Clinton email decision seen as lifeline for those facing similar charges.
re: Chelsea Manning’s lawyers seek answers after apparent suicide attempt is being held for violating the Espionage Act and the papers she took were NOT considered secret!!!!!
Recommendation to let Hillary Clinton off the hook may reverberate, lawyers say
‘Hypocrisy’ exists between treatment of senior and lower-level officials, some say.
A RIGGED SYSTEM
OF THE 1% BY THE 1% FOR THE 1%
JUST LIKE WHEN Larry Summers explains Washington to Elizabeth Warren in one sentence:
“In the spring of 2009, after the panel issued its third report, critical of the bailout, Larry Summers took Warren out to dinner in Washington and, she recalls, told her that she had a choice to make. She could be an insider or an outsider, but if she was going to be an insider she needed to understand one unbreakable rule about insiders: ‘They don’t criticize other insiders.’“
A system that accords treatment based on who someone is, rather than what they’ve done, is the opposite of one conducted under the rule of law. It is, instead, one of systemic privilege.
Questions that surround Snowden’s motives and rationale over his decision to violate his oath.
But What About
– HILLARY CLINTON’S OATH?
– Petraeus’ OATH?
– Joe Biden’s Oath?
– General Keith Alexander Oath?
– James Clapper’s Oath?
– What about Obama’s Oath?
WORK AROUND Clinton’s FBI interview was not recorded or under oath
Hillary Clinton did not swear an oath to tell the truth before meeting with the FBI for three and a half hours last weekend, and the interview was not recorded, FBI Director James Comey told House lawmakers on Thursday. The lack of a sworn oath does not remove the possibility of criminal penalties against Clinton if she lied to the FBI, though he said he had “no basis to conclude” that she was untruthful. ADVERTISEMENT “Still a crime to lie to us,” Comey told the House Oversight Committee. FBI policy is not to record interviews as part of its investigations. Yet the revelations will nonetheless raise questions among Republicans, who have been skeptical of the FBI’s investigation and have demanded to see the transcript of the former secretary of State’s interview.
Comey cited “the context of a person’s actions” and her “intent.” Hillary showed no “intent.” We guess that she accidentally installed a server in her home, then accidentally wiped it clean during an investigation.
LIVE VIDEO FBI Director James Comey testified at a hearing on the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email servers while serving as secretary of state, as well as the decision to not recommend criminal charges against her.
By Tim Johnson and Marisa Taylor
McClatchy Washington Bureau
The FBI recommendation not to prosecute Hillary Clinton and her staff on charges of mishandling classified information will give those accused of flouting national security rules a new line of defense even as it highlights a dual standard in how senior government officials are treated, several experts said Wednesday.
FBI Director James Comey recommended Tuesday that no charges be filed against Clinton or her team for their handling of classified information while she was secretary of state, even though she was “extremely careless” in using a private email address and servers. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced Wednesday that she agreed with Comey’s assessment.
Lawyers who specialize in representing government and military officials who’ve had security clearances revoked said Comey’s recommendation offered them a new tactic in seeking to rehabilitate their clients, especially if Clinton is elected president in November.
“I intend to use the Hillary defense,” said Sean M. Bigley, a lawyer whose firm handles dozens of cases a year involving national security clearances. “I really question how any agency can say someone is a security risk if the president of the United States did something similar.”
He added, “We’ve had people lose 20-year careers for doing less than what she did.”
Mark F. Riley, a former military intelligence officer who became a lawyer defending those accused of national security violations, said he, too, would invoke the Clinton recommendation. “I’m going to use it every chance I get, particularly in oral arguments. I’m going to bring it up over and over and over,” Riley said, adding that he thinks Clinton and her team engaged in “an egregious, egregious security violation.” “Any other person would have had their security clearance revoked,” he said. “A lot of people will think, ‘She’s getting away with it. I’ll chance it,’ ” Riley said. “We’re going to have more problems.”
We have the Petraeus ceiling and the Clinton floor. We have a new standard as to what comprises intent with respect to criminal cases. lawyer Mark Zaid
Security Clearance Lawyers Association, a legal group in the Washington area
National security lawyers, however, said the recommendation on Clinton’s email use was likely to affect far more than the election, including possibly the behavior of those with security clearances.