Clinton indictment odds just ramped up dramatically, according to one former judge.
Andrew Napolitano, who was a Judge on the New Jersey Superior Court from 1987 to 1995 and currently serves as the Senior Judicial Analyst for Fox News, weighed in on U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s Friday statement that she would accept FBI recommendations in regard to the Clinton email investigation.
According to Napolitano, that concession from Lynch spells out “very bad news for Mrs. Clinton legally.”
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) July 1, 2016
“Legally, the FBI has invested thousands and thousands of person hours in this investigation, and clearly the accumulated evidence is sufficient to indict and clearly sufficient to convict on the basis of what is publicly known,” Napolitano said. “We can only assume there’s more evidence of which the FBI is aware that it has not made public.”
Napolitano also felt a Clinton indictment was now more likely than ever because it takes politics out of the equation and puts the Democratic frontrunner’s fate entirely in the hands of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which operates outside the realm of political influence.
“The removal of political people from this entire thing is bad news for Mrs. Clinton, and the odds for a Clinton indictment have increased dramatically in the past 24 hours,” Napolitano told Fox Business.
Napolitano clearly does not trust Lynch to do “the right thing,” remarking that she has had “a very bad two weeks,” criticizing her for editing and redacting an FBI report to create “a false impression about the mass murder in Orlando.”
“She also said the best way to resist terror is through love, and then had a public meeting with the husband of a woman that a whole team has been investigating…. This created an appearance of impropriety. Would she shake the hand of the wife of a Mafia Don she was investigating, or would she sit down and talk with the spouse of a drug cartel chieftain? The answer is no, and she has a duty to avoid the appearance of impropriety.”
For Napolitano, Lynch had little choice but to declare that she would accept the findings of the FBI, even if that meant pushing for a Clinton indictment. The meeting with Bill Clinton, her prior employment with a law firm that did legal work for the Clintons, and several other incidents give the “appearance of independence of the investigation has been compromised.”
“This is actually a good result for justice,” Napolitano concluded. “I have more faith in the team of FBI agents investigating her (Clinton) than I do the political appointees in the Justice Department to do the right thing.”
It’s important to note that the FBI investigation is still underway, and it will not be rushed to a close by the time of the November elections, although the FBI has publicly declared that it will be working to wrap up the case as soon as possible and that it is the highest priority.
If the organization should recommend a Clinton indictment at the end of its findings, then it would not necessarily disqualify Hillary from running or even serving as President.
For that to occur, there would need to be a conviction, which would probably create enough pressure to tip the scales in Donald Trump’s favor provided that Democrats were unable to rally a worthwhile replacement candidate.
Elura Nanos of LawNewz examined the scenarios that were most likely to go down in the event of a Clinton indictment earlier this month. It’s worth a look if you want an overview of the situation. However, be forewarned that Nanos is a Clinton supporter, so it is an opinionated piece, in case you’re looking for a just-the-facts take.
So what do you think, readers?
— Cal News 2day (@Calnews_2day) July 1, 2016
Is Judge Andrew Napolitano right to say that odds of a Clinton indictment have increased dramatically, or will HRC be able to weather the storm and become the next President of the United States? Sound off in the comments section below.