Al Jazeera Reporter says FBI will Interview Hillary in days

Al Jazeera America reporter David Shuster claims Hillary and some others involved in the email scandal will be interviewed very very soon !!!

Shuster also says the investigation is nearing the end and claims the FBI will be recommending criminal charges !!!

We know the Justice Department and probably the White House will be stalling any grand jury proceedings to "protect" Hillary.

Nobody knows for sure, but the curtains might be opening up soon.

My guess is that if no indictments are produced, Congress will hold hearings that could be curtains for some people.

I imagine the Bernie Sanders Campaign is rubbing their hands and licking their chops as this continues.



AJAM’s David Shuster Exclusive: Hillary Clinton to be Interviewed by FBI Director Comey in Mere Days

Al Jazeera America may be shutting off the lights permanently soon, but that doesn’t mean reporters like David Shuster aren’t continuing to go about their business until the final gun sounds.

Wednesday night, Shuster just reported on the 7:00 PM EST AJAM nightly newscast that the FBI has completed its examination of Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton‘s private email server after an investigation lasting nearly one year. The former Fox News and MSNBC reporter states investigators are nearing a verdict whether to seek criminal charges against the Former Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady.

..... Mrs. Clinton admitted to ABC’s David Muir last year that she made a mistake in using a private email system, but continues to insist she did nothing illegal in any capacity.

Curtain Call !!!

Have you seen the thousands of people who are lusting for her demise? My favorite comment:

I would donate to the 'Shank Hillary In Prison' gofundme page if her fellow prisoners set one up.

I feel like Al Jazeera is one of the last sources that you would ever use for a post.

a reply to: xuenchen

Call me cynical, when charges are filed ill believe it..

I wonder if Clinton will give the FBI smart arse comments like she did for Benghazi.

'What difference does it make if my emails got up one night, and went for a walk on my home server ? '

I expect that they will leave Hillary for last.

First they will wind all of her hench-people into the net...promise them they are all facing long jail terms...then cut immunity deals with a few of them to get even more evidence (and witnesses) against Hillary.

Then they will interview Hillary, and let her tell a few more lies about things they have airtight evidence for - so that, worst case, they can get her for Obstruction of Justice, if her dozens of National Security breaches do not stick for some reason (think Martha Stewart).

It is going to be very interesting to see if the Democrats cast her out upon Indictment; or if they are going to let her keep running on the theory that she is innocent until proven guilty. This will be quite a prickly problem, given that the only other candidate who has Democratic delegates is an Independent self-proclaimed Socialist.

Watch for some really quick "emergency" rule changes, so that Joe Biden can be be parachuted into her Delegates and Super Delegates.

a reply to: xuenchen
Something is up.
When we see left leaning news outlets saying that Hillary needs to concede to Bernie, someone knows something new.
There has been a very clear change in the reporting about Hillary.

Shuster is a disgraced journalist that has no credibility whatsoever.

I'm all for a Hillary indictment, but I'll wait for charges to be filed before I believe that windbag.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: xuenchen
Something is up.
When we see left leaning news outlets saying that Hillary needs to concede to Bernie, someone knows something new.
There has been a very clear change in the reporting about Hillary.

Yup.

It seems Hillary is "open season" the last few weeks.

Something is a cook'n

a reply to: Snarl

Geez, I guess I owe you thanks for some perspective. As much as I am appalled by the aforementioned person as a consideration for president . ..I don't like how I have let myself sink as low as I have with comments regarding her in retrospect.
Damn...not sure if that's what you intended or not, but I have become pretty disrespectful in my speach during this election.

a reply to: charolais

Considering the fact that the media here in the West is all in the pockets of corrupt scumbags like Hillary, I think Al Jazeera is probably just as reliable as the "news" they report

lol

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: introvert
Shuster is a disgraced journalist that has no credibility whatsoever.

I'm all for a Hillary indictment, but I'll wait for charges to be filed before I believe that windbag.

Did you get a chance to read the article about Hillary in the Washington Post on Sunday? It was quite interesting. David Shuster didn't write it.
WaP o article
Then there is the big change in the wind....
ATS post

When we see left leaning news outlets saying that Hillary needs to concede to Bernie, someone knows something new.

Which would make Sanders the de facto 'winner' of the primaries, and nomination.

No one would stand for that.

If something is up it's how to ignore the email issue.

a reply to: mobiusmale

It is going to be very interesting to see if the Democrats cast her out upon Indictment; or if they are going to let her keep running on the theory that she is innocent until proven guilty.

If the FBI finds 'wrong doing' by Clinton.

The democrats can kiss the 2016 election good bye.

And they are not going to let that happen.

So the FBI is interviewing her. The reality is that they can not charge her with anything. All they can do is investigate, gather evidence and then hand it over to the Justice department to decide if there is enough to charge her and take it to trial.

After all of the time and effort spent by the republicans to bring and investigate, after all of that, and nothing has come up, what else is there, save to do a political witch hunt, to which they set their sights on Hillary Clinton. And it appears as though they are going to do it, even at the cost of the country, just so they can say they are right and vindicated, even though every time, every other investigation came up that she has done nothing wrong.

But for arguments sake, lets say they do and bring up charges, then what? Ultimately there is no prison that has the capacity to hold her. Until the day she dies, she is entitled by law to have secret service protection, being a former first lady of the United States of America. So even if they manage to find anything and take it to trial, what is the worst that it can get? Probation and a slap on the wrist, that is all.

originally posted by: neo96

When we see left leaning news outlets saying that Hillary needs to concede to Bernie, someone knows something new.

Which would make Sanders the de facto 'winner' of the primaries, and nomination.

No one would stand for that.

If something is up it's how to ignore the email issue.

It is all a matter of timing. She and Sanders have to fight it out so that Sanders can't win but she can't bow out too soon. Biden-Warren will be the plan when Hillary becomes radioactive. Then after the nomination, Hillary will be pardoned and no one will care because she will be out of politics.

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: neo96

When we see left leaning news outlets saying that Hillary needs to concede to Bernie, someone knows something new.

Which would make Sanders the de facto 'winner' of the primaries, and nomination.

No one would stand for that.

If something is up it's how to ignore the email issue.

It is all a matter of timing. She and Sanders have to fight it out so that Sanders can't win but she can't bow out too soon. Biden-Warren will be the plan when Hillary becomes radioactive. Then after the nomination, Hillary will be pardoned and no one will care because she will be out of politics.

That's going bad to worse.

At the end of the FBI investigation I predict that one (or more) of her assistants will take the fall and she will be cleared of the lions share of any statutory wrongdoing. This is despite her wilful ignorance regarding the use of her private server for classified government correspondence.

It's a shame I come to this conclusion but it's clear to me she has some very powerful friends in high places where the rule of law is subject to variances in its interpretation.

originally posted by: BlueJacket
Geez, I guess I owe you thanks for some perspective ... not sure if that's what you intended or not

Star for your response. BTW, I'm not sure what I intended. I was kind'a shocked by that comment ... but it had enough of an effect on me I came back here and replied in-thread. Not initially my intent.

I'm also one of the "Seeing It, Is Believing It" crowd.

It's not that she holds the laws of the land in contempt ... she does in fact seem impervious to them. That alone should be enough to cause a second revolution in this country. Why is no one talking about it?

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Something about the whole Lois Lerner-IRS thing and her walking away unindicted.