Rasmussen Reports: How Likely Is Hillary Clinton To Be INDICTED?

[Segami]

The FBI has been investigating Hillary Clinton's use of a private e-mail server while secretary of State in order to determine whether she mishandled classified information, with some reports suggesting the Democratic presidential front-runner may be indicted. Most voters still believe it’s likely Clinton broke the law by sending and receiving classified information through the server, but they are far less convinced that serious charges will be brought against her.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 64% of Likely U.S. Voters now think it’s likely Clinton broke the law by sending and receiving e-mails containing classified information through a private e-mail server while serving as secretary of State. That’s up from 59% in September and includes 47% who say it's Very Likely. Twenty-nine percent (29%) consider it unlikely that Clinton broke the law, although only nine percent (9%) say it’s Not At All Likely. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on January 24-25, 2016 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2016/how_likely_is_hillary_clinton_to_be_indicted

[Fawke Em]

1. Her fans think this is Benghazi, though.

They simply can't accept that this is a real investigation and not some Republican witch hunt.

[Segami]

3. Witch hunt?....they better get up to speed on this FBI investigation.

"...But that doesn’t mean these messy issues are dead — depending on what happens inside the Justice Department. Clinton is about to face the most serious crisis of her candidacy — a set of legal decisions by the FBI and then the Department of Justice. Those will either kill the issue or kill her chances.

The FBI reportedly has assigned some 100 agents full time to the investigation and another 50 temporarily. The bureau would not commit such massive resources unless the initial investigation raised troubling questions of potential criminality. FBI Director James Comey is monitoring the case closely and coordinating with the intelligence agencies, which have to review the documents. Comey has a reputation for integrity, and it is his call whether to refer charges to the DOJ. Attorney General Loretta Lynch would then decide whether to indict..."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/01/13/hillary_clintons_coming_legal_crisis_129293.html

[thereismore]

6. So first something has to be found. I think that's very likely. Then, Comey must refer it to DOJ.

I'd say that's somewhat likely. Then Lynch must decide to indict. That's quite unlikely.

I'd say the likelihood of Clinton being indicted is very low. But the likelihood that this will live on for a long time
before November is quite likely, and it will guarantee a republican in the WH unless we choose Bernie.

[Segami]

11. After Comey submits his report to the DoJ...

(lets assume) that the report has found substantial evidence against Clinton.....if the DoJ makes a judgement call to suppress the evidence in light of the presidential primary, it would be naive to believe that such information won't be leaked to the public through republican media channels.

[Human101948]

10. "Reportedly" "if" "might well resign" "could be indicted" This article is mostly conjecture...

Hillary is not my first choice, but I will not vote for conviction based on shaky assumptions of guilt.

[Hortensis]

12. "Reportedly." They would also do whatever is

necessary, as instructed by their boss, to make sure the Democratic candidate enters the general election with good, fact-based answers to all questions that might be raised. Nothing is more sure than that the GOP will be flinging filthy lies, knowing their lies will be remembered if they are not blasted to smithereens.

[sabrina 1]

21. I doubt she will be indicted. She will be exonerated just in time for her to gain a lot of sympathy

from voters right before the nomination.

Sorry, but this country doesn't indict its Ruling Class for ANYTHING.

Maybe why she isn't worried. She knows what is going to happen.

[notadmblnd]

33. What, are you kidding? They love going after women

Martha Stewart and Leona Helmsly are just two who have spent time in prison.

[sabrina 1]

34. Right wing prosecutor went after Stewart, she is not nor ever was, part of the ruling class.

That was simply a political prosecution because she DONATED to the ruling class. Helmsly was also nowhere near the power structure that Hillary is a part of.

I could be wrong, but I'm willing to bet that there will be no indictment of Hillary Clinton.

[Segami]

35. Indictment?..... I really doubt it unless...

they find a body tagged along with some missing emails....LOL!

But, if republicans even so much as sniff out that Hillary has indeed broken any laws in a final Comey report, I am convinced that republicans who took all the Benghazi ridicule and heat for their bogus investigations will come out of hiding looking for blood.

It is a path available to them (in their minds) to remove the goat label in exchange for a hero's welcome.

I choose to watch what unfolds.......

[sabrina 1]

39. Yes, of course they will use it, just the fact that there was an FBI investigation.

Too much baggage, we need Bernie who will be a much more difficult target for them. Besides his MESSAGE is even popular with their own base!

[razorman]

45. I agree. I have known a few FBI agents in my time. I can assure you

that the FBI is very proud and protective of their reputation for being by-the-book and non-partisan. This case threatens to upend that reputation if they gather a solid case and no indictment is forthcoming. I believe the stories that are coming out about threats from FBI agents to release evidence to the public if they think a coverup is taking place, whether or not it is true.

[Skwmom]

2. The Democrats want Clinton b/c they think she will keep them from suffering further loses?

What they should be asking is - how low can we go?

And the emails are only the least of it.....

The Republicans can demoralize many Democrats, rev up their base and, attract independent voters.

The Clintons - the gift that keeps on giving.

And Obama thinks this will be good for his legacy? How?

[cali]

4. Rasmussen?

[Segami]

5. Thats them....they surveyed this question.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

7. Rasmussen is a right wing polling outfit. Are we seriously going give them any credence? nt

[msongs]

9. it's their whole case lol nt

[Matariki]

16. Not bad to know what we're in for in the General Election

[Ferd Berfel]

46. Right. If they are going to play this game they won't launch unless she in the nominee and it's too

have an alternative. Sounds Rovian and would sink her chances in the General

[kenfrequed]

8. This shouldn't be about a poll

I think this should be about the facts. Did she transmit that data or not. You would think the FBI could just get off their butts and say so one way or another.

[Matariki]

13. Results of your Jury Service

On Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:26 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Rasmussen Reports: How Likely Is Hillary Clinton To Be INDICTED?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511083135

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Rasmussen is a right wing polling outfit. We don't allow right wing sources like daily caller, drudge report, and rasmussen populate our Democratic board.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:30 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "We don't allow"? Says who? You? That's not in TOS
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Schilling for the RW agenda.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If Rasmussen is banned then a moderator can take care of it. That is not what the jury is for.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Please don't use the alert system for stuff that should be argued in thread.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Matariki]

14. I wish people would stop using the alert feature to censor stuff they don't want to hear.

[frylock]

41. They're using the alert feature to get folks put on time-out.

[Ferd Berfel]

47. Agree. There are lot of cowards here.

I've had several comments whacked this week. Some of the Jury comments on mine (Leave IT) were: "I've seen a lot worse here"

Common kids, PUll up your big boy/girl pants and stop using this tool to CENSOR.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

15. I don't get it. One of my previous post was hidden because it was supposedly from a right wing sourc

Sanders and Wife Steered Campaign, Nonprofit Money to Family and Friends
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251979031

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Freebeacon is a right wing website that targets all Dems. Please hide this garbage.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Wed Jan 6, 2016, 09:21 PM, and voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The source ( The Beacon) of the post is suspect, bias and unreliable. To source The Beacon for any posting is inappropriate.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Extreme right-wing site. Not surprised who is posting it. HIDE

[riversedge]

23. Even a Drudge post was left standing a few days ok. sad

[ProudToBeLiberal]

28. Yep, this double standard against Hillary Clinton supporters is saddening. We are being targeted. nt

[ProudToBeLiberal]

17. I am seeing a double standard against Hillary Clinton supporters. They get post hidden, while

post from Bernie supports are kept alive.

[bvf]

29. You see what you *want* to see.

Without data, you're just whining. Please stop. It's unbecoming.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

32. Now, a man can't shed tears and whine? Wow, are we living in the 1950s?

A man is allowed to show some weakness. We are living in the 21st century.

[elleng]

18. and this is important, right? it really tells us something, right???

'A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 64% of Likely U.S. Voters now think it’s likely Clinton broke the law by sending and receiving e-mails containing classified information through a private e-mail server while serving as secretary of State.'

[in_cog_ni_to]

19. Smoke a joint and go to jail. Email EXTRA, EXTRA Top Secret info from your private server, go free.

WEALTHY PEOPLE/CORPORATIONS RARELY PAY FOR THEIR CRIMES.

Nixon
Reagan
Oliver North
Rumsfeld
G. W. Bush
Condoleeza Rice
Dick Cheney
KKKRove
Black water
Halliburton
Kellogg Brown & Root
Monsanto
Chevron
Exxon Mobil
BP
Wall St. THIEVES and many, many, many others.

Now we can add Hillary Rodham Clinton to that list.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. Except the latter hasn't happened. eom.

[nichomachus]

20. I hate to burst anyone's bubble

But polls aren't what decides whether someone is indicted or not. There's a completely different process than that.

[Segami]

24. Nobody is claiming

that polls decide whether someone is indicted or not.......they are surveying "How Likely" it is for Hillary to be indicted....

[ProudToBeLiberal]

22. Segami, I want to know your secret. I get my post hidden because it was from a right wing source,

but you escape scott free. What's your secret sauce?

[closeupready]

25. A jury ruled 6:1 to leave it - no secret sauce required.

On Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:26 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Rasmussen Reports: How Likely Is Hillary Clinton To Be INDICTED?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511083135

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Rasmussen is a right wing polling outfit. We don't allow right wing sources like daily caller, drudge report, and rasmussen populate our Democratic board.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 28, 2016, 07:30 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "We don't allow"? Says who? You? That's not in TOS
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Schilling for the RW agenda.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If Rasmussen is banned then a moderator can take care of it. That is not what the jury is for.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Please don't use the alert system for stuff that should be argued in thread.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Segami]

26. Look....

Start a thread and go at it and stop implying some kind of board favoritism with your posts.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

27. I am scared :(. People have been on a crusade to hide my posts Do you have my back Segami?

Can I count on your support?

[DaGimpster]

30. When is the last time someone of HRC's political stature was arrested? That is your answer.

I say this no matter how you feel about it the subject.

[HereSince1628]

44. Clinton's also the Firewall against a socialist 5th column attack on corporations

TPTB will balance where Clinton is most needed... in court fighting charges or on the campaign trail eliminating the first serious threat to corporations in 50 years.

[Matariki]

36. Whether she is indicted or not isn't up to a poll

but the perception one way or another might influence the election.

[840high]

38. Many people would agree with you.

[randome]

37. Not likely.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[frylock]

40. kick

[Metric System]

42. Keep f#cking that unicorn.

[Bread and Circus]

43. Clinton is probably guilty of criminal wrongdoing. But she wont suffer for it.

Do the extremely rich and powerful generally suffer for their wrongdoing?

[Reter]

48. She probably will be incicted

Then what is the question.