Washington Post: Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server UPDATE: What immunity indicates regarding status of case

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 2:39 AM GMT
    Indicates the criminal probe is advancing

    ----------------------------
    The Justice Department has granted immunity to the former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email server as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

    The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-clinton-email-investigation-justice-department-grants-immunity-to-former-state-department-staffer/2016/03/02/e421e39e-e0a0-11e5-9c36-e1902f6b6571_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonemail830p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 2:44 AM GMT

    hillary-prison-mugshot.jpg

    hillaryjail01.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 2:46 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidNo taking the 5th this time around, though perhaps he'll be involved in an "unfortunate" fatal traffic accident... soon.

    I suspect he'll be protected by the feds, maybe even the Witness Protection Program given an organized crime syndicate is involved.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 2:53 AM GMT


    15d5jdd.jpg

    hillary-deleter.jpg
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3274

    Mar 03, 2016 3:01 AM GMT
    He should also make sure to bring in the cat.

    Poor Kathleen Whiley's cat was dismembered outside her house.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 3:14 AM GMT
    musclmed saidHe should also make sure to bring in the cat.

    Poor Kathleen Whiley's cat was dismembered outside her house.

    Good point, for any of his pets. Hope they don't lose sight of the thugs who are associated with the Clintons.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 3:29 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    musclmed saidHe should also make sure to bring in the cat.

    Poor Kathleen Whiley's cat was dismembered outside her house.

    Good point, for any of his pets. Hope they don't lose sight of the thugs who are associated with the Clintons.


    That's also true for his family members, which they can use to intimidate the witness. It reminds me of this scene from The Godfather II. They couldn't get to Frank Pentangelli, so they grabbed his brother.



    But the big difference is that the Corleone crime family were loyal Americans with Michael serving in WWW II, while the Clinton crime family are rat bastards who never served, but sold out their country.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 6:00 PM GMT
    New today - not a major story in itself, but the steady drip of info suggests those involved will not go quietly if an indictment is stonewalled.

    FBI investigating if Clinton aides shared passwords to access classified info
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/03/fbi-investigating-if-clinton-aides-shared-passwords-to-access-classified-info.html?intcmp=hpbt2
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Mar 03, 2016 6:46 PM GMT
    I voted for Sanders and I'm disappointed that he did not defeat Clinton on Super Tuesday.

    That said, her opposition is now Trump and the KKK, which means if she loses, terrorists will be leading this country.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 8:02 PM GMT
    HottJoe saidI voted for Sanders and I'm disappointed that he did not defeat Clinton on Super Tuesday.

    That said, her opposition is now Trump and the KKK, which means if she loses, terrorists will be leading this country.

    The whole KKK thing is nothing but spin. He disavowed the KKK many times both before and after the interview in question.

    But what about Obama, who sat in Rev Wright's "God Damn America" church for 20 years?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 8:14 PM GMT
    HottJoe saidI voted for Sanders and I'm disappointed that he did not defeat Clinton on Super Tuesday.

    That said, her opposition is now Trump and the KKK, which means if she loses, terrorists will be leading this country.


    He defeated her in 4 States and is still very much in the running, notwithstanding continued attempts by corporate media to write him off.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 8:17 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    HottJoe saidI voted for Sanders and I'm disappointed that he did not defeat Clinton on Super Tuesday.

    That said, her opposition is now Trump and the KKK, which means if she loses, terrorists will be leading this country.

    The whole KKK thing is nothing but spin. He disavowed the KKK many times both before and after the interview in question.

    But what about Obama, who sat in Rev Wright's "God Damn America" church for 20 years?


    I agree with you that the KKK thing is spin. Trump is hardly the second coming of Hitler. Bernie's my man, and Hillary is my second choice, but I'd be more afraid of Cruz in the White House than Trump.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 8:26 PM GMT
    socalfitness said

    But what about Obama, who sat in Rev Wright's "God Damn America" church for 20 years?


    Doubtless you'll still be banging on about the elusive 'Hillary indictment' when she's nearing the end of her second term too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 8:32 PM GMT
    duluthrunner said
    socalfitness said
    HottJoe saidI voted for Sanders and I'm disappointed that he did not defeat Clinton on Super Tuesday.

    That said, her opposition is now Trump and the KKK, which means if she loses, terrorists will be leading this country.

    The whole KKK thing is nothing but spin. He disavowed the KKK many times both before and after the interview in question.

    But what about Obama, who sat in Rev Wright's "God Damn America" church for 20 years?

    I agree with you that the KKK thing is spin. Trump is hardly the second coming of Hitler. Bernie's my man, and Hillary is my second choice, but I'd be more afraid of Cruz in the White House than Trump.

    Agree. Trump would be more flexible and willing to negotiate. Cruz is a hardliner. Fact that no one in the Senate is endorsing him indicates how well he would work with others.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Mar 03, 2016 9:14 PM GMT
    duluthrunner said
    socalfitness said
    HottJoe saidI voted for Sanders and I'm disappointed that he did not defeat Clinton on Super Tuesday.

    That said, her opposition is now Trump and the KKK, which means if she loses, terrorists will be leading this country.

    The whole KKK thing is nothing but spin. He disavowed the KKK many times both before and after the interview in question.

    But what about Obama, who sat in Rev Wright's "God Damn America" church for 20 years?


    I agree with you that the KKK thing is spin. Trump is hardly the second coming of Hitler. Bernie's my man, and Hillary is my second choice, but I'd be more afraid of Cruz in the White House than Trump.

    Trump is the one doing the spin. He's trying to make it seem like his earpiece was broken, or he never heard of the KKK. He's being dishonest. He's giving the KKK a nod, to let them know they can rally behind him, and they are a terrorist group. There's no spin on the part of the media. They're in shock and dismayed, just like everyone else.

    This laissez faire attitude about Trump and the KKK seems like an extremely dangerous course. The GOP has been using veiled racism and outright homophobia to galvanize bigoted white Christians for years, who are eager to create a totalitarian theocracy, and in their fanaticism they've attached themselves to a billionaire who admires/quotes Putin, Mussolini, Kim Jong-il, and aspires to be just like them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 03, 2016 9:37 PM GMT
    While immunity in itself does not indicate the specific target(s) - i.e. Hillary or her aides, taken the totality of evidence publicly known, including emails originated from the Hillary account, it is inconceivable that she would be innocent and all the guilt would be borne by her aides.

    --------------------------------------------

    Excerpts:

    In an interview on Fox Business’ “Varney & Co” on Thursday, Napolitano said that because Pagliano was granted immunity, the Justice Department is “going to seek indictment” of either Clinton or one of her subordinates.
    --------
    If Clinton gave Pagliano her “personal Secretary of State password” then “we have an indictment for misconduct in office as well as espionage.”
    --------
    Only a federal judge can grant immunity. A federal judge will only grant immunity if a sitting jury is ready to hear testimony from the immunized person. So we know a couple of things. We know the recommendation we were waiting for from the FBI to the Justice Department has already made its way from the FBI to the Justice Department.”

    “We know FBI agents and Justice Department prosecutors are working in tandem,” Napolitano added.

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/03/napolitano-hillary-clinton-should-be-terrified-it-guy-was-given-immunity-video/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2016 6:16 PM GMT
    ^
    This guy, a Professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law and former congressional counsel, begs to differ. He sees immunity for Bryan Pagliano as indicating this affair may be coming to the end of the line (sans indictments).

    Immunity For Bryan Pagliano Will Help End The Hillary Clinton Email Inquiry

    Immunity means the Justice Department must forego bringing a case against him, but if the DOJ thought they had a case against Pagliano, they would not grant him immunity. They would prosecute that case, or else make a plea deal which could include the grant of immunity. They are granting him immunity because there is no case they are foregoing, so, this way, he can and will give them evidence.

    What will Pagliano’s testimony to the FBI and DOJ mean? Most likely, it will bring their inquiry nearer to an end. The emails apparently contain some kinds of information that are found “elsewhere,” although it is not clear whether “elsewhere” is in documents in agency files, the front page of the New York Times, or both. As part of its work, DOJ must figure out what the implications were of having such information on that server. Also, they must find out about the setting up of the server, which Pagliano helped with.

    There is not space here for a complete reprise of the email issue. Suffice it that Clinton would have expected classified documents to get transmission through a different, separate system quite unconnected with her email. The fact that she never once saw, in her own email, a document with classified markings would have confirmed her in that belief. Whatever is said about how big a mistake that was, it was not intentional and does not reach the very, very selective and severe level to be indictable.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/charlestiefer/2016/03/02/immunity-for-bryan-pagliano-will-help-end-the-hillary-clinton-email-inquiry/#6590a869552d


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2016 6:42 PM GMT
    I saw the Forbes piece and found it is outside the mainstream of legal opinions on immunity in general and this case in particular. Immunity is often granted to someone who could be prosecuted with a strong case in return for their testimony on other cases.

    Added comment: Given the overwhelming evidence known publicly, it is inconceivable that an indictment would not be pursued. Also, the author demonstrates ignorance of the espionage codes. Specifically: 1) espionage code does not absolve someone if they lacked intent. Gross negligence is actionable, 2) Explicit classified markings not required to determine if material is, in fact, classified.

    Intent necessary: U.S. Code § 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
    Intent not necessary - gross negligence a factor: 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4167119 messages 31 Jan
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2016 7:53 PM GMT
    socalfitness said Given the overwhelming evidence known publicly, it is inconceivable that an indictment would not be pursued.


    Overwhelming evidence? Don't you mean overwhelming speculation? It is perfectly conceivable that an indictment won't be pursued. Indeed, as time rolls on, the chances are looking increasingly slimmer.

    With the GOP is complete disarray, it's little wonder the last hope for conservatives is on Clinton's downfall.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2016 8:01 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    socalfitness said Given the overwhelming evidence known publicly, it is inconceivable that an indictment would not be pursued.


    Overwhelming evidence? Don't you mean overwhelming speculation? It is perfectly conceivable that an indictment won't be pursued. Indeed, as time rolls on, the chances are looking increasingly slimmer.

    With the GOP is complete disarray, it's little wonder the last hope for conservatives is on Clinton's downfall.

    Emails released and IG report is not speculation. Better stick to what you know.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 04, 2016 9:45 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Emails released and IG report is not speculation. Better stick to what you know.


    A few crumbs of substantive info, some Fox News anonymous "intelligence sources" and a lot of big talk on conservative websites, an indictment doesn't make.