security standards for sensitive documents. On its face, retaining classified materials in such vulnerable settings is a criminal violation. Senior intelligence officials have been charged for less – far less. Storing some 1,300 classified documents on a personal server, and doing it for years, poses a special problem because it shows the mishandling was not inadvertent. It was Clinton’s standard operating procedure. ... The FBI reportedly has assigned some 100 agents full time to the investigation and another 50 temporarily. The bureau would not commit such massive resources unless the initial investigation raised troubling questions of potential criminality. FBI Director James Comey is monitoring the case closely and coordinating with the intelligence agencies, which have to review the documents. Comey has a reputation for integrity, and it is his call whether to refer charges to the DOJ. Attorney General Loretta Lynch would then decide whether to indict.
I just hope these arent the same ass holes that looked for baracks birth certificate and figured eh the original isnt important this reprint forgery with the wrong water mark will do
Ok, Charles Lipson wrote an anti-Hillary article. So what? It's not like he's unbiased. So he's at least consistent over the years in his approach. You are going to be so sad when this turns out to be just like the 'unskewed polls' of 2012. barfo
It made trump look good to democrats, especially union workers. Worked out fine, yeah right. If it was all good, everyone would be in line to vote for Democrats. Instead, it's republicans who are showing up in record numbers at the polls. Here's your buddy, Nate Silver, on Trump: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._trump_had_no_shot_where_did_he_go_wrong.html
And here is my buddy Nate Silver's buddy, Harry Enten, on why turnout in primaries is not predictive of turnout in the general (which is obvious if you think about it for a second). http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/primary-turnout-means-nothing-for-the-general-election/ barfo
Strike two! Just like 538 was right about Trump all along. The past isn't a great predictor of the near future. Senators, e.g. Obama, rarely win the presidency. The dynamic is people had hope for change (dashed to the ground in flames). The saddest criticism of Obama is he's created the perception that Trump is the real hope for change. No matter what 538 gets wrong.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trumps-six-stages-of-doom/ UPDATE (Dec. 27, 6:54 p.m.): As the new year approaches, it’s worth checking back in on this roadmap we outlined earlier in the campaign: The most difficult hurdles between Donald Trump and the Republican presidential nomination are still to come. The recent polling surge by Donald Trump has launched a thousand stories about Trump’s “unprecedented campaign.” But it’s nothing all that unusual: Similar surges occurred for almost every Republican candidate four years ago, including Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich (twice). History’s lesson isn’t necessarily that Trump’s candidacy will go bust tomorrow, however. There are plenty of examples of fringe or factional candidates who held on to their support for much longer than the month or two that Cain and Bachmann did. Sometimes, they did well enough in Iowa or New Hampshire, or even won them. Pat Buchanan claimed New Hampshire in 1996, for instance, while Mike Huckabee won Iowa in 2008. Steve Forbes took 30 percent of the Iowa vote in 2000. The lesson, rather, is that Trump’s campaign will fail by one means or another. Like Cain, Bachmann and Gingrich, Buchanan, Huckabee and Forbes came nowhere close to winning the Republican nomination. If you want absurd specificity, I recently estimated Trump’s chance of becoming the GOP nominee at 2 percent. How did I get there? By considering the gantlet he’ll face over the next 11 months — Donald Trump’s Six Stages of Doom:
