Posted on 11/30/2010 2:26:05 PM PST by OldDeckHand
Only in the nutty 9th, and only in a fairly limited set of circumstances. I haven't read that opinion (in its entirity), but I'm not sure it's going to apply here even if affirmed by the Supremes.
Moreover, I see Assange keeps referring to "international covenants". The problem is, we don't recognize "international covenants". We only recognize treaties. I think the idea that a US court would enforce any action against Clinton, is fanciful at best.
Her problems, and Obama's problems - and frankly every administration that comes after them now - are more practical than legal. How is anyone going to have any confidence that when speaking to a US diplomat, that conversation won't be repeated on the pages of the NY Times either 6-months or 6-years later. This is a mess.
It's isn't exactly the Christian thing to do but one can always hope. For the "greater good", don't cha know?
Regards,
GtG
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.