Andrew Napolitano: Mrs. Clinton’s folks are preparing for the worst.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: IAMTAT

I wonder if he has a special security detail?

I imagine he got lots of heat directed his way.

I imagine they'd threaten him or try to blackmail him first...if they get desperate enough.

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I have hope that when this comes down, as far as Hillary goes, it may be a shock and awe campaign from the FBI.

I truly would not be surprised to see her hit with so many indictment recommedations, that she is literally forced out of the campaign shortly there after. Hillerites would scream bloody murder...smear campaign.. FBI bought off etc. of course.

If they only hit her with 1 or 2 charges, She could drag that out past election and still win while awaiting a court date..

Crazy times in which we live.

The secret information problem. Espionage.

The destruction of evidence problem. Obstruction of justice.

The sale of influence to Foreign Powers problem. Treason.

Once is misfortune.

Twice may be coincidence.

Three times is something else?

Multiple incidences of Espionage, Obstruction of Justice and Treason.

Hello Hillary.

a reply to: Profusion

I like Judge Napolitano, but the Obama Administration is so corrupt I don't think anything will happen to Queen Hillary.

Of course, if an ordinary person had done the same things, she would be spending years inside a Federal prison. In some countries, she would be executed for treason.

I think we're in real danger of having President Hillary -- a nightmare for us and the end of the US.

a reply to: RickinVa

It's a distraction. If any of what you said is true, in a world of justice she's ineligible to hold office. Never mind the prison term.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

US Code
Notes
Authorities (CFR)
prev | next
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

I worked with classified information when i was in both the navy and as a federal security officer.

There is no such thing as its was not classified information when it went into Clinton’s email.

When it is recorded in any way the first person that records it must put a classification on it.

Along with the classification level they put a date on it.

if the FBI looks at the original document the Email was drawn from an finds a date before Clinton sent it in a email she is fried.

Then there is the part where hillary passed things that were later classified. Hillary should have put a classification on it herself if it had ANY sensitive information at all in it.
Since the information was later classified Hillary had no idea what she was doing because she sent information without caring if it was sensitive classified information and without classifying it herself.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Kind of makes you wonder if he works for the Clinton campaign given the mountain of evidence that confirms the criminal wrongdoing. Clinton's staff is still trying to spin this and this is one of those scandals that is unspinable.


a reply to: ANNED
I can't believe this woman had OCA authority.