New Emails Show the Biden White House Coordinated Directly With the DOJ to...
DNC Reveals Why They're Keeping Their 2024 Autopsy Under Seal. Get Ready to...
How 'John' the Homeless Guy Solved the Brown University Shooting
How You Know the Lib Media Realizes There's Nothing in the Epstein Files...
The View Co-Host Drops Embarrassingly Shameful Take on Trump's Bonuses to Our Troops
Trump Knew What He Was Doing With This Move on the Kennedy Center
Trump Just Made a Move That Would Make JFK Proud
Ruben Gallego Doesn’t Want to Stop the Drug Trade, and Says Trump Is...
As America Turns 250, Here's How One Content Creator Is Making Patriotism Shareable...
Guess Who Rachel Maddow Blames for Undoing 30 Years of HIV/AIDS Prevention Work
Markwayne Mullin Just Nuked Bernie Sanders for Refusing to Help Kids With Cancer
Buyer's Remorse? Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich Blasts State for Healthcare Worker Abortion...
Jimmy Kimmel’s Year From Hell (According to Jimmy Kimmel)
Zohran Mamdani Appointee Resigns After Antisemitic Social Media Posts Resurface
You Won't Believe What the Australian PM's Solution to the Bondi Beach Terror...
Tipsheet

WH: It Does Not Seem Hillary Will Be Indicted, 'Based on What We Know'

There has been widespread speculation over whether Hillary Clinton will be indicted for her email scandal, but on Friday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest suggested that she wouldn’t be, at least “based on what we know from the Department of Justice.”

Advertisement

Earnest was responding to a reporter’s question asking if he had “certainty and confidence” that the former secretary of state would not be indicted. Earnest did not presume to speak for the Department of Justice, but eventually said the investigation did “not seem to be headed in that direction.”

“That will be a decision that is made by the Department of Justice and prosecutors over there,” he responded. “What I know that some officials over there have said is that she is not a target of the investigation, so that does not seem to be the direction that it’s trending. But I’m certainly not going to weigh in on a decision or in that process in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by independent prosecutors but again, based on what we know from the Department of Justice, it does not seem to be headed in that direction.”

Earnest’s response was not strong enough to lay ongoing speculation to rest. If you’re wondering why not, take a look at Guy’s piece from earlier this week weighing what some experts have said about the possibility of an indictment.

In the post he looked at the argument former federal judge and U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey made in a recent op/ed, which is that based on publicly available information alone, criminal charges should be filed. Guy also examined a piece by Andy McCarthy that seeks to explain how Team Clinton has been getting away with saying she’s not a subject of the investigation—something Earnest repeated on Friday.

Advertisement

Related:

HILLARY CLINTON

“[McCarthy] says "targets" and "subjects" are targets and subjects of grand jury investigations, and that no matter how intensive the criminal inquiry may be, the FBI itself cannot convene a grand jury on its own. Prosecutors are needed for that part of the process to swing into motion. "No Justice Department, no grand jury. No grand jury, no case — period," he writes.”

Don’t forget, Earnest was speaking on the same day the Obama administration confirmed that Hillary’s server had top-secret information, which is why 22 emails cannot be released.

Carly Fiorina was right. With each passing day it seems like Hillary Clinton is more qualified for the 'big house' than the White House.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement