OpenCDA

August 26, 2015

Pardon Me… ?

Filed under: Probable Cause — Tags: , — Bill @ 8:33 am

Clinton85OpacityOpenCdA wonders …

Will President Barack Obama pull a Gerald Ford and pardon Hillary Clinton for all violations of specific federal criminal laws involving the almost-certain compromise of classified information in connection with her establishing and using her private email server while she was Secretary of State?

If he does, will her quid pro quo be little more than to quietly accept disqualification from seeking or holding any office under the United States regardless of whether that office is elected or appointed?  Will she also agree to have her security clearance revoked with prejudice and agree to never seek its reinstatement, reissuance, or renewal?

It has been established to a reasonable certainty that Clinton knowingly allowed her private email server to be used to pass sensitive national security information which had been entrusted to her when she was Secretary of State.

Clinton then sought to conceal her violations of policy and possibly law from investigators by obliterating or destroying the information stored on the server.  That action appears to have been taken to keep the information on the server out of the hands of US investigators.   In doing that, she obstructed the Intelligence Community’s and its individual members’ duty to assess the damage Clinton did to the national security.

Clinton has asserted that she never received messages marked “classified” on her private email server.   Clinton is well aware of the national security classification markings and dissemination restrictions; she cannot claim ignorance or blame subordinates.   She has a duty to ensure her subordinates who have access to classified information are aware of them as well.  If one of her subordinates improperly stripped a document or a classified excerpt of the required protective markings, then both the subordinate and Clinton bear responsibility.

For an example of a properly marked classified document concerning Clinton’s egregious actions, see the Intelligence Community Inspector General’s memorandum, subject:  Update Classified Materials on Personal Electronic Storage Devices, dated 11 August 2015 and submitted as required by law to designated members of Congress.

As noted in the July 24, 2015, Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton’s Emails, the IG’s referral to the FBI was a security referral for counterintelligence purposes, not a criminal one.  The distinction is important.  It clearly shows determining just how much damage Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of her private email server actually did to the national security is more important than merely sending Clinton to prison.

In 1973 President Richard M. Nixon deserved to be impeached by the House and tried by the Senate for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress.  For over a year after the Watergate break-in on June 17, 1972, Nixon had repeatedly denied any knowledge of the Watergate burglary.  But then the federal court ordered the release of the Oval Office tape recording of the Nixon-Haldeman conversation on June 23, 1972, just six days after the break-in.  In that recording Nixon said, “… call the FBI and say that we wish, for the country, don’t go any further into this case, period…”.   That statement proved Nixon had not only been lying to the people and Congress,  but he had also obstructed justice by ordering Haldeman invoke the authority of the President and stop an FBI investigation.   Shortly after the release of that tape, Nixon resigned before he could be tried.

OpenCdA believes Hillary Clinton could properly be criminally investigated and tried in federal criminal court for destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy in violation of Title 18 USC 1519.  We think a charge under 18 USC 1519 would be more appropriate and more consistent with the gravity of her alleged crime than a lesser charge under 18 USC 2071.

Of course, what OpenCdA believes is absolutely meaningless.  What Attorney General Loretta Lynch thinks does matter.

OpenCdA believes that Loretta Lynch was a good choice to be the Attorney General of the United States.  However, considerable and impressive personal and professional traits are needed for an Attorney General to appropriately charge or decline to charge the former Secretary of State who is a candidate for  President of the United States for crimes.   They are even greater when the alleged crimes, if proven,  show a remarkable disregard for the national security of the United States.

We hope that during her lifetime, Loretta Lynch has supplemented her own personal traits with those of Archibald Cox, Elliot Richardson, and William Ruckelshaus.

After Watergate, the late Senator Sam Ervin said, “I used to think that the Civil War was our country’s greatest tragedy, but I do remember that there were some redeeming features in the Civil War in that there was some spirit of sacrifice and heroism displayed on both sides.  I see no redeeming features in Watergate.”

OpenCdA doubts that Senator Ervin would have found any redeeming features in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s demonstrated disregard for our national security.

4 Comments

  1. But what about those arms that somehow mysteriously ended up in the hands of Muslim extremist “freedom fighters” on Hillary’s watch? Those did some good! Right?! I mean, our foreign policy in the Middle East is working so well! There has to be something redeeming about all of this.

    (note: sarcasm is not easily detectable in the cyber world)

    Comment by JSmetal — August 27, 2015 @ 8:02 am

  2. JSmetal,

    It’s very difficult for me to find anything redeeming in Secretary Clinton’s actions which not only exposed national security information to others but also impeded the Intelligence Community and its members from quickly and accurately assessing the damage her actions did to our national security.

    Often the raw information revealed is perishable, but the revelation of intelligence collection requirements, sources, and methods can do damage that keeps being inflicted for years.

    Even unauthorized access to perishable raw information can get people killed. Here’s a hypothetical (I hope) example: The intelligence value of the travel itinerary for Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens’ for September 11, 2012, would be less after that date than before. But if someone had that itinerary and sufficient lead time beforehand, they might be able to put together a “spontaneous” demonstration in Benghazi, Libya, while he was there.

    Comment by Bill — August 27, 2015 @ 9:32 am

  3. Bill,

    It is my opinion that the Clintons should be locked away in a federal prison for their corruption, cronyism, and crimes over the past few decades. They have been neigh untouchable for that time period. It it sick to think this way, but if this is what it takes (a compromise of sensitive national security information) to get one of them in prison, or at least out of politics for good, then that would be redeeming.

    Comment by JSmetal — August 27, 2015 @ 9:56 am

  4. JSmetal,

    It’s hard to see any humor in any of this, but if either or both of the Clintons were imprisoned, wouldn’t their cellmates have to be Secret Service special agents? By virtue of being a former President, President Clinton gets protection for life. A former First Lady gets it for life or until she remarries. That was no insignificant topic of discussion on Mahogany Row at USSS Headquarters before Nixon resigned and was pardoned. Talk about a hardship assignment… It would surprise a lot of people to know that shortly after he resigned, Nixon exercised his prerogative and declined continuing Secret Service protection.

    Comment by Bill — August 27, 2015 @ 11:19 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress
Copyright © 2024 by OpenCDA LLC, All Rights Reserved