I want to add I do not understand this statement.
We do not know what was said but we do have the chief law enforcement officer in the US meeting covertly with the husband of someone who is the subject of multiple FBI investigations and who is also the democrat candidate for president of the United States.
How is that “nothing”?
It always is, isn’t it?
We may be conditioned to think the way we do, but so may you, and all precedent supports our view.
I did not follow any of that.
Is that what kids are calling it these days? Or was that what we called it back then? The Sacred Chao. A little soixante-neuf.
You think it’s something possibly because you want it to, finally, be something. Precedent on previous Clinton somethings is that they always turn out to be pretty much nothings.
Clearer?
If Hillary does get indicted, what’s the worst that could/would happen?
A fine? A 1-month prison sentence? A sentence long enough to last till past November?
No it is not clearer and I still am not following what you are getting at.
I think the question here is how it might affect her election prospects.
I am not a die hard Clinton apologist. I am a Bernie Sanders supporter.
The only optics that look bad are if you’re a die hard Clinton hater or a news seller trying to get ratings.
Hillary Clinton is not the subject of multiple FBI investigations. It is possible that her email servers are.
But why am I bothering to debate someone who says “democrat” (in lower case) instead of Democratic?
Wrong (bolding mine)…
Really? Neither Clinton nor Lynch had any Secret Service personnel with them, that day? And no staff? And they were flying the planes themselves and also doing flight attendant duty?
Please.
And none of these job descriptions entail making any reports of any kind? Secret Service people never create records or account for the movements of their protectees? Pilots of government aircraft never record the entries or exits of individuals onto their planes?
Folks on the right are making themselves ridiculous with these nutty suppositions. The obvious fact is that quite literally dozens of people would have known about the meeting–those present, and those to whom they (as part of their jobs) reported. In your wildest conspiracy theories, how could you guarantee that not one of them would ever mention the meeting?
I don’t watch television news much but I do read quite a bit.
Things I read were along the lines of the WSJ coverage:
Sorry that you do not. Not sure why you don’t.
Two people who have a long relationship happened to be near each other and said “hey” to each other. There is absolutely no reason to speculate anything other than how it was described except in the twisted minds of various tin foil hatted conspiracy theorists and those predisposed to believe anything evil of anyone named Clinton, those who would spin a saying hey as a secret covert meeting … “they could have been discussing plans to take over the world … we don’t know! Anything is possible to speculate!”. That said without question both of them should have been aware that this country is full of those people and viewed the world through that lens before being sociable. Viewing through that lens they would have seen that being sociable could look bad. Not doing so was dumb. Dumb but not evil and not a major deal.
Where does that link say that Hillary Clinton, herself, is the subject of an investigation?
As noted by running coach, that was a typo. It should have read “recuse.”
Thank you for pointing that out. I didn’t realize I’d made that error, and I’d missed D’Anconia responding to that post.
I am speculating that WJC was trying to seduce her. It sounds just as plausible.
We all get to speculate. 
Well, lets just assume that dastardly info was passed, from one to another and maybe back again. What would be the nature of that info? Bill most likely knows about it. Ms Lynch surely does.
The investigation just plain looks bad. Bill knows that.
If Ms Lynch intercedes to lower the impact, it will look bad. Bill knows that.
And they both further know that if she did no such thing, there will be people claiming that she did, but covertly. Everybody knows that one.
So, what was it about, if our most dire suspicions are realized? And could it possibly be the Big Hairy Ass Deal that keeps Sean Hannity masturbating like a motherfuck?
Time for another congressional investigation. 
No.
Bill is not Hillary’s attorney. And the mere fact that he talked to the official in charge of deciding on an indictment would be unremarkable if it were Bill and Hillary Brunschwaz.
It would still be improper if it were Bill and Hillary Brunschwaz but of course it isn’t Bill and Hillary Brunschwaz. It is the US attorney general meeting with the former president of the US and husband of the democratic nominee for president of the United States who is involved in a felony investigation by the FBI.
Funny thing is even Lorett Lynch sees the problem here as offered up by DSeid above. Weird that you don’t.