I prefer to hear/see everything and assess for myself.

Not those that are committed to spreading rumors and innuendo against Democratic candidates.

Seriously. You might as well be listening to Dick Morris.

bullshit. Because we all KNOW that everything said on Fox news has to be true.

Of course, we must remember he's rabidly right wing and will only put a negative spin on it. Whatever happens, it had better be sooner rather than later. We can't afford a surprise with Trump on the horizon.

The situation is what it is. None of us know anything yet. He was merely predicting what would happen if she were indicted, and what would happen if she were not.

And hi!!

Never...ever....ever for me. YUCK. Propaganda 101...

It's a good thing for some of us who have discerning minds to watch the opposition. We learn an awful lot about them.

The notion that I should shield my eyes and ears from what my political opponents say implies that I have little confidence in my mental powers of assessment.

Heck, I even read some things that Hillary says, too.

I wouldn't believe a thing that Mukasey says.

But I'd wager that the AG won't proceed unless the evidence is a slam dunk.

Too much at stake here, and if the FBI fails to win their case, assuming an indictment, there will be heck to pay in terms of the Comey's and the AG's reputation and careers.

.....that the AG will take the evidence to Clinton to seek a plea deal (if there is sufficient evidence of criminality), and I doubt very much that Clinton would choose a trial over a plea deal. What do you think?

To criminally indict, they have to have evidence that Clinton willfully committed a crime. That's going to be difficult to prove. But if they think they have the goods, surely Clinton will plea.

The outcome can't be that bad though. The reason: the precedent set in the Petraeus case. He knowingly gave extremely classified information to his biographer (with whom he was having an affair) that included the names of covert agents abroad for geez sake, and intelligence info and even classified military positions. What an idiot!

Anyway, what did he plea to and get? A minor offense, a fine, and I think some community service. FBI attorneys were furious about the lax penalty as they should have been. So with that as a precedent case, I don't see anything really bad coming from Hillary's situation, if the worst case scenario happens.

I think the entire email case is overblown. A more serious issue is Hillary's ties to Wall Street. However, I stand with her because I think she is the better candidate. I like Bernie and respect his decades' long commitment to his causes, but I think he is selling a pipe dream to his followers. I am bothered by the ethics of that.

...you will see that the crux of the matter is much more serious than Petraeus' crime. And we have known this for some time, but Mukasey lays it out clearly. Reportedly, there is written evidence that Hillary knowingly and willfully instructed some staff to send information that she knew was classified on plain paper to avoid the markings that would have prohibited it from being transmitted lawfully. He used the word "obstruction." Meaning, I suppose, obstruction of the laws regarding transmission of classified information.

I don't think so.

Hillary signed a non disclosure agreement. In that agreement,
https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRC_NDAS/1/DOC_0C05833708/C05833708.pdf
it made specific mention of various criminal clauses of the US Code that she was subject but not limited to - which proves she was aware of the applicable criminal laws, etc.

They also refer to EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958 -- April 17, 1995 signed by her husband, Bill. In there, it is using words like "any knowing, willful, or negligent action" so negligence in taking care of classified information is a violation that leads to "applicable laws" (cited in the non disclosure agreement).

Hillary's husband, Bill knows all about what happens to folks who store classified information at their house without authorization. It is a crime:
When Bill Clinton Pardoned His Former CIA Director over Classified Documents on His Home Computer

For Hillary to be innocent of that crime, she would have to convince the court that she knew as Secretary of State that she or those who used her server would never send or receive anything that was classified or could be classified after the fact and stored on her server between 2009 until recently when she turned her server over to the FBI. Given that many emails from foreign countries are "born classified", that's an absurd argument to attempt to make. So Hillary very arguably negligently exposed the security of classified information and illegally stored it at her home. Those are criminal acts.

Certainly, the illegal, unauthorized storage of classified material in her home is pretty much a slam dunk case. I can't imagine how she can refute it - just like Bill's own Director of the CIA couldn't refute it. It's a crime and he was convicted for it.

If you've followed this, part of the allegation is that they cut pieces of classified information and inserted that classified information into their emails. That's also against the law. They have depositions from Intelligence Community agents that information was classified at the time it was transmitted. That's against the criminal law - even if it is not marked classified.

And then we have the Clinton Foundation being subpoenaed for information about donors who contributed large amounts (ie $5+ million by Saudi Arabia and Boeing) who also got help from Hillary and the State Department. That has been widely reported by the media, smells real bad and nobody has very good answers yet.

The video is also right: the justice department doesn't cut an immunity deal with someone, if after months of looking at a situation, they don't think there are bigger fish to fry.

Further, the FBI (over a hundred agents), Intelligence Community agents and two inspector generals do not spend 9 months gawking at something if there is nothing to see.

Someone is going to get charged with something after all this time.

Hate to agree with a FOX Noise video but I think there's more right than wrong with what he says.

... unsecured channel that will be the clincher.

What they intend to do about it is another matter entirely.

That is the core of the allegation.

Just in time to sink Democrats in the General.

As for "heck to pay", these people are out of their jobs in January anyway (staying on to the next administration is rare).

And there's no way a trial would be done by January anyway, so if they were really worried about their reputation, they've got scapegoats.

Look at her history of trying to stall the inevitable - the email server, Rose law firm docs, and so on.

She won't plea until the end of pre-trial stuff at the earliest. And that's going to take several months. Most likely she fights, even in the face of a slam-dunk case, until long after it's utterly obvious she's losing at trial.

She won't go to trial because she'll lose the election if she does. People will not vote for an indicted candidate. She'll plea, and the Justice Dept will fast track it. All they want is justice. And then let the voters decide.

If it's a plea to a minor charge, it won't affect the election for two reasons: 1) look at who the Repub alternative for president is; and 2) this email stuff is very small potatoes. Only the Repubs and Bernie supporters care about it.

Wall Street connections? That's an issue.

You think people won't vote for an indicted candidate, but you think they will vote for someone who pled down that same indictment?

Uh...no.

Enough said.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Mukasey

Edit: He has been a frequent Hillary basher on Faux Newz.

the history lesson. Does it matter who he served under? Not everyone is the devil. But point being that watching this even if it is true should have anyone worried, Swiftboat ring a bell? Hillary does because she used a similar tactic on Sanders. And GOP are masters at this. They can turn a no scadel into a scandal.
They will be able to spin this a actual scandal to drive votes away from Hillary. A Pres running for office should have zero scandals. And what Hillary did with email server was just poor judgement at best. If it is found she did nothing illegal the fact having private email server so you don't have to use companies email server is not going to sit well with the (I) voters.

I believe she will actually gain points from this whole sordid mess.

James Comley, current director of the FBI, served as deputy US AG in the same BUSH administration. I suspect the AG has reasons to say what he said beyond political... but you knew this.

I will wait for the FBI to wrap this up...

I am sure the final results of the investigation will be thorough and factual and non-biased.

and Lynch says no, I expect hm to be before TV cameras this fast.

I just hope it happens faster than his refusal to certify the NSA program in 2004.

Yup.

You all spend an inordinate amount of time trolling fox news for anything to show Hillary in a negative light.

I watch FOX news for two hours per week, on Sunday afternoons. I like to see what the enemy is saying about our side.

the government has since said contain classified information

Equal justice for all

No more pleas for bankster thieves and politicians

If the FBI recommends indictment, then the "champion" should encourage and welcome a trial to prove, once and for all, her innocence. If she tries to slither away and not face her accusers, like millions of Americans are forced to do, then she is unacceptable as a leader of anything.

This Revolution is to change the status quo, not accept what has been overlooked in the past.

Clinton will do what is best for the Clintons, not the country.

Mukasey gives two HYPOTHETICALS. The second one is what the OP wrote, as though it was fact and has been decided, this is NOT the case. The first hypothetical that Mukasey offers is NO prosecution at all, which of course doesn't make it into the OP. Don't take my word for it, watch the video. I am so tired of this misleading bullshit.

That is understood and not remarkable.

Mail Message
On Sun Mar 6, 2016, 07:05 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Mukasey on FOX today regarding FBI--Clinton.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511428102

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Citing FOX and Mukasey the ultimate RW hack with GLEE against a democrat. Is this the democratic underground or what? Hide this please.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 6, 2016, 07:19 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: So sad to see this kind of nonsense on DU. Some people need to get their head and their ass wired together.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Facts are facts
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yes it is Fox, however, like it or not Fox is a news station in the US. Mukasey is a former Attorney General, not some nut job standing on a street corner drooling on himself. Mukasey would have a good idea how things MAY proceed. We all need to see how this will shake out. Various media sources will have experts on to speculate on what may happen. All sides will be discussed, but until something happens it is all speculation. Is speculation no longer allowed by anyone about anything?

A point to the alerter....GLEE? Really? Where is the glee? I watched the video and the OP has correctly framed the interview. The only glee is in your imagination.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Posting something with which you disagree does not meet criteria of "This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate."

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.