Yes, this is good news. But to be fair it’s not yet final.
FBI agents and federal prosecutors tasked with looking into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state have yet to find evidence that Clinton intentionally broke classification rules, The Washington Post reported Thursday.
Anonymous U.S. officials close to the investigation told the Post and CNN that interviews with top Clinton aides in recent weeks yielded no indication that Clinton willfully violated U.S. law. Longtime adviser Huma Abedin was among those interviewed, according to CNN.
“From the start, Hillary Clinton has offered to answer any questions that would help the Justice Department complete its review, and we hope and expect that anyone else who is asked would do the same," Clinton’s presidential campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, said in a statement to the Post. "We are confident the review will conclude that nothing inappropriate took place.”
The FBI investigation reportedly has been focused on the security of the server and whether classified information was mishandled on the server.
So, no violations of law or deliberate mishandling of classified information. This is consistent with the previous DOJ finding that no laws were broken by Clinton's use of a personal server or her deletion of private emails.
Of course that isn't going to keep the right wing flaps from yapping.
On that note, the latest batch of pseudo-sense comes from the DailyCaller.
Department of Justice officials have impaneled a federal grand jury in the Hillary Clinton email case and FBI agents have launched a second, separate investigation on political corruption involving the former secretary of state’s official activities and the Clinton Foundation, a former U.S. attorney told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Joseph E. diGenova, who served as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia for four years, said Wednesday he believes the FBI is investigating two separate Clinton scandals.
“The Bureau has between 100 and 150 agents assigned to the case. They would not have that many people assigned to a classified information case,” he told TheDCNF, addressing Clinton’s use of a private email server located at her New York home.
“Based on reports that agents are asking questions about the foundation, it seems to me it is the subject of a second prong of the investigation,” he said
So because Joe diGenova speculates that they don't that need many agents to check out a server — despite the fact they’ve been interviewing most of Clinton’s staff, not just verifying her checksum dump — they must actually have a second investigation going, and a “2nd Grand Jury", to look into Clinton's activities as Secretary of State and the of the Foundation operated by her husband?
First of all, there isn't a “1st Grand Jury” because the FBI probe of her server is still ongoing and they haven’t turned their findings over the DOJ lawyers for their to review and take to a grand jury. The first report I linked says that right here.
Once the FBI’s probe is complete, the findings will be turned over to the Justice Department, who will then decide whether or not anyone involved will face charges, according to CNN.
And then on top of this mythical “2nd Grand Jury” there’s also the great fax marking stripping scandal. Yes, really. It’s a “Bombshell.”
The latest batch of emails released from Hillary Clinton's personal account from her tenure as secretary of state includes 66 messages deemed classified at some level, the State Department said early Friday. In one email, Clinton even seemed to coach a top adviser on how to send secure information outside secure channels. Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, has repeatedly maintained that she did not send or receive classified material on her personal account. The State Department claims none of the emails now marked classified were labled as such at the time they were sent. However, one email thread from June 2011 appears to include Clinton telling her top adviser Jake Sullivan to send secure information through insecure means. In response to Clinton's request for a set of since-redacted talking points, Sullivan writes, "They say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it." Clinton responds "If they can't, turn into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure." Ironically, an email thread from four months earlier shows Clinton saying she was "surprised" that a diplomatic oficer named John Godfrey used a personal email account to send a memo on Libya policy after the fall of Muammar Qaddafi.
[Note: the typos are their’s, not mine, for once]
Ok, so the “thinking” here is that Hillary has a chronic problem with security protocols because when he was unable to send a fax through the secure method she recommended to “strip the markings” and send it unsecure, which some in the right-wing are having a field day with.
One wonders how many other emails and memos were improperly wiped clean of classified markings for the purposes of convenience, or what have you.
Because where there's one, there must also be hundreds after all.
Here’s the thing though, the key to handling classified data is to make sure it doesn’t get into uncleared hands. So when Sydney Blumenthal — who didn’t have a clearance — sent information to Clinton without any markings or classification that the inspector general later says “should” have been classified, who exactly was going to make that determination at the time? Certainly not Blumenthal who didn’t have the authority to designate something as “classified”, right?
All Clinton did was refer the info to her staff, some of whom may have been able to determine that the data “should have been” classified, but that is highly speculative since honestly that kind of thing — data being determined to be classified after it’s been passed around by uncleared people — happens all the time. State has a intelligence department, the INR, would someone not within INR be able to recognize immediately what should be classified and what shouldn’t in an otherwise lay-persons email? [The IG states this only happened twice by the way, and that all the rest of those “classified emails” of her’s simply were not classified at the time she received or resent them.]
The point of the law actually works the other way around, to prevent data that has been deemed classified by the professionals who make it their living to identify what is or isn’t protected and covered information from getting into the hands of people like Blumenthal — or a potential foreign or terrorist threat — in the first place.
If Hillary Clinton decided, in her executive capacity as Secretary of State, to allow information being sent by a cleared member of her staff to herself, to temporarily forgo markings that are preventing her from receiving the information and getting her job done that may have indeed violated some technical regulations but it is very unlikely to have violated the law, or the intent of the law which is preventing classified data getting into unclassified hands. [Stripping the classification for that purpose bugs me, but I’m not yanking my hair out over it.]
And all this may also be why there are leaks coming from the FBI that the current probe has so far found “no malicious” intent. I do question the timing of this particular leak, it seems strategic in light of recent events in the nomination process just as I question the leak from diGenova who is a known Republican political operative and has made numerous bogus claims about Hillary’s “Impending Indictment.”
Rush Limbaugh: "If DiGenova Is Right That There's This Mountain Of Compelling Evidence ... And If There Are No Charges" "The Purpose Here Obviously Is To Protect The Democrat Party." On the January 6 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Rush Limbaugh read from the Washington Examiner's report on diGenova's claims, parroting the argument that "[i]f the Obama Department of Justice does not charge [Clinton], it's clear the reason will be so as to not destroy the Democrat Party's presidential prospects in November. Pure and simple":
LifeZette.com: "The Mortal Threat To Hillary; Former Prosecutor Predicts Clinton 'Will Not Make It To The Finish Line' Because Of Email Scandal." In a January 2016 article on Laura Ingraham's website LifeZette Brendan Kirby reported diGenova's interview on The Laura Ingraham Show, highlighting his claim that if the FBI does not prosecute Clinton, "[i]t will be like Watergate." From the article, headlined "The Mortal Threat to Hillary":
Daily Mail: "Former Federal Prosecutor Says Hillary Could Be Indicted In The Next 60 Days." In a January 6 article, the Daily Mail reported diGenova's claims on The Laura Ingraham Show that the FBI "have reached a critical mass in their investigation of the secretary and all her senior staff":
And he has a habit of other clearly partisan behavior and claims.
DiGenova Falsely Claimed Members Of The Military Were "Relieved Of Their Duty Because They Insisted That There Be A Military Response" To Benghazi Attacks. On October 28, 2013, diGenova claimed on WMAL that some members of the military were "relieved of their duty because they insisted that there be a military response" the night of the September 2012 Benghazi attacks, despite the fact that a military response was ordered by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. These military forces included a Marine anti-terrorism team deployed from Spain and special operations forces that were stationed in Croatia and the United States, but they did not arrive until after the attacks were over. [Media Matters, 10/29/13; Media Matters, 10/28/13]
DiGenova Baselessly Alleged That Obama Administration Tried To Cover Up Theft Of Hundreds Of Surface-To-Air Missiles In Benghazi. In October 2013, diGenova claimed on WMAL that the Obama administration was trying to cover up the theft of 400 surface-to-air missiles that were somehow linked to the American presence in Benghazi. While diGenova told WMAL that he didn't whether the missiles were physically at the CIA annex the night of the attack, "it is clear that the annex was somehow involved in the process of the distribution of those missiles." DiGenova did not name his sources for this claim, acknowledged that some of his information is not "verifiable," and provided no evidence to back up the allegation. [Media Matters, 8/13/13; CNS News, 8/13/13]
DiGenova Has Been Criticized By Lawmaker For "Non-Stop Mugging" For The Press And For Lacking "Impartiality, Non-Partisanship, And Professionalism." In 1998, Joseph DiGenova and his wife and legal partner Victoria Toensing, who were working as outside counsel for the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, were criticized for their actions in connection with the Monica Lewinsky scandal. A February 5, 1998, Roll Call article "Rep. Bill Clay (D-Mo) launched a stinging attack on the two lead attorneys investigating the Teamsters campaign finance scandal yesterday, alleging that the attorneys have lost their objectivity because of their frequent television appearances and 'participation' in the scandal involving ex-White House intern Monica Lewinsky."
Contrast all this to the time when there was an entirely different email scandal. Specifically the one involving over 20 members of the White House staff who after using a private RNC servers “lost 2 years” of emails including what turned out to be official correspondence just as it turned out Congress was investigating the apparent partisan firing of eight U.S. Attorneys.
Even for a Republican White House that was badly stumbling through George W. Bush's sixth year in office, the revelation on April 12, 2007 was shocking. Responding to congressional demands for emails in connection with its investigation into the partisan firing of eight U.S. attorneys, the White House announced that as many as five million emails, covering a two-year span, had been lost.
The emails had been run through private accounts controlled by the Republican National Committee and were only supposed to be used for dealing with non-administration political campaign work to avoid violating ethics laws. Yet congressional investigators already had evidence private emails had been used for government business, including to discuss the firing of one of the U.S. attorneys. The RNC accounts were used by 22 White House staffers, including then-Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, who reportedly used his RNC email for 95 percent of his communications.
As the Washington Post reported, "Under federal law, the White House is required to maintain records, including e-mails, involving presidential decision- making and deliberations." But suddenly millions of the private RNC emails had gone missing; emails that were seen as potentially crucial evidence by Congressional investigators.
And when it comes to mishandling classified data, what about that time back in President Camp when Dick Cheney decided to direct his chief of staff Scooter Libby to leak classified information to the media from the Iraq NIE without following the normal declassification procedure, including information on the classified connection between Joe Wilson’s wife Valerie Plame and the CIA clandestine service?
APRIL 6--A former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney told a federal grand jury that President George W. Bush authorized him to leak information from a classified intelligence report to a New York Times reporter. Details of I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby's testimony were included in a court filing made yesterday by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, who is prosecuting Libby for perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements in connection with the probe into the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity. According to Fitzgerald's filing, an excerpt of which you'll find below, Libby, 55, testified in 2003 that he provided reporter Judith Miller with information from a classified National Intelligence Estimate after being told by Cheney that Bush 'specifically had authorized' him to 'disclose certain information in the NIE.' Libby also testified that Cheney specifically directed him to speak to other reporters about information in the classified NIE (which addressed Iraq's purported weapons of mass destruction programs) as well as a cable authored by Plame's husband, former ambassador Joseph Wilson. The leaking of the classified material was apparently done in an effort to counter claims made by Wilson regarding the White House's justification for invading Iraq. The Fitzgerald filing also notes that Libby told grand jurors that he conferred with David Addington, Cheney's counsel, about the leak directive and that Addington told him 'that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to a declassification of the document.' While both Bush and Cheney have been interviewed by Fitzgerald, it is unknown whether they confirmed or disputed Libby's assertion that he was authorized to disclose findings in classified reports. Libby, Cheney's former chief of staff, resigned his White House post last October following his indictment on five felony counts. (7 pages)
Somehow nobody in the Bush White House managed to be indicted or prosecuted despite magically misplacing two full years of email activity from 22 people including Karl Rove, yet “Hillary has an email problem" when she's provided nearly all of her official emails to the State Dept. and made both them, her personal emails, her email server and her staff fully available to the FBI.
And even after Libby was successfully convicted prosecutor Fitzgerald claimed “There is a cloud over the Vice President” because Libby was convicted for his lies that he discovered the convert nature of Plame’s CIA employment from reporters rather than the truth, Dick Cheney told him.
For the first time since the investigation into the leak of a covert CIA operative began more than three years ago, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has suggested that Vice President Dick Cheney was behind the effort to unmask the officer, the wife of a vocal critic of the administration's Iraq policy.
During closing arguments Tuesday in the obstruction of justice and perjury trial of former vice presidential staffer, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Fitzgerald told jurors that "there is a cloud over the vice president. ... a cloud over the White House over what happened," according to a copy of the transcript of Fitzgerald's statements.
Nobody went to Prison for outing the identity of a covert CIA operative for political gain — because technically under the statute you have to do it specifically to benefit a Foreign Nation or Enemy of the United States, not if you’re enemies happen to be -— your fellow Americans.
Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual’s classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under Title 18 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
If we’re to put all this in context the idea that Hillary might be indicted for doing so much far less than what Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and even Scooter Libby pretty much got away with is just plain ludicrous.
But that won’t stop the right wing from continuing to muddy her reputation by trying.
[Full Disclosure: I held a Top Secret/SAR security clearance for 12 years as an employee of a classified federal contractor where we were regularly briefed by the FBI on counter-intelligence issues and proper handling of classified data. Also I haven’t had a chance to vote in this primary yet since I live in California, but my current preference is in fact for Bernie Sanders, however I don’t think partisan political BS and lies like these from the likes of diGenova should go unchallenged no matter what direction my support may lean.]