Hillary: Should Democrats Nominate A Candidate At Risk Of Indictment?

[Skwmom]

Analysis Of Clinton’s Legal Situation

Regardless of any further revelations that may occur in the case of Clinton’s handling of her email, Clinton is already in some legal jeopardy.

As in the case of General Petraeus, who was found guilty of mishandling classified information merely by leaving notebooks in an unlocked drawer in his house, Clinton clearly mishandled classified information by keeping emails containing classified information in a private server, without appropriate security arrangements to protect the information, and to which people without proper security clearance had access.


Democrats now face a dilemma. With Hillary Clinton as the presumptive Presidential nominee, she is at risk of being indicted for the crime of mishandling classified information any time between now and the election in November 2016.

If such an indictment were to occur in the near future, Democrats could presumably re-group and find an electable replacement, such as Joe Biden.

If on the other hand, the indictment were to occur at a later period, say, in the middle of 2016, after Clinton had effectively secured the Democratic nomination, the indictment would threaten, if not doom, the Democratic Party’s chance of winning the election, even if the Republican candidate were to be flawed.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2015/09/08/hillary-and-the-democrats-dilemma/

[liberal_at_heart]

1. Gereral Petraeus doesn't have the kind of power or money that Hillary does. She won't

face any consequences for mishandling information. She is part of the untouchables.

[Mnpaul]

39. But they do have the same lawyer

I was surprised to read that.

David E. Kendall

[restorefreedom]

2. its a fair question

but i don't think we have to worry. she's not even going to make it to the convention.

[randys1]

29. Well, that is the desire of the GOP, because they fear her the most, it is why

they have done nothing but attack her for decades now.

[restorefreedom]

44. its hard to tell

which candidate the gop wants to run against. they think they can beat hillary because.,benghazi, emails, or whatever fantasy they have cooked up. they think they can beat bernie becsuse he is a dem socialist woo woo.

so basically they think they are going to win no matter what

scary

[Warren Stupidity]

3. I think this is a fake issue for two reasons.

1. the email 'scandal' is unlikely to result in any indictments and is being fed and sustained by the GOP and the compliant media.
2. whoever is nominated and elected is going to be under continuous attack from the same Greedy Obstructionist/Fuckwad Party for as long as they are running and/or in office.

[Agschmid]

6. I agree with this.

[leveymg]

7. I partly agree with you - threat of indictment is only leverage. Hillary is more likely to step

aside as it becomes apparent to more Big Cheese that her chances of being elected in the GE have become unviable. In the end, like Pres. Bill Clinton's CIA Director John Deutch, she will likely be pardoned.

That would make a great bumper sticker: "Hillary in 2016 - She will be Pardoned"

[HassleCat]

4. How much risk is there?

The accusation of mishandling classified material is nothing but a turf war between State and the so-called "intelligence community." The real culprits are those who generated the messages and failed to classify them and attach the appropriate warnings. They're trying to shuffle blame for their lapses onto Clinton. It's highly, highly unlikely that Clinton's worst detractors will be able to come up with specific charges and secure an indictment. They're working furiously to do so, but seem to be running out of gas already. Anyway, political candidates don't allow criminal charges to slow them down, as Chris Christie is demonstrating.

[magical thyme]

36. "nothing but a turf war " No it is not. There was top secret CIA satellite data in one email.

"The real culprits are those who generated the messages and failed to classify them..."

That remains to be seen. Furthermore, that the FBI has just refused to comply with the court order to provide State with a report on its findings to date is troubling, to say the least.

It also remains to be seen whether or not her unsecure server was hacked. It's already known that her ISP, Internap, was hit in a massive hack from China back in 2011. The security firm, RSA, had data stolen in that attack.
http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/10/who-else-was-hit-by-the-rsa-attackers/

[fredamae]

5. Can't compare to Petraeus

he knowingly/willingly provided info to his "girlfriend". To the best of my knowledge-Hillary did not/has not.

I really do not believe HRC is in jeopardy of legal action unless the gop decides to do something independently just to keep crap stirred up.
This email thang, to me, is a none story/scandal/issue-it's more like an excuse to bash her in full cooperation with the corporate so called "news".

Her problems are with her own history as a "third way/New Dem" well connected, well moneyed Democrat = Trust.
All just my humble opinion.

[leveymg]

9. She sent presumed classified materials to Sid Blumenthal who isn't even in gov't

Technically, what she did is worse. At least Petraeus' girlfriend was an officer with a security clearance.

[fredamae]

12. Unless and until the Rule of Law

cites criminality, there isn't, in my pov-any "technicality and presumptions".
Were those particular emails of National Security? Were they classified at the time she sent them or After the fact?
Many "classified" items are simply keeping something embarrassing or of some other insignificant matter out of public view.
We don't know much in the context of the whole, credible, factual story really. All we know is what has been fed to us by not so friendly "corporate media gossip columns" that we no longer should/Can imo-place too much trust In.

[leveymg]

15. Under the law, presumed classified information is classified at the moment it's sent.

Hillary was trained by the Department in how to recognize and handle classified material. That included the EO which makes foreign gov't information presumed to be harmful to national security if released without authorization. 18 USC Sec. 793 makes that a felony.

[fredamae]

16. Thanks for the clarification

of "presumed classified".
I'm sorry, even as a Sanders supporter....I am not buying in to a "there being there"...not at this time, anyway. I still see this as a "witch hunt".

And seriously, if we're gonna "go there" with her...then by God there'd better be an investigation of All high ranking officials emails from congress, the senate, DOJ House/Senate Budget/Finance Committees etc-All of 'em.

[rusty fender]

22. I agree

Exactly what you said

[Human101948]

31. Does presumed include retroactively classified material?

The entire classification system is a joke anyway. Want to cover up your mistakes? It's classified! Retroactively!

[leveymg]

46. There is no legal term "retroactively classified" -it's either presumed classified or deemed

Last edited Wed Sep 23, 2015, 10:41 AM - Edit history (1)

classified (stamped). Either way, it's classified, and to retain, destroy, withhold or release such information without authorization is a federal crime under 18 USC Sec. 793.

[840high]

19. yep

[Skwmom]

21. Exactly. n/t

[AtomicKitten]

45. Her attorney also had a thumb drive of the emails.

He had no security clearance either.

[NCTraveler]

8. Glad to see this is hitting this level of desperation.

They attempted to generate a fake scandal too early in the game. Said it before, after all is said and done, the Clintons come out stronger after every right wing witch hunt. This level of desperation is recognized by people. They smell the bullshit. Time to get back to policy where Clinton is second to only O'Malley on comprehensive progressive policy proposals.

[leveymg]

10. The only ones who smell "BS" are too close to the pasture to retain their sense of smell.

[JoePhilly]

11. I thought this was about how she killed Vince Foster.

Books about the email scandal will end up in the bargain bin next to books about how Hillary killed Foster.

[leveymg]

14. This whole episode is likely to have the opposite effect.

Even Hillary admits she regrets her poor decisions on this one. She also raised the questions: was she "allowed' to do it, or will she ever be held "responsible"?

[JoePhilly]

18. Yawn.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Are you suggesting the seminal poster is still shooting watermelons in his backyard...

Are you suggesting the seminal poster is still shooting watermelons in his backyard to simulate the suicide of Vince Foster?

[fadedrose]

13. Why does the party want her so bad?

They have the patience to wait it out, and they have had her picked as No. 1 frontrunner since election night of 2012. It was announced right after Obama was named as the winner of his second term.

If it hadn't been for her supporters claiming that night that everyone wants her, that it was inevitable, has a humongous group of supporters, donators, etc., other people may have joined the race. We could have had 8 or 9 other contenders running, but for the feeling of hopelessness, did not attempt to run. Also, it is normal for the Vice President to be the natural candidate but he was pushed out long before Beau died and had no support group. How could he have? We already had a frontrunner.

Aside from rumors of Wall Steet ties, foreign donators, the Intiative, etc., not to mention talk of possible crimes to have been committed, I find her arm-waving annoying.

Just saw Jerry Brown talking to Wolf Blitzer. His advice was to watch HC as he would not put anything past her...

Let her go already to find a life with her family. Or have promises been made that can be fulfilled only by her presidency? Who knows?

[Skwmom]

20. Because she represents how they like doing busines in Washington. n/t

[LonePirate]

17. Any Democrat elected President is at risk of an impeachment trial by a Republican Congress.

[Skwmom]

23. But the FBI just declined to help out with a FOIA request

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-state-cant-help-you-hillary-emails-n431021

[Vattel]

24. Not buying it until I see evidence of some behavior that would warrant charges.

[winter is coming]

26. Everyone is "at risk of indictment".

I'm not a Hillary supporter, but that's got nothing to do with the email server.

[randys1]

27. Bash using rightwing meme and source

Welcome to DU

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Hmmmm

I will say if anybody's candidate can't win on his or her own merits maybe he or she isn't the right guy or gal for the job.

[randys1]

34. GOP is afraid of Hillary, it is why they work so hard to destroy her.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. That is empirically obvious.

eom

[PoliticAverse]

28. Someone seriously thinks Hillary Clinton might be indicted over the email issue? n/t

[Mnpaul]

40. Indicted yes

convicted no.

The Republicans will do anything to win.

[PoliticAverse]

41. Last I checked the Democrats controlled the Justice Department. n/t

[Mnpaul]

42. Libby was indicted under the Bush admin

Two Democrats from the executive branch were indicted under Clinton
One Republican under Bush 41
A whole pile of R's under Reagan

[bigwillq]

30. No (nt)

[Renew Deal]

33. This is RW bullshit

But you already knew that.

There is no risk to Democrats unless something happens after the convention. Democrats can nominate whoever they want at the convention. I imagine that person would be an actual Democrat.

[ismnotwasm]

37. It certainly is.

I've been seeing a lot of that around here lately. The FBI doesn't want to play "Hillary's email" the hearing will be over in a few weeks, her campaign is picking up steam (and endorsements) fast

So I guess people gotta go with what they got.

Oh and when I opened the article up, I was treated to a quote by Ayn Rand. FFS.

[Renew Deal]

38. Sanders falling further behind in the polls and people are getting frantic.

[McCamy Taylor]

43. Show of hands, how many Dems take their marching orders from Forbes.

This has got to be the silliest piece of oppo I have ever seen.