Hillary's Lawsuits and Falling Polls May Be What Joe Biden Has Been Waiting For

Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are beginning to feel the legal heat generated by their flamboyant and self-declared 'proper' lifestyle. ~~~~~ In late May, a Florida federal judge set a trial date in a racketeering case against the Clinton Foundation and Bill and Hillary Clinton. Judge Donald Middlebrooks of the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida ordered the racketeering, influenced and corrupt organizations (RICO) case to trial on January 20, 2016. The order came days after a civil suit filed by Larry Klayman, who has filed dozens of lawsuits against the Clintons and other prominent politicians, alleged that the former first couple and their family philanthropy traded political favors for donations or generous speaking fees for Bil Clinton while his wife was the nation's chief diplomat. Klayman's court filings said : "Negotiations by email about influencing US foreign policy or US Government actions to benefit donors to...the Clinton Foundation or sponsors of speaking engagements would not be captured on a US Government email account because her emails would not be with a US Government official." Klayman, in reality, suggests the former first couple and their Foundation used their political clout to drum up foreign donations to the Foundation and exchanged lavish diplomat favors for contributors while Hillary was Secretary of State. Klayman also asked the judge to order a "neutral forensic expert...to take custody and control of the private email server and reconstruct and preserve the official US Government records relating to the conduct of US foreign policy during Defendant Secretary Clinton's term as Secretary of State." While the Clinton legal team could settle the case or enter a variety of motions in an effort to end the lawsuit before trial, the judge's swift decision means the matter could go to court before the February 1 Iowa caucus and February 9 New Hampshire primary. Klayman's request that the court seize Hillary Clinton's email server has not yet been acted on by the judge. In June, the Clinton Foundation filed motions asking the federal judge to toss out the lawsuit. ~~~~~ And today, another Hillary Clinton email server problem was referred to the US Department of Justice (DOJ). The decision on whether to move forward with an investigation lies with Attorney General Loretta Lynch and carries risks for the Obama administration. If an investigation goes ahead, it might turn up even more embarrassing information about Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. However, if the DOJ decides not to investigate, it could lead to accusations of a politically motivated cover-up in an election year. The referral comes from two inspectors general. who have asked the DOJ to open a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email account for her work as Secretary of State. The story was first reported by the New York Times yesterday. The federal government inspectors general, who were not clearly dentified in the Times's report, have asked the DOJ to decide whether Hillary Clinton, the leading Democratic contender for the 2016 presidential election, mishandled classified information while she was the nation's chief diplomat. Clinton has repeatedly said she broke no laws or rules by avoiding a standard government email account for her State Department work. The request to the DOJ follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton’s private account contained “hundreds of potentially classified emails.” The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the Under Secretary of State for Management. It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them. A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign declined to comment when asked by the New York Times. At issue are thousands of pages of State Department emails from Mrs. Clinton’s private account, which she said she used because it was more convenient. BUT, it also shielded her correspondence from congressional and Freedom of Information Act requests. She faced sharp criticism after her use of the account became public, and she subsequently asked the State Department to release her emails. Later, a US DC District Court judge in a FOIA case brought by Judicial Watch ordered the State Department to release all the 55,000 pages of emails as quickly as possible in batches. A first batch of 3,000 pages was made public on June 30. In the course of the review of the 3,000 pages, portions of two dozen emails were redacted because they were upgraded to “classified status.” But none of those were marked as classified at the time Mrs. Clinton handled them. In a second memo to Mr. Kennedy, sent on July 17, the inspectors general said that at least one email made public by the State Department contained classified information. The inspectors general did not identify the email or reveal its topic. In the memos that were provided to the New York Times by a senior government official, the inspectors general also criticized the State Department for its handling of sensitive information, particularly its reliance on retired senior Foreign Service officers to decide if information should be classified, and for not consulting with the intelligence agencies about its determinations. In March, Mrs. Clinton insisted : “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email....There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.” Later, in May, the FBI asked the State Department to classify a section of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that related to suspects who may have been arrested in connection with the 2012 attacks in Benghazi. The information was not classified at the time Mrs. Clinton received it. ~~~~~ On Monday, a federal judge sharply questioned State Department lawyers at a hearing in Washington about why they had not responded to Freedom of Information Act requests from The Associated Press, some of which were four years old. Judge Richard J. Leon of the US DC District Court said : “I want to find out what’s been going on over there -- I should say, what’s not been going on over there.” ~~~~~ Two days later, lawmakers on the Republican-led House Special Committee investigating the Benghazi attacks said they plan to summon Secretary of State John Kerry’s chief of staff to Congress to answer questions about why the department has not produced documents that the panel subpoenaed. That hearing is set for next Wednesday. Committee Chairmen Trey Gowdy said : “The State Department has used every excuse to avoid complying with fundamental requests for documents.” Gowdy said that while the committee has used an array of measures to try to get the State Department to hand over documents, the results have been the same. “Our committee is not in possession of all documents needed to do the work assigned to us....The State Department has sought to delay the hearing, citing continuing efforts to brief members of Congress on the details of the nuclear accord with Iran." Republicans have said the department is trying to protect Mrs. Clinton. ~~~~~ Dear readers, that brings us to the Quunnipiac polls conducted July 9-20 in the three states. In Colorado, Clinton is behind Rubio 38% to 46%, Bush 36% to 41% and Walker 38% to 47%. In Iowa, she trails Rubio 36% to 44%, Bush 36% to 42% and Walker 37% to 45%. In Virginia, Clinton polls closer to her Republican opponents, where she falls behind Rubio 41% to 43%, Bush 39% to 42% and Walker 40% to 43%. And the bad news doesn’t end there. In all three states, Clinton’s rating as a strong leader has dropped by between four and ten points compared to earlier polls. Clinton is barely above 50% in this key category in Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia, underscoring voters’ perception of her questionable leadership abilities. Devastating negative favorability ratings in each critical state, 35% favorable to 56% unfavorable in Colorado, 33% to 56% in Iowa, and 41% to 50% in Virginia, reflect how weak her image is in these swing states. "She has lost ground in the horse race and on key questions about her honesty and leadership," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, in a release : "On being a strong leader, a key metric in presidential campaigns, she has dropped four to 10 points depending on the state and she is barely above 50% in each of the three states." Has her past finally caught up with Hillary Clinton? The lawsuits and rapidly falling polls suggest that it has. Where do the Democrats go now? Not to self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders, who may be doing well in leftist Iowa but who has little chance of winning the general election. Is it time for Joe Biden to salvage the Democrat debacle by announcing his candidacy? Stay tuned.