If Hillary is the dem nominee, will she throw the election to stay out of jail?

[ShootSpeeders]

As long as obozo and AG lynch are in office, nothing will be done to her. But if the repubs win the 2016 election she could well be prosecuted for her security crimes. So if she is the nominee and her poll numbers are bad, it would be smart for her to offer to throw the election in exchange for a non-prosecution deal with the repub nominee.

Democrats need to think about that.

 

[Little-Acorn]

People as corrupt as Democrats might make that deal with her, if they could.

But remind me why Republicans should make any deal with her at all? Considering she hasn't a chance in the Nov. 2016 election even if she's not indicted or convicted?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If the FBI has a case and the DOJ refuses to charge her, all hell will break loose.

 

[emilynghiem]

As long as obozo and AG lynch are in office, nothing will be done to her. But if the repubs win the 2016 election she could well be prosecuted for her security crimes. So if she is the nominee and her poll numbers are bad, it would be smart for her to offer to throw the election in exchange for a non-prosecution deal with the repub nominee.

Democrats need to think about that.

None of the other Presidents from Clinton to Bush got prosecuted successfully.

The Clinton camp is pretty much succeeding in silencing the Sanders campaign
in order to railroad the conventions, nominations, media etc.
to back Clinton as the big moneymaking attraction.

When she is in the news or hype about her or Bill, that attracts attention that Sanders doesn't get. So the media is going where the money is.

None of this threat of prosecution stopped Clinton before.
What makes you think she would stop at this point.

The same media and political drive to keep controversy around Clinton as dangling bait
is going to keep pushing this, like one of those soaps that keeps audiences hanging with no intent to resolve anything,
just kick the can down the road and benefit from the publicity and hype the whole time.

That is more profitable for the media and political interests than resolving anything over Benghazi which would be anticlimactic in comparison. If Sylvestor the Cat ever get a hold of the Tweetie Bird, that would end the series and be no fun to watch.

Better to the opposition riled up, like a hard on that won't go away.
As long as people keep going for this bait, the media and backers are going to use it.

If people really wanted to stop the circus over this, I'd get the Trump and Cruz camps to meet with the Greens and Sanders supporters, and set up a system for checking govt independent of the bought-out parties, lawyers and judges, and media that plays on that monopoly to get paid.

Trump seems content to play the media game, but I'd bypass it --
Work with independent media and undercut the commercialized mainstream media
that doesn't seek to solve the issues but polarize the conflicts more to hype the ratings.

If everyone quit buying into this game of cat and mouse (or Sylvestor and Tweetie)
then we'd focus on real solutions instead of just plotting to take down the competition.

Otherwise it's all a circus, a dog and pony show, to sell hype and tickets and buzz.
Anyone with real solutions is about real work that takes time and effort and is boring.
So the political media just grabs on to hype, to 30-second sound byte key words
and talking points, to generate buzz. None of that is going to solve our country's problems.

If we are going to get real, we can't just rely on voting and following whoever the media can push get elected by "generating the hype and emotional support or rejection at the right moment" to decide the election. But that's what's been happening by riding this election cycle roller coaster, played out in the media and politicians to solicit millions by dragging it out as long as possible, while the problems and solutions we really need to solve get put on hold.