Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DOJ Will Not File Charges Against Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (politico.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the closed-investigation dept.

An anonymous reader writes: After FBI Director James Comey recommended not to indict Hillary Clinton for her email misconduct yesterday, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on Wednesday that the Justice Department has decided not to pursue charges against Hillary Clinton or her aids and that the department will close the investigation into her use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state. "Late this afternoon, I met with FBI Director James Comey and career prosecutors and agents who conducted the investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email system during her time as Secretary of State," Lynch said in a statement on Wednesday. "I received and accepted their unanimous recommendation that the thorough, year-long investigation be closed and that no charges be brought against any individuals within the scope of the investigation."

8 of 801 comments (clear)

  1. Yawn by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Voting for Hillary because she's "not guilty" is like hiring Casey Anthony to babysit your kid.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re: Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What leaks do you need? If what Comey said wasn't enough nothing will satisfy you. He said she's a total fuckwit but her last name is Clinton so his hands are tied.

  2. No justice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Snowden blows the whistle on illegal government spying, is forced to flee the country. Clinton violates laws and exposes classified information and will be the next President. There is no justice in America.

  3. Not surprising by _xeno_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We of course knew this was coming when the FBI didn't recommend indictment, given that Lynch said she'd go along with whatever the FBI decided.

    But I expect the real reason is simple: they don't feel they're guaranteed a conviction. If you listen to Comey's reasoning, he was quite clear that there was no precedent for such a case - meaning that they don't want to set a precedent until they have iron tight evidence where they can be sure they know how the case will go.

    Likewise, "no reasonable prosecutor" would want to be the prosecutor who indicted potentially the first woman president and then lost the case. If the case wasn't a 100%, sure-fire victory, no one would be willing to prosecute it. Which is kind of reasonable: who wants to torpedo their career by killing Hillary's presidential chances only to lose at trial?

    But it does lay clear that there are two classes in the US: the ruling class, who won't be charged for clear violations because they might be able to get off, and the rest of us. Who will be charged for anything and everything they can think of.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  4. Will that include Guccifer? by zedaroca · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I received and accepted their unanimous recommendation that the thorough, year-long investigation be closed and that no charges be brought against any individuals within the scope of the investigation."

    We know about her crime because Guccifer was involved in exposing it. Will they retract the charges against him? Or the only chargeable crime in America is to expose what the law says is a crime?

  5. Such faith in the delegates by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You assumed the delegates have moral fiber.
    People of good character can't this far in the political process.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  6. Re:I would daresay... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you find yourself declaring that the lack of evidence of wrongdoing is, in fact, evidence of wrongdoing, it's time to take a break and realize that you've become trapped in a self-referential delusion loop.

    its_time_to_stop_posting.jpg

  7. Re: Sanders has an option by m6ack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Colin Powell did NOT do the same thing. He did NOT use personal email to send ANY confidential, or even sensitive information over private email. He NEVER culled his email in an effort to hide anything. There was NEVER any question about his correspondence with anyone - and there was NEVER anything Colin Powel ever had to hide. That's why Colin Powel's integrity was NEVER in question. But on the other hand.... Mrs. Clinton is by the admission of the FBI guilty of gross negligence... With many emails on a private account classified or _greater_ basically made available in the public domain due to her wanting to have her relationship with Huma Abadeen or other side deals secret? I held a clearance. I hold that trust that the us government placed in me as an honor. Clearly, this woman feels that such a confidence is not an honor, but an inconvenience.