Should Loretta Lynch recuse herself from the Clinton case?

[SillyAmerican]

There isn't going to be a recommendation from the FBI to indict, so this is all moot and idiotic prattle from the usual suspects trying to churn up controversy where there really is none.

Ah, so you've spoken to Mr. Comey already? You should have told me sooner, I wouldn't have wasted everyone's time with all this idiotic prattle...

[DrScholl]

No, no, no. Build a bridge and get over it. These manufactured scandals are ridiculous.

This is neither manufactured, nor is it a scandal. Did Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton have a private half hour meeting? Yes. Is Lynch the chief lawyer for the country? Yes. Will Lynch be deciding what to do about legal actions which involve Hillary Clinton? Yes. So please explain what "scandal" is "manufactured" here.

You realize that if someone is on trial, and while on trial their spouse goes over and talks to the prosecuting attorney, that that is grounds for a mistrial, yes? Why is that? And it wouldn't matter if the spouse merely said "Howdy", such contact is simply not allowed. Period. Go ask a lawyer or a judge if you don't believe me.

Yawn.

[MaxQue]

There isn't going to be a recommendation from the FBI to indict, so this is all moot and idiotic prattle from the usual suspects trying to churn up controversy where there really is none.

Ah, so you've spoken to Mr. Comey already? You should have told me sooner, I wouldn't have wasted everyone's time with all this idiotic prattle...

There is no accusations at the moment and Mrs Clinton is presumed not guilty until proven otherwise.

So, no, Loretta Lynch cannot stop to talk to everybody, in case they are related to a future prosecuted person.

There will be a conflict of interest if and only if FBI recommends prosecution.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Guys, if this proceeds futher, Lynch would just have to appoint a special prosecutor. That's pretty standard procedure.

At this stage it's the FBI investigation, not something for the AG to get involved.

[Cubby]

So talking about your grandkids can totally destroy any ability to be impartial about someone who wasn't even there, Good to know.

No one talks about their grandkids and West Virginia for 30 minutes straight. Do you honestly believe that's all that was said? Lynch needs to recuse herself now, this is only going to give the GOP more talking points during the election. This is just more proof that Bill & Hillary are a scandal-producing machine.

[IceSpear]

So talking about your grandkids can totally destroy any ability to be impartial about someone who wasn't even there, Good to know.

No one talks about their grandkids and West Virginia for 30 minutes straight. Do you honestly believe that's all that was said? Lynch needs to recuse herself now, this is only going to give the GOP more talking points during the election. This is just more proof that Bill & Hillary are a scandal-producing machine.

You lost. It's time to get over it.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

So talking about your grandkids can totally destroy any ability to be impartial about someone who wasn't even there, Good to know.

No one talks about their grandkids and West Virginia for 30 minutes straight. Do you honestly believe that's all that was said? Lynch needs to recuse herself now, this is only going to give the GOP more talking points during the election. This is just more proof that Bill & Hillary are a scandal-producing machine.

You lost. It's time to get over it.

But... but FBI...

[Virginiá]

Looks bad, but I don't believe there is, nor has ever been any sort of coverup, so it just was just another stupid move by Bill, not the first nor will it be the last. See, as a liberal Democrat who happens to like and trust her current president, I really don't think he would have allowed it, if for no other reason than the risk of ruining his own personal legacy. I'm sure he thinks it would be just awesome for his legacy: "First African American president initiates large coverup of his former Secretary of State and successor's federal crimes"

I'm sure any number of you would give a president you liked and approved of the benefit of the doubt.

[dead0man]

Denial is a deep river this time of year.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

See, as a liberal Democrat who happens to like and trust her current president, I really don't think he would have allowed it, if for no other reason than the risk of ruining his own personal legacy.

Don't worry, his actions such as the pardon of Marc Rich have removed there of being ask risk of his ruining his own personal legacy.

[IceSpear]

Denial is a deep river this time of year.

Agreed. Just look at all the people thinking Hillary could get indicted. LOL

[dead0man]

Do you even know how much crow you can handle?  It can be quite filling.  You might want to be careful

[IceSpear]

Do you even know how much crow you can handle?  It can be quite filling.  You might want to be careful

Funny. I've heard a lot of people tell me that since I signed up here 3 years ago. Yet the only people who have been eating crow are the Hillary haters. How about that?

If you'd like to make a bet on whether or not she's indicted, I'd be happy to oblige.

[Santander]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/02/us/politics/loretta-lynch-hillary-clinton-email-server.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Now she says she'll get out of the way of the FBI.

[SillyAmerican]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/02/us/politics/loretta-lynch-hillary-clinton-email-server.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Now she says she'll get out of the way of the FBI.

Excellent. If Ms. Lynch says she will accept the FBI recommendation that comes her way, as is, that would effectively remove the political factor. Given the contents of the IG report, I may have to consider IceSpear's offer of a bet on whether or not she ends up being indicted.

[136or142]

Ideally, yes. A special prosecutor should be appointed.

There is no longer any provision for appointing special prosecutors.  Kenneth Star's actions kind of led to a desire to do away with that position.

[Beet]

I've always said that Loretta Lynch is an ultra-objective prosecutor with titanium levels of immunity against political pressure. The Republicans and Clinton critics on here disagreed with me. But once again those people have been proven wrong, as Lynch has removed herself from the case. It's possible her own people even leaked the meeting upon Bill's approach in order to send him a clear signal and use this as a pretext for recusing herself. Bill has screwed up on this one.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Yeah. It's kind of sad that people can't get beyond their party mindset and think in terms of what the proper thing to do is. Frankly, John Aschroft acted appropriately, and Loretta Lynch should follow his lead. That's the kind of America I'd like to live in anyway, fwiw.

Says the person who heads every thread with a hair on fire quote about Clinton from a Fox News show, or a quote from a long-discredited book about Clinton, etc. I'm sure glad you're the arbiter of being completely apolitical and non-partisan.

[Chief Justice Keef]

You lost. It's time to get over it.

This has nothing to do with Sanders at all. Stop being so desperate.

[SillyAmerican]

Yeah. It's kind of sad that people can't get beyond their party mindset and think in terms of what the proper thing to do is. Frankly, John Aschroft acted appropriately, and Loretta Lynch should follow his lead. That's the kind of America I'd like to live in anyway, fwiw.

Says the person who heads every thread with a hair on fire quote about Clinton from a Fox News show, or a quote from a long-discredited book about Clinton, etc. I'm sure glad you're the arbiter of being completely apolitical and non-partisan.

Not every thread I've begun is based on a quote from Fox News (although I fully admit that a good number are, because I believe the Fox news people provide a much more objective version of what's going on than can be found on other news outlets). And yes, I read various books and sometimes have questions about the voracity of what I've read, so I post questions.  So I'm confused: do you have a problem with those who read, or those who ask questions?

And for the record, I'm not attempting to be the "arbiter" of anything, I simply offer my opinions and observations in hopes of finding reasonable people interested in engaging in a discussion. Please excuse anything that I may have done which caused offense, as that was not my intent.

[SteveRogers]

Yeah. It's kind of sad that people can't get beyond their party mindset and think in terms of what the proper thing to do is. Frankly, John Aschroft acted appropriately, and Loretta Lynch should follow his lead. That's the kind of America I'd like to live in anyway, fwiw.

So when can we expect you to start a dozen threads demanding the prosecution of Collin Powell and Condoleeza Rice for the same offense?

[Joe Republic]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/02/us/politics/loretta-lynch-hillary-clinton-email-server.html?&hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Now she says she'll get out of the way of the FBI.

But I do realize that I'm wasting my time here...

Nailed it.

[Joe Republic]

Not every thread I've begun is based on a quote from Fox News (although I fully admit that a good number are, because I believe the Fox news people provide a much more objective version of what's going on than can be found on other news outlets). And yes, I read various books and sometimes have questions about the voracity of what I've read, so I post questions.  So I'm confused: do you have a problem with those who read, or those who ask questions?

WT-literal-F

And for the record, I'm not attempting to be the "arbiter" of anything, I simply offer my opinions and observations in hopes of finding reasonable people interested in engaging in a discussion. Please excuse anything that I may have done which caused offense, as that was not my intent.

No, you're a right-wing hack.  There isn't anything necessarily wrong with that on a board full of hacks of every stripe, but don't claim to be anything but.

[Santander]

But I do realize that I'm wasting my time here...

Nailed it.

Many liberals and Democrats were very upset about this too because of the awful optics and poor judgment displayed. Bill is one of those people who doesn't always make the best decisions, and he proved it again here.

Not every thread I've begun is based on a quote from Fox News (although I fully admit that a good number are, because I believe the Fox news people provide a much more objective version of what's going on than can be found on other news outlets). And yes, I read various books and sometimes have questions about the voracity of what I've read, so I post questions.  So I'm confused: do you have a problem with those who read, or those who ask questions?

WT-literal-F

I agree with him. It's hard to accept if you exclusively consume liberal media, but Fox is actually reasonably "fair and balanced".

[Virginiá]

Bill is one of those people who doesn't always make the best decisions, and he proved it again here.

Was he always so boneheaded, or is this something new post-presidency? He seems to have a penchant for stupid PR blunders.