This is hot off the press after the announcement of FBI Director Comey to not recommend charges against democratic presidential candidate, and former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
This is not about guilt or innocence, as a legal investigator professionally, that is a concern. This is about the appearance of impropriety and founded acts unfit for a Secretary of State or President.
- Thursday 06/09/2016 - President Obama announces formal endorsement of Hillary Clinton.
- Monday 06/27/2016 - Bill Clinton just happened to learn the AG was on the AZ tarmac and waited so he could spontaneously board her government plane and chat about grandkids for 30 minutes. She happened to divert from a trip to Aspen to Arizona. The AG and her staff in advance knew there was possibility of impropriety by either or both.
- Friday 07/01/2016 - AG announced meeting may have been inappropriate and would not interfere with the ongoing FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton. She stated, she 'fully expects to accept the recommendations'.
- Sunday 07/02/2016 - Multiple FBI agents meet Hillary Clinton at her home (not nearby FBI headquarters or any other FBI office) and interview her for over three hours.
- Tuesday 07/05/2016 - it is announced that President Obama will be campaigning with Hillary Clinton and she will be flying on Air Force One.
- Tuesday 07/05/2016 - FBI Director Comey announces a litany of violations found in the investigation (below) and recommends to the Department of Justice that no charges be filed.
He may not have recommended criminal charges; however, he did lay out a clear list of violations which clearly show she is unfit to run for or be our president - and should have been charged with.
Quoted directly from FBI Director Comey, nothing added and only reduced down to the key details:
(the full text is here - www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system
Three key quotes from this statement...
"There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."
"There is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information."
My favorite, "This is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. Those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions." - YOU would be that person charged.
This is not about guilt or innocence, as a legal investigator professionally, that is a concern. This is about the appearance of impropriety and founded acts unfit for a Secretary of State or President.
- Thursday 06/09/2016 - President Obama announces formal endorsement of Hillary Clinton.
- Monday 06/27/2016 - Bill Clinton just happened to learn the AG was on the AZ tarmac and waited so he could spontaneously board her government plane and chat about grandkids for 30 minutes. She happened to divert from a trip to Aspen to Arizona. The AG and her staff in advance knew there was possibility of impropriety by either or both.
- Friday 07/01/2016 - AG announced meeting may have been inappropriate and would not interfere with the ongoing FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton. She stated, she 'fully expects to accept the recommendations'.
- Sunday 07/02/2016 - Multiple FBI agents meet Hillary Clinton at her home (not nearby FBI headquarters or any other FBI office) and interview her for over three hours.
- Tuesday 07/05/2016 - it is announced that President Obama will be campaigning with Hillary Clinton and she will be flying on Air Force One.
- Tuesday 07/05/2016 - FBI Director Comey announces a litany of violations found in the investigation (below) and recommends to the Department of Justice that no charges be filed.
He may not have recommended criminal charges; however, he did lay out a clear list of violations which clearly show she is unfit to run for or be our president - and should have been charged with.
Quoted directly from FBI Director Comey, nothing added and only reduced down to the key details:
(the full text is here - www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system
- FBI’s investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail system during her time as Secretary of State.
- Secretary Clinton used several different servers and administrators of those servers during her four years at the State Department, and used numerous mobile devices to view and send e-mail on that personal domain.
- As new servers and equipment were employed, older servers were taken out of service, stored, and decommissioned in various ways.
- When one of Secretary Clinton’s original personal servers was decommissioned in 2013, the e-mail software was removed.
- From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department:
- 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.
- Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent
- 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information
- Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential
- The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014.
- Three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received
- One at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level.
- Found no evidence that any of the additional work-related e-mails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.
- It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.
- Did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information
- There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
- Seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received.
- There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.
- Information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
- None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning.
- Even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
- Hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account.
- Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent.
- It is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.
- There is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information
- This is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. Those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions.
Three key quotes from this statement...
"There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."
"There is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information."
My favorite, "This is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. Those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions." - YOU would be that person charged.
RSS Feed