Clinton scandals, just the fax.

[ford_prefect42]

someone pointed out that despite the Clinton's many scandals, nothing has ever been found to be "actionable". I think it's worthwhile to have a quoick look at the grand list of scandals and to consider the circumstances under which they were found to be "not actionable". I am not going to include anything that's particularly in dispute, or that

Comments

[dantheserene]

She could sacrifice an infant on the Senate floor and the true believers simply wouldn't see it and a bunch of people would still vote for anyone with a (D) after their name.

[banner]

She's done a lot that is actionable. It's just that the DOJ is run by democrats who will not take any action against her.

We do not live in a country ruled by laws anymore. So the 'actionable' line is just a canard and nothing more. What it really comes down to is: Are the people angry enough to rise up and revolt and see her put to death over it?

And the answer to that is no, they're not. And until they are and the ruling elite are swept from power and executed, nothing that they ever do will be 'actionable' because they can break no law.

[allaboutweather]

The IRS, FBI and DOJ have been Democrat lapdogs for a while now. They and the media are why Hillary's all but untouchable.

[prester_scott]

This latest thing released by Project Veritas is actionable. There's hard evidence that she passed down the order for her PAC to field protesters wearing Donald Duck costumes at Trump rallies. I am told this is what Dinesh D'Souza went to jail for... but of course, he is a thorn in Team Obama/Clinton's side, so that wasn't winked at by the DOJ.

As others have said, Hillary is literally untouchable. This is a big part of why I'm voting Trump. It really has very little to do with Trump himself.

[ford_prefect42]

It's hearsay. Creamer *said* that she wanted it. If he were willing to testify, then maybe, but otherwise, it's not actionable. Still against the law, but without hard evidence, no conviction.

[prester_scott]

Technically that is correct, but the FBI and federal prosecutors have ways of making people talk, if they want to. But of course, when the trail may lead to an Obama or a Clinton, they don't. And that is the real point here.

[meistergedanken]

Nice list; will bookmark this for quick future reference. Despite that it is more or less covered in 9), I think the Russian uranium deal (where they gave $140 million to the Clinton Foundation in return for 20% of America's production) deserves its own line item, because there are national security implications. And probably the post-hurricane looting of Haiti that the foundation did also warrants its own entry.

Also, Travelgate was more serious than most people remember. Kind of like the Lewinsky or Watergate scandals, the worst part was not the firing itself, which was permissible if irregular, but the lying about it to make it seem more palatable, i.e., when they said the firings were done because of supposed financial improprieties, which was clearly slanderous - and therefore, presumably actionable (in civil court, at least). I think they dodged a bullet probably because most of the fired employees were placed in other civil service positions after much public scrutiny and pressure.