Legal summaries of Clintonian troubles

"Activity considered to be racketeering may include bribery, counterfeiting, money laundering, embezzlement, illegal gambling, kidnapping, murder, drug trafficking, slavery, and a host of other nefarious business practices.

James Comey and The FBI will present a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice, that includes a cogent argument that the Clinton Foundation is an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic. "  Huffington Post Archive

https://archive.is/bERJ6

******

"Despite being a mostly liberal Democrat and a Hillary admirer, I’ve come to the conclusion that Hillary Clinton and her aides not only violated numerous federal criminal statutes, but may have conducted a cover up to hide incriminating evidence – the likes of which forced Richard Nixon to resign as President. This article was intended to be a quick, digestable piece to help everyone get caught up on the scandal, but I really had no idea how complex this issue was. Here is the takeaway – I believe the FBI will refer Hillary Clinton for indictment for a violation of Section 1924 and Section 793 of Title 18 US Criminal Code dealing with deletion, retention and transmission of classified documents. If prosecuted and convicted, the punishment would be some combination of a fine, a year in prison or 10 years in prison. The implications for the Presidential race will be discussed.

While you’re taking that in, you’ll be happy to know the underlying controversy surrounds an issue we couldn’t possibly be more tired of hearing about – the 2012 terrorist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi. I’ll break it to you now, and I can’t believe I’m saying this, but she actually had something to hide. And there is proof."  wordpress.com

https://informedvote2016.wordpress.com/2016/03/18/do-i-really-need-to-worry-about-hillarys-emails-yes-she-will-be-indicted-full-form/

-----------

IMO despite my endless kvetching and bitching in re the Clinton Capers you all still don't seem to have enough information.  Here is more of it than you probably have time to read.  Two things.  1.  The Huff Post article was pulled off line by the management there almost as soon as it was posted.  2.  The really long piece was written by a college student.

Comments

[steve]

I seriously doubt that Clinton will be indicted under the RICO statutes, although the Clinton Foundation as a criminal enterprise has a nice ring to it.

I have read both those articles, the first of which I thought was breathlessly overblown and I was skeptical about the second one by the college student given his lack of experience, expertise, or sources.

I hope she is indicted if the evidence presents itself, but I tend to agree with you Colonel, that the level of speculation hasn't been particularly informative, with some exceptions.

[Jackrabbit]

Clinton played fast and loose with National Security because she deemed that it was more important to secure HER OWN communications.

This was NOT a 'judgment call' on a policy issue but a deliberate choice to ignore some of the most grave obligations of her office so as to advantage herself!!

To any reasonable person, this simple fact is further evidence of Hillary's corrupt elitism and unquestionably disqualifies her for the Presidency - whether she faces legal jeopardy for her actions for not.

The State Dept IG report demonstrated conclusively that Hillary's use of a private server was NOT for convenience; was NOT approved; and warning signs (of breach) were ignored.

Do we even really need to wait for the FBI? And consider: 1) Sander's silence; 2) artful dodges from establishment pundits/lackeys.

[dc]

The college student's article was great: he sourced it well, and uncovered the labyrinth that underlies the Clinton's public service and private profiteering. It's disgusting. And, the ripped Huffington piece details how the DNC has been further corrupted by Hillary as well.

Our entire democratic system must be overhauled. Money in politics simply must be crushed out, as well as can be -- but the Supreme Court's decisions on campaign finance stand in the way. I fear a constitutional amendment on political money is the only way to fix it properly. And that's very difficult to accomplish, as we all know.

[Jackrabbit]

Other important links

Charles Ortel investigation of Clinton Foundation
charlesortel.com

Intelligence Veterans urge release of FBI information and a special prosecutor
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/05/23/intel-vets-urge-fast-report-on-clintons-emails/

[LeaNder]

I don't have much knowledge or interest in the Clinton Foundation. But I have to admit, I would have loved to watch the debate below, but forgot or gave up by now. In any case it wasn't available yet at the time.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/CF-to-be-aired

"CGI Conversation moderated by Fareed Zakaria, CNN host & Washington Post columnist

Fareed Zakaria and President Clinton were joined by an array of leaders, such as Louka Katseli, Joseph Stiglitz, Gianna Angelopoulous, Prime Minister of Greece Alexis Tsipras, Prime Minister of Italy Matteo Renzi, and George Soros to discuss the current economic climate in southern Europe and solutions to its most pressing challenges.

The conversation will be aired on Fareed Zakaria GPS at a later date.
- See more at: https://www.clintonfoundation.org/blog/2015/09/27/cgi-2015-annual-meeting-highlights#sthash.flgkGdUS.dpu"

If anyone can help me to find it. I am still interested:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/Zakaria-CNN-and-Tsipras

[Bill Herschel]

"Before becoming Secretary of State in 2009, Hillary Clinton purchased a private email server to be installed in her home in New York."

= I am the government. Let them eat cake.

You can not put a thin dime between this and the divine right of kings and queens. How many of you have email servers in your home? Have you ever thought about it? I can go on GoDaddy right now and have my own email address hosted on a GoDaddy server, or I can go to Hub.org and have an email address on a triply secure server in Panama. But in my own home, guarded by the Secret Service?

This is part and parcel with "We came, we saw, he died [giggle]". She is beyond unfit to be President. I refer you again to Yves Smith's article which enumerates the reasons not to vote for Hillary Clinton.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/wall-street-2016-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-213931

[Jackrabbit]

Hillary says that her use of a private email server was just a bad decision. But her evasions suggest otherwise: that she wanted to control the information and safeguard some of it from FOIA requests. Like her email to Chelsea after the Benghazi attacks saying that the attack was al Queda when the story that the Obama Administration was pushing at the time was "spontaneous demonstration".

>> The State Department “allowed” Clinton’s use of a private server
"Allowed" is a very loose term that Clinton uses to suggest "approved". But the State Dept IG Report demolishes this evasion. Dept policy was against private servers - even if their use might have been legal - AND several people that raised questions were told not to speak of Clinton's server.

>> Used for convenience
Server troubles, communications difficulties, and internal friction indicate that this excuse is bogus. She didn't even have the 'convenience' of a State Dept account that she could use for official business.

>> Other Secretaries of State did the same thing
No even close. Colin Powell used a personal email account, not a personal server, and only for a limited time/in a limited capacity.

>> No harm, no foul: no evidence of harm to National Security
No evidence of harm is necessary. Mishandling is illegal.

Not only was the email system not secure from hackers but she sent the email server to a company in Colorado that didn't have a security clearance!

>> Clinton will cooperate with investigation
She didn't cooperate with the State Dept Inspector General investigation and her aides walked out of an FBI interview at one point. Now Obama's DOJ is interceding in a private lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. Hillary Clinton) to prevent/delay her being deposed.

>> Clinton's shifting "nothing to see here" non-answers: 1) had no classified material on server; then 2) had no information marked classified on her server; 3) had no information that was marked classified 'at the time' AND email reclassification abuse.

>> Clinton turned over all "work-related" emails
But she did so long after she was supposed to (she's supposed to after leaving office). She did so not by reviewing emails but by searching keywords over a certain time-period. We KNOW that she missed some emails (from Sid Blumenthal). AND she (apparently) had the server 'wiped' to permanently eliminate what she deemed to be non-work-related emails.

[F5F5F5]

Thanks for these articles. Quite a descent in the rabbit hole indeed.

As a Secretary of State she was using an unsecured mobile device to access an unsecured email server from which she transmitted defense-classified information in plain text to everybody and their uncle.

Not only that, but her communications could be intercepted, and her Blackberry could be turned into a live recording device anywhere in the US and anywhere else in the world, at any time.

Any corporate employee could be sacked, and any public servant could be sacked and jailed for this. Anywhere.

I was waiting for the final nominations for the mud-slinging to begin (Trump's alleged mob connections, Hillary's alleged proclivities, etc), but it looks like plain old reality is catching up.

[HankP]

Here's a take on the author that may make you question his assertions - http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2016/05/meet-crazy-frank-huguenard-classic.html

And from Snopes - http://www.snopes.com/clinton-federal-racketeering-charges/

and an interview - http://www.skeptiko.com/277-frank-huguenard-beyond-mindbrain/

I personally would not be depending on this guy as a source, but maybe that's just me.

[HankP]

Also, as to the second guy, if you actually click through some of his links they are not proof, just opinion. For example, somewhere in there is a link "Clinton will soon be indicted" which goes to ... Tom Delay. Pretty sure he's not hooked in to the investigation.

[Jack]

Sir

It seems that Sid Blumenthal is intimately tied to the Borg Queen's potential obstruction of justice.

It also seems that the college students' lengthy write-up ultimately links the Saudi's as financiers of the extremist group in Libya that killed a US ambassador as well as one of the largest funders of the Clinton Foundation.

As several folks have noted a deep forensic investigation of the funds flows into and out of the Clinton Foundation will be revelatory. Since it may actually bring down the "House of Cards" we can be certain that every attempt will be made to keep it from the American people.

At this point it may very well require an independent special prosecutor like the guy who prosecuted Scooter to get to the bottom of the rotten corruption between big money and big government. IMO, ain't gonna happen!

[VietnamVet]

Colonel,

Thanks again. You’ve drilled right to the core problem of the corruption of the American political process. This is starting to feel like the replay of Watergate with you playing the Bob Woodward role.

If Hillary Clinton is not indicted, the system is rotten through. A sailor is facing 10 years in jail for taking selfies aboard his submarine but not the Secretary of State for setting up a private server at home that stored top secret emails in order to avoid Freedom of Information requests, Record Keeping requirements and Congressional subpoenas.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/kristian-saucier-investigation-hillary-clinton-223646

I doubt that even if elected Hillary Clinton would serve the whole four years; not with her war against Russia. If she is indicted, the Democrats have no one in the bullpen and Bernie Sanders is unacceptable to the corporatists. Donald Trump will be our next President. He really reminds me of Boris Yeltsin. The American Empire will end when he encircles the Capitol Building and Supreme Court with tanks and supporters to take control of all the branches of the government.

[Lefty_Blaker]

Colonel,

I appreciate very much you bringing this issue to the for recently. I think the combination of the two articles (although I have not read the second in detail, yet) gets to the heart of the matter in terms of why Clinton did what she did regarding the emails. She did not want it ever exposed how much she was acting as Sec of State to the satisfaction of donors to the Clinton Foundation etal. Those 30,000 "lost" emails probably had much to implicate her in such dealings. I have seen reference to this somewhere in the past weeks and will try to dig it up.

Now there is increased scrutiny of the corruption of the Clinton Foundation both on this type of pay to play deals and the possibility that it is a big slush fund for the Clintons. Charles Ortel who is seriously investigating the Fund on accounting and other irregularities states that it has had a similar level of improper accounting as did Madoff in his operation. The Clinton Foundation was set up before all the Madoff stuff came to light and it is clear that it was set up to a similar accounting (or lack thereof) standard.

In fact accounting improprieties were standard practice in the the huge stock market bubble that was big part of what drove the economy under him. When the bubble collapsed, so did all the companies like Global Crossing that had typical accounting improprieties (whose CEO was a major Clinton donor). I have little doubt that Clinton set up his Foundation thinking he could get away with similar lack of accounting oversight. And now hopefully this will come back to destroy him and his wife...

[Fred]

dc,

"Our entire democratic system must be overhauled."

Re-write the Constitution because some people currently running or holding office are corrupt? That won't solve the lack of integrity but will ensure the elimination of individual rights within our Republic.

[dc]

I was thinking specifically of money in politics, lobbying, and related lack of conflict of interest rules with teeth. That's a fairly large area of our democratic (meaning "one person, one vote") system. It would take a constitutional amendment to correct it, considering the supreme court's watering down of good governance laws.

[The Twisted Genius]

Fred,

I couldn't agree with you more. The system (Constitution) is not the problem. The sorry class of people we put in place to run the system are the ones screwing over the rest of us. If there was an easy fix, we would have implemented it. It's going to take a lot of heavy thinking and hard work to right this ship.

[K]

The pain you feel now must be profound.

Thank you, Colonel, for sticking with this.

[r whitman]

The general population views Hillary's email scandal as her using the wrong filing cabinet. We political junkies tend to overthink this and magnify what amounts to a minor matter. She is just another politician trying to control the record of her history while in office.

[Haralambos]

This is only tangentially relevant to this thread but of possible interest to many here. The BBC had a report up tonight on HC's Memorial Day speech. The BBC analyst billed it as her attempt to show why she was, in effect, the best candidate to be Commander-in-Chief of the United States. The media misunderstanding of who or what the "Commander-in-Chief" commands is disappointing, especially on the BBC. Bush the Decider's legacy lives on.

[GulfCoastPirate]

"How many of you have email servers in your home?"

I do. Of course, I build email servers for others so it also functions as a test lab of sorts. However, it's certainly not unheard of for people to have their own servers (especially small businesses which are sometimes located in homes).

While you may be able to do that with GoDaddy now you certainly couldn't 8 or 10 years ago. What you can do now is irrelevant to what Clinton did then.

PS - Not a Clinton fan. Just pointing out some facts which seem to get overlooked here quite a bit as many people seem to have the same attitude as you.

[GulfCoastPirate]

Jackrabbit wrote: "But her evasions suggest otherwise: that she wanted to control the information and safeguard some of it from FOIA requests.'

Bingo.

[turcopolier]

haralambos

One of the things I like about HC is that she generally states a distinction between the separate functions of President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. The US as a country has not a "Commander in Chief." We do not have an emperor or empress. if we did I would be silent in honor of my oath as and officer. pl

[GulfCoastPirate]

Jackrabbit wrote: "Not only was the email system not secure from hackers but she sent the email server to a company in Colorado that didn't have a security clearance!"

This is indeed strange.

[turcopolier]

GCP

You build private servers? What do you charge and would that be better than something off the shelf? pl

[turcopolier]

r Whitman

I absolutely disagree with your assertion that HC's behavior with regard to national security information is a minor matter. IMO there are a number of probable major felonies involved both involving her cavalier treatment of the law on information security and the character of the CGI. pl