Will Hillary Clinton be indicted?
Debate Rounds (3)
An indictment in the common law system, is a formal accusation that a person has committed a crime.
In interviews, Donald Trump said he would go after Hillary Clinton if he becomes President.
James Brien Comey is the current Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
He was the United States Deputy Attorney General, serving in President George W. Bush's administration.
Comey is well known for his integrity.
When asked about complaints from some security clearance holders that they would be in jail if they acted similarly to Clinton, Comey declined to comment directly, but said, "There's no special set of rules for anybody that the FBI investigates."
There was classified information on Clinton's email. If someone wanted to argue there was not, then we would have her for failing to do her job by definition.
The State Department released 52,000 pages of Hillary Clinton's emails under court order.
Clinton wrote 104 emails while she was Secretary of State that have been deemed classified.
Clinton's publicly released correspondence also includes classified emails written by about 300 other people inside and outside the government, an analysis by The Washington Post found. The senders included longtime diplomats, top administration officials and foreigners who held no U.S. security clearance.
It was later revealed that at least 1,818 emails that Hillary Clinton sent or received contained classified material, according to one of the State Department’s latest update from its ongoing review of more than 30,000 emails.
Regardless of the FBI investigation, no matter what Comey does, the decision whether or not to indict will come from Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Mrs. Lynch was appointed by Barack Obama, and has been very vocal about her allegiance to him:
Mr. Obama has been very vocal about his support of Mrs. Clinton:
Ergo, it is highly likely that Barack Obama would exert his influence to protect his chosen candidate. He may not even have to; Mrs. Lynch is well aware of his preference and given her allegiance to him may not require any convincing.
Mr. Obama has stated that there will be no political influence on the investigation:
Of course, Mr. Obama also claimed "if you like your health plan can keep it", and that was a lie:
He claimed "ISIS is contained", and that was a lie:
Virtually the entire public narrative of his deal with Iran was a lie:
I could go on about Obama's lies but I believe the point has been made: Barack Obama has no problem lying to the American people when it favors his political agenda.
Also, twice now Obama has used executive orders to essentially make up legislation out of thin air, on the topics of immigration reform and gun control. If a President is willing to abuse his power to bypass the legislature in contradiction of the Constitutional balance of powers, pressuring an appointed official to do his bidding would be a very minor transgression. This is especially true if, as is likely the case with Mrs. Lynch, the official requires very little (if any) persuasion due to their own political ideology.
I believe that the Obama/Lynch roadblock means that no matter what Director Comey and the FBI uncover, Hillary Clinton will be shielded due to their political preference. She will not be indicted while Obama and Lynch hold office.
This brings us to the general election. There are far too many polls to cite here, but the significant majority of polls show Mr. Trump trailing Mrs. Clinton in potential matchup polls. At this point it's safe to say Mr. Trump will be the underdog in November.
Even IF he wins the general election, an indictment is still far from a sure bet. Hillary Clinton's illegal server was located at her home in Chappaqua, NY, meaning the grand jury will be chosen from NY residents. While some in New York City may be loyal to Mr. Trump, the fact is that the significant majority of potential grand jurors in this circumstance would be Democrats having just suffered a major blow, and would likely be very angry (I'm assuming my opponent is willing to stipulate that Democrats seem very angry with the prospect of a Trump presidency). It is quite possible, I would say probable, that these grand jurors would relish the opportunity to return a "no true bill" to Mr. Trump's Attorney General and by proxy to Mr. Trump himself.
There is an additional wild card at play here, and that is the makeup of the Supreme Court. Given that Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan are virtually guaranteed to side with Obama/Clinton in any case appearing before them, any attempt to take legal action against Mrs. Clinton could be pre-empted by an injunction or restraining order preventing that action, relying on the fact that the four Justices above can be counted on to protect Mrs. Clinton.
Like you, I agree she SHOULD be indicted. However, the political reality is that at the moment the President of the United States and the Attorney General will use any means they can to prevent this from happening, and they can rely on the fact that any decision by the SCOTUS is a virtual lock to be at the absolute worst a four-four vote for them. More likely, either Kennedy or Roberts (or both) will join the four liberal justices to prevent the ambiguity of a four-four vote.
"She will not be indicted while Obama and Lynch hold office."
"For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open."
(On Donald Trump becoming the Republican nominee for President of the United States)
"Everyone said it would not happen. Everyone was wrong."
-Stephen Collinson, CNN
LGBT's are starting to support Trump.
“Trump said the ‘LGBT community is starting to like Donald Trump very, very much lately,’ and pointed out that Hillary Clinton, accepts donations from Middle East countries, like Saudi Arabia, which oppress LGBT citizens and women.”
The single greatest unifier of the citizens of the United States was 9/11 when the World Trade Centers fell. It turns out, Saudi Arabia looks guilty of being behind the attack financially by following the money..
When Saudi Arabia threatened the U.S. financially if they released the contents of the 9/11 report, they looked guilty as you know what.
Hillary Clinton received millions of dollers from nations with horrific acts towards LGBT's and feminism. The rage of the LGBT community after the attack on the Orlando gay club turns the tide. Clinton's acceptance of heavy financing by Saudi Arabia turns the tide.
The LGBT community realizes that only Trump will try to protect them from Islamic terrorism.
Joseph R. Murray II, an openly gay lawyer and conservative commentator runs the Facebook group LGBTrump. After the Orlando attack, thousands became members. The Orlando shooting was a stark reminder of the conflict between Islam and "Liberal values".
According to Trump, the only thing saving Hillary Clinton is Obama. He won't be around forever.
Trump said in reguards to Hillary Clinton, “So she’s being protected right now, but if I win certainly its something we are going to look at.”
If Clinton loses the election, she is going to jail.
Russia is in debate over whether to release 20,000 of Clinton's emails that she thought were "wiped clean".
I'll also stipulate that there has been a vocal pro-Trump minority within the LGBT community in the wake of the Orlando massacre.
Given your citation of the article in which Trump pointed out that Hillary is protected by Obama, I assume you stipulate to my point that she will not indicted so long as Barack Obama holds office. I believe you would also agree to the assumption that if she wins the general election, she will not indict herself (technically it would be a matter for the Attorney General, but Mrs. Clinton would decide who that Attorney General is).
Given this circumstance, Pro must establish that Donald Trump is the likely winner of the November general election. Right now, that seems unlikely:
The head-to-head numbers fare no better than approval ratings:
As I posted in the first round, even if this first proverbial domino towards an indictment falls, other obstacles remain. The grand jury making the decision will be drawn from New York citizens. While obviously there are no general election results available, according to the New York Board of Elections 1,133,980 people voted for Mrs. Clinton while 528,792 voted for Mr. Trump. The natural argument here would be that Trump's numbers would naturally be lower due to the larger Republican field; however, there were 936,527 total Republican votes and 1,970,900 total Democratic votes.
The numbers are clear: roughly 2/3 potential Clinton grand jurors would be Democrats. In addition, since this scenario only becomes relevant if Trump manages the November upset, they would be Democrats who had recently suffered a loss to Mr. Trump and thus would likely be hostile to him and anyone representing him. This add up to a very likely "no true bill".
There are other legal factors in the way. You didn't respond to the point I made regarding the makeup of the SCOTUS. Mrs. Clinton can rely on legal intervention preventing an indictment due to the fact that four justices are guaranteed to support her. While it could be argued that Mr. Trump could nominate a conservative justice and make a 5-4 vote possible, the strategy almost guaranteed to take place would be the Senate Democrats stonewalling while Mrs. Clinton's lawyers forced the legal proceedings to be rushed through.
No offense, but a few anonymous people posting on reddit doesn't change the political reality.
There is a final wild card I hadn't mentioned previously: the "fall guy". Barack Obama has already run through several including Lois Lerner, Eric Holder, and Eric Shinseki. It is highly likely Hillary Clinton could find an individual to absorb the punishment for her.
With all due respect, the Russian links are a moot point since, as noted previously, I've already stipulated that she should be indicted. Evidence for the prosecution is not the point of contention here. It is the political and legal corruption shielding Mrs. Clinton from her rightful place in an orange jumpsuit.
Hillary Vlinton is meeting strong resistance from formiddable foes.
D'souza was a former policy analyst in the Reagan White House. In January 2014, D'Souza was indicted on charges of making illegal political contributions to a 2012 United States Senate campaign, a felony under U.S. law. On May 20, 2014, D'Souza pleaded guilty in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to a charge of using "straw donors" to make illegal political campaign donations. On September 23, D'Souza was sentenced to eight months in a halfway house near his home in San Diego, five years probation, and a $30,000 fine. He got out of jail and came after Hillary Clinton with a vengeance.
Here is the trailer to his video about Hillary.
Dinesh D'souza-Hillary's America
Here is the trailer to his video, "Obama's America 2016", the film that made him a target of the Obama administration. He laid a serious blow to the legacy of Barack Obama. Does Barack want seconds from a powerful man who is now a bitter enemy that Obama cannot contain?
In an interview with the Washington Times D'souza said,"Americans no longer have past heroes like Washington, Lincoln and Reagan, but "we do have us” in “our struggle for the restoration of America.”
-The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization which advocates for gun rights. Founded in 1871, the group has informed its members about firearm-related bills since 1934, and it has directly lobbied for and against legislation since 1975. It is also the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States.
We have a perfect demonstration of what begins to happen in the West if leaders cross too far over the line to make a mockery of the rules and common sense.-
Hillary is no shoe-in to win the Presidency. Why?
Most people see Latino vs White.
There is another dimension to the divide. Islam vs. Christianity. Latinos are strongly Catholic/Protestant. Your faith or your politics?
2)Hillary was bought off by big banks to the tune of $21 million, and everybody knows it.
3)Clinton took millions from nations hostile to America, even Saudi Arabia, who is guilty per public opinion of backing 9/11 financially.
This negativity towards the Clinton campaign was magnified by the unveiling of Saudi Arabia as a supporter of 20% of her campaign, the 9/11 report, and the mass shooting of LGBT's in Orland, FL.
4)The Orlando shooting has enhanced the sense of anti-Islamic within Conservatives and planted it into the mindset of Liberals and Moderates, which is a game changer in the political landscape.
The Wild Card will be...
Whoever Trump gets as his VP.
Carly Fiorina- May cancel out the female "glass ceiling" concept, as either would be the first female Vice President. Also establishes full GOP support.
We'd have a good old fashioned cat fight. And a Hillary Clinton stripped of any "being a female advantage".
Sarah and Carly-
Carly Fiorina on Hillary Clinton-
Ted Cruz- Would help with the Hispanic vote and establish full GOP support.
Rudy Guiliani- He'd win New York.
Rudy Giuliani 9/11-
Mia Love- He'd gain female and African American support. She'd be the first female VP and first black female VP.
Mia Love Speech-
Trump's people have proven loyal no matter what. Hillary's? Not so much...
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.