Vail Daily letter: Emailgate, Part 2 |

Vail Daily letter: Emailgate, Part 2

Some points to ponder about FBI Director Comey’s announcement that his agency was resuming its investigation into Hillary Clinton and her emails.

Clinton’s partisans claim it is dirty pool to bring this up so close to election day. But in 1992, the shoe was on the other foot. That was the contest between George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger had already been indicted by the efforts of independent counsel, Lawrence Walsh, as part of the Iran-Contra matter.

But four days before the election, Walsh procured a new indictment based on Weinberger’s diary, which indicated that then Vice President Bush had known about and approved the sale of arms to Iran and transfer of the proceeds to Contra forces in Nicaragua. Bush had denied this.

Clinton and his vice presidential running mate, Al Gore, as well as the liberal media, made the most of it, claiming it showed Bush’s lack of integrity. It probably cost Bush votes, and maybe the election. How could he mount a defense to this charge with only four days to go before Election Day?

That indictment was later thrown out by a judge for legal infirmities. But by then, it was too late. For further details, “Google Caspar Weinberger indictment.”

Another possibility is that President Obama will pardon Hillary Clinton before he leaves office. So the cloud people are talking about — her being elected president while subject to possible criminal charges — is removed. Surely it will be done in the name of the national good, to avoid further stress on the public, etc.

Reminds one of President Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon. The liberals had a fit about that. What will they say if Obama does the same thing for Hillary?

There will be legal issues about evidence obtained from Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Can it be used in criminal proceedings against Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin or other members of the Clinton organization?

The latest news is that the FBI is going to get a search warrant so they can scrutinize those emails. Do they need one if Anthony Weiner gives his consent to the search? He and his lawyers are no doubt trying to get a plea bargain in his sex predator case; will any deals require him to cooperate about the laptop and any other information he got from his now estranged wife?

There can be a legal impediment to using what was said between spouses as evidence against one of them in court; but whether that would also bar use of such evidence against others is a question for legal research.

Terry Quinn


Support Local Journalism

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User