Lynch was asked in a hearing by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, what her department would do if the FBI were to recommend that step. “If the FBI were to make a referral to the Department of Justice to pursue a case by way of indictment and to convene a grand jury for that purpose, the Department of Justice is not required by law to do so, are they — are you?” Cornyn asked.
Lynch didn’t answer directly, but seemed to indicate the department has some wiggle room, and can consult with officials before deciding what to do.
“It would not be an operation of law, it would be an operation of procedures,” Lynch said in reply. She added that the decision to pursue a criminal case would be “done in conjunction with the agents” involved in the investigation. “It’s not something that we would want to cut them out of the process.”
Republicans have been pushing for charges against Clinton, but at the same time, many have predicted that the Obama administration would never allow the Justice Department to bring charges against Clinton for including classified and top secret information on her personal emails. Some Republican presidential candidates, including Donald Trump, have said Clinton is desperately hoping to win the White House in order to avoid the criminal charges that could be brought under a Republican administration.
More at the Washington Examiner
Most commonly the FBI PRESENTS the results of their investigation it doesn’t “refer”
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/faqs Does the FBI work through U. S. Attorneys?
Yes. Although the FBI is responsible for investigating possible violations of federal law, the FBI does not give an opinion or decide if an individual will be prosecuted. The federal prosecutors employed by the Department of Justice or the U.S. Attorneys offices are responsible for making this decision and for conducting the prosecution of the case.
What does the FBI do with information and evidence gathered during an investigation?
If a possible violation of federal law under the jurisdiction of the FBI has occurred, the Bureau will conduct an investigation. The information and evidence gathered in the course of that investigation are then presented to the appropriate U.S. Attorney or Department of Justice official, who will determine whether or not prosecution or further action is warranted. Depending on the outcome of the investigation, evidence is either returned or retained for court.
Clinton has not even been questioned by the FBI she is not even a Person of Interest
Law enforcement investigates, gathers, and protects evidence of possible crimes. That evidence is presented to prosecuting attorneys who represent the state or federal government, and who decide whether or not to file charges or drop a case. Law enforcement doesn’t make a recommendation, one way or the other.
Only about half of all cases referred to federal prosecutors result in charges being filed. Here’s the statistical data for federal referrals for 2010. You can find the numbers in question on page 5. It’s as common not to file charges as it is to do so.
I would be surprised if Clinton were charged with anything. The FBI has previously stated on record that she was not being personally investigated. As was pointed out in Post #1, she hasn’t been formally questioned by the FBI.
The whole media circus has led people to believe they know something. In fact, the people who have promoted the media circus don’t know a damn thing. There’s nothing but a collection of vague allegations without a shred of specific evidence to back them up. It’s been a story without facts, constructed almost entirely of rumors and speculation.
@john:
Just wondering how you might know this?
@Greg:
I, too, would be surprised. Despite the FACT that Hillary definitely set up her own secret, private, unsecured email server and had highly classified information on it (regardless of if she personally sent or received it, she STORED it illegally… though we know she DID do some sending and receiving) it would in fact surprise me if this corrupt, political regime served justice and recommended an indictment of Hillary for negligently putting US national security at risk.
@john:
Yet they do make referrals:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/07/nation/na-fbi7
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-03-06-2576108085_x.htm
@Bill: You are correct. Hillary won’t be charged or even indicted, not because she is innocent, but because of the way the DOJ is politicized. The left will naturally spin that into innocence. She broke the law. Period. Those of us here who actually had clearances for long periods of time (and in my case, processed them and initiated investigations for those who committed violations such as hers), know damn good and well she committed over 2,000 security violations.
@Bill, #3:
Setting up her own server and using it as she did was entirely lawful at the time. Any number of highly placed elected and appointed public officials are known to have been doing exactly the same thing.
The Bush administration is known for a fact to have utilized private e-mail servers owned by the Republican National Committee to conduct official business; millions of e-mails are known to have mysteriously gone missing when they were sought in connection with multiple investigations. That doesn’t seem to bother you in the least.
Further, you have no clue about the actual nature of any “classified information” in question. You don’t seem to think it’s relevant that some of what has been claimed to have been secret had already appeared openly in public media. Nor does it seem to bother you that such information was handled in a similar fashion on private servers during the terms of both Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. What was evidently routine and totally irrelevant during their tenures has suddenly become elevated to the level of criminal activity during that of their successor.
This is a load of manure. What the scandal mongers are now doing is prepping their audience to be righteously outraged when the Justice Department fails to turn their bullshit media fabrication into a politically useful set of charges—because, you know, there’s nothing actually there, and there never was to begin with. How unfortunate would that be? A majority of voters could be left comparing the Democrat Party’s and the GOP’s respective nominees based solely on the the particulars of their platforms and on their records and merits.
Trump? Or Cruz? Really? You can’t be serious.
One of the reasons that Hillary will not be prosecuted is that nearly everyone in the administration has been living on and over the edge. Obama is directing much of this or at least directing with deniability. “Fast and Furious” and Bengasi are only a few. Watch how much money was wasted in setting up Obama Care. Look at the “solendra” capers. This administration is a throwback to the robber barons!
@john:
Just wanted to be sure you got this, John
@Greg:
Uh, sorry, but having classified information stored in an unsecured manner was and is illegal. Hillary had a server set up so she would have full control over what is seen by the public and authorities and what is secretly deleted.
What you or I might think about the nature of the classified data is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that illegally storing classified information IS against the law and THAT is what Hillary knowingly did. I have already stated that if the government should feel it necessary to prosecute Powell or Rice, they should, especially if a prosecution of Hillary is undertaken. Not that they were trying to hide anything, like Hillary was, but everyone is subjected to the same laws…. or should be.
As to the Bush emails, was there any classified information involved? If not, they your are desperately trying to provide cover for Hillary’s stupid illegal activities by comparing apples and potatoes.
Dream on, Greg. If Hillary is not indicted, it will be a huge injustice.
Just sharing every one of those to secret emails with her lawyer, who had/has ZERO security clearance, is a felony for every instance.
The statute of limitations does not run out until after the next president is sworn in.
Donald Trump is promising that, if she hasn’t already been dealt with, he will.