Most Encouraging Statement Suggesting That There May Be Justice After All: Former U.S. Attorney General Joe DiGenova

Hope-Dove-Flying

Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova had this to say on Laura Ingraham’s radio show, speaking  about the FBI’s investigation into Hillary’s intentional mishandling of confidential State Department e-mails—you know, those “stupid e-mails” that nobody cares about:

“They have reached a critical mass in their investigation of the Secretary and all of her senior staff. And, it’s going to come to a head, I would suggest, in the next 60 days…It’s going to be a very complex matter for the Department of Justice, but they’re not going to be able to walk away from it. They are now at over 1,200 classified emails. And, that’s just for the ones we know about from the State Department. That does not include the ones that the FBI is, in fact, recovering from her hard drives. …I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Attorney General Loretta Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an Attorney General.  It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable.”

Sounds almost too good to be true, doesn’t it?  Yet DiGenova is far from a being a loon, a partisan hitman, or one to spin wild theories. He also should know a bit about how the internal workings of the various competing agencies under Justice work. [Full disclosure: I’ve met Joe, and chatted with him a bit, though this was quite a while back. Did you know he is a trained singer? A good one, too.]

I cannot begin to describe how marvelous it will be for the integrity of our government and justice system if Joe’s analysis is proven correct. I don’t even have to consider how much I would enjoy the screams of indignation of the Clinton Corrupted. This scenario is what the Clintons, the Democrats, the DNC, Clintons’ disgraceful mews media defenders and Hillary’s see-no-evil supporters sooooo richly deserve that if it ever comes to pass, Handel’s Hallelujah Chorus might just spontaneously echo from the cosmos, or at least John Kiley’s organ version that he played that immortal night, the best of my life, when Carlton Fisk hit that Game #6 winning home run off the Fenway foulpole, so many years ago.

Let us hope.

__________________

Pointer and Source: Don Surber

 

53 thoughts on “Most Encouraging Statement Suggesting That There May Be Justice After All: Former U.S. Attorney General Joe DiGenova

  1. This election is going to tear me apart!

    What if Hillary is forced to drop out due to the email scandal; Sanders will take the top spot and the Democratic Party nomination.

    What if Trumps gets the GOP nomination?

    Trump vs Sanders = WORST FREAKING NIGHTMARE FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! How does anyone intelligently choose between those two wacko’s? It’ll be time to pack the bags and move to Australia until the friggin’ smoke clears, and there would be smoke!!!

    Oh what the heck; Obama might as well scrap the Constitution and stay in office as Dictator or crown himself King.

    😦

    • If Hillary is out, Biden comes back in.

      Like a rock star. And the media will even spin that he’s an “outsider” – having remained aloof during the campaign season so far.

  2. You know… We all knew that something was going to happen, eventually. Let’s play a game of what if.

    What if the FBI presses charges?

    Can Hillary continue to run? How much of a distraction will they be? Is election possible? If elected, will a conviction lead to impeachment? If the charges force her to drop, where the hell does that leave the DNC?

    • “Can Hillary continue to run?”

      Of course she could, just not as fast, or as far, sporting a cumbersome monitoring bracelet, and all.

      There’s also the “Huber Law,” established by Wisconsin State Assemblyman/Senator Henry Huber, which allows prisoners work release privileges.

      Those privileges need to be earned going forward with continued compliance and no further legal entanglements, something for which Hillary’s not properly wired.

      • The possibilities are endless! Could you imagine President Hillary giving the State of the Union with the Speaker of the House, the Vice President, AND her parole officer sitting behind her on the stand? How about the weekend fireside . . . . erm . . . cellside . . . chats? Will she wear Prison Orange or Prison Green on Inauguration Day? People Magazine wants to know! And, ankle monitors are all the rage in Paris this Spring. It’s true! They are.

        jvb

    • Of course she would keep running.

      Given what I’ve seen of Hillary supporters and most Democrat partisans these days, Hillary could murder an 5 year old autistic girl in a wheelchair who just said “I have established a charity for orphans” and it wouldn’t deter her supporters from voting for her.

        • I should clarify:

          It wouldn’t deter Democrats from supporting her as long as a republican is running against her. She could throw 10,000 puppies into a river in a sack and the opposing republican could be a left-of-center republican and they’d still vote for her.

          Take the republican out of the mix and they may pause for 10 minutes to think before voting for her.

          • Well, I mean… She’d have the PETA vote locked up! Better those puppies die than live a lifetime of slavery to their cruel human masters, right? Perhaps she did it as a demonstration on how river pollution happens and will shortly announce a promise for EPA dollars, there’s some environmental votes in there fo sho.

  3. One thing that’s fun to contemplate is that if, for instance, a violation is seen as handing one email to the server company, then you could end up with one of those indictments where the defendant is facing a possible 300,000 years of jail time.

  4. Biden will step in, with much save-the-day, indeed, save-the-party fanfare.
    Although Hilary failed the DC bar exam in 1973, she did eventually pass in Arkansas, where I presume that ignorance of the law is also not a defense. So she should be familiar with that concept. It will be interesting to see what defense she offers, if it should come to that.
    I doubt that it will though. A scenario where she steps down due to ‘health issues’, (which I believe may be significant), promises to fight this witch hunt (the term I pray she will use), and then pursues a delaying strategy for the rest of her life would fit the dodge and delay tactics that the Clintons have schooled us all in. To see her held deliciously accountable for her actions is so very appealing, but I can see Bill Clinton engineering a fix as outlined above.

    • Her being charged is a wonderful fantasy, and I for one will have many pleasant adolescent-type dreams about it in the near future, but I’d be willing to bet that wishing and hoping is as close as we could ever get to this materializing. She’s already been crowned by the DNC, and she’s almost certainly “too big to prosecute” anyway. Any move in that direction would probably be met with counter-accusations of sexism, too, which would just mobilize even more idiot voters. Nonetheless, I will continue to purchase reverse indulgences from the pope, and slaughter a goat 5 times a day while facing Mecca until al least late September.

  5. I think Joe is kidding both himself and the audience with his statement. I can’t possibly believe that Loretta Lynch isn’t getting periodic updates from the FBI Director as to the progress of the investigation and what form his report is going to take.

    If it starts to look too much like it is leaning toward recommendation of indictment she is going to either send it back for revision or shut down the investigation altogether. If not, she’ll leave it alone and let it become the Republican equivalent of Fitzmas, where all the Dems waited eagerly for a huge number of indictments hopefully including Karl Rove, but only got Scooter Libby in the end.

    There is simply no way she is going to let this situation deteriorate to the point where she has to make the public choice between indicting Hilary and throwing the election process into chaos, and not accepting the FBI Director’s recommendation to do so, at a potentially very big political cost to Obama’s legacy.

    I predict that the report will outline all kinds of lapses on Hilary’s part, but will stop just shy of recommending indictment. At that point most folks will stop caring about it, since all they will pay attention to will be the bottom line, and the rest will shut up, lest they look like sore losers or become targets for derisive “see! See! It was a nothing burger!” comments.

    I do not believe the Director will butt heads with the AG over this, even if he believes she is interfering with his independent running of his agency. He has a family to worry about and a pension he does not want to lose, and he won’t endanger either by potentially crossing this administration.

    Like I said in another post, the electoral votes are stacked, so you can hope and believe all you like, but there really is almost nothing standing between Hilary and the White House.

    • Thee really are ethical people in Washington; the question is who. The mishandling of classified information is an especially bad place to establish a precedent of shrugging off carelessness or worse. We don’t know where the Eliot Richardsons are, but they are there. My guess is that Joe is overly optimistic, but all it takes, all it ever takes, is the right person in a position to make a difference and take a stand. Children? Any law enforcement official who brought down Hillary would never have to but a beer again, but more than that, the speaking tour and book sell itself.

      • Amen and amen. However, even the most ethical people have pasts and things they hold near and dear, not to mention it’s the ethical people who are usually the most vulnerable to accusations by the unethical, as Jonathan Swift pointed out.

        I don’t think Obama’s supporters are the type that would show up with violin cases and say “nice house ya got here, and such a nice family. It would really be a shame if something happened to them…” However, I do think anyone who got too close to something guaranteed to hit and leave a mark on either Obama’s legacy or Hilary’s chances might get a visit from Treasury saying his bank account mysteriously had one too many zeroes or from high-tech crimes saying a cache of kiddie porn had popped up on his computer, but that the AG was willing to overlook this and let him retire quietly, with his full pension, if…

        I also think your statement that anyone who brought down Hillary would be getting bought drinks and making a best-seller book tour is way off. Hillary has been the most admired woman in this country for 20 years, for better or for worse. She’s on a LOT of young girls’ walls right next to Sally Ride and Wendy Davis and was probably on those young girls’ moms’ walls. The man who brings her down might indeed sell a book, but he better not try to tour it or make speeches, or he will be pelted with slogans and worse everywhere he goes.

          • Yup, the woman who stood up to the anti-abortion patriarchy in Texas and held the system in place for hours, and who was ready to take a walk to the State House in pink sneakers (except that didn’t happen).

            • And who thoroughly embarrassed her party, her gender, her supporters and the state by one of the most hypocritical and unethical campaigns for governor imaginable. Those icons can fall hard, Steve. Don’t think Hillary is immune.

              • Amen, amen, and amen, Jack. However, you can only be embarrassed if you are capable of shame, and a lot of feminists aren’t capable of it. That’s why I made my last post as a parody of what a lot of them did say and are still saying. Gender or race can shore up a lot of icons who otherwise would have feet of clay (like most people do) with the members of that gender or race. I don’t think all the little old ladies will be having their granddaughters drive them to vote so they can see the first female president before they die, but I think there is a very big chunk of the gender, including almost all the single women and young women, who would vote for Hillary no matter what she did.

              • No one even talks about Wendy Davis anymore. Who is she exactly? Supposedly from my neck of the woods…last I heard her name (before today) was pretty much the day after she lost the election (and proved that Texas Democrats will vote for any Democrat regardless…)

      • I’ve been called a lot of things, but ‘optimistic’ is a first! To be clear, I doubt that this will play out in any of the ways that so fill my political allies with glee. My point is that even in a complete worst case for Hilary, she won’t be perp-walked to Federal Prison to serve her 300,000 year sentence, so everyone settle down. I do wonder why the FBI investigation continues, at the pleasure of the POTUS, and what the end-game is there.

      • Do you think that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who was involved with “legalities” behind the US torture program, should be indicted and imprisoned?

        That is far more severe than this case. Far more severe.

        And yet, we have not seen mass indictments of CIA agents or members of the Bush administration for the torture program, which undoubtedly included things which would constitute war crimes and violate the Geneva conventions. We hung people at Nuremburg for some of this stuff.

        Hillary getting indicted over emails seems unlikely.

        Also, a lot of people are confusing “retroactively classified emails” with “classified emails”. This is especially true amongst far-right dingbat media sources.

        The problem is that, from what it appears in the investigation, emails containing classified information were not marked as being classified. This is, in fact, relevant to the law, and whoever failed to note it was classified while sending stuff to Hillary was violating the law, but Hillary would not be in violation of the law.

        “1,200 classified emails” doesn’t mean what he is pretending it means.

    • You are so, so wrong about Hillary’s inevitability. I said at the beginning that she will never be elected; I couldn’t predict this route, but a route materializing was certain. The real problem is that the alternatives, depending on when she goes down for the count, are about as horrible as she is, though in different ways. Well, one menace at a time.

      • That sounds like the basis of an Ethics Challenge post, if it hasn’t already been done. “It’s down to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. You have only one vote, and “I won’t vote”, “suicide”, “I’m moving to Venezuela”, and “potato” are not acceptable answers. What do you do?”

        • Vote for Sanders.

          What bad things is President Sanders going to do?

          Compare that to President Trump.

          The toys that the president has access to are things which are very dangerous in Trump’s hands, if you think he is at all serious about the stuff he spouts out on a regular basis. And of course, a diplomat (as the president is) who regularly spouts out nonsense like Trump without thinking about it is an utter disaster.

          Sanders, conversely, is much less prone to foot-in-mouth disease, will get along well with our allies, is likely to be pretty diplomatic, and won’t randomly try and ban Muslims from entering the country or engage in ill-advised military adventurism.

          Remember, the president can’t pass laws.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.