Justice Dept. grants immunity for staffer who set up Clinton's email server

[webfact]

Justice Dept. grants immunity for staffer who set up Clinton’s email server
BY BNO NEWS

WASHINGTON: -- A former State Department staffer who set up the private email server used by Hillary Clinton has been granted immunity in exchange for cooperation in the ongoing investigation into Clinton’s use of email as secretary of state.

The Washington Post, citing a senior U.S. law enforcement official, said the Federal Bureau of Investigation had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano by offering immunity in the FBI’s investigation, which is expected to wrap up in the coming months.

Full story: http://www.streetwisejournal.com/justice-dept-grants-immunity-for-staffer-who-set-up-clintons-email-server/


-- StreetWiseJournal 2016-03-03

[2fishin2]

You don't grant somebody immunity unless prosecution is forthcoming....hurry up will ya!

[zaphod reborn]

This is Trump's only chance of getting elected. Have Hillary indicted after she wins the Democratic nomination. His entire campaign strategy is based on this contingency. Watch out for what you hope for.

[lannarebirth]

Reminds me of those Doonesbury cartoons from the Watergate era. There's your first brick in the wall outside the White House.

[lannarebirth]

This is Trump's only chance of getting elected. Have Hillary indicted after she wins the Democratic nomination. His entire campaign strategy is based on this contingency. Watch out for what you hope for.

Trump polls worse against Sanders.

[Andreas2]

Valuable background information about this case by The Judge:

• ... The exposure of state secrets, either intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage. For the secretary of state to have committed espionage is, quite simply, scandalous. ...
• ... On her first day on the job, she swore under oath that she recognized and understood that legal obligation and she promised to comply with it. She did not comply. ...
• ... On that road are emails revealing the names of secret undercover intelligence assets, the locations of North Korean nuclear facilities, the transcripts of telephone conversations among foreign intelligence agents, and the travel plans of then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens in the days before he was murdered. ...

It looks very bad for Mrs. Clinton, whether she is the Democratic nominee or not.

Full article here: Hillary Clinton's false hopes

[2fishin2]

After working in the military for 23 years and then as a civilian contractor for another 12 I can say without a shadow of doubt if any service member even thought about doing what she did, they would have prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Her day is coming though.

And whoever said Sanders polled higher than Trump, how in the world did you come up with that? hahahahahah

[ukrules]

This is Trump's only chance of getting elected. Have Hillary indicted after she wins the Democratic nomination. His entire campaign strategy is based on this contingency. Watch out for what you hope for.

Trump polls worse against Sanders.

This won't make any difference, if Clinton wins the nomination then she's the candidate.

I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton wins the Dem nomination, and any subsequent investigation is then put on hold so it doesn't interfere with the electoral process.

If she wins it then there's no touching her for years and as one of 'the special people' I'm sure she will secure a pardon for herself anyway.

If Trump wins the election which I think he will then he will quite likely do everything he can to destroy her.

[Publicus]

The Treyghazi committee that started the emails stuff passed on granting immunity to Mr. Pagliano who'd invoked the 5th Amendment before the congressional inquisition last fall and declined to produce documents to the Republican controlled body. As noted additionally in the link below, once the congress maximus grants immunity, prosecution by the executive branch is effectively precluded.

So here's a fact or two about the decision by Pagliano to accept immunity by the DoJ....

With respect to Pagliano, however, this would hardly seem to be a serious issue. Unlike Lerner, he is not a senior or central figure in the investigation. The chances of his facing any kind of criminal jeopardy for setting up a private e-mail server (which by definition had to have occurred before any classified e-mails were sent through that server) would seem extremely remote. (emphasis added)

http://www.pointofor...liano-immunity/

The rightwing superpatriot IG's and intelligence bureaucracies are stonewalling a FOIA filing to reveal their contact with Republican senators, Charles Grassley of Iowa first and foremost. The top assistant to the DepState IG is a former Grassley Republican staffer in the Senate.

Correct The Record today demanded that the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the State Department complete a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request CTR sent over four weeks ago for the emails of Deputy Inspector General Emilia DiSanto. CTR also echoed calls for DiSanto to recuse herself from matters related to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after it was reported in The Hill that a whistleblower from within the OIG said the office had become increasingly partisan and had an “anti-Clinton” bias. Specifically, it was revealed that Deputy Inspector General DiSanto was working with an “active partisan mandate to undermine both the State Department…and Secretary Clinton.”

“Yesterday’s new allegations of bias have cast serious doubt on the impartiality of the OIG, who is responsible for independently overseeing the State Department,” said Brad Woodhouse President of Correct The Record.

“In light of these troubling revelations, the OIG should immediately adhere to our FOIA request and release all of Emilia DiSanto’s emails. Additionally, DiSanto should recuse herself from handling any matters related to Hillary Clinton.”

DiSanto is a former aide to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and has previously been accused of leaking information and documents about Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

http://correctrecord...retary-clinton/

[does]

His entire campaign is based....

It's nice to have a political expert on TV. Maybe they have a job for you at Fox. They love "experts".

This is Trump's only chance of getting elected. Have Hillary indicted after she wins the Democratic nomination. His entire campaign strategy is based on this contingency. Watch out for what you hope for.

[arjunadawn]

With the past years of justice and reason thwarted constantly I cannot grasp how real justice will be allowed to play out. I cannot comprehend why/how Obama would allow this to play down to the wire risking throwing everything to the GOP. Obama does not hate HRC enough to see Trump in her stead. Obama, who snubs his nose at nearly all laws, could hardly allow this to go to the wire without some mechanization in play. This could have been torpedoed in many ways. It only make sense if the theater of the absurd is considered.

[helpisgood]

And whoever said Sanders polled higher than Trump, how in the world did you come up with that? hahahahahah

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/

CNN March 2 article:

Clinton 52% Trump 44%

Sanders 55% Trump 43%

To quote from that article:

"Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents."

Edited March 3, 2016 by helpisgood

[ggt]

The Obama "In-Justice Dept." has become famous for "Not" prosecuting high profile Democratic criminals...working in the government...Clinton will be no different...

[hawker9000]

This is Trump's only chance of getting elected. Have Hillary indicted after she wins the Democratic nomination. His entire campaign strategy is based on this contingency. Watch out for what you hope for.

Trump polls worse against Sanders.

The only think that could save the Sanders candidacy now is the actual indictment of Hillary. 'Not even sure THAT would do it. But as far as the primary races go, he's done. Clinton now @ 1052 delegates to Sanders' 427. And her pledged delegate count alone (i.e., excluding superdelegates) outnumbers Sanders total delegate count. Sanders shot his wad in the New Hampshire victory, which was his home turf.

[JetsetBkk]

The Treyghazi committee...

<snip>

Yay! Trey Gowdy for president!

[arjunadawn]

In any rationale world her potential base would be so appalled by her overwhelming and non-stop appearance of impropriety that they would hardly loan her legitimacy of racing to nominate her.

Charges? Indictment? No matter. When a figure has this much palpable dirt on them the case is made clear that Hillary is a tool- she is a weapon. The goal is to inflict the weapon on others irrespective of right, justice, reason, or law- it makes no difference what crimes HRC committed. The ends justify the means and the ends are imposing an ideology on America.

The Democratic Party has behaved this way for years and perfected it to art form. Americans are too stupid to actually perceive that they are not taken for granted, they are being warred upon under the cover of representing them. When such vast numbers of people behave this way, irrespective of honor, right, wrong, proper or improper, you have an insurgency, not an election.

[2fishin2]

And whoever said Sanders polled higher than Trump, how in the world did you come up with that? hahahahahah

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/

CNN March 2 article:

Clinton 52% Trump 44%

Sanders 55% Trump 43%

To quote from that article:

"Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents."

Huh? If Sanders was polling so high, why isnt he winning? Think the poll could be wrong.

[aTomsLife]

And whoever said Sanders polled higher than Trump, how in the world did you come up with that? hahahahahah

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/

CNN March 2 article:

Clinton 52% Trump 44%

Sanders 55% Trump 43%

To quote from that article:

"Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents."

Huh? If Sanders was polling so high, why isnt he winning? Think the poll could be wrong.

I glanced at the article to look for how the data was collected, but didn't see anything. If it was simply a random sample of people throughout the fifty states, then the result is pretty much meaningless, since the U.S. doesn't elect its presidents based on popular vote. And unless they poll at least 3,000 people in each state and from there figure out the electoral count for each candidate, just about any 'national' poll will yield questionable results.

Edit: it was right there at the bottom of the screen: The CNN/ORC Poll was conducted by telephone February 24-27 among a random national sample of 1,001 adults. Results among the sample of 920 registered voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

It's as I thought. Not nearly enough people were polled.

Edited March 3, 2016 by aTomsLife

[NovaBlue05]

Obama doesn't want to hurt Clinton's chances and he doesn't want his name on obstruction of justice by burying the investigation . He simply instructs Lynch to drag it on until Inauguration day and he walks away from it and lets the next schmuck address it. If that Schmuck is Hillary, it all quietly vanishes since her media has never shown any journalistic curiosity in it.

[lannarebirth]

Obama doesn't want to hurt Clinton's chances and he doesn't want his name on obstruction of justice by burying the investigation . He simply instructs Lynch to drag it on until Inauguration day and he walks away from it and lets the next schmuck address it. If that Schmuck is Hillary, it all quietly vanishes since her media has never shown any journalistic curiosity in it.

Ford pardoned Nixon for " all offenses against the United States which he has committed, may have committed or taken part in" on his way out of office. Obama may do the same for Hillary on her way in. Maybe he'll throw in one for Bill so he gets a pass for the foundation.

I think Obama sees Clinton as the only one that can protect his legacy, such as it is. He should know that she'd throw both him and his legacy under the bus the day after she needs the African American establishment to deliver their constituency's vote to her.

Edited March 3, 2016 by lannarebirth

[sgtsabai]

To those that can't read or listen to anything but right wingnut bullcrap, do just a tad bit of research. Every poll including your beloved faux (not the) news poll shows Bernie beating all the Republican candidates and by more than Hillary. As far as the "Democratic" primaries, yes, it will take a miracle for Bernie to overcome the corporate wing.

As I understand, the immunity given was use immunity. Use immunity is useless immunity. Only exact words cannot be used against one, anything gleaned from those can be. Only a fool would accept use immunity. I was "offered", I went to jail until Justice William O. Douglas freed myself and the other 3 unindicted co-conspirators. I was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Gainesville 8(+4) trial. Jury was out about 1 hr. and 30 min. Most of which was for free lunch. Jury members including the foreperson came to our reunions. NOT GUILTY! Semper Fi! I hope Hillary is indicted soon, very soon, but certainly not holding my breath. Bernie will be the next president if she is before primary ends, not a fascist or religous wacko right wingnut Republican, and America and the world has a chance.

[CWMcMurray]

This is Trump's only chance of getting elected. Have Hillary indicted after she wins the Democratic nomination. His entire campaign strategy is based on this contingency. Watch out for what you hope for.

Trump polls worse against Sanders.

The only think that could save the Sanders candidacy now is the actual indictment of Hillary. 'Not even sure THAT would do it. But as far as the primary races go, he's done. Clinton now @ 1052 delegates to Sanders' 427. And her pledged delegate count alone (i.e., excluding superdelegates) outnumbers Sanders total delegate count. Sanders shot his wad in the New Hampshire victory, which was his home turf.

But if she ends up being indicted , it is not completely out of the question that the 717 super delegates could go for Sanders

So if he stays in and stays close.. There is always a chance .. Although a really really slim one...

Just hope the Dems start thinking about the best candidate rather than doing what the DNC wants them to do...

[CWMcMurray]

And whoever said Sanders polled higher than Trump, how in the world did you come up with that? hahahahahah

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/

CNN March 2 article:

Clinton 52% Trump 44%

Sanders 55% Trump 43%

To quote from that article:

"Sanders -- who enjoys the most positive favorable rating of any presidential candidate in the field, according to the poll -- tops all three Republicans by wide margins: 57% to 40% against Cruz, 55% to 43% against Trump, and 53% to 45% against Rubio. Sanders fares better than Clinton in each match-up among men, younger voters and independents."

Huh? If Sanders was polling so high, why isnt he winning? Think the poll could be wrong.

Because the DNC has anointed Hillary as the next Presidential candidate for the Dems and don't care about anything else...

And the sheeple on the Democrat side are voting as they are told

As if Bernie got the nomination heads would roll in the establishment on the Dem side and the democratic leaders in the DNC like the way things are and don't want any change

[Publicus]

Valuable background information about this case by The Judge:

• ... The exposure of state secrets, either intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage. For the secretary of state to have committed espionage is, quite simply, scandalous. ...
• ... On her first day on the job, she swore under oath that she recognized and understood that legal obligation and she promised to comply with it. She did not comply. ...
• ... On that road are emails revealing the names of secret undercover intelligence assets, the locations of North Korean nuclear facilities, the transcripts of telephone conversations among foreign intelligence agents, and the travel plans of then-U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens in the days before he was murdered. ...

It looks very bad for Mrs. Clinton, whether she is the Democratic nominee or not.

Full article here: Hillary Clinton's false hopes

Reading the Riot Act when there isn't a riot is an old tactic. It immediately raises horrors and sets off alarm bells to some who are prone to thinking a law has been violated simply because someone with a false agenda decides to present some laws that are serious sounding and that have serious consequences.

There isn't any prosecutor. No grand jury. No charges. Only the right trying to make the most it can of an inquiry by the Department of Justice being conducted at the request of people charged with the national security, rightwing superpatriots that they are.

It is laffable to present anything about Hillary Rodham Clinton conducting "espionage."

Everyone who takes a government office swears an oath....at least one oath but often more than one, in the intelligence community especially and in the highest government positions. The oaths are serious matters and are taken seriously.

Information in the emails had their point of origin, which were not the SecState Hillary Rodham Clinton, who received them. Those who sent the information almost surely will suffer some serious consequence which is only right and proscribed by the laws and oaths.

HRC knowingly did nothing covered by the Riot Act laws that are purposefully presented in the post to create a sensationalist stir.

[Publicus]

You don't grant somebody immunity unless prosecution is forthcoming....hurry up will ya!

The right is carrying on as usual. All the while life goes on as usual as lawyers and other analysts look at this from a calm perspective.

CNN Says "Take A Breath" On Clinton Aide Immunity While Fox Cries Indictment 51 minutes ago

Following a report that a former Hillary Clinton aide was being offered immunity by the Justice Department as part of an investigation into the former secretary of state's supposed mishandling of classified information, CNN explained that such developments are common in investigations and that it does not necessarily imply any criminal charges were imminent. In contrast, Fox News baselessly claimed the report showed the Justice Department "has decided it's going to indict" Clinton and cited anonymous sources to claim an indictment could come within the next 90 days.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/03/03/cnn-says-take-a-breath-on-clinton-aide-immunity/208999

Wash. Post: Clinton Aide Is Granted Immunity In Exchange For Cooperating In Investigation Into The Mishandling Of Classified Information.

The Washington Post reported on March 2 that the Department of Justice granted immunity to Bryan Pagliano, a Clinton aide who had set up her email server in New York in 2009. The article noted, "So far, there is no indication that prosecutors have convened a grand jury in the email investigation to subpoena testimony or documents, which would require the participation of a U.S. attorney's office":

http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/03/03/cnn-says-take-a-breath-on-clinton-aide-immunity/208999

CNN Analysts Explain Immunity Is Normal, Does Not Imply Criminal Charges Are Forthcoming

CNN's Errol Louis: Immunity Does Not Guarantee "Something Criminal Or Nefarious Was Going On." During the March 3 edition of CNN's New Day

CNN political commentator Errol Louis pointed out that a lawyer would want to get their client immunity in order to prevent "any misunderstandings or any possibilities," and that immunity does not necessarily show "that something criminal or nefarious was going on."

CNN's John King: Immunity Deals Are "Common In Investigations" And Republicans Need To "Step Back" From Making Conclusions.

During the March 3 edition of New Day, CNN chief national correspondent John King said giving immunity to participants is "common in investigations." Further, he explained that it is routine to make "a deal with the people who aren't central to the investigation to get the information that you need for the investigation." King said Republicans who believe "this is the sign of the coming indictment and everything else" need to "step back for a minute" and wait for the investigation to end before jumping to conclusions.

Here's a conclusive perspective that presents a view from the mainstream middle rather than from one media democraphic or one far out political extreme. As with almost everything in politics the truth lies somewhere vary far away from Faux and the hardcore bitter extreme right.

Is Clinton gonna be led away in handcuffs? I highly, highly doubt it. While they do have immunity, they can certainly interview this guy that's a former staffer that was helping set up this private e-mail server. They're going to get information about what was Clinton talking about, what was his understanding about why they set it up, but it's really not clear whether or not the information was classified at all,

[CNN, CNN Newsroom with Carol Costello, 3/3/16]

[lannarebirth]

I'm sure the FBI's IT data forensics team will have by now been able to resurrect the 30,000 deleted "personal" emails and they should be able to tell if the private server was at any time "hacked into". These are areas of the investigation that have had little press to date but I expect we'll be hearing more about in the future. Maybe we'll discover this patsy is as devoted to Hillary as Rose Mary Woods was to Nixon, or possibly not.

Edited March 3, 2016 by lannarebirth

[Ulysses G.]

She's going DOWN!

[Publicus]

Lotta speculation, assumptions, presumptions, forecasts, predictions, unnamed sources, claims, supposition, accusations, strong language about a felon and criminal.....the wailing and whinging goes on interminably.

Hillary Clinton will answer questions in this before it is over and it will be over no problem. Just as former SecState Clinton camly ran circles around the Treyghazi committee for 11 hours, she will respoond to the questions coming to her. The right will of course refuse to accept the outcome.

Same-o same-o.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Publicus

[Jingthing]

She's going DOWN!

Downtown D.C.

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, that is.

[NeverSure]

To those that can't read or listen to anything but right wingnut bullcrap, do just a tad bit of research. Every poll including your beloved faux (not the) news poll

You know, because you have a habit of posting like that, I simply don't read them and I didn't read this one. I stopped right there. You're really something else and I'm not going to say what that is. You apparently wouldn't understand.

Cheers.