Guest Post by Paul Craig Roberts
Judge Napolitano in the article below explains the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton. There are two aspects of the investigation. The original source of her trouble is the charge that she failed to safeguard national security secrets.
As Judge Napolitano explains, this crime does not require intent and can result from negligence or simply from a lack of awareness that a secret is being revealed, as in the case that Judge Napolitano provides of the US Navy sailor who was prosecuted for espionage because a “selfie” he sent to his girlfriend revealed a sonar screen in the background. An even more egregious case is that of the US Marine who was prosecuted for using email to alert superiors to the presence of an al-Quada operative inside a US military compound. The email is considered unsecure and thus the Marine was prosecuted for revealing a secret known only to himself.
In view of these unjustified prosecutions of US military personnel, the FBI has no alternative to recommending that Hillary be indicted.
Whether Hillary will be indicted ostensibly depends on the Justice (sic) Department and the White House. In fact, it is unlikely that either Wall Street or the military/security complex wants Hillary indicted as both have invested too many millions of dollars in her presidential candidacy, and both interest groups are more powerful than the Justice (sic) Department and the White House.
I do not think that Hillary was a good US senator and Secretary of State, and I do not think she is qualified to be President of the US. Nevertheless, I do wonder how important are the secrets about which she is accused of negligance. Even the one possibly serious disclosure that Judge Napolitano provides of Hillary forwarding a photo from a satellite of a North Korean nuclear facility doesn’t strike me as important. The North Koreans, along with the entirety of the world, know that the US has satellites and communication intercepts operating against them 24/7.
Many things with secret classifications are not secrets. In my career I had many security clearances. As staff associate, Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, House Committee on Appropriations, I had top secret clearances because secret weapon systems were at stake. It was a joke among the staff that many of the “secrets” were available in the public defense literature.
As Assistant Secretary of the Treasury I received the CIA’s daily briefing of the President. It was boring reading. I came to the conclusion that the CIA was not going to report anything of consequence that possibly could turn out to be wrong.
Later, as a member of a secret Presidential committee to investigate the CIA’s view of the Soviet Union’s ability to withstand an arms race, I had very high clearances as the committee had subpoena power over the CIA. If the Kremlin had had access to the top secret documents, all the Kremlin would have learned is that the CIA had a much higher opinion of the capability of the Soviet economy than did the Kremlin.
Distinguished law professors have concluded that the US government classifies documents primarily in order to hide its own mistakes and crimes. We see this over and over. The US government can escape accountability for the most incredible mistakes and the worse crimes against the US Constitution and humanity simply by saying “national security.”
In my opinion, it is the second FBI investigation of Hillary that should be pursued. This is a much more serious possible offense. There is suspicion that Bill and Hillary privatized their public offices and turned them into a money faucet for themselves.
This is a serious problem everywhere in the West. A few years out of office and Bill and Hillary can drop $3 million on their daughter’s wedding. A year or so out of office and Tony Blair was worth $50 million. As an Assistant Secretary of Defense once told me, “European governments report to us. We pay them, and we own them.”
In Anglo-American legal history, one foundation of liberty is the requirement that crime requires intent. I do not believe that Hillary intentionally revealed secrets. If she was negligent, that should be made public and should be sufficient to disqualify her from occupying the White House. What is clear to me is that the legal principle that crime requires intent is far more important than “getting Hillary.” This foundational principle of liberty should be protected even if it means letting Hillary go.
And certainly Obama should pardon the sailor and marine.
Two Smoking Guns: FBI on Hillary’s Case by Andrew P. Napolitano
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43947.htm
PCR lists a litany of problems: corrupt politicians, spies who can’t report anything solid (for whatever reason), entitled Deep State operatives who think they own other governments, massive investments in officials that bring perversions of justice. It all reinforces into a self-defeating downward spiral, because it cannot cope with reality (which doesn’t CARE how much you spent building up Barack and Hillary and Paul Ryan and John Boehner); when things happen according to consequences, all your investments go to 0 and cannot be redeemed.
Consequences can be delayed, but I don’t think they can be avoided. They also tend to accumulate, synchronize and go exponential if you delay them long enough. This will be really interesting to those who don’t have to live it.
I agree for the most part with PCR here, and almost always believe that “intent” should be required for a crime to be prosecuted. But, in this case, we are to allow clinton to just play the dumb old lady “I don’t understand this whole technology thing, so sowwy” “and her line about her server “wipe it, like with a wash cloth, ha ha ha”? She knew damn well what she was doing, and is now trying to plead ignorance.
Another point about “intent” is that its irrellevant in this case anyway. She, along with everyone else who has ever had and kind of security clearance, signed a nondisclosure agreement, and in it they acknowledge that they can and will be prosecuted if the disclose something, even accidentally. If you have a problem with that, don’t sign your name. By signing your name, you are acknowledging that ‘intent’ is not required. She was also given a brief about all of this, had it explained to her in painstaking detail.
Her intent was in the cover up. She has been trying ti hide the truth and dragging out any revelations since this whole charade started. She and Bill are a criminal enterprise for sale to the highest bidder. The only thing you have to understand is that 53% of Hillary supporters will vote for her even if she is indicted. What a country.
Bob.
In America, the Rule of Law is a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are publicly known, enforced equally, judged by independent authority in court and consistent with the natural law as understood by the Founders.
The second condition, equality before the law is an essential part of the American system of government. This equality does NOT mean that we are all guaranteed equal outcomes or conditions of life, but that when accused of a crime, we will all be treated equally, regardless of social class or position. Equality before the law has been damaged almost to the point of no return, with the idea that some institutions are too big to fail so must be given tax revenue of hardworking Americans to prevent their failure. And the idea that a 5 Billion Dollar fine for Goldman Sachs for its role in mortgage fraud in 2007 was imposed, yet NOT ONE PERSON is held accountable before the law is another sign of that decay. And the reality of a former First Lady whose list of criminal associations and neglect of national security while sitting as Secretary of State, but is very likely to be elected to the highest office of the land in spite of any high crimes and misdemeanors with which she may be charged should make anyone cringe who holds the principle of equality under the law as sacred.
It isn’t that I’m picking on Hillary Clinton; her case just is a perfect example of how far our Republic has fallen from the day that Ben Franklin answered the crowd’s question as to what sort of government the Framers had given them “a Republic, if you can keep it.” Her callous indifference to other people’s rights is well documented, yet the support for her election is barely eroded by the constant revelations that she broke the laws and believes herself to be above the law.
Someone once suggested to me that the reason the Clintons were so successful politically is that from the initial revelations about Bill’s scummy behavior in Arkansas using state policemen to guard his trysts all the way to the stained blue dress from an intern young enough to be his daughter, he appeals to the cad in people. He makes it seem like the guy who gets a little to drunk and gropes everyone’s wives might be able to be President and that appeals to many of us on a base level. And that Hillary’s single-minded determination to thrust herself into official capacity, first declaring herself co-president, then running again and again for offices for which she had neither experience nor community engagement to perform, but using her social and political connections as leverage to obliterate opponents — that kind of feminist narcissism appeals to a great number of women in this country who have been told for decades that they’ve been held out of the highest pay grades because of sexism, therefore Hillary’s determination to win at all costs is to be admired and applauded. She makes it seem like a strong woman is allowed to put up with anything in order to reach her goal, no matter what.
But in my opinion, the Clintons, more than any other of the myriad defective politicians in our country’s history, brought on the societal crisis we will face in this next few years. And again, in my opinion, it has not been so much the policy wonks the Clintons brought with them into the Executive branch of our government who have now become so embedded in the Wall Street Board – Bureaucratic Appointment (not to mention the unNews Media) swinging door treadmill that is emblematic of the corruption that destroys the integrity of almost every decent human being elected and sent to the Hill, it is the very aura of corruption that they have taught the American people to overlook because they deliver the “goods” to their constituency. When a citizenry lacks the belief that their political leaders should be ethical and honest, and only assess the monetary benefit to themselves if they sell their vote, they have given up any idea that political leaders serve anyone other than themselves and are just hoping for a morsel or bone in the transaction.
That, in my opinion, is the legacy the Clintons have given us.
With you Maggie, when all someone wants is to have the state steal as much as possible from the productive and give it to them, voting for a corrupt thief seems logical.
Lets burn her anyway. Thats what we do with witches.
No no no. Gotta pour water on them so they melt…
Poboy and KillBill… fire or ice, either will suffice in a world that makes sense, but this one no longer does.
The free shit army has grown enormous, stronger than any of us want to admit. They no longer care if Obama or Hillary or whomever is doing what is good for business, the economy, for jobs or for anyone except THEM… and when a country is populated by a majority of bloodthirsty vampires, it really is time for drastic measures.
Stakes through the heart is the only cure.
My friend is 94. He says he is all for Hillary. I gave him a piece of paper and asked him to write down her qualifications for being president. He pushed it back and said there is only one, “she’s a woman”.
We’re toast.
In this case Hitlery’s “intent” was the idea that she was somehow above the rules for the “little people” and didn’t need to pay rules, or the rule of law, any attention.
For that, I say 30 days, er ah, years in the hole.
what Maggie said, the first longer comment, that is just swell
how she put it all together that way. Agreed.
To everyone that feels sorry for HC, I don’t think
she should slide because of being female. Her crimes represent
both greed/avarice…and blood-lust/cruelty. Send her to the gallows for her
crimes, then we can start to look at the men.
Maxer’s Mom… After she hangs from the neck until dead, a stake through the heart for good measure, okay? Then burn the bitch.