Judge Napolitano: What if the FBI Is Onto Hillary Clinton?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Jess13, Mar 17, 2016.

  1. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #1
    What if the FBI Is Onto Hillary Clinton?

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/andrew-p-napolitano/fbi-goods-hillary/

    What if Hillary Clinton is in legal hot water and she knows it but won’t admit it? What if she has decided to go on the offensive and make her case that she did nothing unlawful with her emails that contained state secrets?

    What if the essence of her defense is that other secretaries of state used non-secure email devices and thus it was lawful for her to do so, as well as the point that none of her emails was “marked classified” at the time she sent or received them? What if these defenses do not hold up to even cursory examination?

    What if the other secretaries of state to whom she refers are Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice?
    What if neither of them diverted all of their emails to a private server? What if neither of them sent or received state secrets — secrets that under the law of the land are marked “confidential,” secret” or “top secret,” not “classified” — using a non-secure email account?

    What if neither of them hired an information technology expert and paid him to divert both a standard State Department email stream and a secret State Department email stream to a private server in one of their homes?

    What if neither Powell nor Rice is currently running for president?
    What if neither Powell nor Rice has had his or her behavior as secretary of state referred to the FBI for a criminal investigation by the inspector general of the State Department?

    What if the law of the land is that a document or email contains state secrets by virtue of the information or data in the document or email and not by virtue of any warning label? What if the legal definition of a “state secret” in the U.S. is “information the revelation of which could cause harm to the security of the United States”

    What if it is the law of the land that people in the government to whom state secrets are entrusted are required to recognize the secrets when they see them and protect them from intentional or inadvertent revelation?

    What if it is the law of the land that everyone in the government to whom state secrets are entrusted receives a multi-hour tutorial from the FBI on how to protect state secrets? What if the successful completion of that tutorial is a legal prerequisite to the receipt of a national security clearance and thus the receipt of state secrets?

    What if that tutorial reminds the people to whom secrets are being reposed that it is their legal obligation to recognize and accept and understand the law before they can receive any state secrets? What if, in order to confirm that understanding, all people who receive the tutorial are required to sign an oath at the end of the tutorial recognizing, accepting and understanding the law and agreeing to be bound by it? What if Clinton signed just such an oath?

    What if Clinton had no intention of complying with the oath she signed at the time she signed it? What if we know that because we know she hired the information technologist to divert her emails the same week she received the FBI tutorial? What if she never told the FBI that she planned to divert all her emails — including those that would contain state secrets — to a private non-secure email server in her home?

    What if it is the law of the land that the failure to secure state secrets is a felony, known as espionage? What if it is the law of the land that espionage can be committed by a person who intends to expose state secrets or by a person who doesn’t care if she exposes state secrets? What if the FBI explained to Clinton on her first day as secretary of state that the grossly negligent exposure of state secrets constitutes espionage?

    What if before Clinton was secretary of state, she was a U.S. senator from New York for eight years? What if during that time, she was a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee? What if during her time in the Senate, she was exposed to hundreds of military-related state secrets?

    What if Clinton is smart enough and shrewd enough and experienced enough to recognize a state secret when she sees one?

    What if the FBI has seen emails in which Clinton ordered subordinates deliberately to avoid State Department secure channels of communications and to send state secrets to her through channels she knew were not secure? What if Clinton passed on state secrets to others who had no security clearances? What if she did so knowing she was sending state secrets from her non-secure server to other non-secure servers?

    What if Clinton sent or received more than 2,000 emails that contained state secrets? What if she authored more than 100 of them herself? What if some of the 2,000 emails were so secret that the FBI agents investigating her lack the security clearances to view those emails?

    What if Clinton did all this so that she could keep her behavior as secretary of state secret and away from all officials in the State Department outside her inner circle, away from the president and away from the American people?
    WHAT IF SHE ORCHESTRATED AND CARRIED OUT A CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE THE ESPIONAGE ACT?

    What if the FBI is onto her? What if the Democrats are not?


    Andrew Napolitano


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Napolitano

    Andrew Peter Napolitano (born June 6, 1950) is the Senior Judicial Analyst for Fox News Channel, commenting on legal news and trials, and is a syndicated columnist whose work appears in numerous publications, such as Fox News, The Washington Times, and Reason. Having served as a New Jersey Superior Court Judge, he now teaches constitutional law as a Distinguished Professor at Brooklyn Law School. Napolitano has written nine books on constitutional, legal, and political subjects.

    Napolitano sat on the
    New Jersey bench from 1987 to 1995, becoming the state's youngest then-sitting Superior Court judge.

    As a judge, Napolitano issued several notable decisions. In
    State v. Barcia, Napolitano found that random DWI roadblock checkpoints were unconstitutional under both the Federal and New Jersey state constitutions, and sustained a motion to suppress drug and drug paraphernalia evidence found at such a stop. In the case In re K.L.F., Napolitano found that New Jersey’s Frivolous Pleading Statute could be applied against the state as well as private litigants whose claims were frivolous. In Cusseaux v. Pickett, Napolitano decided that a woman who was abused and mistreated by her husband has a civil cause of action against her abuser for the resulting battered woman syndrome.

    He resigned his judgeship in 1995 for private practice. He later pursued a writing, teaching, and television career. He also served as an adjunct professor at
    Seton Hall University School of Law for 11 years from 1989–2000. Napolitano is a distinguished visiting professor at Brooklyn Law School where he teaches courses on advanced and introductory constitutional law and jurisprudence, and has begun a renewed endeavor to developing his natural law jurisprudence.


    Judge Nap

    https://twitter.com/Judgenap
     
  2. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    too many "what IF's". as much as I hate Hillary either charge her or let it go, Benghazi got stupid after a while.
     
  3. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #3
    I think if the FBI had a reason to indict, they would've done it by now.

    On a similar note, I doubt the democrats would've allowed Hillary to run in the primaries this long if that specter looming over her shoulder represented a very real threat. As much as they obviously like her, they wouldn't risk ceding the presidency to the Republicans for Hillary's sake alone if things didn't come out in the wash.
     
  4. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #4
    they might have learned from Benghazi's 7,000,000,0000 investigation & want to do things right, this one does not seem to be over & as said, keep it at ONE or TWO at the max. anything else if simply stupid as hell.
     
  5. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #5
    What if I woke up tomorrow and had a never ending shelf of bourbon or what it when I got home tomorrow my wife had a new iPhone waiting on me (shudder)
     
  6. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #6
    what if she waited a few months for the 7 instead?
     
  7. thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #7
    The scope of the FBI investigation is huge, as it also involves the emails Hillary deleted by wiping out her server during bengazi hearings - 30,000 emails- Classified Bengazi emails were found in the investigation..when Hillary clearly stated at the Bengazi hearings that there were no emails related to the bengazi event.
    so far the FBI was able to retrieve 20,000 of the 30,000 emails that were deleted.

    Then there is the Clinton Foundation that received state secrets, which is a whole different avenue of a seperate investigation FBI team - this is the conspiracy to sell state secrets, racketeering etc.. side of the investigation.

    Then there is also The Judicial Watch FIOA court case also expanding..

    Analysts are saying the FBI would probably have the case wrapped by May?
     
  8. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #8
    Then I'd have time to bring her to her senses..

    Though I do think I'll be buying her one but right now she can't figure out if she wants and s7 or 6s
     
  9. kch50428 macrumors 6502

    kch50428

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2015
    Location:
    North Iowa
    #9
    If Hillary were a Republican man, the anchors of MSNBC would be sitting in puddles for they'd have wet themselves in glee from the endless loop video they'd have been running 24/7 of the arrest and perp walk of the arrestee.
     
  10. Jess13 thread starter Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #10
    Judicial Watch, reason Hillary is being criminally investigated, just published new USG material they received on Hillary. The National Security Agency told Hillary to “shut up when she repeatedly complained, wanting to use unsecure Blackberry inside her State Department SCIF. Haha!

    JW v State Hillary BB NSA-IAD 00646

    http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/jw-v-state-hillary-bb-nsa-iad-00646/



    Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_Compartmented_Information_Facility

    A Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF; pronounced "skiff") in United States military, security and intelligence parlance, is an enclosed area within a building that is used to process Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) types of classified information.

    SCI is usually only briefed, discussed, and stored in an accredited SCIF.

    Access to SCIFs is normally limited to those with clearance.[1] Non-cleared personnel in SCIF must be under constant oversight to prevent unauthorized access to classified material;[2] as part of this process, non-cleared personnel are typically required to surrender recording and other electronic devices.[3] All of the activity and conversation inside is presumed restricted from public disclosure.
     
  11. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
  12. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #12
    The Wiki isn't wrong so much but you can have SCIF's at different classification levels
     
  13. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #13
    you mean 6+ or 6S+ or plain 6?
    I love the large screen. I have the 6+.
    going to give that to the wife & upgrade to the 7+ when it's out.
     
  14. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #14
    Not "usually." Always.
     
  15. Jess13 thread starter Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #15
    The SCIF in question happens to be highly secure, and Hillary was told by the NSA to SHUT UP.
     
  16. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #16
    6s normal..my wifes phone is a fashion accessory so she's still scoping the lay of the land with regards to which to get. I just wish she'd make up her mind
    --- Post Merged, Mar 17, 2016 ---
    I was referring to the wiki entry I just glanced over the rest.
     
  17. Mousse macrumors 68000

    Mousse

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Location:
    Flea Bottom, King's Landing
    #17
    Hillary is more of a MAN than a lot of the GOP candidates.:p Hail, she's more of a man than Bubba.:D:D:D
     
  18. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #18
    women make up their mind hourly & you are supposed to know what she meant even if she didn't spell things out right ;)
     
  19. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #19
    This is the journalistic equivalent of treason. What if Andrew Napolitano wasn't such a partisan hack?
    --- Post Merged, Mar 17, 2016 ---

    If Hillary were a Republican man, she could delete 20 million emails and no one would say ****.
     
  20. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #20
    Like Nixon deleted tape?:rolleyes:
     
  21. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #21
    No republican could ever get away with what Clinton has already stated by with, not to mention this espionage... She will be indicted when they believe they have a lock on the case, and that will leave Bernie to run against Trump...
     
  22. jkcerda Suspended

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #22
    I sure hope so, Feel the Bern.....
     
  23. Jess13 thread starter Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #23
    He’s a gay man, who’s libertarian, youngest Superior Court judge in New Jersey’s history, he teaches constitutional law in Brooklyn, and has no agenda. You’re partisan: “Must. Defend. Muh. Hillary.”
     
  24. thewap, Mar 17, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2016

    thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #24
    Actually the buck stops at Obama. Even if the FBI refers the case for indictment to the DOJ, the DOJ could refuse to indict Hillary by advisement / order of the POTUS. If and when that should happen, there will be a war of the intelligence community against the white House as no intelligence dept would ever want to work for a lawless president. (and no intelligence agency would clear the president to be able to deal with state secrets)

    Effectively the republic would be dead and the govt an outlaw entity ripe for revolution or civil war.
     
  25. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #25
    No, like the 20 million emails the Bush administration deleted. You good with that?
     

Share This Page