Rudy Giuliani, the man that many believe Trump will tap for Attorney General, walked a very fine line this morning in responding to a question about whether or not the Obama administration should pardon Hillary Clinton for her numerous alleged crimes. While noting the obvious intricacies around potentially prosecuted a former political foe, Giuliani noted that “there are deep and disturbing issues there” and that “President Obama should leave it to the system that we all believe in to determine, is she innocent or is she guilty.” Per The Hill:
“I don’t like to see America become a country in which we prosecute people, you know, about politics. On the other hand, there are deep and disturbing issues there in which if you don’t investigate them — ”
“That’s why I don’t think President Obama should pardon her,” Giuliani added. “I think President Obama should leave it to the system that we all believe in to determine, is she innocent or is she guilty?”
Giuliani added that declining to probe the Clinton Foundation’s questionable finances could set a poor precedent for similar investigations.
“It’s hard to investigate other people,” said Giuliani.
“What do you say to a foundation where you have a fraud of $50,000 when you haven’t looked at a foundation of where there is an alleged fraud in the millions or hundreds of millions of dollars? Now, it may be true that it’s not true. But it hasn’t been investigated.”
Here is Giuliani’s full interview on Fox News this morning (fast forward to the 4:20 mark for the Clinton Foundation question):
The questioning of Giuliani this morning came after the White House Press Secretary offered the following cryptic answer yesterday to a question about whether or not Obama would pardon Hillary. Of course, by refusing to offer a denial, many have since speculated that a pardon is at least under consideration.
While we’re certainly not legal experts, it is unclear how the Obama administration can pardon Hillary when no actual crime has been charged at this point in time.
The author says “it is unclear how the Obama administration can pardon Hillary when no actual crime has been charged at this point in time.”
Simple, instruct AG Lynch to indict her for the whole laundry list of crimes on January 18th, Obama then pardons her for everything on January 19th. Any future attempt to prosecute her would be double jeopardy.
Nixon was pardoned by Ford with no actual crime having been charged.
The President has the full and unchallenged authority to issue any pardon he wants to anyone he wants for any reason he wants.
Giving a pardon to an undicted criminal only confirms her guilt and the conspiracy to protect that c*nt. She may escape “justice” in this world, but not the next.
As I recall, Nixon was never charged with a crime. I think the President can pardon anyone for any reason. Can someone shed some light on this?
The other possibility is that Obama may name a paper tiger special prosecutor now, who will officially clear the Clintons of any wrongdoing.
Obama doesn’t like Hillary.
He may just let the clock run out.
Rudy(9/11)Giuliani needs to be in the dock right along with Hillary.
How about Trey Gowdy for AG? Perhaps Trump should save him as a young Supreme Court nominee?
I’d pass on Giuliani and I have no idea why Christies name should even come up in AG discussions.
Obama should to a prisoner exchange….He can pardon Snowden and Assange in exchange for Clinton.
Clintons should be handed over to Haitians along with Clinton Foundation Funds.Also Clintons involved with vaccinations.Gates openly admitted sterilizing with vaccines.What say the people/children this hot mess mandated on?
If a criminal gives a pardon in order to cover up his own part in the crimes then the pardon is void!