Clinton Scandals won't go away

Clinton Scandals won't go away
  • 385
  • 108
  • 10

My Recent Posts

While I hold little hope of Hillary being held accountable for the many crimes she has committed, the cover ups are still working on being exposed.

 

it has been proven she has committed dozens of felonies.  She violated

§2071. Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States…”

§2232. (a)

(a) Destruction or Removal of Property To Prevent Seizure.—Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to make such search or seizure, knowingly destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government's lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control or to continue holding such property under its lawful custody and control, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both..

(b) “Impairment of In Rem Jurisdiction.—Whoever, knowing that property is subject to the in rem jurisdiction of a United States court for purposes of civil forfeiture under Federal law, knowingly and without authority from that court, destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of impairing or defeating the court's continuing in rem jurisdiction over the property, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”

 

Intent is not required, simply the fact that she did it and we know she had classified material (including 2 SCI emails) that were recovered from her person server.

 

Each email is a separate felony

 

She almost certainly violated -

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a)
Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b)
Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
 
While working with her foundation she also likely violated -
 
Title 18 § 201. Section (b) clearly states “Whoever -- (2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for: (A) being influenced in the performance of any official act; (B) being influenced to aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity of any fraud, on the United States”…

Why am I bringing this up again?  Because a federal judge on Wednesday ruled in a case filed by Judicial Watch, that she must answer more questions about her emails - this time on record and under oath.  This includes questions about setting up her personal server and email addresses.
 
I still hold hope that she will be held to account for her obvious criminal activity, whether it be Whitewater, or as Secretary of State, or her campaign colluding with russia, but I doubt it will really happen.
 
Hopefully this 2 tier system of justice the political class has set up in the US will finally break through and there will be "Equal Justice for All", and not one set of rules for us and a separate set for them.

Comments

Lindsay Wheeler Added Nov 15, 2018 - 8:32pm
Why she is not in jail---I don't know!  Jeff Sessions had TWO YEARS top put her in jail for OBVIOUS CRIMES. A Private Email server while Secretary of State!?!  WTF. 
 
I keep on saying this, "America is dead", because of incidents like this. The Constitution is NOT followed regarding the Natural Born 
Citizen clause!  Even the Repuke party doesn't follow the Constitution. The 1965 Immigration Act was a law of Treason and genocide--that a government, any government genocides its own ethnic majority that built it is outrageous! (ethnic dilution) My congressman, Justin Amash, of Michigan's 3rd House District, said, that the first thing everyweek, the Republican leaders of the House, SUSPEND THE RULES OF THE HOUSE and conduct business --- as """They""" see fit!  And these are Repukes!  And we are supposed to have the "Rule of Law". If you can't follow and obey the House's own rules---What kind of example does one set for following the Constitution?  If you can't obey in the Little---how can you obey in the Greater?
 
And now Clinton---Nothing happens to her!  How long does this go long?  Are they waiting for her to die?  And Tom Fitton has to do all the work?  Where is the Justice Department?  
 
All these Leftist scream about "justice" but here we have a public official that broke the law(s), and they are silent!  
FacePalm Added Nov 15, 2018 - 8:32pm
Concisely-
The Klinton scandals won't go away 'til she does...the sooner, the better, for America and the world itself.
 
i still want to know where Khaddafi's gold went...i have a few guesses.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Nov 15, 2018 - 8:33pm
I have come to the realization, about Khaddafi's gold, that our government is Evil. 
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 8:42pm
The crimes I focused on were those that have actually ALREADY BEEN PROVEN.  gross negligence doe not require intent.  This doesn't even include the collusion with russia, the Uranium 1 pay to play deal or any of the clinton crime foundation huge payments while she was secretary of state and influence peddling which is harder to prove.
 
There needs to stop being a divide between the political class and the rest of us in legal jeopardy
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 8:43pm
The fact that we even call them the "political class" shows how far we have drifted from our founding in which we were a completely classless society.  There is no true upper class/middle class/lower class in America as in level of wealth can quickly move to any other level with good (or bad) ideas, work ethic, etc.
Fmontyr Added Nov 15, 2018 - 8:53pm
Be realistic guys!  You may hate Hillary very much.  But don't you know that your friends, Republicans, could find no reason to charge Hillary with a crime.  Makes you real mad doesn't it, but your guys are to blame for Hillary going free.
 
P. S. Ken, you are very confused.
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 9:02pm
FM - there was plenty of reason to charge her with a crime.  They chose not to.
 
How am I confused?  I cited federal law, I cited what they found.  It is cut and dry.  Please elaborate and give evidence.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 15, 2018 - 9:17pm
The language "....We know she  ot of things, but seems a felon, beyond rightist wet dreams, not....now "Benghazi, benghazi, benghazi....her unsecured email server caused it, right?  LOL  Try an unsecured goddamn cellphone.
Fmontyr Added Nov 15, 2018 - 9:43pm
"The crimes I focused on were those that have actually ALREADY BEEN PROVEN."
 
Ken, you know that is not true, you just have a passionate hatred of Hillary.  She has not even been to trial.  No court has found her guilty of a crime.  Only your uncontrolled hatred of her finds her guilty.  I'm glad our system of justice doesn't work in your way.
 
However, if you persist you might in fairness look at Donald Trump.  He has committed far more crimes than anyone who has served as our president.  The incoming Congress will be on his crimes.  Hillary was only a Secretary of State; Trump is higher rank.  Lord help his sorry soul!
 
BTW, you have done a great job of presenting all the legal stuff about Hillary.  Too bad your friends didn't take any of that seriously.  I agree with you that there are multiple classes of justice in America.  Be thankful that you aren't in the lowest class.
Bill H. Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:13pm
Ken - Wait until Mueller is done and let's see it there is enough space to handle all of the shit on Trump that has been found.
Get a life, forget about Hillary, and go get laid.
Troll Hunter Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:22pm
Lol, Clinton "scandals".
Seriously, there should be some sort of test to post here.  If you think Hillary somehow made $50,000,000 through Uranium One somehow, but you can't prove it, maybe you should get a time out.
 
Hey, Autumn, I think stupid fucking moron liars like Ken should get a time out.
Your thoughts?
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:46pm
"The crimes I focused on were those that have actually ALREADY BEEN PROVEN."
 
Ken, you know that is not true
 
Actually, it is.  The fact that she wasn't taken to trial is a separate question.  It is a FACT that she had confidential, secret, top secret and SCI (sensitive Compartmentalized Information) on her personal server.
 
Each email that falls into that category is a separate felony under the espionage act.  Intent is NOT required.
 
It is public record that these emails exist and were present - aside from anything else she did.
 
100% PROVEN that she committed multiple felonies, aside from anything else she has done
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:47pm
look at Donald Trump.  He has committed far more crimes than anyone who has served as our president.  The incoming Congress will be on his crimes. 
 
What crimes has he committed? What has been proven?  NOTHING.  Aside from everything else she has done, the FBI found emails on Hillary's personal server that fall under espionage act.  That is a FACT.
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:51pm
If you think Hillary somehow made $50,000,000 through Uranium One somehow, but you can't prove it, maybe you should get a time out.
 
Maybe you should learn how to read or get a time out?  This had NOTHING to do with Uranium one.  In fact it was specifically stated. It had to do with one set of crimes, and one set only.  The emails that violated the espionage act.
 
I simply pointed out later that those are already proven felonies that only need someone to follow up and actually charge the crimes in a slam dunk case against her.  There are multiple other crimes she has committed along the way including the pay to play U1, but that isn't as cut and dry as what is already public record PROVEN felony
Fmontyr Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:51pm
Ken,
Trump uses non-secure iPhone all the time.  White House uses non-secure servers.  Are you going to prove them guilty, and if not, why not?
goldminor Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:54pm
Judicial Watch does an outstanding job. This should be interesting. Break out the popcorn, and then run her through the wringer.
Ken Added Nov 15, 2018 - 10:56pm
Depends on what they are used for.  You are simply obfuscating the facts of the espionage act.  The fact is top secret information must be relayed in a specific fashion.  gross negligence - such as hillary did by putting classified information on a personal server - breaks the law.
 
Give specific instanse where WH put classified information on non-secure servers or even personal servers or where Trump transmitted classified information via the unsecure iPhone, and I will say prosecute as I do here. 
 
The only stipulation I have about that is the president can declassify anything he chooses at any time for any reason, so what the president does doesn't really fall under this
Troll Hunter Added Nov 15, 2018 - 11:34pm
Ken:
Umm, the point is you STATED Hillary did "crimes" with Uranium One and then used that to bolster your lie about the NEXT fake crime. you moron.
NEITHER were "crimes"...
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 12:28am
Troll - I can be patient, even with rude people. I have been so with Mishka within reason.  I will not approve of rude name calling on my threads.  This is your first and only warning.
 
What Hillary may or may not have done with U1 is irrelevant.  I did not use it to bolster anything.  The violation of the espionage act stands on its own merits.  I stated specifically that what happened with the "pay to play" still needs to be investigated, but this was specifically about the email violations as related to the espionage act.
 
FacePalm Added Nov 16, 2018 - 12:31am
She also lied under oath before Congress on multiple occasions.  That is also a fact.  Those are felonies, too, aka "perjury."
 
None of the named and obvious crimes she committed are a pimple on the ass of her evil, though.
 
Just wait.  The storm is coming.
Women are Inferior Added Nov 16, 2018 - 12:48am
@ Ken - Well, then go make a Citizen's Arrest, you fucking asshole.
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 12:49am
I call them as I see them, and you are a complete, stone cold moron.
It's a s simple as that.  You present ZERO facts, you copy and paste meaningless stuff, and you LIE CONSTANTLY.  
AND, you present yourself as someone who can arbitrarily decide what is what when the goddamn EXPERTS refute your bs time and time again.
You have nothing.
You are nothing...
 
Troll, I have presented facts and actual US CODE.  It is only meaningless because you cannot understand basic law.  I have not lied at all, but hey, as you are attempting to be Mischka's prodigy you would see it that way.
 
If that is the best you can do, with absolutely no evidence backing you up, I am through with you.  You cannot show where I  "lie constantly" and prove me wrong, you just throw out accusations, and you try to marginalize and make it personal.
 
That is unacceptable.  What "experts" are refuting me?  You have posed no evidence....and you can't because I am citing facts and law
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 12:51am
Troll - I quoted what you said, but removed your post, as I told you that was your one and only warning.  You ignored that, so unless you can be civil, your posts will go where Mishka's do
FacePalm Added Nov 16, 2018 - 1:40am
In support of Ken, i just skimmed through his article, and he did NOT mention Uranium One at all.
 
He DID mention that the article is relevant because of what a FEDERAL JUDGE JUST RULED in re: The Liar submitting to questioning again, THIS TIME ON THE RECORD AND UNDER OATH, not the sweetheart deal from corrupt fibbies like last time.
 
IIRC, he's quite a ways from The Liar's home base, and other legal beagles are MUCH closer - and they're closing in, too.
 
Just curious to all the defenders of The Liar; when she's convicted, will you be men and confess that maligning Ken and others who despise her for her evil and criminality was wrong?
Flying Junior Added Nov 16, 2018 - 4:21am
There must be a twelve-step program for people who can't let go of their irrational hatred of the Clintons!

Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 4:45am
when she's convicted, will you be men and confess that maligning Ken and others who despise her for her evil and criminality was wrong?
 
I doubt she will ever be convicted even though the evidence is incontrovertible for what I pointed out about the espionage act.  If they take the rest into consideration, to even try, it would be a good day for this country to show there aren't 2 levels of law enforcement.
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 4:47am
There must be a twelve-step program for people who can't let go of their irrational hatred of the Clintons!
 
Does step 1 or 2 require them to admit their lying and legal manipulation?
 
Funny how you talk about the hatred of the Clintons, yet you do not dispute a single fact in what I posted...
Jeffry Gilbert Added Nov 16, 2018 - 5:02am
Though a federal judge just ordered her to answer questions one predicts Killary will have "complications" from her already massive health problems that will prevent her from doing so.
 
Or, perhaps she'll need medical assistance that is only available in a non extradition country. 
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 5:11am
What massive health problem Jeffry?  other than her apparent constant intoxication?
Jeffry Gilbert Added Nov 16, 2018 - 5:18am
Parkinsons for one, and complications from it. 
 
You'll recall her collapse at the dedication of the memorial in lower Manhattan. 
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 5:34am
I recall several issues, just nothing was ever clear about why, other than drank a lot of wine while wandering in NY trails...never saw her shake as most folks with parkinson's do
FacePalm Added Nov 16, 2018 - 6:40am
Do you remember at least a couple of times on the campaign trail, where she spazzed out and her head was rocking like a bobble-head doll, or when she was standing next to BJ Billy on a stage as balloons dropped, and she gazed around, wide-eyed and empty-headed, her mouth fixed in an "O"?
 
i saw vid which showed a hole in her tongue, as well.
 
What exactly is wrong with her i have no clue, but suspect it's karma.
 
i can remember predicting that if she lost the election, she'd be smart to be on the first thing smokin' out of this country, but maybe her satanic rituals have convinced her that her alternative reality will protect her, like it's done since she began her professional career as an attorney.
opher goodwin Added Nov 16, 2018 - 6:43am
Ken - I think you'll find that not many people care anymore. They're looking forward with anticipation to discover more of the sins of the present incumbent.
FacePalm Added Nov 16, 2018 - 8:10am
 Opher-
i think you'll be surprised at just how many DO care - especially to see that Justice is done, as it is literally carved in stone above the entrance to SCOTUS: "Equal Justice Under Law."
 
i have no doubt that every attendee at all of Trump's rallies who ever uttered the full-throated shout, 'Lock her up!" will certainly care, as well as all who feel the same way who couldn't make the rallies, which i daresay would be a sizeable number, indeed..
 
And frankly, i don't think they'll find anything with which  to get Trump caught up in their trick bag; anything they DO find, however, no matter HOW petty, will be made into a mountain instead of the molehill it is in truth...based on MSM's history of blaming Trump for everything, on charges as ridiculous, specious, and petty as "he created a climate..."  What falderol, what nonsense, what claptrap and tomfoolery.
Ken Added Nov 16, 2018 - 8:30am
Opher - I have to agree with FP on this one.  While many here may not wish to see her imprisoned, I think most, or at least a very significant minority wish to actually see her pay for her crimes.
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 16, 2018 - 8:54am
Ken has it right is this little statement, "The fact that we even call them the "political class" shows how far we have drifted from our founding in which we were a completely classless society. "   
 
Socialism is the creation of a political class to govern.  The Mueller probe has got a big problem.  The political class has make anything that Trump as done not a crime because they themselves have put in place special rules for the governing class.  And now Trump is a member.
George N Romey Added Nov 16, 2018 - 9:07am
The blunt truth is that the Clintons know all the dirty secrets of Washington and as much as some will huff and puff they will never blown down the Clinton house.  
Fmontyr Added Nov 16, 2018 - 9:11am
Thomas Sutrina, 
Haven't you forgotten that there was a white class and a black (2/3rds of a person) class.  There was also the gentlemen dandy class and the ignorant white folk class who didn't own property.
Troll Hunter Added Nov 16, 2018 - 9:15am
Ken Nov. 15th 8:42pm:
"The crimes I focused on were those that have actually ALREADY BEEN PROVEN.  gross negligence doe not require intent.  This doesn't even include the collusion with russia, the Uranium 1 pay to play deal or any of the clinton crime foundation huge payments while she was secretary of state and influence peddling which is harder to prove.
 
There needs to stop being a divide between the political class and the rest of us in legal jeopardy"
 
That's where he conflated Uranium One to a CRIME, which it never was, and it had nothing to do with Clinton as nine different government agencies made a decision on it.  Ken and Faceplant don't even know what Uranium One was, they just heard Rush Limbaugh scream about it for some reason.
Fmontyr Added Nov 16, 2018 - 9:18am
Thomas Sutrina,  Also, explain how socialism has created a political class?  For most of its existence in the US there was no socialism but there always was a political class.
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 16, 2018 - 9:25am
Fmontyr,  I know there are many classes, I hear it from DIMMS all the time.  I focused on the one being discussed.
James Travil Added Nov 16, 2018 - 9:25am
Face as a registered member of the Church of Satan I can absolutely assure you that Hillary Clinton is NOT one of us! I find it insulting and an uncalled for slight on actual Satanists everywhere to be put in the same boat as that warmonger psychopath, drop it, or back it up with some proof! As for Trump I think he probably didn't want to look biased in calling for a further investigation of Hillary. But as a supporter of Judicial Watch I still have hopes that she will someday be in some way held accountable. As for Sessions, he didn't go after Hillary because he was too busy trying to get the DEA and state and local authorities to go after sellers and users of marijuana in states where it is legal. That and Sessions was the worst Attorney General in American history. 
Bill Added Nov 16, 2018 - 10:02am
The OP is entirely correct.  The law in question is the same one we worried about while training to deliver nukes - it hasn't changed in 40 years.  It's the same law a young seaman was incarcerated for for the mistake of taking a selfie for his girlfriend in a restricted area - even though nothing classified was actually contained within the image.  Each individual charge carries a penalty of up to 10 years in jail and a $10,000 fine - and a "charge" is any unauthorized movement of a single document, inbound or outbound, and whether or not it was intentional (i.e. the copies sent to an offshore server likely controlled by a foreign government).  My my estimate, if anyone gets up the courage to indict her she faces up to at least 2,000 years in jail - but that someone had better carry a big life insurance policy to care for their loved ones when they commit suicide by 2 shots to the back of their heads.
 
Where I would disagree with the author is in the acceptance of the possibility it was MERELY "gross negligence."  Nonsense, even if Hillary were truly as stupendously inept as her defense claims she was.  It was a carefully considered policy to avoid the legal requirement for tracking government correspondence.  I don't know which is more frightening - the idea that half of our country would knowingly want to elect someone that inept, or that they would elect her knowing she was a felon who intentionally placed our nation's secrets out on an easily hacked server.
 
As others have said, this country is most likely in its last gasps of Empire.  Historically it is time; our debts are mounting and half of our elected officials not only refuse to talk about controlling it but instead wish to hasten the demise with even more spending.  The current administration has taken what steps it could to stave it off by improving the economy, but the necessary reforms to prevent catastrophe MUST either be bipartisan or certain to fail.  I sincerely doubt success will come from Congress; the only possible recourse that has any chance at all of success is a Convention of States.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Nov 16, 2018 - 10:29am
Fmontyr Your responses are ludicrous. You are the apex of obtuse. 
 
Private Email Server. Plain, simple English. She is NOT supposed to do government work on a Private Email Server. How hard is that to understand?  Well, if you are leftist, a Hillary sycophant, then, I guess it is hard to understand!  Or---not wanting to be Honest. 
 
You, Fmontyr are not a honest person.   
 
 
Leroy Added Nov 16, 2018 - 11:08am
For the good of the country, I would favor dropping the Clintons crimes and the Russian collusion investigation, although the former is real and the latter is fake.  Let's move on.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Nov 16, 2018 - 11:20am
No, I don't agree to move on. If dropped everything, then there is NO rule of law, there is NO justice, and there is a Two-tier justice system. 
 
In the creation of the Mueller investigation, again, The Rule of Law comes in!  Where is the Crime? In order to have a special counsel, one has to allege a crime has been committed!  Russian collusion is NOT a crime!
 
Your comment Leroy is a total abdication of Justice and the Rule of Law. But you do back my contention that America is dead and gone. Justice does not exist in Apathy. But then a half of America, the media and academia don't believe in Truth, Honesty, Law, or Objective reality; they are ideologues. 
 
Clinton needs to be prosecuted, Obama's presidency voided, and the Mueller investigation stopped and annulled. The Mueller investigation is about investigating a Foreign Intelligence operation mis-re-direct against American citizens to set them up!  You approve Leroy of Spying on Americans?
Fmontyr Added Nov 16, 2018 - 11:36am
On 25 January 2017, Newsweek also target="_blank">reported that senior White House staffers, including Kellyanne Conway, Jared Kushner, Sean Spicer and Steve Bannon had active accounts on the Republican National Committee’s e-mail system:

The system (rnchq.org) is the same one the George W. Bush administration was accused of using to evade transparency rules after claiming to have “lost” 22 million emails.
But after then-candidate Donald Trump and the Republicans repeatedly called for “locking up” Hillary Clinton for handling government work with a private server while secretary of state, the new White House staff risks repeating the same mistake that dogged the Democrat’s presidential campaign. They also face a security challenge: The RNC email system, according to U.S. intelligence, was hacked during the 2016 race.
 ...............................................

Trump's Unsecured iPhones Make Clinton's Basement Server Look ...


https://www.vanityfair.com/.../trumps-unsecured-iphones-make-clintons-basement-serve...

 
Cyber-security protocols, the president has complained, are “inconvenient."
goldminor Added Nov 16, 2018 - 12:53pm
F J ...there must be a twelve-step program for people who can't let go of their irrational hatred of Trump! See how that works?
 
Lindsay W...spot on as usual. I would like to see a serious invetigation of the Clinton Foundation as well as on Hillary. Hillary will never get locked up, but she deserves to be cebsured for what she did, and for the nation to be made aware that what she did was wrong. Note Fmontyr's fake news comment under yours, how typical of him.
 
Dino Manalis Added Nov 16, 2018 - 2:26pm
 Bill and Hillary are lawyers and good at hiding their secrets.
John Minehan Added Nov 16, 2018 - 2:49pm
"K]nowingly" and "willfully" indicate the state of mind required for a criminal prosecution.  
 
This implies that an inadvertent or unknowing violation would not be grounds. 
John Minehan Added Nov 16, 2018 - 3:02pm
"[G]ross negligence doe not require intent."  
 
Per Prosser & Keaton On Torts is "want of even slight or scant care."  The state of mind is often seen as a willful disregard of foreseeable risks.
 
This is not the case with Mrs. Clinton's server.
 
Two things make this something that can be prosecuted for gross negligence: 1) the harm was not foreseeable; and 2) the problem seemed to be with the Dep't of State Special Security Officers and Document Custodians who did not do an effective editing job and on whom Secretary Clinton could have reasonably relied.
 
While Secretary Clinton, as a leader of a Cabinet Department is responsible for all her people do and fail to do, she probably cannot be held personally criminally liable.
 
The remedy was at the ballot box . . . and that remedy was had in November 2016.   
John Minehan Added Nov 16, 2018 - 3:04pm
"Two things make this something that cannot  be prosecuted for gross negligence:" 
John Minehan Added Nov 16, 2018 - 3:24pm
From A Man For All Seasons by Robert Bolt:
 
"MARGARET: Father, that man's bad!

MORE: There's no law against that.

ROPER: There is. God's law!
MORE: Then God can arrest him.
ALICE: While you talk, he's gone!
MORE: Go he should, if he were the Devil, until he broke the law.
ROPER: Now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"
 
To further quote the play, "I trust I make myself obscure."
Fmontyr Added Nov 16, 2018 - 3:50pm
goldminer,
"I would like to see a serious invetigation of the Clinton Foundation as well as on Hillary."
I would like to see a serious investigation of the Trump Foundation as well as Trump.  NY is already doing the Foundation investigation and the investigation of Trump will begin after Jan. 3, 2019.  I have nothing to do either of these, just saying.
FacePalm Added Nov 16, 2018 - 5:02pm
Leroy-
For the good of the country
 
Please explain how it is "good for the country" to let a known criminal escape justice?
 
James-
The Liar was exposed as a witch by a former hatchet man for the Klintons in Arkansas, Larry Nichols.
 
The NYC police, who seized Weiner's laptop, found video in a folder marked "insurance" of The Liar and her lesbian lover, Huma Abedin(likely also a spy for the Muslim Brotherhood) torturing a child in a manner so heinous that seasoned NYC detectives and cops of 30+ years wept.
Have you ever heard of the John Podesta email hack?  Does the name "Marina Abramovic" mean anything to you?  How about "spirit cooking"?
 
Suffice it to say that this is one who has long dedicated herself to evil; you say satan is a myth; i say i've met him, and know he isn't.
Aaron Johnson Added Nov 16, 2018 - 10:08pm
What's with the obsession of Hillary?  Can we let it die?
FacePalm Added Nov 16, 2018 - 10:36pm
Fmontyr-
and a black (2/3rds of a person) class
 
The Constitution says "3/5ths," but that's history, now, after the 13th Amendment.
 
Aaron-
It'll start dying when she's convicted and imprisoned, and stop after she does.
Aaron Johnson Added Nov 16, 2018 - 10:38pm
I'm tired of these partisan takes where the application applied to one person is different based on ideological preferences.  Actually, I agree with you that it appears that Hillary violated laws during her stint in the Obama administration.  However, I doubt you'll agree that Trump likely committed obstruction of justice based on his interview with NBC News' Lester Holt and a recent interview with the Daily Caller where he again appears to justify the appointment of Whitaker to replace Sessions in heading the Justice Department by pointing to Mueller's investigation.
Here's the specific quote:
"Well, I heard it was a very strong opinion. Uh, which is good. But [Whitaker] is just somebody that’s very respected.
I knew him only as he pertained, you know, as he was with Jeff Sessions. And, you know, look, as far as I’m concerned this is an investigation that should have never been brought. It should have never been had.
It’s something that should have never been brought. It’s an illegal investigation. And you know, it’s very interesting because when you talk about not Senate confirmed, well, Mueller’s not Senate confirmed."
For context, he was asked by the Daily Caller why he appointed Whitaker where he talked about his attributes but then quickly switches to Mueller.  Why do that?  It was already inferred that Whitaker's appointment was made because of his strong opinion that Mueller has violated the rules of the special counsel. 
Something tells me that you'll rationalize it away.
FacePalm Added Nov 17, 2018 - 12:40am
Ok, multiple Congressional investigations have concluded that Trump never had a damn thing to do with the Russians, especially insofar as any non-crime of "collusion" with them goes.
 
Second, Mew-ler is scum; he deliberately prosecuted people he KNEW to be innocent, got convictions, and went to parole board hearings to influence them not to grant parole to these INNOCENT people.  Not that you will, but websearch "gohmert mueller unmasked" for an earful.  In addition, the Wikileaks dump of State Dept. cables revealed that he personally delivered samples of American uranium ore to the Russians - which makes it kind of convenient that he can avoid prosecution for treason while "investigating" Trump for "Russian collusion," doesn't it?
 
Third, Rosenstain, who recommended Mew-ler, has FAR more reason to recuse himself, specifically because he was witness to - and signed off on - the FISA lies that made it "legal" for D'OhBama's people to infiltrate and spy on the Trump campaign, a crime multiple orders of magnitude greater than Watergate.
 
Fourth, please deign to explain why an appointment of Sessions' deputy can in ANY WAY be construed as "obstructing justice," especially when this WHOLE "INVESTIGATION" is completely unjust.  Tell me, if you will, what crime Trump is alleged to have committed, one for which there's ANY evidence?  It's absolutely UNjust to find a man or woman and investigate their entire lives LOOKING for a crime, and in point of fact, it's EXACTLY what the USSR apparatchiks would do on a routine basis.
 
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.”
~ Lavrentiy Beria, Soviet politician, Marshal of the Soviet Union and state security administrator, chief of the Soviet security and secret police apparatus under Joseph Stalin during World War II.
 
 Finally, i don't give a damn that you're "tired" of the pursuit of justice for The Liar.  Most Americans don't like to see criminals escape justice, especially corrupt ones who've managed to escape it for several decades.
Ken Added Nov 17, 2018 - 2:16am
Where I would disagree with the author is in the acceptance of the possibility it was MERELY "gross negligence."  Nonsense, even if Hillary were truly as stupendously inept as her defense claims she was.  It was a carefully considered policy to avoid the legal requirement for tracking government correspondence
 
I don't disagree, but what I was pointing out was that all that is required is gross negligence.  That is why the FBI specifically reworded Comey's statement from "Gross Negligence" to "Extremely Careless", as there is legal specificity in that term.
 
John M - you are off on this case.  Intent is not required with this section of the Espionage Act.
 
Face - Blacks were never considered 3/5 of a person.  That compromise was specifically to limit the amount of representation they could have in a census.  It was not ever an implication that they were less of a person than anyone else.  If the south had been allowed to count non-voting slaves as a full population member, they would have dominated the house of representatives and nothing would ever have passed.  For census purposes the north wanted them counted as 0 and the south as 1.  They compromised at 3/5.  It never had anything to do with their amount of humanity.
Jim Stoner Added Nov 17, 2018 - 2:22am
It's just projection and what-about-ism.  Like the caravan, yesterday's fake news. 
Trump did all these things and worse.  
Flying Junior Added Nov 17, 2018 - 2:25am
Jim,
 
You are the second guy that has called the caravan fake news on the WB.  What are you basing that on?  We are expecting another two thousand people on the San Diego Border in the next couple of weeks.

Ken Added Nov 17, 2018 - 2:33am
Like the caravan, yesterday's fake news. 
 
Have you not seen videos of what is happening on the CA border, or the mayor of Tijauana asking for assistance because they have completely overrun his city?
James Travil Added Nov 17, 2018 - 2:37am
Face, a witch does not a Satanist make. There are Druids, Wiccans, and other types of witches. Please either PROVE that Hillary is a Satanic Witch or STFU with your ignorant slander! 
FacePalm Added Nov 17, 2018 - 3:03am
Tucker just made this very point, and showed vids from all of MSM dutifully repeating the false talking-point that the "caravan" was an illusion, or minimizing the threat...like Bill Marr, who seemed to at least conform HIS commentary to the reality that yep, they do exist, but the danger they pose is non-existent.  The president obviously disagrees.
 
Personally, i think that any who cross illegally should be immediately arrested, and upon conviction, be required to work at prison wages until they can pay their OWN way back to their country of origin, with the caveat that any bleeding-heart who desires to see them on their way back home can contribute to a fund earmarked ONLY for that purpose.  After all, why should airline tickets be on the backs of US taxpayers?
 
Ken-
Article 1, section 2, paragraph 3, Constitution for the United States:
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons
 
While this section does not specifically name blacks(probably because there were slaves of other races, as well, like Indians and those of other ethnicities), most will have little trouble reading between the lines; the words "two thirds" never appear in the constitution in re: any man, woman, or child, save for the expulsion of a Member of Congress - otherwise, the phrase "two thirds" only appears in reference to amendment or voting procedures, which was the reason for the correction of Fmontyr.  In any case, it's a minor point, and completely irrelevant to your article.  i just don't care much for misapprehension and propagation of historical, easily-provable fact.
FacePalm Added Nov 17, 2018 - 3:06am
Jim-
From my observation, the "what-about-ism" is a way to stifle debate and gloss over easily provable and unpunished CRIMES.  It's a typical Alinsky-ite tactic...one his disciples on CNN readily and repeatedly engage in, to deflect accountability, used to mock or disparage those who disagree with their propaganda.
Aaron Johnson Added Nov 17, 2018 - 7:00am
Facepalm:  "Ok, multiple Congressional investigations have concluded that Trump never had a damn thing to do with the Russians, especially insofar as any non-crime of "collusion" with them goes."
 
You're right that we haven't seen evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians, though there's possible evidence that Roger Stone did.  However, that wasn't the crime that I was asserting.
 
It was obstruction of justice, which I see you conveniently didn't address. 
 
 
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 17, 2018 - 7:46am
Talking to a foreign government is not a crime.  Purchasing research against an opponent without listing in the campaign is a crime.  Letting it to be used to get a FISA warrant to investigate the opponents is a crime.  The FBI not telling the judge where the information came from is a crime.    The investigation has found crimes but not Trump's.
Fmontyr Added Nov 17, 2018 - 8:37am
Clearly we don't know what the Mueller investigation has found but some overt actions of Trump may be considered obstruction of justice.  The firing of James Comey, providing a fake story for the meeting Jr. had with the Russians in Trump Tower, and various attempts to have people withhold specific damaging information.  A number of persons close to the president and his campaign have plead guilty and several sentenced and others have been indicted. 
John Minehan Added Nov 17, 2018 - 8:51am
"John M - you are off on this case.  Intent is not required with this section of the Espionage Act."
 
As noted above, the text you presented uses the words "knowingly" and "willfully," which describe the mens rea required for a criminal violation.
 
Even gross negligence requires "the want of even scant care." 
 
The Sailor mentioned (who now works for an acquaintance of mine, it is a small world) intentionally took the picture in what he knew was a restricted space.  Mrs. Clinton, in contrast, could reasonably rely on Dep't of State's Special Security Officers to "dumb down" e-mail traffic to keep it unclassified, which it would have had to be even on a gov't computer working on NIPR Net.  
 
Think about it this way, espionage in time of war carries the death penalty.  Can you make that a "strict liability offense?" 
Bill Kamps Added Nov 17, 2018 - 12:55pm
Like many politicians, it is likely that HRC committed some crimes.  Like almost all politicians it is almost certain she will never be charged. 
 
Whether is was her "lost" billing records at the Rose law firm, insider trading that was statistically impossible, the email server, her multiple friends that committed suicide, the Clinton Foundation, somewhere she almost certainly violated the law.  Whether it is provable or not, is a whole other matter.
 
She is a clever attorney, and knows how to cover her tracks.  In addition, politicians are reluctant to indict other politicians because they could be in hot water next time.  Look at guys like Charles Rangel, he was found guilty of tax fraud, and only had to resign his Ways and Means chairmanship.  In the end they take care of their own. 
 
Legal scandal is only used to defeat an opponent politically, almost never to send them to jail.
FacePalm Added Nov 17, 2018 - 4:19pm
Aaron-
Fourth, please deign to explain why an appointment of Sessions' deputy can in ANY WAY be construed as "obstructing justice," especially when this WHOLE "INVESTIGATION" is completely unjust.
 
That was in reply to your question and quotation.  i notice you didn't respond to it.
 
James-
The proof is now with the FBI, as that's who the NYPD shipped the laptop to, hopefully after making a copy, since the FBI has a history of "losing" certain sensitive info.  If/when the Weiner "insurance" file becomes public knowledge, you'll have all the proof you need.  In the meantime, if you have any friends in any police or police-type agencies, query them about what the NYC detectives and cops found on the Weiner laptop.  Be sure to tell them that it's off the record.
 
Some youtube vids exist which reference this incident...and some say that portions of the referenced video appear on the dark web already - but i don't go there, and even if i did, wouldn't provide a link to it.  As a general rule, satanists are some of the most evil people on the planet.  Denial of this fact is to flee from the Truth.  Ever hear the phrase "Pedovore"?  What about "adrenochrome"? If not, you should look them up.  i just searched youtube for "weiner laptop nypd."  If you do the same, you'll find out for yourself, eventually...assuming you have the stomach for it.
Aaron Johnson Added Nov 17, 2018 - 5:21pm
Facepalm's comment: "Fourth, please deign to explain why an appointment of Sessions' deputy can in ANY WAY be construed as "obstructing justice," especially when this WHOLE "INVESTIGATION" is completely unjust."
I think the appointment of Whitaker would have been questionable by itself given the public comments from him being critical of Mueller, but hard to prove obstruction of justice by itself.  However when Trump mentions in the interview that he believes the Mueller investigation is unfair right after being asked about Whitaker's appointment, then that's damaging.  
What would have been better is to simply appoint a person, who hasn't made public comments criticizing Mueller.  Why doesn't that make sense?
Bill Added Nov 17, 2018 - 6:31pm
John:  "Two things make this something that can (not - corrected by another user) be prosecuted for gross negligence: 1) the harm was not foreseeable; and 2) the problem seemed to be with the Dep't of State Special Security Officers and Document Custodians who did not do an effective editing job and on whom Secretary Clinton could have reasonably relied."
 
That is a nonsensical and circular set of arguments.  For the offense, the harm is the mishandling; the prevention is not to mishandle.  You may only transmit or receive Classified documents over approved secure channels. That's it, it's simple and explained to everyone who ever handled classified documents.
 
Conviction under the statute is straightforward.  Had I, for example, as a young Lieutenant, been studying in the classified vault one day and on returning the documents accidentally had the cover sheet, containing itself no actual classified information but marked Secret, remain in a pile of other non-classified papers and then taken that pile home with me - and then returned it the next day, even though nobody else had seen that cover sheet but gotten caught returning it - that would have been up to 10 years in jail.
 
Hillary Clinton established a private server.  She was not incompetent, it was not accidental - it was set up specifically to keep her communications out of DOJ official records.  She then proceeded to send and receive Classified materials through that unapproved medium.  That is the definition of guilt for that statute, period, end of story.  If somone gets the stones to actually indict her, she faces up to more than 2,000 years in jail.
Fmontyr Added Nov 17, 2018 - 7:57pm
Bill, aren't you saying that the congressional committees which had Republican chairpersons are idiots for not finding criminal acts which could be referred to the Justice Dept. for prosecution?  Do you think that Trey Gowdy and others who hated Hillary were stupid for not reporting wrongdoing to the Justice Dept.  Explain this, please.
FacePalm Added Nov 17, 2018 - 9:06pm
Aaron-
What would have been better is to simply appoint a person, who hasn't made public comments criticizing Mueller.  Why doesn't that make sense?
 
No. 
Think back.  What happened when Sessions recused himself?  Rosystain moved up to "acting" Attorney General, even though HE should have recused himself because he was FAR too close to the things being investigated, e.g. signing off on extending the illegally-obtained FISA warrants, for starters.
 
Now that Sessions is gone, Whitaker, Sessions' #1 guy, has moved up, and is now the "acting" AG.  NOT permanent; ACTING.
 
So what if he made statements about him not liking Mew-ler?  He's a freakin' criminal, himself!  AG's are not SUPPOSED to like criminals.
Ken Added Nov 18, 2018 - 2:33am
FP - you miss the entire point of that.  I have pointed it out many times.  It NEVER was intended to say they weren't whole people.  The entire constitution was built to try and break down slavery, but they could only go so far and get southern states to sign on.  That is why they made the "3/5 compromise"  It had NOTHING to do with counting blacks or slaves as partial humans.  it had EVERYTHING to do with not allowing the south to dominate the legislature and have so many seats that they couldn't keep rolling back slavery.
 
It is kind of embarrassing that you would think this was intended to create the idea that blacks (slave or otherwise) are only partially acceptable.  Read the DoI "All MEN are created equal".  Read the first draft that I have posted here several times, condemning the forced slavery by King George, and all caps stating they are MEN (Jefferson's caps).  To treat this as antyhing otherwise is simply ignorant. 
 
Sorry to say that to you, but that is simple fact, and showing a complete lack of knowledge of what forced the 3/5 compromise and what it meant.  I have posted many times what it has meant and how it was passed and why.  To believe that it had ANYTHING to do with implying that Blacks were less equal than anyone else is completely disingenuous since I have posted EXACTLY what it meant and why - from their words themselves.
Ken Added Nov 18, 2018 - 2:42am
Clearly we don't know what the Mueller investigation has found but some overt actions of Trump may be considered obstruction of justice
 
Only by ideologues by you.  You do NOT understand the constitution, and I would be willing to be you have never even read it in its entirety, and probably win that bet.
 
The President IS the executive branch.  PERIOD.  He can hire or fire anyone in that branch for any reason or for no reason at all, at his discretion.  He has allowed an investigation to go on for 2 years that he could have stopped at any time.  LEGALLY.  He has not stopped funding it, he has done nothing to hinder it.  He has allowed it to proceed, even knowing it is an investigation looking for a crime, not suspecting a crime looking for evidence. but hey, keep pushing your lies, right?
Ken Added Nov 18, 2018 - 2:45am
Jm how about this?
 
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
 
Section F
Ken Added Nov 18, 2018 - 2:49am
think the appointment of Whitaker would have been questionable by itself given the public comments from him being critical of Mueller, but hard to prove obstruction of justice by itself. 
 
please research the appointments clause...
John Minehan Added Nov 18, 2018 - 11:17am
"(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—"
target="_blank">https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

 
Note my highlights.
 
The reason the Department of Justice ("DoJ") shied away from this is it would be difficult to prove intent.
 
As the Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton had people whose job it was to handle classified information and to appropriately transmit such information, Document Custodians, Special Security Officers and the like.
 
Mrs. Clinton, on her private devices or with her home-brew server, worked "in the clear" BUT if she used a government issue device, she also would have worked "in the clear," over NIPR net the government unclassified network, which interfaces with the civilian internet.
 
They were NOT supposed to send her Classified over NIPR.  This "reasonable reliance" makes proving "gross negligence MUCH harder.
 
Further, as a major political party's likely nominee, she was not going to take a plea bargain like GEN (R) Petraeus did.  Her interest lay in fighting this tooth and nail and politicizing this as much as possible.
 
The remedy was at the ballot box and, as to Mrs. Clinton, justice was served.     
John Minehan Added Nov 18, 2018 - 11:52am
"John:  "Two things make this something that can (not - corrected by another user) be prosecuted for gross negligence: 1) the harm was not foreseeable; and 2) the problem seemed to be with the Dep't of State Special Security Officers and Document Custodians who did not do an effective editing job and on whom Secretary Clinton could have reasonably relied."
 
That is a nonsensical and circular set of arguments.  For the offense, the harm is the mishandling; the prevention is not to mishandle.  You may only transmit or receive Classified documents over approved secure channels. That's it, it's simple and explained to everyone who ever handled classified documents.
 
Conviction under the statute is straightforward.  Had I, for example, as a young Lieutenant, been studying in the classified vault one day and on returning the documents accidentally had the cover sheet, containing itself no actual classified information but marked Secret, remain in a pile of other non-classified papers and then taken that pile home with me - and then returned it the next day, even though nobody else had seen that cover sheet but gotten caught returning it - that would have been up to 10 years in jail.
 
Hillary Clinton established a private server.  She was not incompetent, it was not accidental - it was set up specifically to keep her communications out of DOJ official records.  She then proceeded to send and receive Classified materials through that unapproved medium.  That is the definition of guilt for that statute, period, end of story.  If somone gets the stones to actually indict her, she faces up to more than 2,000 years in jail."
 
As a threshold matter, ! was the "other user" who made the correction.
 
With a Secretary of State,  the position makes one both a producer and a consumer of classified information.
 
As a consumer of classified information, she relies on people (like yourself in another life apparently) NOT to sent her classified material over NIPR (the government's unclassified internet).  Whether she had interfaced with NIPR through a State Dep't issued device or devices or her home brew server and multiple Blackberries, this would still be true.
 
However, she is also a producer  of collateral classified information.  Her schedule, itinerary and impressions can or are classified, possibly as much as Top Secret-level classified.
 
In a situation like the one with Mrs. Clinton, the foreseeable breach would have been leaks of the things produced by Mrs. Clinton and her office that were classified.
 
However, that is NOT the material at issue.  The issue seems to have been with things sent to Mrs, Clinton by people on whom she might reasonably rely.  It is tough to prove gross negligence ("want of even scant care") as to an unforeseeable harm.
 
Your example about the cover sheet is inapplicable. 
 
In the first place **you** took the classified coversheet out of the vault.  Mr. Clinton was sent documents by others.
 
In the second place, there are only a handful of cases on prosecution for "gross negligence" all turn on things like knowing you had actually taken classified out of a vault and not immediately returning it or taking classified to a meeting with a suspected double agent you were handing and leaving it unattended.  The reported cases are all more severe than  either your hypothetical or Mrs. Clinton's actual circumstances.
 
In the third place, classified cover sheets are NOT classified.  It's not good practice to take them outside a vault or SCIF, as it sows confusion, but it is not criminal. 
 
NB:  I can see what you state as a hypothetical as being grounds for some kind of Non-judicial Punishment, but those penalties are a lot less than "10 years in jail."  I would caution anyone that Soldiers can always request a Court Martial in lieu of Non-judicial Punishment, so make sure you have a case before proceeding.
 
    
Jim Stoner Added Nov 18, 2018 - 3:16pm
I am in favor of keeping private communications private, and not making them official documents. This may have been Hillary's intention, or it may have been convenience, given her need to decompress at home from an intense schedule--it's hard to be sure as she was all over the place and never successfully put it to bed.  I see no evidence she intended to improperly disclose significant classified information, but she has been properly accused in public of negligence in handling sensitive information--as has Trump with his phones.   (I am also in favor of making Trump's Twitter account not be official documents, as they don't meet the standard of having the weight of anything beyond expressions of opinion, tweets from a twit.)
Surely there were technical violations.  It was investigated and there was nothing indictable.  I'm satisfied. 
FacePalm Added Nov 19, 2018 - 1:55am
Ken-
intended to create the idea that blacks (slave or otherwise) are only partially acceptable.  Read the DoI "All MEN are created equal".  Read the first draft that I have posted here several times, condemning the forced slavery by King George, and all caps stating they are MEN (Jefferson's caps).  To treat this as antyhing otherwise is simply ignorant. 
 
The Constitution is the Supreme Law; the DoI, NOT.  You cannot use any portion of the DoI to defend yourself against any charge.  It isn't "positive law."
 
What is written in the Constitution is what's written in the Constitution.  IT is the Supreme Law of the Land(Art. 6).  The ONLY people in America to which the 3/5's verbiage could POSSIBLY apply is slaves...and in no way exclusively to black people.
 
But this point is entirely tangential and therefore completely irrelevant and immaterial to the intent of this article.  It does remind me of what is written in the Banker's Manifesto, though:
 
"Keep them divided and arguing over matters of no consequence to us, except as teachers to the common herd."
FacePalm Added Nov 19, 2018 - 2:17am
Jim-
but she has been properly accused in public of negligence in handling sensitive information
 
First, thanks for acknowledging this point.
Second, are you aware that Strzok influenced Comey to re-write his non-indictment, changing the language from the legal standard sufficient for criminal charges, "grossly negligent," to "extreme carelessness," which is the very meaning of the phrase?
 
But she's guilty of SO much more: evil, perverse, bestial things.
 
As has been noted, many commentators, including Jeanine Pirro(former judge), Andrew Napolitano(former judge), and Jay Sekulow(and many others) all agree that "intent" has ZERO bearing on The Liar's guilt.
 
But if/when she's indicted, everything on Weiner's laptop relating to The Liar can be introduced as evidence against her...which includes the 30k+ emails she unlawfully deleted(Congress had placed ALL her electronic devices under subpoena, thus making the case for CLEAR obstruction of justice charges, not to mention the phones and blackberries deliberately smashed with hammers and/or removal of SIM cards, which is evidence of "guilty knowledge," an element necessary to prove - or legally infer - obstruction).
 
But as long as she is imprisoned for a term of years likely to exceed her lifespan, it won't matter about the callous, bestial things she's done; God will ensure justice on her for those, for no human court can properly administer it.
Ken Added Nov 19, 2018 - 6:25am
The reason the Department of Justice ("DoJ") shied away from this is it would be difficult to prove intent.
 
 
Again, intent is NOT required to be found guilty under this portion of the espionage act.  Simply mishandling of the information IS.  Hence the submariner who spent a year in confinement simply for sending his girlfriend a picture of himself aboard the submarine.  What Clinton did was far worse and far more negligent - and intent is pretty easy to read in if you really wanted to go that route with pushing classified material through a private server - which the evidenced have produced many classified emails from that server, including 2 coded SCI
Ken Added Nov 19, 2018 - 6:32am
The Constitution is the Supreme Law; the DoI, NOT.  You cannot use any portion of the DoI to defend yourself against any charge.  It isn't "positive law."
 
jFP - you are way off here.  The DoI IS part of the US Code - as are the articles of confederation for that matter.
 
That said, however, The constitution does not define slaves as 3/5 of a person in terms of humanity.  It is simply in order to count the census for limiting the number of representatives the south would have so they would not overwhelm every bill they disagreed with.
 
It was another step within the constitution to force an END to slavery, not to reduce the slave to subhuman status.  You are simply wrong here and should research the 3/5 compromise.
 
They took every step they could at the time to end slavery, and yet still have the south sign on to the union.  They knew they could not survive as 2 separate countries, but they also knew they could not survive long term allowing slavery.  They used every means they could to restrict it and limit it until they could finally remove it.
 
Once the cotton gin was invented, the south saw that slavery was going away and no longer truly a viable alternative, and that - as much as anything else - caused the civil war.
 
Even by limiting the slave count in the census for representation purposes, the slave count in the south went from (don't remember exact numbers would have to go back to a previous post of mine to find specific numbers) 200k slaves in 1789 to 1.2 million in 1850.  This would have allowed the south to completely dominate the house of representatives and much of the anti-slavery legislation passed in those 60 intervening years would have been DOA in the house with representation of those that couldn't even vote for those representing them.
Fmontyr Added Nov 19, 2018 - 9:46am
FacePalm,
"But she's guilty of SO much more: evil, perverse, bestial things."
It is clear that you have gone off the deep end and don't know what you are talking about.
FacePalm Added Nov 19, 2018 - 3:08pm
It's clear you don't give a crap about investigating what was found on the Weiner laptop.
FacePalm Added Nov 19, 2018 - 3:10pm
Ken-
What part of "this is a tangential, unimportant issue completely unrelated to the thread topic" did you not understand?
Tubularsock Added Nov 20, 2018 - 4:23pm
Ken, you are barking up a dead tree.
 
Tubularsock agrees the Clinton’s are crooks, so are the Rockefeller’s, Bush’s, and Trump’s!
 
Haven’t you noticed by now that the rich and well positioned NEVER see jail time. Or rather Tubularsock maybe should say rarely.
 
It’s the name of the game. And pretty simple.
 
In fact, most of them GET MEDALS from other rich friends and fellow criminal traveler’s Institutions and Foundations.
 
It is not that you are correct on this topic but SO WHAT!
 
MONEY AND POWER has always spoken louder than evidence.
 
Cheers.
 
Ken Added Nov 21, 2018 - 3:11am
TS - I seem to recall nelson rockefeller being replaced By Gerald Ford as VP because of tax issues, but hey, don't let facts get in the way of your ideology, right?
George N Romey Added Nov 21, 2018 - 11:11am
TS there are things about our public and private leaders (yeah I know they are anything but leaders) that would freak the general population out.  However, even with hard evidence there would be deniers of course.
 
The other day I screened a 2 hour interview with Harry Markopolos the man that tried numerous times to turn Bernie Madoff in to the SEC but was rebuffed every time.  He was being interviewed for the 2017 movie about the life of Madoff.
 
What really pissed Markopolos off was that even in December 2008 when the scandal broke the press refused to really cover the extent of Madoff's evil. For example Madoff would troll the death notices for any man he knew that had died that might have some money.  At the grave site after the burial he'd approach the widow and offer his condolences. Then he'd "offer" to take over her financial affairs to put her "mind at ease."  Why wouldn't the press want to cover such sorted details?  In the mind of Markopolos the press did not want to expose Wall Street.  Wall Street where it was a known secret among many for years that Madoff was doing something underhanded but no one felt the need to speak out.  After all Madoff was a big shot in their little club for the uber wealthy.
 
As a side note.  Trump had been approached numerous times about investing with Madoff but never did because he instinctively knew something wasn't right. 
Tubularsock Added Nov 21, 2018 - 12:09pm
Now Ken, being sent to prison and not getting a VP slot isn’t exactly what Tubularsock calls punishment for crimes of the Rockefeller’s!
 
Tubularsock’s ideology is to have laws that apply to ALL crooks equally.
 
It’s very democratic in a country that preaches “The Rule of Law”, don’t you think, Ken?
Tubularsock Added Nov 21, 2018 - 12:10pm
George, you are correct at one level about scandal but things have changed a bit with OrangeTweet.
 
The shit that Dump does and has done would have NEVER passed muster in the past. It is not only praised by the “deplorables” but is lapped up like only gutter dogs would do!
 
It is interesting that Trump had been approached by Madoff and never got involved but that may have been due to not being “instinctively” knowledgeable but rather being just too involved in his own scams.
 
You know, Dump had to beat out the Madoff competition.
 
If you toss the Clinton’s and the Bush’s in all this with Dump and Madoff and you would only scratch the surface of Criminal Gangs of the 21st century.
John Minehan Added Nov 21, 2018 - 2:04pm
Actually, Rockefeller was Ford's VP and he was dumped as VP candidate for Bob Dole in 1976.
Ward Tipton Added Nov 27, 2018 - 2:44am
If even one among the American Aristocracy or Establishment Elite was ever held to account, they would all be subject to being held to account for their actions. It will never happen. Period. 
Tubularsock Added Nov 27, 2018 - 11:02am
Ward Tipton, you have got that right.
None of rich and powerful will be taken down and sent to jail.
It is just how the American game is played!
And then they all get medals from each other and a pat on the back!
Fmontyr Added Dec 6, 2018 - 6:01pm
Why did George H. W. Bush, a gentleman and a statesman vote for Hillary Clinton? 
Why do former presidents not hate Hillary Clinton? 
What criminal acts has Hillary committed?
Ward Tipton Added Dec 7, 2018 - 2:23am
Poppy Bush was head of the CIA during this little affair that came to be known as the Iran Contra affair and a whole lot of logistics support went through Arkansas where this guy by the name of William (Slick Stoagie) Clinton was a governor. 
 
There was more of the operations that continued at a later date, when oddly enough, Clinton received a lot of support from the Bush and other private organizations to gain the white house. There is some evidence of this to be found I am certain, though mine never came from any books or reading materials. 
Bill Added Dec 7, 2018 - 9:36am


Ward Tipton 

 



"If even one among the American Aristocracy or Establishment Elite was ever held to account, they would all be subject to being held to account for their actions. It will never happen. Period. "
 
Well, never is a long time.  And, actually, some HAVE been held accountable for crimes - providing hope that maybe more will as well.  Statistically, it is less likely that there is NO crime going on in government at any given time than the possibility that all the air in a room will, because of Brownian motion, randomly and suddenly rush to a corner of the room suffocating everyone in it.  Statistically possible?  Yes, but highly unlikely to ever happen even once before the heat-death of the Universe.
Bill Added Dec 7, 2018 - 9:47am


Tubularsock 

 



"George, you are correct at one level about scandal but things have changed a bit with OrangeTweet."
 
The TDS is strong in this one...
 
Trump is vulgar.  That is not a crime, it is merely unpopular.  Mueller investigation is wrapping up, no hint of any "Russian Collusion" has come to light so far.
 
Here is the difference.  Forgetting everything else in her past, Hillary's server broke the same law I was subject too back in the day when I was training to deliver nukes in my designated pointy jet.  Had I once accidentally taken a single otherwise BLANK numbered page from a classified document with the word "SECRET" on it home and been caught returning it, I would have faced up to 10 years in jail.  Intent is not a defense; the act itself constitutes "gross negligence."  As proof, Trump recently pardoned a young sailor who Obama jailed for taking an innocent selfie inside a "secure" area.  He was convicted even though the photo itself showed nothing of a classified nature.  He simply forgot the rule, and went to jail - first offense.
 
We have before us a case the FBI thoroughly investigated.  They determined without doubt that she intentionally established the server and intentionally trafficked classified materials on that server.  Hillary admits to using the server (a bit of a "duh," but still a confession of the action).  The intelligence agencies now believe at least 5 foreign intelligence agencies accessed materials on the server.  Each document transmitted or received counts as one offense under the law - and thus if ever indicted based on the glaring, obvious, and incontrovertible evidence she would face up to about 5,000 years in jail.
 
If Trump committed an actual crime, I'm fine with him going being impeached and going to jail once he is no longer President.  But, if we do not indict and convict Hillary, the fiction of justice in this country is clearly dead and buried.
Fmontyr Added Dec 7, 2018 - 11:17am
Bill, you said,
If Trump committed an actual crime, I'm fine with him going being impeached and going to jail once he is no longer President.  But, if we do not indict and convict Hillary, the fiction of justice in this country is clearly dead and buried.
 
So why have so many investigations, a primary purpose of which was to cast dirt on Hillary to make her unattractive as a candidate, failed to find reasons to indite her??   Republicans and most everyone knew she was the presumed candidate to follow Obama.  Ever since her days in Arkansas as an outsider, Republicans have been hell-bent on destroying her as they knew she was very intelligent and had political ambitions.  As any politician she has had some miscues but none worth making a big fuss about unless the intent is to have her look bad.  Get over it Hillary haters.  She has multiple times the character and honesty of the jerk now in the White House.  Turn your attention to him!
Ward Tipton Added Dec 7, 2018 - 1:26pm
So intelligent that she consented to go to Arkansas ... only after she failed to pass the bar exam in DC. She is definitely ambitious though.
Bill Added Dec 9, 2018 - 2:53pm


Fmontyr 

 



"Bill, you said,
If Trump committed an actual crime, I'm fine with him going being impeached and going to jail once he is no longer President.  But, if we do not indict and convict Hillary, the fiction of justice in this country is clearly dead and buried.
 
So why have so many investigations, a primary purpose of which was to cast dirt on Hillary to make her unattractive as a candidate, failed to find reasons to indite her??"
 
You need to look again.  With respect to other investigations, the conclusion was that they did not have sufficient evidence to convict - NOT that she wasn't guilty.  In some cases it was because key witnesses ended up dead - the proverbial "suicide by two shots to the back of the head."  At some point, even the most avid fan ought to connect the dots and figure out that their hero is crooked.  And, it is terrifying that they don't.
 
With respect to the FBI investigation into her illegal server, you are failing at reading comprehension.  Here is the key statute:  (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793).  Comey not only acknowledged in his famous statement that she violated the terms of the statute, he also implied that it was pointless to RECOMMEND indictment because (most likely) he knew the DOJ would not follow up on it.  He as much as said out loud that they were in the tank for her, that recommending indictment would either simply make him look foolish or worse be literally hazardous to him, and he was making that statement to cover his ass.
 
The statute in this case is exactly the same one my squadron mates and I needed to be concerned about when we were training to deliver nuclear weapons 35 years ago.  Intent does not matter.  Gross Negligence, for purposes of this statute, is DEFINED as the act of removing classified materials from a secure location without written permission from appropriate authorities to do so.  A young sailor, sentenced by Obama, was convicted of this crime (and later had his remaining sentence commuted, not pardoned, by Trump) for taking a selfie for his girlfriend in a "no pictures" area even though nothing actually classified was revealed.  That was a one-time "oops," not a years-long policy as in the case of Hillary - and if it meets the "gross negligence" criteria then most certainly running a server for two years which has now been verified to have been hacked by at least 5 foreign governments damned well does too.
 
It is truly sad that our country has become so partisan, and our people so brainwashed, that they actually believe that crimes should not be prosecuted if it is "one of their people."  I, like many people, want the laws upheld for EVERYONE, not just my party (I'm independent anyway).  The reality is that everyone CC'd on every one of those documents who did not immediately report the breach of security is also guilty of the same crime, and all should be prosecuted and convicted.  That could get interesting, since Obama also corresponded with Hillary on that server (although I don't know for certain if he received or transmitted any classified documents - a possible defense for him personally).  In an even more bizarre twist, had Obama put in writing for the official records that he approved her action, no matter how apparently hazardous to U.S. Security, it might not have been a crime - but he didn't.
 
So I stand by my original statement.  There may also be many others of every Party affiliation who get convicted - so be it.  For Public Confidence to be restored, examples must be made.
Fmontyr Added Dec 9, 2018 - 11:40pm
Remember Benghazi, Bill?  Eight times, or was it more, Republicans in Congress held hearings ostensibly to put the blame on Hillary for the three deaths.  The real purpose was to make Hillary look bad as a political candidate as a couple of Repub committee members have stated.  You know she started under a different set of rules so it was a mixed bag situation.  So for the server thing, I'm sorry you and Fox News didn't get the conviction you desired. 
Now fast forward to the current administration and there have been security miscues occurring in a number of instances.  Top secret materials were handled by some number of people, Kushner, et al., without proper security clearances  No one has done anything about those and the many other criminal acts of the current administration.  That will change soon.  
 
Bill Added Dec 10, 2018 - 9:40am


Fmontyr
 
"Remember Benghazi, Bill?  Eight times, or was it more, Republicans in Congress held hearings ostensibly to put the blame on Hillary for the three deaths.  The real purpose was to make Hillary look bad as a political candidate as a couple of Repub committee members have stated.  You know she started under a different set of rules so it was a mixed bag situation.  So for the server thing, I'm sorry you and Fox News didn't get the conviction you desired. "
 
The politics is all yours pal.  And, I am not talking about any other investigation into Hillary - she's probably guilty of something but the witnesses are all conveniently dead - so please stick to the subject or I will know you are being disingenuous.  As ex-military I'd rate Hillary's behavior with respect to Benghazi as colossally incompetent and contemptible, but not criminal.
 
What I am talking about a simple rule which is also a felony if you don't follow it.  You don't take classified material and place it on an insecure server.  Ever.  Each and every time you do, or once you do someone gets hold of a copy, you have committed a felony.  Hillary admitted she did it, and if a poor hapless seaman spent a few years in jail for forgetting a single time not to take a selfie somewhere, she should be in jail.  That is called equal justice under the law, something political zealots such as yourself are unable or simply unwilling to grasp when it affects their favored parties.
 
If Trump people actually broke the same rules, they should be punished as well.  Unlike you I do not only see guilt when it happens on a single side of the aisle.  However, as I understand it Kushner had written permission from the President of the United States to act in a temporary manner pending his permanent clearance (quite likely delayed due to political shenanigans).  Remember, POTUS has the power to allow ANYONE access to ANY classified information they feel necessary for the good of the country - as long as they follow the process.  Obama could have done that same thing for Hillary; however, doing so would have been an acknowledgement that the purpose of her server was to circumvent federal documents laws - something POTUS CANNOT simply waive - so she still would have been guilty of a felony.
 
You don't get to have it two ways and still have the rule of law.  What is tragically pathetic is that people like you don't get why it is a bad thing for everyone until it comes back to bite you in the form of a government like Venezuela's.  Once you start down the road of "only the politically unfavored are ever guilty," you inevitably end up with a s***hole country.  Go read some history, and maybe rethink your position a bit.  I've been to a few of them, and I've gotta say anyone who truly thinks what they have is actually an improvement over enforcing rule of law here is so far gone they should be in a padded room.

Fmontyr Added Dec 10, 2018 - 11:37am
That is called equal justice under the law, something political zealots such as yourself are unable or simply unwilling to grasp when it affects their favored parties.
Being a bit judgmental aren't you Bill? 
 
I have been a longtime crusader for equal justice under the law, no doubt for longer than you have lived.  My goal is to greatly reduce the life and liberty losses which the blacks must endure by not receiving the same treatment as whites under the law. Here we are talking about millions of person years of inequity.  Your concern is for a sailor (white?) and an illegal use of a server.  My understanding is that no classified material was leaked by Hillary, whereas there have been numerous leaks under the current administration.  The POTUS  himself has done damage to the US several times, and don't tell me he has the right to do that.  I know that but he is incompetent and doesn't realize what he is doing.  So many times his wishes are in violation the laws.
 
What is tragically pathetic is that people like you don't get why it is a bad thing for everyone until it comes back to bite you in the form of a government like Venezuela's.
Being a bit theatrical aren't you Bill?
 
I probably know more than you about the fraudulent and scandalous activities during the financial crisis of 2007-08.  Little people lost their homes.  Little people went bankrupt.  The assets of little people were taken to restore solvency.  Big boys did just fine, some even getting bonus money from us taxpayers.  Equal Justice?  Give me a break!
 
Now who are actually driving us to have a government like Venezuela??