Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumMike Malloy - Will Hillary Clinton Be Cleared Or Indicted?
This subject is open for discussion.
We need your take on this matter.
What do you think?
What would you do on election day?
SUBSCRIBE
http://www.youtube.com/MikeMalloyVideo
PLEASE SUPPORT THE MIKE MALLOY YOUTUBE CHANNEL
http://tinyurl.com/MalloyChannelDonations
RandySF
(59,902 posts)And it's bleeding over into General Discussion.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)She may not actually be Indicted but the FBI will not exonerate her. She's likely to simply release her delegates, the AG will run out the clock, and she'll be pardoned as Obama's sad last act.
RandySF
(59,902 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Do you have a better idea if Comey finds she violated her security agreement?
pnwmom
(109,028 posts)And he has no responsibility for deciding whether she did or didn't conform to departmental procedure. That's up to President Obama, who was her boss.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)It's not departmental procedure that is the guide to prosecution. It's the applicable Executive Order 13526 and the relevant sections of the Espionage Act and other federal statutes. That is certainly within the ambit of the FBI's investigation. See, http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251552653
pnwmom
(109,028 posts)A U of Michigan professor who wrote a manual on classification for the Dept of Homeland Security explains why. At great length.
http://prospect.org/article/why-hillary-wont-be-indicted-and-shouldnt-be-objective-legal-analysis
Why Hillary Won't Be Indicted and Shouldn't Be: An Objective Legal Analysis
There is no reason to think that Clinton committed any crimes with respect to the use of her email server.
Richard O. Lempert
March 20, 2016
_________________________________________
And this, from Dan Abrams:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/analysis-prosecute-hillary-clinton/story?id=38168118
But based on what has been public through the beginning of April, there doesnt seem to be a legitimate basis for any sort of criminal charge against her. I fear many commentators are allowing their analysis to become clouded by a longstanding distrust, or even hatred of Clinton.
In fact, I recently expressed my view of this investigation to a friend who retorted "I didnt know you are a Hillary guy." I guess there is almost no way to analyze this case without being accused of partisanship, but then please also mischaracterize me in this context as a Dennis Hastert guy, a George Zimmerman guy, a Brendan Dassey guy, a gun control guy and an anti-Obama guy (just to name a few).
Hillary-bashing is good clean political sport, but a federal criminal indictment is serious business, saved for serious crimes and hopefully based on serious evidence, which as of yet, has not materialized.
________________________________________________
And there is this piece, from Politico;
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-prosecution-past-cases-221744
The most serious punishment for security violations during that three-year period was firing, said Sharon Papp, general counsel of the American Foreign Service Association.
Although, at the discretion of the State Department, some of these cases were referred to the Department of Justice, I do not know of a single State Department employee criminally prosecuted in a security violation or security revocation case, Papp wrote in a declaration submitted by Keysers defense. I am aware of no case in which a State Department employee who took classified material from its proper location [but did not disclose it improperly]
has been prosecuted.
Several experts told POLITICO that in light of the legal obstacles to a case and the Justice Departments track record in such prosecutions they are confident Clinton wont face charges.
Based on everything Ive seen in the public media, not only dont I see the basis for criminal prosecution, I dont even see the basis for administrative action such as revoking a clearance or suspending it, said Leonard, the former director of the Information Security Oversight Office.
Looked at as a potential criminal case, this would be laughed out of court, said William Jeffress, a Washington attorney on the defense team for former Bush White House aide Scooter Libby during his trial for lying in a leak investigation. There hasnt been any case remotely approaching a situation where someone received emails that were not marked classified, who simply receives them and maybe replies to them and a criminal prosecution is brought, Jeffress said.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)This is not a complete and relevant discussion of the law. I've seen several like it. None of them deal candidly with the history of prosecutions under Sec. 793. Most of those initially charged with 793 plead down to 1924.
pnwmom
(109,028 posts)And have you worked at the Department of Homeland Security and written the classification manual?
leveymg
(36,418 posts)pnwmom
(109,028 posts)who disagree with you on how to interpret and apply the law.
Your Hillary hate makes you the real expert.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)draw your own conclusions about the merits of the case, as have I.
It's probably a bad idea to take anyone's analysis on this topic as definitive, other than Director Comey's. Don't draw assumptions about the experience and expertise and candor of other persons.
Don't assume "experts" in the media are "non-partisan" just because they claim to be. They probably aren't.
pnwmom
(109,028 posts)You can do it all.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Take that from someone who has worked with both for more than 30 years.
ThePhilosopher04
(1,732 posts)to the American people.
msongs
(67,509 posts)Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)Roy Rolling
(6,947 posts)EMail "scandal"? There is no "scandal", there is an investigation. There may be an ALLEGED scandal, but there is no scandal.
There is no "cleared or indicted". There is just an investigation.
I am not a fan of alerts, but the reckless graphic of this video is borderline offensive.
pnwmom
(109,028 posts)that they have been pushing these you-tube videos, along with the label "help support our lawsuit to stop Obama's radical agenda."
Mike Malloy, like a lot of Bernie supporters, has simply become a left-wing echo chamber for right-wing Hillary hate. He's pathetic.
mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)ReRe
(10,597 posts)I feel she should be indicted, but she will probably be cleared.
Reminds me of a Constitutional crises we got ourselves into before. You know, like the 2000 and 2004 elections?
We will be required to chew up and shallow the antacid pill, sit down and shut up for "Democracy's" sake. It makes me sick just to think about it.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)That's the precedent based upon the case of Bill Clinton's CIA Director John Deutch who was found by the Inspector IG and the FBI to have hooked up classified laptops to his home Internet. Attorney General Reno ran out the clock and Deutch was pardoned on President Clinton's last day in office.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)...small ray of hope for justice in this land. But we might have to wait until she's on the way out the door before Justice catches up? Well, that's no good. "Justice delayed is justice denied." ~~MLK,Jr