Source: April 29, 2016

The Justice Department hasn't set a deadline for the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of private e-mail because doing so would undercut the probe, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said.

Investigators will do "a full, thorough and independent review" of whether classified information was mishandled through the use of Clinton's private e-mail sysrem when she served in President Barack Obama's administration, Lynch said Thursday when asked whether voters were owed a resolution of the issue as Clinton moves toward securing the Democratic nomination for president.

Read more:


Mr.Wayne's picture
Mr.Wayne 2 years 10 weeks ago

The DOJ has had these documents, emails, etc. for quite awhile now. Hundreds of investigators, cybercops and related 'experts' have been pouring over the data nonstop since they were obtained. These folks have the capacity to analyse, digest and decipher entire terrorist groups' communications almost 'on the fly' and they can use forensic tools to retrieve data from most any device that exists. Additionally, the NSA has been in the business of collecting ALL communications of the type under discussion here. They have already automatically collected and stored anything she 'purged from that server, as well.

Are we supposed to believe that - with all those resources actively working - the AG and the DOJ still don't know enough to say, "She's 'dirty' - we need to immediately move forward with an indictment". All they need is one solid charge against her to indict her. The 'probe' may continue during and after her arrainment - this is common in criminal cases. Well, at least for the rest of us..... Additional charges are often filed after the fact when 'new information' comes to light.

So, why the 'stall' tactics? Some powerful persons or group are doing damage control to keep their 'candidate' looking good during the electoral process. Those folks may not really care if she's guilty..... they may have an investment to protect. They are completely 'in her corner' and will support her regardless. For anyone feeling differently; the latest example of congressional members urging leniency for one of their own, who just happens to be a serial molester. fraud AND a well known politician.

Maybe some folks here see the granting of lifetime immunity to HRC's IT guy as some sign that they must be serious about persuing against HRC. There are many types of 'immunity' that may be granted (like 'use immunity', etc.) but the choice they made tells me something I've not heard mentioned so far. I'll briefly explain what I mean.

Granting him lifetime immunity from any prosecution could have a more sinister alternate rationale. This may allow the Gov't to stall the proceedings until the electoral process is in just the right position to create a hearing wherein he essentially tells a story that paints him guilty while seemingly clearing her of any wrongdoing beyond incompetance. The IT guy bites the bullet (takes one for the team) but it's a freebe, since he can't be held accountable. The DOJ can then lament the 'error' of granting the immunity in the first place - and explain it away based upon the "urgency" of their investigative efforts.

The Government is losing the trust and respect of the people it claims to serve. Maybe this is what happens when we vote based only upon "talking points" instead of the candidate's track record of transparancy or their personal integrity..... As it is right now; I feel like we're all just "voting in the dark" - right where they seem to want us.

Add comment

Login or register to post comments

Democrats Should Steal Trump's Thunder on Trade

It's time to run bigger, better and harder on trade policies.