Hillary Clinton. Who will guard the guards?

Before I begin reading any article about politics I look to the author information. Who are they and what is their bias. Here is me and mine:

I was born and raised in NYC. My mother was a probation officer for Kings County and then Queens. Her compassion was my compass. I started working on Wall Street at a young age. Between then and now is 30 years. I am a registered Democrat but that is just an expensive logo on my shirt. If others choose another brand it does not upset me and I hope that we may have enjoyable and informed conversations. I have a good view of the visible part of the political iceberg and the largest part beneath the surface. I voted for both Bill and Hillary Clinton and Obama twice. Many of my friends have run for office, some have lost, some have won.

I am writing this post for me and sharing it with you. There was no source I could find that gave me a good understanding of ’emailgate’.  After presenting the absolute facts I do share my admittedly worthless opinion

I have recently updated this to include President Obama’s Fix interview and I have broken that into its components. In the end I leave it to the reader can draw their own conclusion. If you don’t know the specifics of her problems this is only a sparse outline:

Breaking down Obama’s discussion of Hillary and ’emailgate’ from a Fox tv interview. Obama said:

  • “…a carelessness” in managing her emails: This is chick full of legal defense from statutes that may apply. Carelessness infers no intention. Her emails is a adwfense that she was permitted to delete emails because they belong to’her’.
  • “There’s classified, and then there’s classified.” This is meaningless to anybody who understands classifications and it was meant for general consumption to soften the allegations against Hillary.
  • She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy.” Here he reiterates a possible defense to deter Department of Justice moving forward with a case. This infers her legal defense in response to certain statutes that require the prosecution to prove intent.
  • “…that there’s a carelessness in terms of managing e-mails that she has owned.” Another precise legal term that insists that the emails were ‘hers’ to delete.

If the FBI investigation suggests a grand jury they would refer the case to Loretta Lynch, the Director of the Department of Justice and an Obama appointee.

  • The FBI discretion with the course of the investigations. They could go mile wide, mile deep but that has peril risking a lower probability of conviction.
  • The investigation of Hillary Clinton and her entourage takes time. All I’s must be dotted, T’s crossed. I think the FBI will request, and obtain, at least one more immunity in advance of the referral and that will possibly go to Huma, her longtime confident and advisor.

My opinion begins…

  • Politics is a consumer item and Hillary #ImWithHer has been manufactured, packaged and put on the shelves at eye level.

It is difficult to speculate about the precise charges, however directionally It is narrower to go after her within the scope of the Espionage Act.

  • Takes her security clearance away and is non negotiable
  • Avoids problems and drawn out trials that other charges might bring such as questions of ‘who had control of the server’, ‘intent’, ‘benefit’ of corruption,  concealing and destruction of government property, the dangers of pressing a racketeering conspiracy and the light burdens of anticipatory obstruction of justice
  • Reserves the opportunity to use more flexible charges later as the Clinton Inc investigations continue
  • Gives more freedom for investigators to find a cooperating witness to help navigate the forensics of the Clinton Inc.

I expect the FBI to refer a case and for the Department of Justice to either appoint a special counselor and let Hillary’s campaign continue or to simply decline to prosecute for political reasons.

  • I expect Hillary will not withdraw her candidacy. Her nuclear option is to take her plea to the voter and put her defense on the ballot. Justice cannot be a Quinnipiac poll.
  • Will Obama pardon Hillary? I don’t believe he would and this also indicates that charges won’t be followed up on by the DoJ. He would be hesitant to absolve them for crimes preemptively (EX PARTE GARLAND) That presidential privilege has historically been used sparingly and only after investigations are mostly complete.
  • Is Hillary to big to fail? Obama’s unwarranted defense of her is troubling, it sends a message to the FBI and to the Department of Justice and is clearly interfering in an active investigation.
  • Does being Hillary Clinton constrain the ability to prosecute a criminal case against her? She has little political capital and the ‘power elite’ are opportunistic, but they will stick to her and the omniscient Clinton Global.
  • Hillary has inexhaustible legal resources to overwhelm the United States Government.
  • Her SWAT response is to go on the attack and one target is the office of the Inspector General alleging that the office has an anti Clinton agenda.

If she is charged and if we can begin the post-mortem, the greatest irony is that the espionage act is the same mechanism that the Obama administration has relentlessly and aggressively used against whistle blowers, journalists, Edward Snowden and Private Manning