Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
295,657
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 107:
Line 107: + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Hillary Clinton email scandal (view source)
Revision as of 07:13, January 7, 2018
, 07:13, January 7, 2018→FBI whitewash
==FBI whitewash==
==FBI whitewash==
In a nationally televised address on April 10, 2016 [[President Obama]] intervened on behalf of the presumptive [[Democrat]] presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Obama made clear that he did not want criminal charges brought against Clinton. Obama made two points: Mrs. Clinton 1) had exhibited “carelessness,” and 2) had not intended to breach national security when she stored and transmitted classified information on her private system.
Clinton herself and other key witnesses had not been interviewed.
Agent Peter Strzok changed the term “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless.” If Comey used the words “grossly negligent,” it would be the equivalent of pronouncing Clinton guilty.
The principal [[felony]] offense in Clinton’s case is the willful retention or transmission of classified information — subsections (d) and (e) of the Espionage Act (section 793 of the federal penal code). To prove this offense, the prosecutor must prove that the official 1) had possession of the information, 2) had “reason to believe [it] could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation,” 3) transmitted it to an authorized person or place, or failed to deliver it on demand to an authorized government agency, and 4) acted willfully, which means acting intentionally and with an understanding that one’s actions are wrongful. This is a straightforward case of [[criminal]] intent.
There is no requirement to prove an intent to harm the United States. The statute calls only for an awareness that the information could be used to hurt the U.S. or benefit a foreign nation. To be guilty, the official does not need to want that to happen; she must merely be aware that it could happen. Of course, every government official who is privileged to hold a security clearance is well aware of this. Making the official aware of it and having the official expressly acknowledge her awareness are essential parts of the indoctrination that is a condition of getting the clearance. And thus every government official with a security clearance knows it is wrongful to transfer classified information to a person not authorized to have it or to a place where its storage is not authorized.<ref>http://amp.nationalreview.com/article/455202/hillary-clinton-email-investigations-trump-justice-department-revives-motive-criminal-intent </ref>
The private system she set up was in violation of government and State Department regulations. Her loyal staff fought efforts to bring her into the government email system – even though she forced the resignation of an ambassador over, among other things, his conducting of government business over an unauthorized private email system.
When the request was made that Clinton surrender her emails to the State Department, she turned them over to her own lawyers and subordinates who did not have the security clearances required for access to the information. She destroyed tens of thousands of emails, even though they were under subpoena, so that they could not be reviewed by the State Department or the FBI. Of the 30,000 she deigned to surrender to the State Department, over 2,000 contained classified information, some of it among the nation’s most highly classified national-defense secrets. And she serially lied in her public statements about her emails, in congressional testimony (in which she brazenly claimed to have turned over all work-related email to the State Department, and that her lawyers had carefully reviewed every email before designating which should be surrendered and which withheld), and in her FBI interview (in which she pretended not to know what the ubiquitous “[C]” designation — for confidential — in classified documents meant).
===Peter Strzok===
===Peter Strzok===
Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin lie to FBI investigator Peter Strzok. “Mills did not learn Clinton was using a private server until after Clinton’s [Department of State] tenure...Mills stated she was not even sure she knew what a server was at the time....Abedin did not know that Clinton had a private server until about a year and a half ago when it became public knowledge.”<ref>http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/04/clinton-aides-went-unpunished-after-making-false-statements-to-anti-trump-fbi-supervisor/ </ref> Email exchanges from 2009 to 2011 exist in which both Mills and Abedin directly discussed or were involved in discussing Clinton’s server. Mills asked about it in a Feb. 27, 2010 email to Abedin and an aide to Bill Clinton who helped set up the Clinton Chappaqua server. “Ur funny. We are on the same server,” Cooper replied. Mills and Abedin were also involved in an Aug. 30, 2011 exchange in which State Department official Stephen Mull mentioned that Clinton’s “email server is down.” In a Jan. 9, 2011 email exchange, Cooper told Abedin that Clinton’s server had been malfunctioning because “someone was trying to hack us.” “Had to shut down the server,” wrote Cooper, who told the FBI in his interviews that he discussed Clinton’s server with Abedin in 2009, when it was being set up. Neither Mills or Abedin were prosecuted for making lying to the FBI.
Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin lie to FBI investigator Peter Strzok. “Mills did not learn Clinton was using a private server until after Clinton’s [Department of State] tenure...Mills stated she was not even sure she knew what a server was at the time....Abedin did not know that Clinton had a private server until about a year and a half ago when it became public knowledge.”<ref>http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/04/clinton-aides-went-unpunished-after-making-false-statements-to-anti-trump-fbi-supervisor/ </ref> Email exchanges from 2009 to 2011 exist in which both Mills and Abedin directly discussed or were involved in discussing Clinton’s server. Mills asked about it in a Feb. 27, 2010 email to Abedin and an aide to Bill Clinton who helped set up the Clinton Chappaqua server. “Ur funny. We are on the same server,” Cooper replied. Mills and Abedin were also involved in an Aug. 30, 2011 exchange in which State Department official Stephen Mull mentioned that Clinton’s “email server is down.” In a Jan. 9, 2011 email exchange, Cooper told Abedin that Clinton’s server had been malfunctioning because “someone was trying to hack us.” “Had to shut down the server,” wrote Cooper, who told the FBI in his interviews that he discussed Clinton’s server with Abedin in 2009, when it was being set up. Neither Mills or Abedin were prosecuted for making lying to the FBI.