Author Topic: Judge Jeanine Pirro on why Hillary won’t be indicted: It will be a classic Clinton manuever  (Read 218 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SirLinksALot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,417
  • Gender: Male
SOURCE: AMERICAN THINKER

URL: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/judge_jeanine_pirro_on_why_hillary_wont_be_indicted.html

by: Thomas Lifson




Judge Jeanine Pirro is a tough cookie, well versed in hardball politics, New York-style.  As district attorney for Westchester County, just north of New York City, she no doubt crossed paths many times with then-U.S. attorney for the Eastern District Loretta Lynch.  The home-brew server of the Clinton email and bribery scheme was located in her turf, in Chappaqua.

So when the former judge makes clear her opinion on what lies ahead for Hillary, I pay attention.  Yesterday, she appeared on Fox and Friends and let us all know why she thinks Hillary will skate:

Quote
Pirro said that Clinton is not going to be indicted in the email case because of the series of events that the charges would trigger.

"The reason she will not be indicted is because her first witness as a defendant in a criminal case is the President of the United States. Why? Because Hillary Clinton emailed President Barack Obama. He knew she had a private email server. So he is complicit. And they will not allow a constitutional crisis where the President of the United States knew about the risking of security of the United States," said Pirro.

The judge said Clinton "threw a shot across the bow" recently when she said publicly that "everyone" in Washington knew she was using a private email.

"Translation? Mr. President, this isn't happening because you're my first witness," said Pirro, explaining that this investigation is a "charade and a dance" at this point.

Underlying this perspective is the reality that there is no time and even less inclination to hold President Obama politically responsible via impeachment by Congress.  That is, assuming he would be directly implicated in the scheme, if only by negligence.

CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE REST