Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Smoking Gun: Email Suggests Hillary Broke Law [Federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova: "Felony"]
Life Zette ^ | January 8, 2016 @ 11:05 AM | Keith Koffler

Posted on 01/08/2016 9:52:13 AM PST by GonzoII

The latest batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department early Friday contain what may be the smoking gun that forces the Justice Department to charge the former secretary of state with a crime, according to former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova.

"This is gigantic," said diGenova. "She caused to be removed a classified marking and then had it transmitted in an unencrypted manner. That is a felony. The removal of the classified marking is a federal crime. It is the same thing to order someone to do it as if she had done it herself."

On the June 17, 2011, email chain with senior State Department adviser Jake Sullivan, Clinton apparently asked Sullivan to change the marking on classified information so that it is no longer flagged as classified.

Clinton, using her private email server, asks for "the TPs," apparently a reference to talking points being prepared for her. Sullivan, who is using his official State Department email, responds, "They say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it." Clinton responds, "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w[ith] no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

It's not clear if Sullivan actually followed through on Clinton's orders. But if he did, it may expose Clinton to serious legal jeopardy.

"This makes it impossible for the bureau not to recommend charges," diGenova said of the FBI. "This makes it impossible not to go forward, and it certainly ties the hand of the attorney general."

Some have speculated that while the FBI may recommend charges, Attorney General Loretta Lynch might try to avoid doing so for political reasons.

The revelation also appears to put to the lie Clinton's claim that she never handled classified information on her server.

"I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time," she has claimed. By instructing her aide to send her material marked classified, it is clear that she not only may have received classified information, but that it was indeed "classified at the time."

"This means that when she said, 'I never received anything marked classified,' she in fact did," diGenova said.

David Bossie, president of the watchdog group Citizens United, said the email could become the emblem of Hillary's email scandal.

"It proves that Hillary Clinton affirmatively instructed senior staff to send classified data to an unsecured server," he said. "With that, it cements into history, much like the famous Bill Clinton finger wag."



TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 201106; 20110617; citizensunited; clinton; coverup; digenova; email; emails; hillary; hillaryclinton; jakesullivan; joedigenova; josephdigenova; server; soshillary; sullivan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last
"This is gigantic," said diGenova. "She caused to be removed a classified marking and then had it transmitted in an unencrypted manner. That is a felony. The removal of the classified marking is a federal crime. It is the same thing to order someone to do it as if she had done it herself."

1 posted on 01/08/2016 9:52:13 AM PST by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

If Hillary being indicted depends on action by the Obama Justice Department, then I can practically guarantee that no indictment will ever be brought against her.


2 posted on 01/08/2016 9:56:21 AM PST by WTFOVR (I find myself exclaiming that expression quite often these days!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

She is guilty as sin on so many issues...but they may be able to get her on this one.

If she in fact instructed someone working for her to remove the security headers and markings of a classified correspondence, and then send it unsecure...she did in fact commit a serious crime and should be prosecuted for it.

I hope and pray they do. she more than deserves it.

I still hope the undoubtedly damning evidence of her and Obama’s dealing in Benghazi some day comes out...that would send her away for 25 or more years.


3 posted on 01/08/2016 9:57:06 AM PST by Jeff Head (Semper Fidelis - Molon Labe - Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Clinton responds, "If they can't [send a document via secure fax], turn into nonpaper w[ith] no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

And there it is.

Watch for the Left to either suddenly coalesce around Bernie or find someone else to shove into front-runner status.

I want to see the actual email. Annoys me when reporters spend more text paraphrasing a document than just publishing it verbatim.

4 posted on 01/08/2016 9:57:09 AM PST by ctdonath2 (History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the week or the timid. - Ike)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Frau Braun isn't worried, she has Obama's balls on a string.

Only the CoC can give a stand down order, and only the SoS need know.

5 posted on 01/08/2016 9:57:09 AM PST by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Yep, I’m going to start holding my breath right now. The ruling elite have to follow the same laws as normal people, so she will definitely get charged.


6 posted on 01/08/2016 9:57:10 AM PST by thorvaldr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

“It’s not clear if Sullivan actually followed through on Clinton’s orders. But if he did, it may expose Clinton to serious legal jeopardy.”

I’m not a lawyer but it seems that giving the order puts her in jeopardy regardless of whether he acted on it.


7 posted on 01/08/2016 9:59:19 AM PST by Magic Fingers (Political correctness mutates in order to remain virulent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Hillary isn’t going to be indicted. The things that us lesser mortals would go to prison for, that’s the political equivalent of a parking ticket for her.

Its a non-issue. And proving she knew she handled classified e-mail and improperly resent it is going to be very hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

It may be a felony but who cares? Its the same kind of felony like lying in court. Big deal and the Clintons get away with it.


8 posted on 01/08/2016 9:59:22 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Methinks someone is leaking out false info from the FBI to draw people into the false notion an indictment is a sure thing, knowing all along it was never coming in the first place.

This can be — in diGenova’s words — as “gigantic” as the eye can see, but Loretta Lynch knows too much will be blown open about the actions of the Obama people if she indicts Hillary.

I don’t believe Lynch will even have to make the call. Look for the FBI to conclude that, while some haphazard practices pertaining to classified documentation may have occurred, any evidence it can be linked to Hillary is, at best, “inconclusive.”


9 posted on 01/08/2016 9:59:23 AM PST by ScottinVA (If you're not enraged...why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
If the Justice Dept. refuses to take this up - is there anything Congress can do?
What about a State AG (like maybe Texas)?
10 posted on 01/08/2016 10:00:44 AM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
Watch for the Left to either suddenly coalesce around Bernie or find someone else to shove into front-runner status.

They never were more than lukewarm about Hil anyhow. She was a sellout to Wall Street and banks as far as they're concerned.


11 posted on 01/08/2016 10:00:46 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

12 posted on 01/08/2016 10:00:46 AM PST by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation Continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Obammy won’t touch her. Why? He knows he will go down with her if she is indicted. Mutual destruction.


13 posted on 01/08/2016 10:00:57 AM PST by teletech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Clinton will claim that the TP’s were not classified info, just innocuous nothings intended for public release anyway, and therefore not secret. The media will parrot the line over and over, and make her accusers look foolish for trying to “make political issues over nothing.”

Put money on it.


14 posted on 01/08/2016 10:01:08 AM PST by henkster (Never elect a president with unresolved mommy issues.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

15 posted on 01/08/2016 10:01:26 AM PST by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation Continues)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

I concur 100%. Instead of running for President, she should be facing big league criminal charges.

I think it was Trump who said the only reason Ms. Clinton was running for President was to avoid being criminally charged.


16 posted on 01/08/2016 10:01:34 AM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Go after the person who actually removed the security classification, and then, as his defense, he may claim he was “under orders”, and failure to comply threatened his continued livelihood.

This gives a direct shot at the “unindicted co-conspirator”.

An unindicted co-conspirator is a person who is identified by a law enforcement officer to have engaged in a conspiracy, but who is not charged in the indictment charging that person’s fellow conspirators. The term unindicted co-conspirator was familiarized in 1974.

The publicity alone is often enough to force out the unindicted co-conspirator, or at least destroy any moral authority they may claim.


17 posted on 01/08/2016 10:01:40 AM PST by alloysteel (If I considered the consequences of my actions, I would rarely do anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

She will face the same penalty as Lois Lerner. Nothing

Laws are for conservatives, not liberal apparatchiks


18 posted on 01/08/2016 10:01:59 AM PST by Cubs Fan (Black privilege--being able to falsely yell racism and have the media fawn all over you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Was this from the New Years Eve document dump? That would be so ironic if it was.


19 posted on 01/08/2016 10:01:59 AM PST by McGruff (Still hoping for a Trump/Cruz 2016 ticket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
"It proves that Hillary Clinton affirmatively instructed senior staff to send classified data to an unsecured server," he said. "With that, it cements into history, much like the famous Bill Clinton finger wag."

And we all know how that just destroyed Bubba's presidency.

Oh, wait...

20 posted on 01/08/2016 10:02:23 AM PST by ScottinVA (If you're not enraged...why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson