Trump advisor Jeanine Pirro may have had foreknowledge of a 2016 online hoax that tried to coerce the FBI—via fraud—into reopening Clinton's case and indicting Clinton. Pirro now uses her FNC show to coerce an end to a probe that may expose her. FNC and Congress must investigate. 
2/ Three days before the True Pundit hoax that tried to coerce the FBI into indicting Clinton, Rudy Giualiani pals Jeanine Pirro and Jim Kallstrom floated on FNC the hoax's core narrative—that NYPD had incriminating evidence on Clinton they would leak if Comey did not indict her.
3/ The narrative was false: NYPD had no incriminating (or even new) evidence in the Clinton case. But three days before Pirro and Kallstrom floated that lie, their friend Rudy Giuliani said on FNC he'd spoken to active FBI agents—and teased a big surprise that would hurt Clinton.
4/ Doug Hagmann—a Trump supporter—has said Giuliani was "behind" the info coming out of NYPD during the week Pirro and Kallstrom floated what later became the True Pundit Hoax. True Pundit claimed to have both NYPD and FBI sources.
FNC and Congress must investigate all of this.
FNC and Congress must investigate all of this.
5/ If Pirro was involved in the True Pundit Hoax, her nightly attempts—using FNC air—to have Special Counsel Mueller's agents "marched out in handcuffs" and the Special Counsel's probe ended immediately could well be an attempt to Obstruct Justice in a probe that would harm her.
6/ FNC already airs a show by a Trump advisor who nightly calls for an end to any investigation of Donald Trump—a conflict of interest that's intolerable. But Pirro using her show to interfere with an investigation in which she may be a witness would be another matter altogether.
7/ Whether Pirro was part of a conspiracy to steal the 2016 election by using coercion and fraud to tamper with an FBI probe—or whether it just *looks* that way—isn't presently known. But that she's a witness in the Mueller probe is clear—so she shouldn't be discussing it on FNC.
8/ The decision to block Pirro from using FNC to—possibly—Obstruct Justice isn't a difficult one because (a) as a Trump advisor and associate, she already shouldn't be discussing an FBI probe into Trump's advisors and associates, and (b) there are many other things to talk about.
9/ No is saying Pirro needs to change her personal opinion of an FBI probe that will certainly interview her and could eventually implicate her. But it is an entirely separate matter for FNC to pay and otherwise abet Pirro in nightly maligning the probe and slandering its agents.
10/ Attempts to corruptly influence an ongoing FBI probe in which one is a likely witness via explicit calls to force an end to the investigation can, under certain circumstances, border on criminal conduct—especially if one is advising the probe's target to shut down the probe.
PS/ I don't say this ex-prosecutor can't discuss legal topics broadly, but Pirro should no more be permitted by FNC to seek to derail Mueller's probe than to harass the cop who recently caught her driving 54 miles over the speed limit: 119 in a 65mph zone. newsweek.com/jeanine-pirro-…
PS2/ My hope is Pirro—as a lawyer—will conclude her long-running commentary on a probe that may implicate her with a noble action: volunteering, on-air, to testify under oath about her contacts pre-election with Trump, Kallstrom, Giuliani, Flynn, Bannon, Don Jr., and True Pundit.
PS3/ The FNC host referred to in Tweet #6 is Sean Hannity, who acted as a shadow domestic-policy advisor for Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign and now nightly calls for an end to any criminal investigation of Trump—or his advisors from the 2016 presidential campaign.
PS4/ Trump advisor Jeanine Pirro's Opening Statement from December 10 may yet be evidence in the federal criminal probe into Trump and his advisors and associates (Pirro was pre-election—and is now—a Trump advisor). Future "Statements" may be evidence too.
PS5/ Assuming Jeanine Pirro did a pre-interview with Kallstrom before his October 30, 2016 appearance on her show, she knew—and encouraged with her queries—Kallstrom's implied threat against the FBI to the effect that NYPD would leak fake evidence if Comey didn't indict Clinton.
NOTE/ The Pirro "Opening Statement" linked to in Tweet "PS4" was aired on December 9th, 2017 and posted to YouTube on December 10th, 2017.
DOCS1/ Jeanine Pirro interviews former Assistant Director of the FBI James Kallstrom on her FNC program on October 29 or 30 of 2016 (checking on dates). Their discussion of illegal NYPD leaks in the Clinton investigation comes at the end of the interview.
DOCS2/ (Keep in mind: on October 29/30, 2016 there was no evidence NYPD had illegally held evidence in the Clinton case, let alone was threatening to illegally leak it, let alone that it'd be falsified evidence. What Pirro and Kallstrom discuss is the upcoming True Pundit Hoax.)
