Posted on 03/07/2016 3:32:45 PM PST by Kaslin
Last week’s Washington Post bombshell, the news that the Justice Department has given immunity from prosecution to the former State Department staffer who maintained Hillary Clinton’s “homebrew” email server, is forcing Mrs. Clinton and her apologists to alter their media strategy.
For months it has been obvious that a serious criminal investigation of the former secretary of State’s reckless mishandling of classified information has been underway. Yet Camp Clinton has maintained that the government is merely engaged in a “security inquiry” that is focused on the physical server itself -- not a probe of criminal suspects. This has never made sense. The FBI, which has assigned many agents to the case, is in the criminal investigation business.
Plus, when the now-immunized former staffer, Bryan Pagliano, invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege in refusing to testify before the House Benghazi committee, it signaled that he feared truthful answers would incriminate him.
Now with Pagliano apparently poised to cooperate with the FBI, the claim that Mrs. Clinton is not a criminal suspect is untenable. So Clinton and her supporters are changing tack: instead of implausibly insisting there is no crime to investigate, they argue that there is no crime worth prosecuting.
This narrative was first floated a few months ago. The story goes like this: retired General David Petraeus, the former CIA director, committed a classified information offense that -- according to Clintonistas -- was far more serious than Mrs. Clinton’s conduct, yet Petraeus was permitted to plead guilty to a single misdemeanor count. Ergo, a prosecution of Mrs. Clinton over her comparatively minor misconduct cannot be justified.
When Camp Clinton first began spinning its Petraeus yarn, I explained that it relies on Anne M. Tompkins, the former U.S. attorney for western North Carolina who oversaw the prosecution against the general. Tompkins, who just happens to be a Hillary Clinton donor, exploits the aura of authority from her obvious familiarity with the Petraeus case to suggest that she is a reliable source on Clinton case -- which she dutifully portrays as weak. To note just the most obvious problems with her analysis: even when she worked for the government (which she no longer does), Tompkins never had anything to do with the Clinton investigation; and she can’t possibly know the full extent of the FBI’s evidence because the probe is ongoing and, quite properly, the FBI is not commenting publicly.
Moving right along, though, Ms. Tompkins relates that, despite his serious crimes, General Petraeus was permitted -- by Tompkins, of course -- to plead guilty to a mere misdemeanor. Thus, she reasons, it would be unthinkable to file charges -- particularly, harsher felony charges -- against Clinton, the purportedly lesser offender.
Precious, no?
The Obama-appointed prosecutor who plea-bargained egregious felonies down to a slap on the wrist for the Obama-appointed CIA director would have us view her irresponsible charging decision as the gold standard for evaluating similar cases.
And how’s this for a small world: the defense lawyer who beguiled Tompkins into giving Petraeus a near-total pass just happens to be David Kendall -- Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer.
I saw a man go from Captain to Specialist 4 for merely saying a code word I public.
Both Clintons are such simpleton. Such, I surmise, is Yale “Law”.
I would not be surprised if Loretta Lynch decides to give Hillary a pass. Lynch did it to Lois Lerner.
I’ve posted it before, and I’ll say it again: The D.C. Grand Jury, made up of Dems, will not indict the Dem candidate. This is academic, of course, because the Dem A.G. will never prepare an indictment or urge the Grand Jury to return one.
This will provide cover for Clinton and Obama, who will say that Justice heard all the evidence, granted immunity when necessary, and found no crime. Separate rules apply for the Clintons, so I would recommend that the rest of us not try this e-mail stunt at home.
Nothing to see here, folks.
The old harridan is having an out of mind experience..
Bret Baer just let Hillary get away with ‘no e-mails marked classified’ lie. And did NOT challenge her statement that all of her ‘classified e-mails’ have been classified after the fact.
Glad to see that other people agree with my theory that Patreus’ crime was reduced to a misdemeanor as cover for Hillary. I just didn’t realize that so many people were involved in both cases.
That was dumb of him. (I suppose you meant he said a code word in public?)
I sure hope so, because that’s where she belongs.
Hillary is caught.
This is the kind of defense you put up when you know you’re guilty and that you’re caught.
Hillary is destroying the Democrat Party.
Is there some Freeper legal eagle who can shed light on this? If Lynch fails to prosecute, then that means hillary will avoid going to trial. If she’s not tried now, then doesn’t President Cruz or Trump’s AG have the option of pressing ahead with trying her? It’s not double jeopardy, right?
I wouldn’t either.
Off course they won’t and that is why I don’t believe that Trump can beat her in the general election.
We are dealing with a cabinet level appointee who egregiously broke the rules. Rules which she should have been quite familiar with, but proceeded to do so anyway, likely in a pay for play scheme she wanted to keep off the books and out of official communications loops.
No investigation of her time in office will ever be complete without investigating the donations to the Clinton Foundation by heads of State and other parties and entities positioned to personally benefit from the largess of the Secretary of State or her office, or from policy decisions made thereby.
Failing to indict does not invoke double jeopardy.
I muted her so I didn’t have to hear her screech
If she hasn’t been tried and found not guilty she is still open to being charged with any crime committed until the statute of limitations runs out. IIRC, there is no statute of limitations for treason.
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.