"I’ve stated many times over the years that I believe Clinton should have been prosecuted for mishandling classified information, just as lower-tier government officials like Sandy Berger and David Petraeus were. "
You ought to read what James Stewart reported in his fact-based book "Deep State." Stewart is both a lawyer and an investigative journalist. He is no partisan hack. In his fact-based book "Blood Sport," he reported facts that made both Clintons look amoral and possibly criminal.
Stewart reports that a team of FBI agents working on the Hillary e-mail case agreed that no prosecution was warranted. That was based on the case law respecting the statute and on the facts they had uncovered. The case law showed that there had to be some clandestine intent to walk away with classified documents without authorization. The most they could show was that Hillary's e-mails had a few documents with an encircled "c."
Sandy Berger obviously had clandestine intent. Otherwise, why would he stuff documents in his pants before leaving a secure area.? Gen. Petraeus showed highly sensitive, classified to a biographer, gave her notes on the documents and let her take pictures of them. Then he lied about it.
It's easy for laypeople and pundits with law degree to say someone should be prosecuted. But if you're the prosecutor in charge, you have a responsibility. And if you kowtow to the backseat drivers and to popular sentiment (as that NY prosecutor who got Trump indicted might have done), you and you alone must face the consequences.
Admittedly, with the national Attention Deficit Disorder and fever-pitched emotions, explaining nuances is like talking to the wind. But there must be a wall of sorts between the court of public opinion and the legal process.
Well said. What few people realize, among all the chaff, pearl-clutching, and innuendo is that:
1. Hillary did not break State Department rules, which did not prohibit use of private email. Both her predecessors, Condy Rice and Colin Powell, also used private emails (Powell used his AOL account, and told Hillary so). Her use of a private server was probably *more* secure than her predecessors.
2. Hillary did not deal with classified documents, as Trump did. Further, she and her staff carefully talked around anything they considered classified, such as drone targets. Retroactive examination by various agencies identified a number of email chains which they considered contained classified information, but we have to take that with a grain of salt. For instance, 26 of the emails were sent by a private citizen (Sidney Blumenthal) who did his own "research" and was trying to be helpful, with information which could not necessarily be verified, and which Hillary considered "journalistic". When shown many of the "classified" emails, Hillary and her staff were puzzled as to why they should be considered classified information. For instance, 6 of the *most* sensitive were summaries of press reports of drone attacks; they were considered Top Secret because in spite of drone details and attacks being widely discussed from Popular Mechanics to The New York Times, the very *existence* of drones was still classified, as far as the Defense Dept. was concerned!
3. The Inspector General's review of the investigation raised a number of procedural issues - including that certain FBI agents involved directly or periphally in the investigation *also* used private email for bureau business; that a number of agents had too-close relationships with the press and too many interactions, in some cases to the point of accepting emoluments; etc. - but they concluded that Comey's ruling not to prosecute was in fact consistent with precedent and comparable cases.
As far as I'm concerned, Trump should be in jail for inciting a riot on January 6, 2021, so I have zero sympathy for Trump now, with his latest self-inflicted legal wound.
That said, regarding Hillary, didn't she delete emails and scrub her personal server? Doesn't that constitute "intention and obstruction"? While the Hillary and Trump cases may be apples and oranges, the fact the DoJ went out of their way to NOT prosecute her does give at least a shred of credence to the Trump defenders' claims of a double standard. Certainly from a political perspective, if not a legal one.
If I recall correctly, that was about her deleting supposedly personal emails off her personal server with the BleachBit app. That didn't have to do with classified material (a separate matter). I believe the allegation from Republicans was that she wanted to hide potentially damning private emails, possibly related to the Clinton Foundation (which wouldn't surprise me in the least).
Don't get me wrong, she did a lot of improper (and really weird) stuff. And again, I think she should have been prosecuted for mishandling classified information. But I don't believe the email-deleting stuff was ever thought to be criminal. Just suggestive of other corruption.
Get Trump by way of proving espionage without material evidence of damage. Get Trump without proving malicious intent. Get Trump where no reasonable prosecutor would charge Deep State’s friend, but will charge its political enemy. Get Trump where sloppy housekeeping is willful mishandling of class’d docs, and where Clinton destroying state’s evidence is gross negligence. Get Trump where an Expatriot judge from a country whose government confiscates its citizens’ farmland passes judgment for Deep State’s case. Get Trump on the same day the FBI discloses docs confirming foreign money transfers to Biden entities so as to shade its impact. Get Trump, as the protagonist of all things in this Stack’s opinion pieces. Get Trump so as to appease the DC country club where whose bread they eat is whose song they sing. Get Trump, so a DC insider with a better personality and controlled by donors can facilitate their well being. Get Trump, so as to get rid of the obnoxious load mouth notwithstanding superior well being metrics during his administration. Get Trump where personality is more important than policy. Get Trump, Get Trump, Get Trump.
Let Trump commit literally any crime he wants to, no matter how serious or damaging to the country, for no other reason than the desperate love you feel for him. Love Trump, Worship Trump, Serve Trump.
Constitution, what’s that? The one where efforts are made to make the Federal City a state ? Or the one where they want to expand the Supreme Court to achieve judicial governance ? Or the one where it’s circumvented due to contrived emergencies? No, more importantly, - the self feeding, never ending, career affirming political apparatus that exists in DC. The #1 Real Estate market is in and around DC, The Great DC Country Club.
That thing you're totally cool with Trump suspending, out of the love you have for him, while rationalizing your servility with a bunch of non sequiturs.
"I’ve stated many times over the years that I believe Clinton should have been prosecuted for mishandling classified information, just as lower-tier government officials like Sandy Berger and David Petraeus were. "
You ought to read what James Stewart reported in his fact-based book "Deep State." Stewart is both a lawyer and an investigative journalist. He is no partisan hack. In his fact-based book "Blood Sport," he reported facts that made both Clintons look amoral and possibly criminal.
Stewart reports that a team of FBI agents working on the Hillary e-mail case agreed that no prosecution was warranted. That was based on the case law respecting the statute and on the facts they had uncovered. The case law showed that there had to be some clandestine intent to walk away with classified documents without authorization. The most they could show was that Hillary's e-mails had a few documents with an encircled "c."
Sandy Berger obviously had clandestine intent. Otherwise, why would he stuff documents in his pants before leaving a secure area.? Gen. Petraeus showed highly sensitive, classified to a biographer, gave her notes on the documents and let her take pictures of them. Then he lied about it.
It's easy for laypeople and pundits with law degree to say someone should be prosecuted. But if you're the prosecutor in charge, you have a responsibility. And if you kowtow to the backseat drivers and to popular sentiment (as that NY prosecutor who got Trump indicted might have done), you and you alone must face the consequences.
Admittedly, with the national Attention Deficit Disorder and fever-pitched emotions, explaining nuances is like talking to the wind. But there must be a wall of sorts between the court of public opinion and the legal process.
Well said. What few people realize, among all the chaff, pearl-clutching, and innuendo is that:
1. Hillary did not break State Department rules, which did not prohibit use of private email. Both her predecessors, Condy Rice and Colin Powell, also used private emails (Powell used his AOL account, and told Hillary so). Her use of a private server was probably *more* secure than her predecessors.
2. Hillary did not deal with classified documents, as Trump did. Further, she and her staff carefully talked around anything they considered classified, such as drone targets. Retroactive examination by various agencies identified a number of email chains which they considered contained classified information, but we have to take that with a grain of salt. For instance, 26 of the emails were sent by a private citizen (Sidney Blumenthal) who did his own "research" and was trying to be helpful, with information which could not necessarily be verified, and which Hillary considered "journalistic". When shown many of the "classified" emails, Hillary and her staff were puzzled as to why they should be considered classified information. For instance, 6 of the *most* sensitive were summaries of press reports of drone attacks; they were considered Top Secret because in spite of drone details and attacks being widely discussed from Popular Mechanics to The New York Times, the very *existence* of drones was still classified, as far as the Defense Dept. was concerned!
3. The Inspector General's review of the investigation raised a number of procedural issues - including that certain FBI agents involved directly or periphally in the investigation *also* used private email for bureau business; that a number of agents had too-close relationships with the press and too many interactions, in some cases to the point of accepting emoluments; etc. - but they concluded that Comey's ruling not to prosecute was in fact consistent with precedent and comparable cases.
As far as I'm concerned, Trump should be in jail for inciting a riot on January 6, 2021, so I have zero sympathy for Trump now, with his latest self-inflicted legal wound.
That said, regarding Hillary, didn't she delete emails and scrub her personal server? Doesn't that constitute "intention and obstruction"? While the Hillary and Trump cases may be apples and oranges, the fact the DoJ went out of their way to NOT prosecute her does give at least a shred of credence to the Trump defenders' claims of a double standard. Certainly from a political perspective, if not a legal one.
If I recall correctly, that was about her deleting supposedly personal emails off her personal server with the BleachBit app. That didn't have to do with classified material (a separate matter). I believe the allegation from Republicans was that she wanted to hide potentially damning private emails, possibly related to the Clinton Foundation (which wouldn't surprise me in the least).
Don't get me wrong, she did a lot of improper (and really weird) stuff. And again, I think she should have been prosecuted for mishandling classified information. But I don't believe the email-deleting stuff was ever thought to be criminal. Just suggestive of other corruption.
Get Trump by way of proving espionage without material evidence of damage. Get Trump without proving malicious intent. Get Trump where no reasonable prosecutor would charge Deep State’s friend, but will charge its political enemy. Get Trump where sloppy housekeeping is willful mishandling of class’d docs, and where Clinton destroying state’s evidence is gross negligence. Get Trump where an Expatriot judge from a country whose government confiscates its citizens’ farmland passes judgment for Deep State’s case. Get Trump on the same day the FBI discloses docs confirming foreign money transfers to Biden entities so as to shade its impact. Get Trump, as the protagonist of all things in this Stack’s opinion pieces. Get Trump so as to appease the DC country club where whose bread they eat is whose song they sing. Get Trump, so a DC insider with a better personality and controlled by donors can facilitate their well being. Get Trump, so as to get rid of the obnoxious load mouth notwithstanding superior well being metrics during his administration. Get Trump where personality is more important than policy. Get Trump, Get Trump, Get Trump.
Let Trump commit literally any crime he wants to, no matter how serious or damaging to the country, for no other reason than the desperate love you feel for him. Love Trump, Worship Trump, Serve Trump.
Do not love Trump. Do like the obnoxious style of wrecking the DC Country club. Get me a polite DC club wrecker, and we’ll talk.
And by DC Country Club, you of course mean the U.S Constitution, our peaceful transfer of power, and our top national security secrets.
Defending such violations comes from love. It sure as heck doesn't come from patriotism.
Yea suspend it. Like its suspension during Covid to force dubious voting methods.
>> Yea suspend it.
All because you love Trump.
>>Like its suspension during Covid to force dubious voting methods.
Didn't happen, of course.
Constitution, what’s that? The one where efforts are made to make the Federal City a state ? Or the one where they want to expand the Supreme Court to achieve judicial governance ? Or the one where it’s circumvented due to contrived emergencies? No, more importantly, - the self feeding, never ending, career affirming political apparatus that exists in DC. The #1 Real Estate market is in and around DC, The Great DC Country Club.
>>Constitution, what’s that?
That thing you're totally cool with Trump suspending, out of the love you have for him, while rationalizing your servility with a bunch of non sequiturs.
Trump loves chaos. It needs to it to remain relevant. Unfortunately his worshippers will back him 100% no matter what.