Posted on 03/31/2016 9:51:16 AM PDT by Kaslin
The FBI investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's failure to protect state secrets contained in her emails has entered its penultimate phase, and it is a dangerous one for her and her aides.
Federal law enforcement sources have let it be known that federal prosecutors and the FBI have completed their examination of raw data in the case. After the FBI acquires raw data -- for example, the nature and number of the state secrets in the emails Clinton failed to protect or the regular, consistent, systematic nature of that failure -- prosecutors and agents proceed to draw rational inferences from that data.
Then they proceed to corroborate those inferences, looking for other sources to support or even to contradict them. With one exception, all of this work has been done with neutral sources of evidence -- documents, email metadata, government records and technical experts.
The exception is Bryan Pagliano, the one member of Clinton's inner circle who, with either a written promise of non-prosecution or an order of immunity from a federal judge, began to cooperate with federal prosecutors last fall.
Here is what he told the feds.
Pagliano has explained to federal prosecutors the who, what, when, how and why he migrated an open State Department email stream and a secret State Department email stream from government computers to Clinton's secret server in her home in Chappaqua, New York. He has told them that Clinton paid him $5,000 to commit that likely criminal activity.
He has also told some of the 147 FBI agents assigned to this case that Clinton herself was repeatedly told by her own State Department information technology experts and their colleagues at the National Security Agency that her persistent use of her off-the-shelf BlackBerry was neither an effective nor an acceptable means of receiving, transmitting or safeguarding state secrets. Little did they know how reckless she was with government secrets, as none was apparently then aware of her use of her non-secure secret server in Chappaqua for all of her email uses.
We know that the acquisition and corroboration phase of the investigation has been completed because the prosecutors have begun to ask Clinton's top aides during her time as secretary of state to come in for interviews. This is a delicate and dangerous phase for the aides, all of whom have engaged counsel to represent them.
Here are the dangers.
The Department of Justice will not reveal to the aides or their lawyers what it knows about the case or what evidence of criminal wrongdoing, if any, it has acquired on each of them. Hence, if they submit to an FBI interview, they will go in "blind." By going in blind, the aides run the risk of getting caught in a "perjury trap." Though not under oath, they could be trapped into lying by astute prosecutors and aggressive FBI agents, as it is a crime -- the equivalent of perjury -- to lie to them or materially mislead them.
For this reason, most white-collar criminal defense lawyers will not permit their clients to be interviewed by any prosecutors or FBI agents. Martha Stewart's lawyers failed to give her that advice, and she went to prison for one lie told in one conversation with one FBI agent.
After interviewing any Clinton aides who choose to be interviewed, the DOJ personnel on the case will move their investigation into its final phase, in which they will ask Clinton herself whether she wishes to speak with them. The prosecutors will basically tell her lawyers that they have evidence of the criminal behavior of their client and that before they present it to a grand jury, they want to afford Clinton an opportunity blindly to challenge it.
This will be a moment she must devoutly wish would pass from her, as she will face a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't dilemma.
Here is her dilemma.
If she were to talk to federal prosecutors and FBI agents, they would catch her in many inconsistencies, as she has spoken with great deception in public about this case. She has, for example, stated many times that she used the private server so she could have one mobile device for all of her emails. The FBI knows she had four mobile devices. She has also falsely claimed publicly and under oath that she neither sent nor received anything "marked classified." The FBI knows that nothing is marked classified, and its agents also know that her unprotected secret server transmitted some of the nation's gravest secrets.
The prosecutors and agents cannot be happy about her public lies and her repeated demeaning attitude about their investigation, and they would have an understandable animus toward her if she were to meet with them.
If she were to decline to be interviewed -- a prudent legal but treacherous political decision -- the feds would leak her rejection of their invitation, and political turmoil would break loose because one of her most imprudent and often repeated public statements in this case has been that she can't wait to talk to the FBI. That's a lie, and the FBI knows it.
Some Democrats who now understand the gravity of the case against Clinton have taken to arguing lately that the feds should establish a different and higher bar -- a novel and unknown requirement for a greater quantum of evidence and proof of a heavier degree of harm -- before Clinton can be prosecuted. They have suggested this merely because she is the likely Democratic presidential nominee.
The public will never stand for that. America has a bedrock commitment to the rule of law. The rule of law means that no one is beneath the law's protections or above its requirements. The DOJ is not in the business of rewriting the law, but the Democrats should get in the business of rethinking Clinton's status as their presumptive presidential nominee, lest a summer catastrophe come their way.
You’re welcome.
The sitting president.
Thanks for this. I was not aware the FBI interview were optional.
No,just F’en wrong AKA incorrect.
My point that you missed is they are too lenient on the bitch
Impeachment is part one. The big part would be removal by the Senate.
And now we know why she is running for President. Always progressing forward to avoid the crimes or sins of her past.
This does not even take into account her gross malfeasance in regard to Benghazi.
MSM reporting bias.
EVent
Remus Rodham; horse thief, sent to Montana Territorial Prison 1885, escaped 1887, robbed the Montana Flyer six times. Caught by Pinkerton detectives, convicted and hanged in 1889.”
Media reporting of event involving Hillary
The editors crop Remus’s picture, scan it, enlarged the image, and edit it with image processing software so that all that’s seen is a head shot.
The accompanying Article is as follows:
“Remus Rodham was a famous cowboy in the Montana Territory. His business empire grew to include acquisition of valuable equestrian assets and intimate dealings with the Montana railroad. Beginning in 1883, he devoted several years of his life to service at a government facility, finally taking leave to resume his dealings with the railroad. In 1887, he was a key player in a vital investigation run by the renowned Pinkerton Detective Agency. In 1889, Remus passed away during an important civic function held in his honor when the platform upon which he was standing collapsed.”
President Trump will prosecute the Hildebeast.
They’ve got her dead to rights....
If he gets too close to winning, you can bet Obama will have him arrested for something. "Inciting a riot" or some such nonsense
I love Napolitano, but so many of his commentaries are wishful thinking. He sees the world through rose-colored glasses, almost childlike. He thinks all the players in this matter are going to just put politics aside and act morally and rationally and by the book. Nothing short of an Act of God will bring any of these people to justice.
Not to worry. Bill Clinton has already established that purgery is not a serious offense, unless of course you are not rich and/or well-connected.
The law doesn’t matter in this case.
Her fate lies in Obama’s hands whether he allows the DOJ to move on this. My bet is that this is dragged out until after the election.
Democrats are never prosecuted unless they turn on the party.
James Trafficant is the last and only one that I can remember. And he was just a congressman.
Will he be a co-conspirator?
Not unless Trump is the nominee. This whole investigation is a joke, they will never indict her. The only way she will be truly exposed is if she goes head to head against Trump and the GOP treasonists are doing their utmost to protect her so she can be elected and they can continue selling out the country.
NOT this time.
There will be NO President Hillary Clinton.
Once the details of the FBI investigation into her collusion in accepting huge amounts of money through the Clinton Foundation, for political favors while secretary of State, she'll be such "damaged goods" in the eyes of the voters that it will make NO difference is she's indicted or not. She'll be an UNELECTABLE candidate.
Why do you think there are 150 or more FBI agents assigned to her case. It's gone way beyond the email server.
Even if she runs she'll get no more than 25% to 35% of the vote and that will only be thanks to the die-hard Dems.
When ALL the details of the investigation are made public, or leaked, she would not be able to be elected county clerk of East Jesus, Nebraska.
There is no law or ruling that a sitting President is immune to prosecution.
It is all Kabuki to keep the masses of unwashed from creating turmoil. Enjoy sports and TV.
If he gets too close to winning, you can bet Obama will have him arrested for something. “Inciting a riot” or some such nonsense
Assasination is more likely. And they would make it look like a right wing TEA Party group did it.
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.