Hillary Clinton to be interviewed in FBI email investigation

www.cbsnews.com...

A source has confirmed to CBS News that Hillary Clinton will be interviewed by the FBI within the coming weeks, in connection with the investigation into her private email server.

One of her top aides, Huma Abedin was interviewed by the FBI at its Washington field office in April, an official familiar with the investigation told CBS News Friday.

The FBI and Justice Department have been investigating whether sensitive information that flowed through Clinton's email server was mishandled. Abedin was interviewed at the FBI's Washington field office last month. The FBI's investigation into Clinton's email server was first reported in August.

We are getting closer and closer to judgement day!

On Wednesday, in an unrelated civil case, a federal judge in Washington said he may order Clinton to testify under oath about whether she used a private email server to evade public records disclosures.

The order from U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan granted a request from the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch to question six current and former State Department staffers, including Abedin, about the creation and purpose of the email system.

Let's all cross our fingers and hope she isn't above the law. If she gets indicted I fully expect them to give her a slap on her old wrists BUT depending on the severity of her case who knows, right?

If Hillary goes to jail, does it mean Bernie gets the nod for the democrats, that would be awesome. The witch in jail and Mr Sanders for president.

a reply to: dukeofjive696969

Don't know, but like Trump, his supporters must still go out and vote until the convention to get that magical number of delegates. But then again, who here really knows all the rules of either the RNC and DNC?

That said, if Clinton is no longer available then Bernie is their only shot at beating Trump. They could make the ultimate blunder by giving the nod to Biden but that would probably secure Trump's victory.

a reply to: Swills

Why do I get the feeling that this nice quaint little "interview" will be an exercise in throwing someone under the bus?

Agreed - she'll likely just cop a slap on the wrist and someone else will be publicly sacrificed as an offering towards her righteous campaign for the Oval Office.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Remember David Petraeus?

Petraeus gets probation for leaking secrets to mistress

Petraeus pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count of unauthorized removal and retention of eight highly secret "black book" binders that he had improperly retained from his time as top military commander in Afghanistan.

PROBATION AND A FINE?! What????

It's bad enough he took classified information out of the secured SCIF but then he showed them to a woman he was having sex with! Because why? To show off?

8 classified binders! Amazing! He must have made multiple trips to the car, perhaps had someone help him (most likely unknowingly). Removing these items from the SCIF is an automatic Do Not Pass Go, Go Directly To Jail. If you have a security clearance the obvious fear is how easily you can be corrupted to leak information. When applying for your clearance an extensive background check is done; from visiting your family, friends, neighbors, past employers, past co worksers, to doing a credit check, you must be clean. No criminal record either (although sometimes exceptions are made).

Usually the easiest way to turn people is money, especially if they're in debt. This jackass rolled for a younger woman! Thank god she wasn't a spy!

So at the end of the day, he got off on easy street. If anyone else did that they would be crucified and spend the rest of their lives in federal prison.

Key Words: "Under Oath"...The old decrepit battleship is going down.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Will she also be redefining the definition of "is" while under oath?

I don't think the Clinton's respect the oath if adhering to it means they get in trouble.

a reply to: IAMTAT

She is allergic to "under oath" and this is evidenced by her body having a biological reaction when asked to tell the truth, also known as coughing fits.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I find it strange that the feds can't pull out old transmission records from other email accounts. What I mean is Hillary can delete her emails... But what about the recipients? Did they delete their copy? Hasn't the fed sent a subpoena to the email server for all data that has been sent through it to grab IP addresses and lining them to known email addresses and then subpoena each other email client? Seriously this should have been easy to dismantle by now. Even I can pull up IP addresses from emails sent on someone's device with ease. Especially when it comes to internet security.

Unless Hillary was using a proxy.

a reply to: Swills

You can't help but see that the tide is turning on her.
The Huffington Post has an article out saying that Guccifer will be key in Sanders becoming the Democrat nominee.

She will have to be extra careful.

One little white lie slip-up and it's curtains.

She will be "solemnly" "swearing" under her breath.

The FBI needs professional mind readers for her.

a reply to: Swills

Can't someone just throw water on her and be done with it?

Didn't it work in OZ?

a reply to: xuenchen

Any bets on whether she takes the 5th in such an interview?

What would the implications of that be?

I really hope justice is served. People need to be shown that politicians aren't above the laws they are suppose to uphold and make.

imho, this bears emphasizing wholesale:

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: IAMTAT

Will she also be redefining the definition of "is" while under oath?

I don't think the Clinton's respect the oath if adhering to it means they get in trouble.

Can you imagine her seething arrogance in such a situation. To have a 'little people' take her to task for anything must absolutely send her outrageous ego into orbit.

The interviewer needs to have a titanium gonad cup and a face shield. Her spit might be very acidic or even venomous.

a reply to: speirs22

I agree, the people need to know that politicos are not above the law.

Except that . . . increasingly for at least 60 to 200 years

they LARGELY HAVE BEEN above the law.

Particularly those in the upper ranks of the oligarchy stoolies.

Watch the youtube video by CHANGING PLACES Director Aaron Russo about Rockefeller etc.

originally posted by: GiulXainx
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I find it strange that the feds can't pull out old transmission records from other email accounts. What I mean is Hillary can delete her emails... But what about the recipients? Did they delete their copy? Hasn't the fed sent a subpoena to the email server for all data that has been sent through it to grab IP addresses and lining them to known email addresses and then subpoena each other email client? Seriously this should have been easy to dismantle by now. Even I can pull up IP addresses from emails sent on someone's device with ease. Especially when it comes to internet security.

Unless Hillary was using a proxy.

I'm watch'n you

You are too smart for your britches.

You better go on Alex Jones quickly dude, since it seems like you are full of common sense.