Congrats, America: Hillary, Trump Could Both Be Criminally Charged After 2016 Election
(ANTIMEDIA) Republican
presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary
Clinton have made
headlines recently for their alleged problems with the law.
Trump, who in April of 2016 was named as the defendant in a lawsuit filed by Katie
Johnson, is scheduled to appear before a court on December 16, 2016. The
lawsuit alleges Trump, along with former banker billionaire and convicted
pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, raped Johnson when she was thirteen. The incident
allegedly happened in the 1990s.
Epstein, who was convicted of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution in
2008, has also been associated with former President Bill Clinton, whose
name appears in “flight logs showing the former
president taking at least 26 trips aboard the ‘Lolita Express,’” a term used in association with Epstein’s Boeing 727
jet. The jet was allegedly set up with beds where Epstein
and guests “had group sex with young girls.”
The lawsuit was first
filed in April, but U.S. Magistrate Judge Karen
Stevenson threw the suit out in May because Johnson then failed “to state a civil rights claim.” The plaintiff was representing herself at the time,
claiming to be unemployed and having only $276 to her name.
In June, Johnson went
on to refile the suit in the Manhattan
federal court. This time around, Johnson filed the suit under the name “Jane
Doe,” asking $75,000 plus attorney fees. But in September, Johnson dropped her
lawsuit, only to have it refiled weeks later with three affidavits instead of
two.
While Trump is scheduled to appear in court for a status
conference in December in reference to this case, it still requires more information before it leads to a trial or
settlement.
In
contrast to Trump’s case, Clinton’s brush with the law is taking place at a
different, more advanced level — but is still not close enough to conviction to
ruin her chances of being elected.
Just over a week before Americans head to the polls to
cast their ballots, the FBI announced it would be reopening its probe into presidential
nominee and former secretary of state Clinton’s use of a private email server.
The announcement followed the discovery of an email stash found on a laptop
that belonged to former congressman Anthony Weiner.
Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin, is a longtime Clinton aide.
She claims
to have been unaware that her emails were
on Weiner’s device.
Though the FBI has announced it obtained
a warrant to review the 650,000 emails, it
is unlikely the agency’s investigation will achieve any results before election
day.
The FBI is seeking
to determine whether the messages found on
Weiner’s computer include any classified information or evidence that may
indicate Clinton undermined U.S. national security.
In an article
for Law Newz, Ronn Blitzer attempts to answer
some of the questions the public might raise now that the FBI has announced the
probe, attempting to determine how Clinton’s legal future will look if she’s
elected president.
While the law “is hazy,” Blitzer writes, he goes over several scenarios. First, he explains “it’s highly unlikely that an indictment
would come before November 8.” If it
happened, however, “the
indictment itself wouldn’t mean that Clinton could no longer run, as an
indictment is only an accusation, not a conviction.” Theoretically, he continues, “the
Electoral College could … go rogue and not vote for Clinton, even if their
states tell them to.”
Another
possibility is that Clinton would be pressured, either by the DNC or the
public, to “give up her candidacy.”
In the case Clinton wins but is indicted before
her inauguration, “she
could try to play beat-the-clock and hope to take office before her case
concludes.” But if she’s both indicted and
convicted before the inauguration and then sentenced, “she may be deemed incapacitated, in which case Section 3 of the 20th Amendment kicks
in and the Vice
President-Elect, in this case Tim Kaine, would become President.”
But if Clinton wins the election and is inaugurated as
the investigation is carried on, “Clinton would luck out,”
Blitzer explains, “due
to the philosophy that Presidents — and only Presidents — [sic] are immune from
prosecution while in office.”
Since the House of Representatives determined in 1873
that a president may only be impeached over offenses committed after their
inauguration, Blitzer writes, impeachment over the email scandal isn’t likely to take
place. And even if she’s convicted after moving to the White House, “President Hillary Clinton could pardon
herself.”
These scenarios could all play out fairly similarly in
Trump’s case, assuming the rape lawsuit filed against him leads to a
conviction. But whether Clinton or Trump is elected, their federal or FBI
probes may result in nothing more than footnotes in the grand scheme of things
— especially once we’re faced with the realization that elected officials are
required to meet lower standards of conduct than the rest of us.
Only
after the FBI probe is finalized will we know if Congress is willing to tackle
the presidential immunity rules.
This article (Congrats,
America: Hillary, Trump Could Both Be Criminally Charged After 2016 Election) is free and open source. You have permission to
republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alice Salles andtheAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media
Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8
pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article
toedits@theantimedia.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment. Peace, NB