Democrats are hoping and praying that if Hillary Clinton isn’t indicted, that the whole issue of her email investigation and the whiff of corruption that goes with it will magically go away. They’re wrong.
It’s essentially a no-win situation.
If Hillary is indicted, that will confirm the idea that she did something wrong. If she’s not indicted, the perception will be that she was given a pass because of her political connections and that she is above the law, unlike the people she seeks to govern.
This column from the Sacramento Bee makes a similar case:
Indicted or not indicted, Clinton could lose politically
No matter how the FBI investigation into the handling of sensitive information on Hillary Clinton’s personal computer server ends, it likely will hurt her presidential bid.
If she is indicted, she will face further questions about her honesty and perhaps even calls for her to step aside. If she isn’t indicted, as many legal experts predict, critics will accuse the Obama administration of letting her escape charges merely because they want her to win the White House.
The threat of political pain even with no indictment was underscored as dozens of Republicans lawmakers pressed Attorney General Loretta Lynch to appoint a special prosecutor far removed from the White House to determine if any laws have been broken.
But Lynch has resisted those demands even after Barack Obama said Clinton did not endanger national security, after the president and vice president endorsed her, and after Lynch met privately with Clinton’s husband this week.
Under pressure, Lynch did announce Friday that she expects to accept the recommendation of investigators and prosecutors at the FBI and the Justice Department as well as FBI Director James Comey, a Republican, in the case. “I fully expect to accept their recommendations,” she said.
She said that she still plans on reviewing the case, which was launched by the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division after classified information was found in some of Clinton’s emails last year, and will not recuse herself.
Don Smaltz, a lawyer appointed as an independent counsel to investigate former President Bill Clinton’s secretary of agriculture, Mike Espy, in the 1990s, said Lynch should have appointed a special prosecutor last year.
“I think she would have a more thorough investigation,” he said. “The public could have more confidence in whatever the outcome is.”
Lots of people have been punished harshly for doing much less than Hillary Clinton has done.
The public knows this and that’s the crux of her problem.
No matter how this investigation ends, it will look bad for her.