Emailgate - FBI will soon have to make a choice, knuckle under or recommend criminal charges.

[maxparrish]

With a couple of significant political injuries to the Benghazi committee, Bernie Sanders "in the tank" lifeline to Hillary, and President Obama's transparent attempt to derail the FBI investigation (comments later walked back by the White House), one might think Hillary and her choir feel safe. And yet, while she may still walk on her felonies (the State Dept and AG office has been slow walking FOIA requests for many months) she is far from being out of the woods. Reputedly the FBI is pissed at Obama's attempt to undermine their work.

Fox News’ Catherine Herridge, gives us the lowdown on the FBI investigation's progress: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...email&utm_campaign=Jolt10162015&utm_term=Jolt

Three months after Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email address and server while secretary of state was referred to the FBI, an intelligence source familiar with the investigation tells Fox News that the team is now focused on whether there were violations of an Espionage Act subsection pertaining to “gross negligence” in the safekeeping of national defense information.

Under 18 USC 793 subsection F, the information does not have to be classified to count as a violation. The intelligence source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity citing the sensitivity of the ongoing probe, said the subsection requires the “lawful possession” of national defense information by a security clearance holder who “through gross negligence,” such as the use of an unsecure computer network, permits the material to be removed or abstracted from its proper, secure location.

Subsection F also requires the clearance holder “to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer. “A failure to do so “shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

A former FBI agent, who is not involved in the case, said the inconsistent release of emails, with new documents coming to light from outside accounts, such as that of adviser Sidney Blumenthal, could constitute obstruction. In addition, Clinton’s March statement that there was no classified material on her private server has proven false, after more than 400 emails containing classified information were documented.

Oh My. But does she skate? Much depends on the courage of the FBI to stand up to a President. According to the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/u...&utm_campaign=Jolt10162015&utm_term=Jolt&_r=0

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He said it was a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

Those statements angered FBI agents who have been working for months to determine whether Ms. Clinton’s email setup had in fact put any of the nation’s secrets at risk, according to current and former law enforcement officials.

Investigators have not reached any conclusions about whether the information on the server had been compromised or whether to recommend charges, according to the law enforcement officials. But to investigators, it sounded as if Mr. Obama had already decided the answers to their questions and cleared anyone involved of wrongdoing.

The White House quickly backed off the president’s remarks and said Mr. Obama was not trying to influence the investigation. But his comments spread quickly, raising the ire of officials who saw an instance of the president trying to influence the outcome of a continuing investigation — and not for the first time.

“Injecting politics into what is supposed to be a fact-finding inquiry leaves a foul taste in the F.B.I.’s mouth and makes them fear that no matter what they find, the Justice Department will take the president’s signal and not bring a case,” said Ron Hosko, a former senior F.B.I. official who retired in 2014 and is now the president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, who maintains close contact with current agents.

Will the FBI knuckle under to political pressure, or to Obama's politicized DOJ? No doubt both Lynch and Obama hope that the FBI will, and the DOJ won't have to take the heat if they fail to indict.

It would seem impossible for the DOJ to bring criminal charges against the Democratic frontrunner in an election year. Of course, if Biden were running, the PICCA (People in Charge of Current Administration) might suddenly see the light and dump the queen.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

And the political witch-hunt continues. Hopefully they will find a blue dress with Hillz jillz.

 

[Trausti]

And the political witch-hunt continues. Hopefully they will find a blue dress with Hillz jillz.

Yep. The laws are for the hoi polloi and not for those who lord over us.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Well once we know that a law has actually been broken, then maybe we can discuss that.

 

[Bronzeage]

Nothing is going to come of this, except perhaps future Cabinet Officers will have the proper email servers.

A prosecution of a technical violation of the law benefits no one. If there was not a security breach, there is not much to do or say. If there is a trial, every Secretary of State during the age of email will have to explain how their email was handled. Maybe they'll just plead the 5th.

 

[maxparrish]

Well once we know that a law has actually been broken, then maybe we can discuss that.

We now know that - it's not honestly disputable by those who have read the text, and know the law on the treatment of classified material. The appropriate response to her gross negligence and intentional violation of federal statutes should be proportional to what others have suffered for far less negligence in the handling of classified material.

One year at Leavenworth is about right.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Well once we know that a law has actually been broken, then maybe we can discuss that.

We now know that - it's not honestly disputable by those who have read the text, and know the law on the treatment of classified material. The appropriate response to her gross negligence and intentional violation of federal statutes should be proportional to what others have suffered for far less negligence in the handling of classified material.

One year at Leavenworth is about right.

Only a year? What are you, soft on crime?

 

[fromderinside]

Well once we know that a law has actually been broken, then maybe we can discuss that.

We now know that - it's not honestly disputable by those who have read the text, and know the law on the treatment of classified material. The appropriate response to her gross negligence and intentional violation of federal statutes should be proportional to what others have suffered for far less negligence in the handling of classified material.

One year at Leavenworth is about right.

There you go. Thanks for helping us with this. It must be nice to be a judge, jury, and prosecutor, all wrapped up in oneself.

When bilby proves right all you have to do is say is "I told you so" and your conscious is cleared of unclassified prosecutions, jury decisions, and judgments.

Ah the spotless mind.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And the political witch-hunt continues. Hopefully they will find a blue dress with Hillz jillz.

Yep. The laws are for the hoi polloi and not for those who lord over us.

Funny, because the Executive Branch was violating the 4th Amendment with the cyber spying on all Americans, yet, you folk seem to be concentrating on a single person in the Obama Admin over email security. Makes one really think that the actual drive is a witch hunt against Clinton.

Granted, you folk don't like Obama much, so why not attack over the cyberspying... or do you just hate Hillary that much more than him.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The only reason that this is even a story is because Obama wants to distract everyone from finding out that the CIA shot down that plane over the Ukraine.

You people are such sheeps for buying into it.

 

[Bronzeage]

Why don't we just get a copy of all of Hillary's emails from Eric Snowden?

 

[fromderinside]

Why don't we just get a copy of all of Hillary's emails from Eric Snowden?

Her emails, because they aren't on a government server, are safe from Snowden silly.

 

[Derec]

And the political witch-hunt continues. Hopefully they will find a blue dress with Hillz jillz.

 

[Trausti]

And the political witch-hunt continues. Hopefully they will find a blue dress with Hillz jillz.

 

[Trausti]

Yep. The laws are for the hoi polloi and not for those who lord over us.

Funny, because the Executive Branch was violating the 4th Amendment with the cyber spying on all Americans, yet, you folk seem to be concentrating on a single person in the Obama Admin over email security. Makes one really think that the actual drive is a witch hunt against Clinton.

Granted, you folk don't like Obama much, so why not attack over the cyberspying... or do you just hate Hillary that much more than him.

 

[Derec]

A prosecution of a technical violation of the law benefits no one.

Well it would benefit these two at the very least.

Also, to say that a "technical violation" of the law should not be prosecuted is kind of weird and opens a door to a whole new defense strategy for any crime ...

- - - Updated - - -

 

[Horatio Parker]

Lotsa fixins, no burger.

Wake me when the progression from regulatory infraction to criminal charge hits the real world.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[skepticalbip]

Also, to say that a "technical violation" of the law should not be prosecuted is kind of weird and opens a door to a whole new defense strategy for any crime ...

You know, it is funny that people do offer a "defense" of criminal wrong doing on claims of "it was only a technical violation of the law" so not serious. To the extreme it is only a technical violation that people happen to die after being shot. All the perpetrator did was pull a trigger so that is all they should be charged with if that is a crime.

 

[Bronzeage]

Well it would benefit these two at the very least.

Maybe so, but they are probably not eager to have a trial during a campaign.

Is the Justice Department going to go after Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfield? We know Dick Cheney is safe, because he never learned to use email.

 

[fromderinside]

Well it would benefit these two at the very least.

Did Carly I'msoSmart keep HP sensitive mail on her private server, did MyBrowasprez keep Florida email with Florida housing lobby on his private server. How about Fatty Bridgecloser, did his NJ messes hide on his private server? Hell we all know Orange Tang keeps his stuff on twitter.

Why am I pointing to private sector and state government for republican candidates? Because none of them served the Federal Government in the last seven years. Boxer ears!