Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, speaks during an event at Stanford University in Stanford, California, U.S., on Wednesday, March 23, 2016. In the wake of a series of deadly terrorist attacks in Brussels on Tuesday, the U.S. presidential front-runners clashed over interrogation techniques and whether to stop foreign Muslims from entering the country. 'Our country's most experienced and bravest military leaders will tell you that torture is not effective,' said Clinton. Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

With Bernie Sanders now slightly ahead of Clinton nationally in the latest Bloomberg poll, it's time to reevaluate the meaning of pragmatism. Hillary Clinton might be ahead of Bernie Sanders in delegates, but Vermont's Senator has a monopoly on political momentum. Sadly, his opponent has a monopoly on controversy, and will face FBI interviews in the near future. A Los Angeles Times article titled Clinton email probe enters new phase as FBI interviews loom highlights why Clinton's campaign is stuck in political quicksand:

Federal prosecutors investigating the possible mishandling of classified materials on Hillary Clinton's private email server have begun the process of setting up formal interviews with some of her longtime and closest aides, according to two people familiar with the probe, an indication that the inquiry is moving into its final phases. Prosecutors also are expected to seek an interview with Clinton herself, though the timing remains unclear.

Yes, federal prosecutors will interview Hillary Clinton, in addition to her close associates.

At what point will establishment Democrats admit this fiasco is horrible for a general election?



When federal prosecutors are interviewing your candidate for president, even Donald Trump has a good chance at the White House.

Furthermore, former U.S. attorney general Michael Mukasey believes A Criminal Charge is Justified. Former Obama intelligence official Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn says that "If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail." Former NSA director Michael Hayden called Clinton's email setup "stupid and dangerous." Even Edward Snowden, the antithesis of America's intelligence community in many ways, says it's "ridiculous" to think Clinton's emails were secure.

It's time for Democrats to deal with reality, not just allegiance to a political icon, and rally around the only candidate not linked to an FBI investigation, and other controversies. With recent victories and future wins ahead, Bernie Sanders has all the political momentum heading towards Election Day. Most importantly, Bernie Sanders is the only leading candidate with positive favorability ratings in 2016.

Hillary Clinton has negative favorability ratings in ten national polls. When people forget about Trump's rallies, and the billionaire pivots to his former identity as a Democrat ("I probably identify more as a Democrat"), then the Clinton campaign is in big trouble.

In terms of these favorability polls, Hillary Clinton holds negative ratings by an over 10-point margin in 9 of these polls.



The fact that in 9 out of 10 national polls, Clinton is viewed in a negative manner by an over 10-point margin should worry anyone fearing Trump, or a Republican White House.

Clinton is even viewed unfavorably by a 21-point margin in a March CBS/Times poll. Democrats can't run a winning presidential campaign with the slogan, "We'll save you from Trump with a person who's less despised."

Furthermore, the Clinton campaign won't tell you that nationally, 64% of women find Hillary Clinton "not honest and trustworthy." Young feminists are choosing Bernie Sanders over potentially the first female president and 61.4% of women ages 18-29 prefer Bernie Sanders over Clinton.

In terms of the future of the Democratic Party, NPR writes "A recent Quinnipiac poll found that Sanders bests Clinton among 18- to 44-year-olds, 78 percent to 21 percent." Because of this energy and enthusiasm, Bernie Sanders has raised more money than Clinton in February.

When Jann S. Wenner of Rolling Stone endorsed Hillary Clinton, Mr. Wenner wrote "Clinton is far more likely to win the general election than Sanders." First, this statement is undermined by the fact Real Clear Politics shows Bernie Sanders defeating Donald Trump by 17.5 points in an average of national polls. In contrast, the "far more likely to win" Hillary Clinton beats Trump by 11.2 points, and this margin was less than 4 points several months ago, before Trump's violent rallies.

Bernie Sanders hasn't only "destroyed" Donald Trump by a wider margin since last December, he's performed better against Trump in national polls since last October. I wrote a piece on October 21, 2015 titled Bernie Sanders Defeats Trump By a Wider Margin Than Clinton in a General Election. From last October until today, Bernie Sanders has consistently outperformed Clinton in matchups against Donald Trump.

Also, nothing in the Rolling Stone piece endorsing Clinton mentions the ongoing FBI investigation. The Christian Science Monitor clearly states the nature of the FBI's investigation, stating "The FBI is indeed conducting a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information on the private email server Clinton used for State Department communications."

Yes, Hillary supporters, "The FBI is indeed conducting a criminal investigation."

Like The Christian Science Monitor, The Washington Post has clearly stated the nature of the FBI's investigation and in early March wrote that "The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer, who worked on Hillary Clinton's private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official."

You've read the words correctly, and the FBI investigation is a "criminal investigation."

Say it again, "criminal investigation."

Even the best defense of Clinton's email fiasco, a piece by Ruth Marcus titled Why Hillary Clinton is unlikely to be indicted over her private email server, states "Lucky for her, political idiocy is not criminal."

This too, makes for an interesting campaign slogan.

However, "political idiocy" is indeed criminal, when there's intent and motive involved in the idiotic behavior. The example given my Duke Law Journal regarding intent and motive states "As far as the criminal law is concerned, Donny intended and attempted to kill a human being; his motive for doing so is simply not relevant."

Hillary Clinton might have been motivated by convenience, but she intended to circumvent government networks, and this intentional act resulted in 22 "Top Secret" emails on a private server.

Furthermore, everyone knows that convenience wasn't the only reason Clinton had the private server. In addition, the FBI isn't spending over one year investigating with 100 agents to give Hillary Clinton a parking ticket.

I explain in this YouTube segment why Hillary Clinton will likely face FBI indictments. I also state in a recent CNN International appearance with John Vause that Clinton indeed faces the possibility of indictment from the FBI investigation.

In addition to the political momentum favoring Bernie Sanders, Vermont's Senator doesn't have to worry about a cover-up. Like Watergate, Hillary Clinton's political future rests upon the actions of others. A recent Reuters article describes the precarious state of Clinton's campaign in a piece titled Role of tech who set up Clinton's server unknown to bosses at State:

Wisecarver and Swart, who had worked in the department for decades, were soon swapping emails expressing confusion and surprise that a political appointee, a so-called Schedule C employee who is more commonly hired to work in the secretary of state's offices, should be joining the IT department's ranks... The department told Reuters that Pagliano and Kennedy had little contact, and that Kennedy was unaware of the server or his subordinate's role in running it. Nor did Wisecarver, Pagliano's day-to-day boss, or Swart know, according to the former colleague, who said the IT office should have been informed.

Like Watergate, it's the cover-up that dooms politicians, not necessarily the original act linked to unethical behavior.

Bryan Pagliano is just one of many people involved with the FBI's investigation. Future indictments are likely, considering the scope of the FBI's investigation and the bewilderment of top intelligence officials. With recent wins, and future wins on the horizon, political momentum is clearly on the side of Vermont's Senator. It's not pragmatic or realistic to champion Clinton, knowing that Bernie Sanders defeats Trump by a wider margin, without an FBI investigation, and with the highest favorability ratings of any candidate in 2016. I explain in another interview on CNN International with John Vause that voters should choose Bernie Sanders, if indeed they fear Donald Trump.

Remember, Trump can't ask Bernie Sanders for his Goldman Sachs speech transcripts during a televised debate. Clinton's campaign can't even stand being pointed at, so just imagine Trump explaining why he donated to Clinton's Senate campaigns during a debate. Bernie is by far the superior candidate, and already matches up better against GOP rivals; without the myriad of issues faced by Clinton. For the country, and especially the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton should concede the nomination to Bernie Sanders.