How Bill and Hillary Clinton Could Soon Become Criminal Defendants

"Republicans have thirsted for a criminal prosecution of a Clinton - Bill, Hillary, any Clinton will do - since the 1990s. Thirty years and several near-misses later, they may finally get their wish. The Clintons almost certainly aren't going to prison, or even getting convicted. But with characteristic hubris, Bill and Hillary have walked themselves to the brink of federal charges by defying bipartisan congressional subpoenas on the Jeffrey Epstein investigation."

"But nearly lost to history is that Clinton barely avoided a federal indictment. On his final day in office in January 2001, Clinton agreed to a deal with prosecutors that spared him criminal charges for perjury and obstruction in exchange for a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license, a $25,000 fine, and a public statement acknowledging that he had testified falsely."

"A decade and a half later, Hillary Clinton narrowly dodged an indictment for her use of a private email server while secretary of state. Shortly before the 2016 election, FBI Director James Comey unilaterally announced that Clinton had been "extremely careless" but that the Justice Department would not pursue criminal charges; he then announced the case's re-opening, eleven days before the election. Clinton was spared an indictment, but Comey's public comment"

Republicans have pursued criminal prosecution of the Clintons since the 1990s, and recent developments raise the prospect of federal charges. The Clintons face potential criminal contempt exposure after defying bipartisan congressional subpoenas tied to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, though conviction or prison remains unlikely. The current Justice Department is portrayed as making decisions through a partisan litmus test. Bill Clinton narrowly avoided federal indictment in 2001 via a plea deal that suspended his law license and imposed a fine. Hillary Clinton narrowly avoided indictment over her private email server after FBI Director James Comey's controversial 2016 statements and re-opening of the case.

Read at Intelligencer