|
The law was strengthened in 2014 after she left office, and would have been unambiguous, but certainly her IT folks and the folks at Dept State might have coordinated more to be 100% secure and 100% clear. I assume that is why the law was strengthened in 2014.
There will be people on both sides, but to make a defensible finding requires that the allegations be clear and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This isn't a civil case where a preponderance of evidence will do. I don't see any clarity because there are no charges yet and no clear evidence. No one on this earth is sure, though many claim to be. If there are charges, you can bet they'll be backed up with flawless evidence, otherwise they will never happen. JD will review and decline to proceed.
JD will need a case that cannot lose; they will not allow a mud-dragging, or insinuation, or trial by youtube. If that flawless case doesn't exist, there won't be a indictment.
|