« " ... 22 Clinton emails contained top secret information." LA Times | Main | Open Thread 31 January 2016 »

30 January 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Col Lang,

Title 18 US Code 793 section (f)

"Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

You will note that there are no distinctions between sender
and receiver of a communication. Further that the deliberately
onerous to the prosecution "intent" clause of a full blown
espionage charge are absent.

There are also some potential FRA, and FOIA violations.

I would not be surprised if some of HRC's statements on TV
are used as evidence against her.

This would under normal circumstances be a slam dunk.

USMC 65-72
FBI 72-96



As the Trump tweet linked in Cilizza's article shows, he is going to create so much doubt about her that many working class Democrats in Florida and Ohio will swing to support Trump.

But, with Democrat seniors, unions and blacks supporting her by a large majority it's likely she becomes the Democrat nominee. IMO, Sanders has to win both Iowa and New Hampshire to remain viable.


I wonder how often one or more of HRC's underlings clipped a "classified" label from the government server and cut-and-pasted it into an email to Clinton's private server. Those folks should be savoring what limited freedom they have left, tick-tock.


If its a jury trial in Washington, won't she be able to get enough supporters onto the jury to prevent conviction?


The Borg turning on her only makes her interesting again.



I believe I said a day or two ago that I doubt if a grand jury indictment could be obtained in DC. Fifteen miles away in Alexandria, VA I could round up enough people in ten minutes to indict or convict her. Its a question of demography. pl

Kevin Egan

I don't know anything about state secrets, but I do follow the press corps, so I must respectfully disagree: the press *hates* the Clintons (the feeling is mutual, of course), and Cilizza seems to hate her more than most--he's always ready to pile on to any Clinton bad news. We'll see what happens, but I think most of the Borg turned on the Clintons somewhere back around 1993!

a a

You mean conversations between the Secretary of State and the President about, I would guess, foreign affairs, are things that might be thought of as classified?

Color me shocked.


a a

This is about systematic violation of the law on classified material. pl


Don't forget, it's 'Teflon' Hillary we're talking about here. With the FBI 'leaking' the info, such leaking can be used to taint its prosecution down the road. Maybe the FBI goal is to submarine 'Teflon' Hillary's Democratic Patty Nomination, which would knock her out of the running outside her running as an Independent Candidate.

As my good Virginia friend put it, we're talking about 'Teflon' Hillary. And don't count your chickens before the eggs hatch.



She has to keep working class Democratic voters in the general election. Seniors and union members have been screwed by the current Democratic administration. Black turnout won't be as high as '08 or 2012 even with a bunch of Remember Ferguson! and Justice for Flint! rage. The Black Lives Matter movement sure doesn't care about Hispanics (or Asian or Indians, or....) does it? Of course mentioning the "immigra...." word just gets those other voters energized for Trump.



The press hates Hilary? You aren't equating Fox with "the Press" are you? I haven't seen any hatred in Pravda on the Hudson and not in the other three networks either.


In addition to content, I have seen a few comments about the near certainty that Hillary's email server was hacked. But, I have not seen anything about security since Hillary's comment last spring that there was SS standing outside the door. I have not seen reports of exploitation either. Question, have I just missed it, or has it been remarkably silent on that front?

It would seem that every intelligence service in the world would have been beating a path to her door. Tell us NSA, how much of the traffic hops back to interesting places?



IMO, you're right. Pravda on the Hudson just endorsed her and Kasich. So, you know where their head's at.



She would be the best opponent for Trump whose unPC media savvyness would put her on defense throughout the campaign. He'll have so much material to work with. Bernie I think will be a much more difficult opponent for him.


A must read on the Clintons' corruption


Scale and complexity arise from the multiple channels that link Clinton donors to the Clintons: there is the stream of six-figure lecture fees paid to Bill and Hillary Clinton, mostly from large corporations and banks, which have earned them more than $125 million in the fifteen years since Bill Clinton left office in 2001. There are the direct payments to Hillary Clinton’s political campaigns, including for the Senate in 2000 and for the presidency in 2008 and now in 2016, which had reached a total of $712.4 million as of September 30, 2015, the most recent figures compiled by Open Secrets. Four of the top five sources of these funds are major banks: Citigroup Inc, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase & Co, and Morgan Stanley. The Clinton campaign meanwhile has set a goal of raising $1 billion for her Super PAC for the 2016 election.

Finally there is the nearly $2 billion that donors have contributed to the Clinton Foundation and its satellite organizations since Bill Clinton left office.

William R. Cumming

HRC's subordinates involved may well have problems under this section of Titlem 18!

Old Microbiologist

I agree with you completely. The law is clear and she signed a statement and swore an oath to that effect. But, so did Patraeus and he basically skated with a hand slap.

It has looked to me suspicious that this even came to the front and I had thought at the time it was to serve as a distraction from other much larger issues such as selling political decisions, lifting trade sanctions and bans, etc. for donations to the Clinton Foundation which has been very shady from day 1. Failure to file taxes, unreported incomes, lavish salaries to mother-in-law and father-in-law a former Congressman who is the worst criminal in Congressional history, among other highly suspicious activities. The Clintons carry an amazing amount of negative baggage so it defies logic the Party would even consider running her and yet this is what continues to happen. The undying support among her fans I find bizarre. She and her husband represent the absolute worst in American society and it is people like them which are pushing the US towards a revolt. Yet, they continue unabated. I sincerely hope she gets the justice she so richly deserves. But, as a cynic who worked for the military 40 years I know what not to expect.

However, we are seeing another phenomena since Obama. A rising belief that if the leaders can break all laws indiscriminately then no laws are in fact valid. This cannot end well unless some major correction occurs. The only hope for that is some wild card such as Trump. I do not like him whatsoever, but I believe he is our last hope for this correction to occur. The next potential correction will be with bonfires and pitchforks. I am hoping Trump forces a perp walk with all the criminals in our government starting with Bush and all the rest since. But, I cannot see that happening unless the people are sufficiently supportive. Perhaps this election is really a measurement of this rising unrest?

Chris Rogers

Well folks we have a saying in the Uk dating back a few hundred years that is apt for HC at this juncture in time, namely: "hoisted by her own petard." Given Ms. Clinton epitomises all I detest in modern politics, particularly the greed and need to put personal inter sys above those of the 'nation state', I'm pleased to see the wheels falling off her bid for the WH. Indeed, i'd prefer Trump as President, which is saying something given I'm very much of the left, as such my enemies enemy is my ally as they say.


I am struck by how many commenters here are attributing Hillary Clinton's actions to arrogance or hubris. This seems to be avoiding a more straightforward motivation.

Perhaps Hillary wanted to share top secret information with others (like Bill, for starters) and this was the best way to do so without leaving any of her own fingerprints. Isn't access to highly classified infomation quite a valuable commodity, for all sort of different reasons?

The nature of Bill and Hillary Clinton's marriage has always puzzled me. Perhaps the reason they have remained together is that each of them has enogh damaging information on the other to destroy him/her.


Has Sidney Blumenthal's name come up in this most recent flurry?

Margaret Steinfels

Indictment? (Even if warranted.) Wishful thinking.

On classification and top secret, I recommend the late Daniel Moynihan's thoughts on the practice: "Secrecy: the American Experience.


Dems seem to be in denial. I too would sure be pleased if Hillary, Duhbya et al got justice.

It goes back further, real wages for 90+ percent of the country haven't increased since 1978. There's a lot of frustration, fear for the next generation and anger out there. The rich get richer and everyone else does not.

Obama campaigned on Change but we got more Same. I've got no use for Trump either, but I think you're right, the swings will get wilder until we get a correction. Bonfires and pitchforks are still cheap.


Why would the Clintons want or need to share information with each other? Wouldn't it be simpler just to talk to each other rather than go through these devious manipulations if they wanted to share information?

If espionage was involved one might think of Robert Harris' novel The Ghost, about a thinly disguised Blair and his wife, who turned out to be the CIA agent running him. In the case of the Clintons, such a fiction might not involve the CIA but Mossad. When Clinton was President there were rumours that the Israelis had a spy in the White House code named Mega, and that it might be Clinton himself.


We have seen a major increase in attacks on Sanders. Look at what the Post has been doing over the last week. Could it be that the Grandees in the Dem party have concluded that Clinton is indeed toast and that the way has to be prepared for Biden by destroying Sander's credibility?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Blog powered by Typepad