Didn't Hillary sign an affidavit under threat of perjury?:Lost emails from Clinton server discovered

[NWCorona]

"Clinton’s presidential campaign has previously claimed that the former top diplomat did not use her personal "clintonemail.com" account before March 2009, weeks after she was sworn in as secretary of State.
But on Thursday, the watchdog group Judicial Watch released one message from Feb. 13, 2009, in which Mills communicated with Clinton on the account to discuss the National Security Agency’s (NSA) efforts to produce a secure BlackBerry device for her to use as secretary of State.

The discovery is likely to renew questions about Clinton’s narrative about her use of the private email server, which has come under scrutiny."

I wonder about that signed letter stating that everything has been turned over. That was under threat of perjury.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/274230-lost-emails-discovered-from-clintons-server

[Fairgo]

1. Good point

It would appear prima facie...but since the rule of law is now a bendy, stretchy thing...I'm guessing that this can be thrown on the pile of other transgressions dismissed under the "Whoopsie Daisy!" defence.

[NWCorona]

3. Yup!

Hillary already built in her plausible deniability defense but still.

[cosmicone]

2. Meh... that dead horse has been beaten enough n/t

[NWCorona]

4. What 🐴 is that?

The emails or apparent act of perjury?

[ladjf]

6. It must not have been beaten effectively. She's still walking around free and

is on the verge of becoming one of the most powerful people on Earth. Not bad for an "Artful Dodger".

[Human101948]

15. yeah Nixon did something similar....committed treason and still gained the White House...

The new release of extended versions of Nixon's papers now confirms this long-standing belief, usually dismissed as a "conspiracy theory" by Republican conservatives. Now it has been substantiated by none other than right-wing columnist George Will.

Nixon's newly revealed records show for certain that in 1968, as a presidential candidate, he ordered Anna Chennault, his liaison to the South Vietnam government, to persuade them to refuse a cease-fire being brokered by President Lyndon Johnson.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-vietnam-treason

Of course, I am not suggesting that Hillary's evasions are equivalent.

[ladjf]

18. Only with the revealed hard copy video taped information and the fact that

George Wallace told Nixon that he and his supporters weren't going to support him in his hour of crises
did Nixon resign. Remember his famous words "I'm not a crook".

Romney "bit the dust" when the video of his telling words did him in.

Cops that have broken laws are finally getting their "come up-pings" by way of videos.

But in all of these cases, the tapes were more flukes than part of a real security system to monitor
the behavior of OUR officials. Currently all of the money is being spend on monitoring US. costing
untold billions of dollars.

[revbones]

52. Truth? Yes she has beaten the truth enough. Maybe it should see the light of day now... nt

[Bill USA]

5. Judicial Watch: Rabid Right Noise machine favored by GOP Disinformation mills and GOPers 4 Bernie

[NWCorona]

7. But those emails uncovered done lie tho

[Bill USA]

20. what is the meaning of what is in the emails?

"to discuss the National Security Agency’s (NSA) efforts to produce a secure BlackBerry device for her to use as secretary of State."

Does "efforts" mean there is something immediately available? Is that what you are claiming?

I mean what is "to discuss the National Security Agency’s (NSA) efforts to produce a secure BlackBerry device for her to use as secretary of State." ... supposed to mean?

[NWCorona]

23. Did you read the link?

It's not the meaning of the emails it's there existence I two ways significantly.

She signed a letter saying she turned over EVERY EMAIL that was work related. This was ordered by the judge under penalty of perjury.

And secondly this means that there is yet another gap in her emails and this is the reason my first point came up.

This is a huge issue.

[Bill USA]

24. EXPERTS SEE LITTLE CHANCE OF CHARGES IN CLINTON EMAIL CASE - I know RWrs & Bernie minions don't like

.. to hear this but it's true. Only fascists and Bernie supporters keep hoping their wish will come true.


EXPERTS SEE LITTLE CHANCE OF CHARGES IN CLINTON EMAIL CASE

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Asked earlier this month whether she'd be indicted over her use of a private email server as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton responded, "It's not going to happen."

Though Republicans characterized her response as hubris, several legal experts interviewed by The Associated Press agreed with the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The relatively few laws that govern the handling of classified materials were generally written to cover spies, leakers and those who illegally retain such information, such as at home. Though the view is not unanimous, several lawyers who specialize in this area said it's a stretch to apply existing statutes to a former cabinet secretary whose communication of sensitive materials was with aides - not a national enemy.

During her tenure as the nation's top diplomat between 2009 and 2013, Clinton's work emails were routed through a private computer server located in the basement of her New York home. The State Department now concedes that a small percentage of those messages contained sensitive national security information, including some later determined to be top secret.
(more)

[NWCorona]

26. Please find when that link was posted the first time here

And look at my posts

I feel my arguments are reasonable.

But why change the subject?

[Bill USA]

31. I'll take the judgements of legal experts, law professors & a former CIA General Counsel over your

.. opinion. Sorry, I know Republicans are hopin' and wishin' it to be true, but I'll go with people with the knowledge and experience in that area of the law.



Law Professor Explains Why Hillary Clinton "Won't Be Indicted And Shouldn't Be" Over Her Email Server
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/21/law-professor-explains-why-hillary-clinton-wont/209438

University of Michigan Professor of Law and Sociology and former Department of Homeland Security classification expert Richard Lempert debunked common right-wing talking points about the FBI investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a personal server for government emails to explain why Clinton "won't be indicted and shouldn't be."

Right-wing media have hyped the idea of an imminent criminal indictment over Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server despite experts consistently debunking claims that Clinton violated the law. In a March piece for American Prospect, Lempert wrote that Clinton's email use did not constitute criminal conduct, noting that relevant law says one must "knowingly and willfully" disclose "certain categories of classified information" to violate the statutes regarding the disclosure of classified information. Lempert explained that Clinton "would have had to know she was dealing with classified information, and either that she was disclosing it to people who could not be trusted to protect the interests of the United States." He also noted that heads of agencies, such as Secretary of State, "have considerable authority with respect to classified information," including declassifying material their agency has classified (emphasis original):

[blockquote style="border: 1px solid #000000;padding:10px;"]What constitutes criminal conduct with respect to the disclosure of classified information?

Relevant law is found in several statutes. To begin with, 18 USC, Section 798 provides in salient part: "Whoever knowingly and willfully ... [discloses] or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety and interest of the United States [certain categories of classified information] ... shall be fined ... or imprisoned."

The most important words in this statute are the ones I have italicized. To violate this statute, Secretary Clinton would have had to know that she was dealing with classified information, and either that she was disclosing it to people who could not be trusted to protect the interests of the United States or that she was handling it in a way (e.g. by not keeping it adequately secure) that was at least arguably prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States.

(...)

Heads of agencies have considerable authority with respect to classified information, including authority to approve some exceptions to rules regarding how classified information should be handled and authority to declassify material their agency has classified.

(more)

The Hillary Clinton e-mail ‘scandal’ that isn’t
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-hillary-clinton-e-mail-scandal-that-isnt/2015/08/27/b1cabed8-4cf4-11e5-902f-39e9219e574b_story.html

Does Hillary Clinton have a serious legal problem because she may have transmitted classified information on her private e-mail server? After talking with a half-dozen knowledgeable lawyers, I think this “scandal” is overstated. Using the server was a self-inflicted wound by Clinton, but it’s not something a prosecutor would take to court.

“It’s common” that people end up using unclassified systems to transmit classified information, said Jeffrey Smith, a former CIA general counsel who’s now a partner at Arnold & Porter, where he often represents defendants suspected of misusing classified information.

“There are always these back channels,” Smith explained. “It’s inevitable, because the classified systems are often cumbersome and lots of people have access to the classified e-mails or cables.” People who need quick guidance about a sensitive matter often pick up the phone or send a message on an open system. They shouldn’t, but they do.

“It’s common knowledge that the classified communications system is impossible and isn’t used,” said one former high-level Justice Department official. Several former prosecutors said flatly that such sloppy, unauthorized practices, although technically violations of law, wouldn’t normally lead to criminal cases.
(more)

[NWCorona]

33. I'm not going to touch the mediamatters link

But the other one was written in August of last year. The developments since then are highly relevant. Besides that whole argument boils down to everyone does it with out addressing the three other investigations that doesn't even pertain to that issue. Besides the FBI wouldn't have that many agents working for nothing.

So now can we talk about the issues in this post? It's completely outside the scope of what you are talking about.

[Bill USA]

56. I realize REpublicans are fearful of mediamatters since it was created by David Brock who was once a

Conservative 'hit-man' going after the Clinton's. In the book 'Blinded by the Right" Brock tells his story of being a character assassin for the Republicans and his eventual waking up to what he was doing and finding a more honest and healthy way of living.

Brock is one of the best at pointing out the disinformation efforts of the Republican Noise Machine (his second book on the Right Wing Disinformation Infrastructure).

[NWCorona]

59. It's not fear

Brock destroyed Anita Hill. He gets no clicks

[Bill USA]

63. the GOP hate/fear Brock BECAUSE he was formerly part of their character assassination team who

went after anybody the GOP wanted 'taken out'.

"As a young journalist in the 1990s, David Brock was a key cog the Republican noise machine. Writing for the American Spectator, a conservative magazine funded by billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, Brock gained fame for his attack pieces on Anita Hill and President Bill Clinton. Then, in 2002, Brock came clean. In his memoir, Blinded by the Right, Brock admitted that his work was based on lies and distortion, and part of a coordinated smear campaign funded by wealthy right wing groups to discredit Clinton and confuse the public."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/09/republican-noise-machine


Having written Blinded by the Right, and the REpublican Noise Machine he gave an insiders account of how the right wing's Disinformation infrastructure produced volumes of propaganda to destroy the Clinton's and others.

That's why the GOP hates/fears Brock.

After he turned himself around and realized he couldn't keep operating as a 'hit-man' writing falsehoods to hurt those on the GOP's "enemies list" he created Media Matters.org and Correct the Record to fight the disinformation he formerly helped create.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

39. What do legal experts say about the chances of prosecuting Bush and Cheney?

I bet there's even less chance they see the inside of a courtroom from a defendant's table so obviously that reassures us that nothing untoward occurred during their tenure.

[Bill USA]

57. I wonder how many Sanders supporters know the name: Valerie Plame. She was a covert CIA agent who

was outed by a number of slimeballs in the Bush administration. INterestingly, even though outing her was damaging to our national security (how many people arouong the world are going to risk being seen with any Americans in foreign service, serving in other countries, if they fear the Republicans may expose them by exposing U.S. covert agents - with whom they have had meetings with?) nobody was ever charged with exposing her.
But, being a Republican administration, they went through the motions of investigating the crime, but nobody was ever charged with exposiing Plame. G. Liddy was found guilty of lieing to the FBI, however.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

60. Okay. But by your aforementioned metric that means nothing bad happened.

[leveymg]

41. Bill, Sec. 798, a different statute. Felony Sec. 793 (e) and (f) do not require willful intent.

Thank you for the evasion and deflection. What you're laying out is Hillary's lawyers and campaign talking points. They aren't complete, and are misleading. Nice try, Bill.

[ky_dem]

49. She might never be indicted (and I personally think it is pretty unlikely)

But why would you want to vote for someone who was 'sloppy' and violated the law -

"Several former prosecutors said flatly that such sloppy, unauthorized practices, although technically violations of law, wouldn’t normally lead to criminal cases"

[Bill USA]

27. FLASHBACK: 22 million Lost Bush White House Emails (From Private Accounts) Triggered a Media shrug

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/03/10/flashback-when-millions-of-lost-bush-white-hous/202820

Even for a Republican White House that was badly stumbling through George W. Bush's sixth year in office, the revelation on April 12, 2007 was shocking. Responding to congressional demands for emails in connection with its investigation into the partisan firing of eight U.S. attorneys, the White House announced that as many as five million emails, covering a two-year span, had been lost.

The emails had been run through private accounts controlled by the Republican National Committee and were only supposed to be used for dealing with non-administration political campaign work to avoid violating ethics laws. Yet congressional investigators already had evidence private emails had been used for government business, including to discuss the firing of one of the U.S. attorneys. The RNC accounts were used by 22 White House staffers, including then-Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, who reportedly used his RNC email for 95 percent of his communications.

As the Washington Post reported, "Under federal law, the White House is required to maintain records, including e-mails, involving presidential decision- making and deliberations." But suddenly millions of the private RNC emails had gone missing; emails that were seen as potentially crucial evidence by Congressional investigators.

The White House email story broke on a Wednesday. Yet on that Sunday's Meet The Press, Face The Nation, and Fox News Sunday, the topic of millions of missing White House emails did not come up. At all. (The story did get covered on ABC's This Week.)
(more)

Later, when the executive office of the President was sued, the "lost" emails were magically found!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/14/white.house.emails/

ington (CNN) -- Computer technicians have recovered about 22 million Bush administration e-mails that the Bush White House had said were missing, two watchdog groups that sued over the documents announced Monday.

The e-mails date from 2003 to 2005, and had been "mislabeled and effectively lost," according to the National Security Archive, a research group based at George Washington University. But Melanie Sloan, executive director of the liberal-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it could be years before most of the e-mails are made public.

"The e-mails themselves are not what we're getting," Sloan said.

Documents related to the handling of e-mail under the Bush administration and subsequent information regarding how White House e-mails are currently archived will be released under a settlement with the Obama administration, which inherited a lawsuit the groups filed in 2007. But the National Archives must sort out which documents are covered by the Freedom of Information Act and which ones fall under the Presidential Records Act, which means they could be withheld for five to 10 years after the Bush administration left office in January, Sloan said.
(more)

[frylock]

34. It's wonderful that you guys use Bush's malfeasance to excuse Hillary's.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. Have you seen the thread about Hillary giving new contracts to Blackwater?

[frylock]

48. Unfortunately, yes.

[leveymg]

43. You want to know the biggest difference w/Bush Admin crimes: 10 year statute limitations

[FlatBaroque]

53. ...amd lest we forget, Democrats chose not to prosecute

the vast criminal enterprise that was the Bush White House. You know, look forward and all that.

[KoKo]

16. The "Party in Power" rarely investigates itself..

Last edited Thu Mar 24, 2016, 08:06 PM - Edit history (2)

That's why it was, under Bush, that "Progressive Media" had it's greatest Growth and greatest Sucess making Nancy Pelosi, Madam Secretary and winning back the US House of Representatives. We did good work exposing Bush/Cheney exposing the invasion of Iraq and what that led to. We focused on Voting Rights after the Stolen Election in Florida..and we brought up the other issues that Bush/Cheney ignored like Environmental devastation coming because of "Climate Change." Gay Rights and other issues were taken up by the Dem Party to move it to recognizing Military Service for Gays and other rights.

So...now we have Democrats in control for over Seven Years and we want to address what Obama was not able to address given his Repub controlled House and a diminishing Senate Majority. Yet, through the Obama years...Progressive Media dwindled. Progressives were told to shut up and ridiculed by Rahm Emmanuel and others in the New Obama Administration.

So...it makes sense that Opposition Party would Seize on what Dems couldn't accomplish just as we did with Bush II and every other Repub Admin.

What you do forget is that it was the RW that proved that Bill Clinton did have an affair with Monica Lewinski. And, that we Dems still didn't believe that was possible but the "Blue Dress" DID test Positive for Bill Clinton's interaction with Monica and the RW was responsible for exposing that which was necessary for us to know about.

So...we can look at this as that Both Parties should be investigating what goes on with the opposing Party and that we both over-reach (but Repugs definitely have been the worst at this) ....yet, this is what a Democracy should be about.

We shouldn't discount the Hillary Info because there is a paper trail and investigations following the Clinton Foundation and its ties to "Influence Peddling" while the former President's Wife was serving in US Govt. as SOS. This all includes Foreign Policy Judgement and Mistakes where the SOS really should be questioned about what went on between the Clinton Global Initiative and the State Department during her term.

I'd want this investigation if it was a Republican serving as well as when it is a Democrat serving.

[paulthompson]

21. hear, hear

I agree completely.

Power corrupts. I'd like to think one thing that makes most Democrats better than most Republicans is that Democrats are more willing to criticize those on their own side who have done wrong, whereas Republicans tend to close ranks no matter what. For instance, there's Ronald Reagan's famous eleventh commandment: "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eleventh_Commandment_%28Ronald_Reagan%29

Unfortunately, a lot of Clinton supporters here seem unwilling to admit that Clinton has done wrong with the email scandal, even after she admitted "mistakes" were made, and they try everything they can to sweep it all under the rug.

Yes, Republicans investigate Democrats for obviously self-serving political reasons. But sometimes that's how the truth is uncovered and crimes are exposed.

[boomer55]

8. Remember its only a crime for us little people....

[Punkingal]

9. I don't understand this. She is not a stupid person.

Why risk perjury charges?

[NWCorona]

11. I will never say Hillary is a stupid person

I put her above Bill.

I think it's a few things but what Hillary is gonna say is that she didn't have a hand in the selection and retention of the emails other than giving the order to her staff. The affidavit was explicit but still.

[Fairgo]

13. On point!

This is a very sharp and calculating person. She did not get where she is by accident. She rode Bill Clinton to the top and made her bones with the wiseguys once she arrived. She sought out the powerbrokers, made her alliances, and burnt the crops behind her.

[snagglepuss]

36. She rode Bill Clinton to the top and made her bones with the wiseguys once she arrived.

She sought out the powerbrokers, made her alliances, and burnt the crops behind her.


You a way with words! That's be a great beginning for a novel!

[Fairgo]

37. Hey! You are right...

HRC's story is like a Shakespearian tragedy. It's Lady Macbeth as Richard the III...set in "House of Cards". The screenplay writes itself.

[MisterP]

19. one word: impunity

the Republicrats have been able to do what they want with the party for 20 years: if we vote out of fear to keep the Pubs out that rewards them, if enough people just "meh" and the Dems lose, the party's activists are blamed

they have had their hands on every lever of power in the country: FBI leaks don't scare them if the run out the clock on Sanders first

[leveymg]

45. Like her lawyers, HRC is an extreme risk-taker who has gotten away with a lot. Give her the button?

I can't agree with that.

[amborin]

64. too horrifying to contemplate

[AzDar]

10. Once again... we must ask: Criminal, or Incompetent? Either disqualifies one from being POTUS...

[tk2kewl]

12. or arrogant...

...or all of the above

[840high]

35. All of the above.

[Human101948]

17. That's ridiculous! Bush Jr. was both and he was in the White House for 8 years....

Historians: Bush presidency 'battered,' 'incompetent,' 'unlucky'

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/06/bush.legacy/

[Politicalboi]

28. Comparing Hillary to Bush Jr

So it must be okay.

[Human101948]

38. I didn't compare Hillary to Bush Jr....merely pointing out that the bar is low...

for entry into the White House. Reagan did it with a smile and a shoeshine.

[AzDar]

32. Glad you recognize the similarities...however, being incompetent and/or criminal should disqualify.

[JoePhilly]

14. Better call the indictment fairy!!!!

[NWCorona]

25. It's funny that the bar has been raised to an actual indictment

When this news broke last year. The point where we are currently facing seemed so far fetched that the mere idea of Hillary having to be interviewed by the FBI would be a disqualifier. Now I'm sure that some people are actually contemplating the idea of her running while being indicted.

It's been a very interesting year.

[JoePhilly]

42. The entire thing is a RW ...

... mastabatory fantasy.

[NWCorona]

50. Please tell us how you really feel about it

[leveymg]

47. Last year, her supporters didn't even acknowledge there are any applicable rules or laws. nt

[Marr]

51. Oh god, you're right-- I remember that.

[awake]

22. Do not forget perjury was used to impeach Bill Clinton

And if anyone thinks that the Republicans will not impeach Hillary they have not been paying attention to what's going on these days.

[libdem4life]

29. I'd guess the Drafts are already in process but won't be published

until after the Primary with working drafts of some kind leaked prior to the GE.

That is, unless the PTB choose to allow her to be elected, then start the absolutely certain "investigations"...most of which have already been done. That would do immeasurable harm to our Party.

To lose is one thing. To win and put the country through the equivalent blowback of Bill Clinton's shenanigans...disaster. And there he is, every day in the White House...with nothing to do. Comparisons will undoubtedly be made to drag up the past, as well. The Republicans will be in Political Nirvana.

This is not the First Woman President I had in mind. Mired from Day 1...forget the First 100 Days.

It is absolute folly for Democrats.

[msanthrope]

30. Judicial Watch? The anti-gay legal firm?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-sues-doj-for-lgbt-bar-associations-2012-lavender-law-conference-career-fair-documents/

[amborin]

46. Kill the messenger? This is from The Hill; they are reporting on the latest development in the case

regardless of how bad JW is, they are succeeding in getting these emails released and exposing the truth;

[msanthrope]

58. Of course. Judicial Watch. nt

[amborin]

62. the truth will be revealed; it doesn't matter who succeeded in getting these emails released; they t

tell a very incriminating story

[amborin]

44. K&R just saw this; will delete my duplicate

[One_Life_To_Give]

54. Why does this surprise you?

It is not like we have not long suspected and had ample evidence that some e-mails were missing. And that those e-mails met the requirements to be turned over to State and FOIA under most reasonable peoples interpretation.

The only question we should be asking at this time is; Has the FBI found something sufficient that Comey will resign. That threat is probably the only way tis goes beyond the current dribble of inuendo.

[NWCorona]

55. I'm not surprised at all

But these emails run counter to the affidavit she signed saying she turned over everything. There was a reason the judge made Hillary sign it.

It also means there's another gap in Hillary's emails which means there's more emails out there.

[Vote2016]

61. hard to believe a Clinton would fib under oath