This is one crazy election

From Elizabeth Warren:

https://theintercept.com/2016/...e-better-than-obama/

Three days before the Iowa caucuses, Sen. Elizabeth Warren has released what might have been her closing argument had she been a candidate in the presidential race.

It’s a thorough indictment of a rigged system in Washington that allows corporate criminals to go free while those without the same power and influence get severely punished.

The report — a 12-page booklet titled “Rigged Justice: How Weak Enforcement Lets Corporate Offenders Off Easy” — cites 20 well-documented civil and criminal cases from 2015 “ in which the federal government failed to require meaningful accountability.”


Of the 20 cases, which span Wall Street, the auto industry, pharmaceuticals, natural resources, and more, only one resulted in any convictions to executives, and that was for a misdemeanor — in the Upper Big Branch mine case, where 29 Americans died.

Warren:

“Accountability has been shockingly weak.”

“Enforcement isn’t about big government or small government,” “It’s about whether government works and who it works for.”

*****************
maybe Warren needs to add another example to include national security and govt corruption

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:

Of the 20 cases, which span Wall Street, the auto industry, pharmaceuticals, natural resources, and more, only one resulted in any convictions to executives, and that was for a misdemeanor — in the Upper Big Branch mine case, where 29 Americans died.

She left out the IRS and the VA.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...f-top-secret-emails/

Hillary For America press secretary Brian Fallon released a statement after the intelligence community announced that 20 of Clinton’s emails were too sensitive to ever be released:

We firmly oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails. Since first providing her emails to the State Department more than one year ago, Hillary Clinton has urged that they be made available to the public. We feel no differently today.

After a process that has been dominated by bureaucratic infighting that has too often played out in public view, the loudest and leakiest participants in this interagency dispute have no prevailed in blocking any release of these emails.

probably means to say "now prevailed"

This flies in the face of the fact that these emails were unmarked at the time they were sent, and have been called “innocuous” by certain intelligence officials. We understand that these emails were likely originated on the state Department’s unclassified system before they were ever shared with Secretary Clinton, and they have remained on the department’s unclassified system for years. And in at least one case, the emails appear to involve information from a published news article.

This appears to be over-classification run amok. We will pursue all appropriate avenues to see that her emails are released in a manner consistent with her call last year.

quote:

HRC has always been a vindictive, conniving bitch, corrupt in the money sense and willing to do anything for power. She is now facing the consequences of years of doing anything she wanted to do without regard for legality or morality.

Most if not all of official Washington on the Democrat Side have been willing to overlook her conduct (and Bill's as well) because they shared the power and loot.

I see chickens coming home to roost and I love it. Certainly some of Hillary's Accomplices will go under the bus, many of whom by-the-way are involved in her campaign. In the end though I expect to see Hillary indicted for serious crimes, although I am not holding my breath for a perp walk.

I would like to think so, but I doubt anything will happen to her at all, oh we'll see screaming and reporting and bloggosphere stuff on the right.

Other than that, I expect her to just waltz right off into the pantsuit sunset...

Please arrest her already....

Fox News

Official: Some Clinton emails 'too damaging' to release

By Catherine Herridge, Pamela K. Browne
Published January 29, 2016


EXCLUSIVE: The intelligence community has deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging" to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding.

The determination was first reported by Fox News, hours before the State Department formally announced Friday that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information.

The State Department, when first contacted by Fox News about withholding such emails Friday morning, did not dispute the reporting – but did not comment in detail. After a version of this report was first published, the Obama administration confirmed to the Associated Press that the seven email chains would be withheld. The department has since confirmed those details publicly.

The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton's personal server.

Fox News is told the emails include intelligence from "special access programs," or SAP, which is considered beyond “Top Secret.” A Jan. 14 letter, first reported by Fox News, from intelligence community Inspector General Charles McCullough III notified senior intelligence and foreign relations committee leaders that "several dozen emails containing classified information” were determined to be “at the CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, AND TOP SECRET/SAP levels."

The State Department is trying to finish its review and public release of thousands of Clinton emails, as the Democratic presidential primary contests get underway in early February.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, there is an exemption that allows for highly sensitive, and in this case classified, material to be withheld in full -- which means nothing would be released in these cases, not even heavily redacted versions, which has been standard practice with the 1,340 such emails made public so far by the State Department.

According to the Justice Department FOIA website, exemption “B3” allows a carve-out for both the CIA and NSA to withhold "operational files." Similar provisions also apply to other agencies.

Fox News reported Friday that at least one Clinton email contained information identified as "HCS-O," which is the code for intelligence from human spying.

One source, not authorized to speak on the record, suggested the intelligence agencies are operating on the assumption there are more copies of the Clinton emails out there, and even releasing a partial email would provide enough clues to trace back to the original – which could allow the identification of “special access programs” intelligence.

There was no comment to Fox News from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General, or the agency involved. Fox News has chosen not to identify the agency that provided sworn declarations that intelligence beyond Top Secret was found in the Clinton emails.

The State Department was scheduled to release more Clinton emails Friday, while asking a D.C. federal court for an extension.

FBI investigators looking into the emails are focused on the criminal code pertaining to “gross negligence” in the handling and storage of classified information, and “public corruption.”

“The documents alone in and of themselves set forth a set of compelling, articulable facts that statutes relating to espionage have been violated,” a former senior federal law enforcement officer said. The source said the ongoing investigation along the corruption track “also stems from her tenure of secretary. These charges would be inseparable from the other charges in as much as there is potential for significant overlap and correlation."

Based on federal regulations, once classified information is spilled onto a personal computer or device, as was the case with Clinton and her aides, the hardware is now considered classified at the highest classification level of the materials received.

While criticized by the Clinton campaign, McCullough, an Obama administration appointee, was relaying the conclusion of two intelligence agencies in his letter to Congress that the information was classified when it hit Clinton’s server -- and not his own judgment.

Joseph E. Schmitz, a former inspector general of the Department of Defense, called the attacks on McCullough a “shoot the watchdog” tactic by Clinton’s campaign.

The developments, taken together, show Clinton finding herself once again at the epicenter of a controversy over incomplete records.

During her time as the first female partner at the Rose Law firm in Arkansas during the mid-1980s, she was known as one of the “three amigos” and close with partners Webb Hubbell and Vince Foster. Hubbell ended up a convicted felon for his role in the failure of the corrupt Madison Guaranty, a savings and loan which cost taxpayers more than $65 million. Hubbell embezzled more than a half-million dollars from the firm.

Foster killed himself in Washington, D.C., in July 1993. As Clinton’s partner in the Rose Law firm, he had followed the Clintons into the White House where he served as the Clintons’ personal lawyer and a White House deputy counsel.

Clinton’s missing Rose Law billing records for her work for Guaranty during the mid-1980s were the subject of three intense federal investigations over two years. Those records, in the form of a computerized printout of her work performed on behalf of Guaranty, were discovered under mysterious circumstances in the Book Room of the private White House living quarters.

The discovery of those records was announced during a blizzard in January 1996 by attorney David Kendall, who still represents Hillary Clinton. After Clinton testified before a grand jury, prosecutors concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she committed perjury or obstruction of justice.

Despite Clinton’s recent public statements about not knowing how the technology works, at least one email suggests she directed a subordinate to work around the rules. In a June 2011 email to aide Jake Sullivan, she instructed him to take what appeared to be classified talking points, and "turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

A State Department spokesman could not say whether such a fax was sent.


Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.

Pamela K. Browne is Senior Executive Producer at the FOX News Channel (FNC) and is Director of Long-Form Series and Specials. Her journalism has been recognized with several awards. Browne first joined FOX in 1997 to launch the news magazine “Fox Files” and later, “War Stories.”

quote:

This flies in the face of the fact that these emails were unmarked at the time they were sent, and have been called “innocuous” by certain intelligence officials. We understand that these emails were likely originated on the state Department’s unclassified system before they were ever shared with Secretary Clinton, and they have remained on the department’s unclassified system for years. And in at least one case, the emails appear to involve information from a published news article.

Ahhhh.....the story just keeps a'changin' don't it?

Let's list the steps between now and when the cell door clangs shut behind HRC.

1. The FBI must complete its investigation.

2. That investigation must amass enough compelling evidence of intentional wrongdoing on HRC's part to get the matter referred from the FBI to DOJ.

3. DOJ must then refer the FBI's information to the US Assistant Attorney General (USAAG) for either DC or NY (I'm thinking its DC, since that is where the the SecState office is located, but could be NY, since that is where the server was located). That referral decision will involve White House approval by BHO, and may involve discussions with the leadership in both the House and the Senate, and quite possibly the Chief Justice.

4. Assuming it gets referred, the USAAG must present the matter to a federal grand jury. For something this classified, complicated, and controversial it may require impaneling a special grand jury.

5. The federal grand jury would then hear evidence and return an indictment (or not).

6. HRC and her legal team will file to get the indictment quashed. If denied, they'll appeal, and appeal, and appeal.

7. If the indictment stands, HRC would be allowed to surrender herself at a time and place of her choosing. Even though I'd pay a sizable chunk of change to see her being taken by an ATF SWAT team at 0245, dragged from a rat hole by her hair a la Saddam, and perp walked in cuffs to a waiting paddy wagon, that ain't happening.

8. HRC would be arraigned and released on her own recognizance or given some nominal bail (<$10M).

9. Then comes pre-trial legal maneuvering. Anywhere in that process, the case could fall apart or she could be offered and accept a plea deal (for her to accept, it would probably involve no prison time).

10. Finally, after grinding ever so slowly, the wheels of justice would see HRC appear in court.

11. Then comes voir dire trying to impanel a "jury of her peers," a jury with the correct balance of females to male (F>M), skin hue (only one Caucasian male, and that person a self-proclaimed left-wing liberal SJW, would be allowed).

12. Then comes a protracted trial.

13. If convicted, there will be appeals and more appeals, during which HRC would be released on her own recognizance.

14. When, finally, the conviction stands, HRC would surrender herself to serve some nominal time at some Club Fed location, probably the open campus facility in West Virginia.


Personally, I have zero faith in this going beyond step 2.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:

Personally, I have zero faith in this going beyond step 2.

One can hope can't they?

You can be certain any discussions will NOT involve the Chief Justice or any member of the Court. That would be most improper.

Maybe between clerks, admin personnel, but not the Justices.

As far as a Grand Jury, I assume all the Grand Jurors would have to pass security checks and be cleared for the level of materials.

This will present another interesting challenge, how to have a fair and public trial with evidence that cannot be made public.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
You can be certain any discussions will NOT involve the Chief Justice or any member of the Court. That would be most improper.

Maybe between clerks, admin personnel, but not the Justices.

As far as a Grand Jury, I assume all the Grand Jurors would have to pass security checks and be cleared for the level of materials.

This will present another interesting challenge, how to have a fair and public trial with evidence that cannot be made public.

Why couldn't the grand jury be made up of high-ranking military and intelligence professionals who already have this kind of clearance? Wouldn't that, in fact, be considered a jury of her peers...since she's been a Senator and SOS?

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
Let's list the steps between now and when the cell door clangs shut behind HRC.

Aw c'mon, let's just fit her for the orange jumpsuit and be done with it.

quote:

Why couldn't the grand jury be made up of high-ranking military and intelligence professionals who already have this kind of clearance? Wouldn't that, in fact, be considered a jury of her peers...since she's been a Senator and SOS?

Hmm, insiders as the grand jury for an insider because they've all sucked off of the government teat? No, that's not how a grand jury in a free society works.

I bet if you asked HRC about a jury of her peers she would tell you that it is impossible...because she has no peers!

Lol I might have her inmate number tattood on my ass...just because

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
Personally, I have zero faith in this going beyond step 2.

I might suggest steps 1-3 (maybe 2.5) would be enough to end her presidential campaign, especially if specific staffers of hers are also named in the referral.

As much as I'd love to see this lying bitch go to jail (where she belongs), I'll accept this whole topic simply knocking her out of the presidential race.

WH Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, today responded to a direct question about Clinton being charged. He stated that Clinton "is not a target of the FBI investigation." Based on listening to Rush a couple of days this week, he seemed to think the FBI has to either press for indictment, or lose all credibility. Right now, I'd say things don't look so good for Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills--someone has to fall on this grenade and this President and the Democrats won't let it be Clinton.

I hope this revelation burns her down.

If any other government employee had started their own personal email server for official government business (top secret or not) they would have been terminated and charged. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it is absolutely unacceptable for the Secretary of State to do this same thing and skate as if it is 'no big deal'

I an just guessing, but perhaps they always keep a federal grand jury active with TS clearances.

Such a jury wouldn't have the SAP tickets, but if needed that could happen relatively quickly.

Or they could bring testimony from the individuals with the authority and responsibility to classify these particular topics. They could testify that the emails are classified.

A number of the Clinton team, including lawyers, have already read these emails.

DoJ might also introduce the specific classification guideline documents for the associated programs.

We haven't heard much about it, but normally there would be a huge effort to purge the classified emails from any computers or servers where they may have migrated.

When HC says there were no emails marked classified, that could become a double hit. If the email is classified, not only is it improperly controlled by being on a private system, but a separate violation is that it is improperly marked.

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
You can be certain any discussions will NOT involve the Chief Justice or any member of the Court. That would be most improper.

Maybe between clerks, admin personnel, but not the Justices.

As far as a Grand Jury, I assume all the Grand Jurors would have to pass security checks and be cleared for the level of materials.

This will present another interesting challenge, how to have a fair and public trial with evidence that cannot be made public.

Why couldn't the grand jury be made up of high-ranking military and intelligence professionals who already have this kind of clearance? Wouldn't that, in fact, be considered a jury of her peers...since she's been a Senator and SOS?

Grand juries and trial juries are completely separate with different roles and functions.

The Grand Jury works in secret, to consider whether there is sufficient evidence if a crime to issue an indictment. If evidence is classified, they would need to have clearances.

The Jury in a trial is different. The trial must be public. It's job is to hear the evidence argument and charge from the judge, and render a verdict of guilt or innocence. I'm not really sure how that would work with highly classified evidence needed.

I'm glad to see the BBC running it:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35446455