Posted on 02/20/2019 3:02:28 PM PST by bitt
Former FBI General Counsel James Baker originally believed Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of highly classified information was “alarming” and “appalling.” At the time, he believed her use of a private server to send the classified emails was sufficient enough to secure an indictment to possibly charge her for violations under the Espionage Act, for mishandling sensitive government documents.
Baker held onto that belief until shortly before his former boss FBI Director James Comey made the public announcement not to charge Clinton on July 5, 2017. He said he changed his position only after arguing and discussing the situation over a period of time with senior colleagues at the bureau, to include Comey. Comey, however, had already written an early draft in May, exonerating Clinton and changing “grossly negligent,” a legal term for mishandling classified information to “extremely careless,” according to drafts obtained by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017.
Ratcliffe Questions Baker
Under questioning by Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Baker spoke extensively about the back and forth arguments. Baker is currently under a DOJ investigation for allegedly leaking information to the media and he steered clear of answering any questions regarding leaks.
“As the FBI general counsel, you originally believed it was appropriate, it was appropriate to charge Hillary Clinton with violation of the law for mishandling classified information,” asked Ratcliff, who is with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Baker answered. He described reviewing a classified “binder” containing material related to Clinton’s investigation that contained sensitive and highly classified emails she was transmitting over her semi-secured server.
(Excerpt) Read more at saraacarter.com ...
p
I'm sixty-one years old. I retired from the US Air Force after a 22 year career 21 years ago. I had a top secret codeword clearance for most of my career.
If I had done this, I would STILL BE IN PRISON at Fort Leavenworth.
Laws for thee but not for me.
--H. Clinton
July 5, 2016, James Comey...
- "Clinton and her team were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information"
- "...there was no clear evidence they intended to violate the law.
- "Although there is evidence of potential violations regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."
"semi-secured" means that the bathroom door was kept locked.
...and then received his check.
I interpreted it to mean that Canky’s frequent and “explosive” visits to that room prevented anybody, friend or foe alike, from entering.
BS
CYA
Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) , Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, joined Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures to discuss the latest developments in the House investigation of Deep State spying on the Trump campaign and administration. The liberal media has completely ignored the shocking revelation that the Obama administration and top officials at the DOJ were spying on Donald Trump during the campaign and after he was sworn into office. During the election top Democrat Party Attorney Michael Sussman met with the top lawyer of the Department of Justice to deliver the phony Russian dossier. The DOJ then used this fake political document to spy on Donald Trump and his campaign. (Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
==============================
Hillary maintained a private, unsecured e-mail server as Obama’s secretary of state and did not turn it over to the government for archiving after leaving office. Obama later lied about his knowledge of this server, the existence of which enabled Clinton to withhold documents related to the Benghazi debacle from congressional investigators.....among many Clinton underhanded activities.
Newly-revealed documents obtained by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch reveal that the Obama State Department allowed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top aide Huma Abedin to remove sensitive documents that were not to be made public records (including official “Muslim Engagement Documents”).
Judicial Watch received the records on Thursday in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that sought all DS-1904 forms completed by or on behalf of Former Secretary Hillary Clinton, Former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, Former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin, and Former Deputy Chief of Staff Jacob Sullivan.
Clinton and Abedin were permitted to remove both electronic and physical records, claiming “they were ‘personal’ materials and ‘unclassified, non-record materials,’ including files of Clinton’s calls and schedules, which were not to be made public.”
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton noted the gravity of the latest revelations, stating they showed further corruption in the Obama administration and with Clinton.
“We already know the Obama State Department let Hillary Clinton steal and then delete her government emails, which included classified information,” Fitton said in a statement. “But these new records show that was only part of the scandal. These new documents show the Obama State Department had a deal with Hillary Clinton to hide her calls logs and schedules, which would be contrary to FOIA and other laws.”
Electronic records Clinton was allowed to remove:
Copy of “daily files.”
Non-record copy of a log of calls the Secretary made since 2004.
Official and personal copy of the Secretary’s “call grid” which is a running list of calls she wants to make.
Physical records Clinton was allowed to remove: 16 boxes of personal schedules from 1993-2008 (prior to her becoming Secretary of State).
29 boxes of miscellaneous public schedules ranging from her time as FLOTUS up to her State Dept tenure.
1 box of personal reimbursable receipts. 1 box of personal photos. 1 box personal schedule.
Personal correspondence.
Daily file binders. Gift binders. Gifts (actual). Topic binders.
Electronic records Abedin was allowed to remove
Outlook contacts.
Physical records Abedin was allowed to remove (5 boxes): Travel Records Muslim Engagement Documents Newspaper Articles
Gift Archive Binder
FLOTUS “Courtesy Storage/Box Content List” Binder
CODEL Trips Binder
Menu Cards & Table Arrangement Binder
Personal Event Planner (2001 thru 2011)
“The originals of some Clinton documents were retained, such as the call logs and schedules,” Judicial Watch reports. “For other records, including material that predates Clinton’s tenure, there is no indication that a copy was made. The most significant of these are Hillary's personal correspondence and gift binders, which could reflect Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative ties.”
SOURCE https://www.dailywire.com/news/24711/obama-state-dept-made-deal-hillary-allowing-ryan-saavedra#exit-modal
=======================================
NOTE WELL--Hillary listed the removed items itemized above.....making it totally unverifiable.
If laws are to be respected and adhered to, Hillary Clinton must be prosecuted.
They avoided the meat of Clinton’s crimes by focusing on the hardware and the failure to turn over emails... By looking at it with a microscope they successfully avoided seeing the elephant.
She was selling her office (and evidently selling classified information too...) she was raking in money by the carload from everyone who needed attention from State, and they completely ignored that. It’s an email issue, a mistake anyone could make, people make all the time.
In the era of Clinton, the investigation *is* the coverup. How you focus an investigation allows them to see what they choose to see and avoid seeing what they do not want to see. Then later, when the truth begins to out, they can all say, that was investigated years ago and she was exonerated.
Most Americans who have held a security clearance know that Hillary’s felonies in mishandling highly classified information were far more than enough to charge her for violations under the Espionage Act. The minority who have held a clearance and don’t agree are America’s far-left globalist enemies and would support charging anyone other than a high-profile democrat who was guilty of the same serious felonies.
he believed her use of a private server to send the classified emails was sufficient enough to secure an indictment to possibly charge her for violations under the Espionage Act, for mishandling sensitive government documents.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We all believe she should have been charged, except for those who are afraid of her.
Originally?
Dufus!
I wish a Congresspeople knew how to ask the right questions.
1) Who did you discuss this with? On what dates/times?
2) What arguments did each individual make?
3) Did anyone ever seem concerned about the political ramification of charging Hillary Clinton?
4) Do you think she was guilty of gross negligence? Not whether a jury of DC residents would convict, was she guilty based on the evidence?
5) Is proof of intent ever necessary to establish a crime of neglect? Isn’t neglect by definition unintentional?
6) Are there other statutes involving mishandling classified information that DO require proof of intent?
7) etc.
Book. Thrown at me.
End of story.
BTTT
Bookmark
Oh yes, “Duh”! Damn straight Hillary should have been indicated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.