Hillary will be indicted, and she will not be the next President of the US.
The FBI will move to indict Hillary Clinton. This is a fact. The FBI just doesn't task hundreds of agents on something that is "no big deal". We haven't heard shit from the FBI, because the FBI does not comment on active criminal investigations. There are numerous emails withheld from what was released to the public because they are Top Secret.
Loretta Lynch will prosecute the case, because they will not risk alienating moderate voters (the real deciders of elections) to look at a Republican candidate who has promised to allow their DOJ AG appointment to prosecute Hillary if there is evidence of her wrongdoing.
Obama will not offer a pardon to Hillary; he has always been about building his own legacy and he doesn't want the highlight of his presidency to be something a la Nixon. Furthermore, that would tarnish the establishment Democrats and drive voters into the open arms of Bernie Sanders, the DNC's "Trump". Obama, Hillary, and establisment Democrats want Bernie about as much as they want Trump (read: 0%).
Hillary. Is. Fucked. When you have Huffpo, Salon, and the scum of the mass media writing about how fucked she is, you know it can't be covered up anymore. Why don't you see it on TV yet? Because the media elites don't want Bernie to win either. Hillary will get the nomination. She declares a strong VP candidate, most likely chosen by the DNC. Then, she gets indicted at a convenient time for the Democrats, and the campaign now focuses on the VP's ability to act as the President.
Bernie, who will have been shut down by then, won't have the momentum to get back up and start a third party run. He will be pressured to not re-enter, because pulling votes for a third party will guarantee a Republican victory. Nobody will question the shady backroom dealing, because the narrative in the summer up until the election will be "We Must Unify and Stop Trump".
Screenshot this.
>>69479793
Good point, but eveyone seems to believe Hillary is above the law.
>>69479793
I wish that this would happen as you predict, but unfortunately, I'm a firm believer that the corruption in the government knows no bounds, and nothing negative for her will come of this.
>>69479793
I doubt that Obama and the government would use Hillary as a sacrificial lamb to show the American people that no one is above the law.
Indicting Hillary before the election would ruin the Democrat party. There's no way Obama would allow that.
>>69480993
Obama does not care about Hillary.
>Indicting Hillary before the election would ruin the Democrat party.
There are plenty of Democrats who would swoop up and take the establishment nomination. Joe Biden would definitely be put out there if she were to be indicted before the convention. As I said, she'll pick a strong, electable VP and when it does come down, they will rely on the VP as the new candidate.
All the DNC cares about is not electing Bernie. That is what will ruin the current Democrat Party. The same way Trump has, and probably will ruin the Republican Party right now.
>>69480240
She has been so far. Why would that change now?
>>69480993
>Indicting Hillary before the election would ruin the Democrat party. There's no way Obama would allow that.
I disagree. The Clinton's retain tremendous influence within the Dem party - witness Hillary's virtual anointment as the nominee, democracy be damned.
I think Obama wants to remove that influence, and replace it with his own. Hillary being indicted would achieve that goal, by basically purging the party of Clinton influence. Obama can then pour himself into that vacuum.
>>69482017
She has not been "above the law".
The FBI has an ongoing criminal investigation, has granted immunity to most of her staff members in exchange for testimony, and is set to interview her in the next week or two.
Just because the FBI director hasn't come out on CNN to say "we got her lol" doesn't mean nothing is happening.
>>69479793
It's cute that you believe that, anon.
Democrats are above scrutiny and the law.
>>69482338
Dude she's been above the law for decades now. If they finally manage to bring her down over this, more power to them, but it won't change the past 30 years or more of impunity.
>>69482338
The FBI can investigate all it wants. All the AG has to do is sit on her hands until Obama pardons Clinton on his way out.
>>69482526
[citation needed]
I don't seem to recall massive FBI investigations into her activity beforehand. Charity fraud and other shady (read: typical) political activities do not compare to violating classification laws. (Which, by the way, was already announced to have been hacked by China.)
This is shit above and beyond what that cuckold Bradley Manning did. Everything is absolutely quiet right now, because the FBI wants to have everything 100% by the books so when they do move forward, nobody can fault them for procedural errors.
I don't care if we become reptilian food in 2018, or jew gimp-slaves, or even if we are playing marbles with our own teeth in a FEMA camp.
This election is fucking WWE spectacular.
>>69482612
You didn't even bother reading my post.
Obama has more negatives than positives to pardon Clinton. He will not do it. And Loretta Lynch will not be able to sit on convening a grand jury for very long.
>>69479793
When they finally indict her I might begin to take the notion of them going after her (which they fucking should) seriously.
Until then, it's just a bunch of us having a circle jerk about wanting to watch her campaign burn and piss in the smoldering ashes.
I will honestly be surprised if they do end up indicting her, which until that happens it's just more of the same old bullshit. It's fucking frustrating that she's getting away with this.
>>69482885
>It's fucking frustrating that she's getting away with this.
She's not. There is just no hard news to report about it, for obvious reasons (ongoing investigation, liberal media, etc.)
>>69479793
Indictment when?
>>69482833
>This election is fucking WWE spectacular.
It really is.
>>69483057
Like I said, I'm pissed about it, but I have my doubts that anything will come of it until the FBI actually serves her an indictment.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/20/bolton-fbi-will-explode-if-hillary-not-indicted-over-email-scandal-due-to-politics/
It seems likely, but people in the government have gotten away with worse.
>>69479793
>Increasingly nervous Trumpshit for the 10th time this year.
LMAO.
No.
>>69483553
Is the G on your flag supposed to mean Germany?
>>69479793
Yes, but I'm kind of hoping they wait until after the convention to arrest her. If they do it beforehand the whole thing might backfire and Bernie could end up as the actual nominee by default.
>>69482848
>more negatives than positives
Obama gives no shits about butthurt Republicans, in fact I think he enjoys it.
Sure, it'll be the scandal of the week, but outside of conservative blogs it won't get more than a few mentions in the press.
Just look at Fast and Furious. You can tweak law enforcement and allow thousands of guns across the border and get hundreds of Mexicans killed while talking up 'awful gun violence in Mexico caused by American guns' and when you get caught, you can say Bush Did It and everyone will nod and cover up for you.
Yes, Bush did something like it - sent a few guns over with live tracking devices. When those devices failed, the plug on the program was pulled.
But nope, when a Democrat does it, it's OK. Because Greater Good, y'all.
>>69483641
I hope Hillary gets the dem nomination, and a week before the election they arrest her leaving 1 week for bernouts to gather support. It might win Trump the nomination if things play out that way.
>>69482612
Obama hates the clintons and the Clintons hate obama. Bill and Chelsea are all out in the past couple weeks shitting all over Obama and Obama threw Hillary to the wolves. He can't run for President again and doesn't owe anything else further to the party, so why damage his rep by pardoning Hillary?
>>69483641
They aren't rushing to interview her three months before the convention because they want to convict her after. If they do it after the DNC, then the party will accuse the FBI director of using his position to be partisan towards the GOP. Whereas if he does it before, they still have a viable candidate (theoretically in Bernie) and they could change the rules before the convention to put another candidate in (e.g. Biden).
>>69483793
>Trump the nomination
Trump the general*
Fuck I'm out of it right now
>>69483886
He may hate the Clintons but I bet he loves the Democrat party and agenda more.
I'm sure there's some bargaining going on. He'll pardon her, but get some juicy thing in return. That's why this is dragging out the way it is - so he can secure that favor before issuing the pardon.
>>69484163
A pardon does the Dems zero good, especially given by another dem. The rumor mill is that if the FBI recommends to the Department of Justice that Hillary be charged criminally and the DoJ does not play ball they'll just leak it.
If the FBI recommends to the DOJ that Hillary be charged
>whether or not she is actually charged by the DoJ
>whether or not she is found guilty
>whether or not she is pardoned
She will be dead politically. A pariah. Something nobody wants to touch with a ten foot pole.
>>69479793
You're a dope.
Anyone ever tell you that? Sit you down in a nice, comfy chair, hand you a soft drink and say, "Son, *you're* a fucking moron."
>My guess would be yes
>>69482480
Is that why W, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell continue to breathe the sweet air of freedom? Because
>Democrats
are above the law?
>>69484370
>she will be dead politically
lol yeah, with Republicans, but why would anyone care about them?
This will be spun as "Obama pardons Clinton so she can be free to reign without this nothingburger of a 'scandal' hanging over her head" and that will be that.
If you think the press is going to complain then you're blind. Without public pressure to do the right thing, it just goes away. Of course, anyone who complains will be called 'sexist' or 'anti-woman' and that will be that.
>>69484522
Is this more of that 'bush lied' shit?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0
Don't get me wrong, the Iraq war was a huge mistake, but the whole country overreacted post 9-11 on all fronts.
Hillary Clinton to be Interviewed by FBI Director Comey in Coming Days
http://www.mediaite.com/online/ajams-shuster-exclusive-hillary-clinton-to-be-interviewed-by-fbi-director-comey-in-mere-days/
Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey are meeting frequently to discuss the progress and handling of the highly sensitive case,
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/31/one-shot-at-queen-fbi-ag-intensify-focus-on-clinton-email-probe.html
Hillary is screwed if she lies to the FBI, she will go down like Martha Stewart.
>>69484731
>lol yeah, with Republicans, but why would anyone care about them?
No. Everyone and their mother will be outraged. The DoJ would have to ignore a recommendation from the FBI that she be charged. If the FBI leaks the recommendation, then it's on Obama's Attorney General Appointee Loretta Lynch to refuse. Obama has nothing to gain from party favors at this point, he served 8 years in the highest office already. Lynch will look like she's playing partisan politics if Clinton isn't charged.
>This will be spun as "Obama pardons Clinton so she can be free to reign without this nothingburger of a 'scandal' hanging over her head" and that will be that.
Not even the press will paint it that way largely if the FBI decides she should be charged with violations of the Espionage Act.
>If you think the press is going to complain then you're blind. Without public pressure to do the right thing, it just goes away
This already exists, and you have surprisingly little faith in the system. FBI Director Comey is known for attacking both sides of the political spectrum and Lynch is meeting regularly with him according to FBI sources.
>>69485697
Keep hope alive, I guess.
Sorry, I'm just cynical after following politics for the past 20 years. I hope you're right but I'm pretty sure you're not.
