Petraeus prosecutor: Clinton has committed no crime

[riversedge]

Source: usatoday.com




Petraeus prosecutor: Clinton has committed no crime
Anne M. Tompkins 7:27 p.m. EDT August 30, 2015
Unlike Petraeus, Clinton did not "knowingly" store or share classified information in violation of the law.
635765453752964047-Hillary6


Former attorney general Michael Mukasey recently compared the inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when she was secretary of State with former CIA director David Petraeus’ federal conviction for the unauthorized removal and retention of classified information.

As the former U.S. attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, I oversaw the prosecution of Gen. Petraeus, and I can say, based on the known facts, this comparison has no merit. The key element that distinguishes Secretary Clinton’s email retention practices from Petraeus’ sharing of classified information is that Petraeus knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct, and that was the basis of his criminal liability.

The facts of Petraeus’ case are a matter of public record. During his tenure as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, Petraeus recorded handwritten notes in personal journals, including information he knew was classified at the very highest levels.

These journals contained top secret and even more sensitive “code word” national defense information, including the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities, diplomatic discussions, and quotes and deliberative discussions from National Security Council meetings, including discussions with the president of the United States.

............

Importantly, Petraeus was well aware of the classified contents in his journals,...........
.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/30/clinton-controversy-no-comparison-petraeus-column/71421242/

---

Oh, it is wonderful to see this article. Enjoy







USA TODAY

Column: GOP's Clinton email indictment fantasy

[Kingofalldems]

1. Boom.

Clinton haters, repubs and cavers not likng this one.

[riversedge]

4. It is so sweet.

[billhicks76]

10. Ridiculous

Bush was way worse erasing all his emails. This is a non-issue. Is FOX listening? They should interview this prosecutor. No comparison to Petraeus. By the way, I don't support Clinton...too close to the Bush family for me to be able to keep food down.

[pnwmom]

2. Thanks. I'll be ready next time the die-hards compare her to Petraeus. n/t

[DURHAM D]

12. Trump has said repeatedly that what Hillary did was

worse than what Petraeus did and it has ruined his life. I guess being a special adviser to the President is a ruined life. Who knew?

Someone needs to call Trump on his shit but the media will not do it.

[CTyankee]

46. it should stop some people dead in their tracks...and this is in USA Today...

[gwheezie]

3. Only idiots compare Clinton to petraeus

Totally different circumstances. He gave his girlfriend classified documents. HRC didn't do anything like that

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. As you know Petraeus plead guilty to a misdemeanor.

As you know Petraeus plead guilty to a misdemeanor. There are posters on this board who have started threads that Secretary Clinton violated the Espionage Act of 1917 which is a felony and is reserved for spies, traitors, and deliberate leakers.

[DURHAM D]

13. She is a felon according to our

resident non-legal expert -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251552653


and 41 DUers agree

[gwheezie]

21. Oh dear you made me read THAT thread

I had avoided it since the title sounded like right-wing loon paranoia but now I read the entire damn thing. Some folks just hate Hillary.

[Hekate]

25. That. Is. Disgusting.

[DURHAM D]

27. Speaking of disgusting...

Hillary is also a murderer. Well... 21 DUers agree.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251555176

What a weekend.

[calimary]

32. Standing with the "she murdered Vince Foster" crowd, perhaps?

[Hekate]

34. I'm guessing there are a whole bunch of DUers who won't vote for HRC if she's the nominee....

Because Traitor Murderer Liar. It is really hard to back down from accusations like those.

Ya think they'll have the decency to stfu here after the Convention?

Naaaaah. Just enough to avoid the troll-hammer.

[pnwmom]

20. Then there are plenty right here, because I keep seeing that claim. nt

[LiberalArkie]

6. I don't think of of the tech people on DU accused her of a crime, but it would have been way

too easy to accidentally commit a crime. In the business world corporate and personal email is separate because it is too easy to reply to someone using the wrong email address, thus putting wha should be private onto a public system. Where I used to work, they (like most) had a special program for the phone that encrypted the corporate email going back to the corporate email server.
That method is safe, and indeed no one has ever said whether the email server she had was a corporate encrypted email server (like Blackberry) or not.

I think she always used a Blackberry, so I hope that was the system she had. No one has ever said, so us Techies just assumed it was like a personal email server which would have required a lot of attention to not send a reply through the wrong email system and a lot of attention of the other parties also.

What we always knew was that HRC sending an email to a friend at state asking "Hey you want to do lunch?" and the person at state replying to the email with some classified data not noticing what the email address was.

The corporate world resolved that when exec's and managers wanted iPhones instead of Blackberrys. They required a special email program for the phones so that problem would not happen.

[DURHAM D]

15. jftr - .gov did not work for the government issued devices

[mcar]

7. k&R

Than you!

[Laser102]

8. The media and repugs have tried very hard to destroy her. They keep forgetting how tough she is.

GO HILLARY!!!

[BooScout]

9. Hillary ~ 1....GOP smear machine ~ a big fat ZERO!

Now if we can get certain people here to stop dragging up rw talking points and lies.

[Geronimoe]

11. How does this person know so much?

How does this prosecutor know what was on the server, what was deleted, and what was wiped clean?

[onehandle]

14. Oh, are you claiming a crime?

How do you know so much?

How do you know what was on the server, what was deleted, and what was wiped clean?

Or... anything?

[DURHAM D]

16. Perhaps you should re-read the article.

It is right there in black and white.

[pnwmom]

22. She knows about what she prosecuted the general for and she knows

that nothing like that has been claimed in the media, with regard to Hillary.

As has been explained over and over again, her use of the private server for non-classified materials was legal and has nothing to do with the issues of classification that are still being discussed.

[former9thward]

37. She is a financial contributor to Clinton.

I'm sure that means nothing to you.

[pnwmom]

38. Yes. And she wouldn't throw away her money by donating to someone

she thought was breaking the law.

She's not taking money FROM Clinton -- she's giving it TO Clinton. Big difference.

This Federal prosecutor wouldn't be donating money and supporting Clinton publicly if she thought Clinton had done something she should be prosecuted for.

[riversedge]

44. your questions are

irrelevant since the information was not classified nor did she pass it along during pillow talk, nor did she lie to the FBI

[Gothmog]

17. This is great news

[former9thward]

36. Great news from a contributor to the Clinton campaign.

What would you think she would say?

[pnwmom]

39. She's a contributor because she thinks HRC would make a good president.

Why would she contribute if she thought HRC was a possible felon?

She clearly believes every word of her essay -- and she's backing her words up with her checkbook.

[former9thward]

60. Ahh, when did she contribute?

Before or after this controversy?

[pnwmom]

65. Makes no difference. She wrote that essay this week. If she was feeling betrayed by the candidate

she donated to -- if she thought that person might have committed a felony -- then she wouldn't be going to bat for her now.

[onecaliberal]

18. Duh!

Can we move the hell on now?

[nikto]

19. As a Bernie-supporter, I must say, I HATE these BS insider tripwire "charges"

Complete BS, from start-to-finish, just like Benghazi! Benghazi! and Eric Holder's
Fast and Furious.

IMO, the cui bono for imposing BS "scandals" like the email kerfluffle (which, everybody has noticed,
sure didn't matter much when Dubya was the Prez) is that these phony scandals
distract from, or obscure, real issues, which if discussed intelligently, might actually attract voters.

It's a frikkin' smokescreen to avoid actual discussion of issues, which, if discussed, is
unequivocally bad for Conservatives and the GOP.

To be sure, Bernie and his supporters have issues with Hillary, but they are policy and ideologically-based.

This email garbage, like Benghazi, is intended to obscure or displace real policy discussion.

These unethical methods remind us once again, no matter how much Bernie and Hillary's supporters may argue,
the GOP and Conservatives are Enemy #1.

Let's not forget that.

[pnwmom]

23. Thank you, Bernie-supporter.

I hate to see Dems tearing the other candidates apart. We don't know who is going to win the primary and we don't want to knee-cap him or her before the general even begins.

[Mbrow]

24. On top of that,

you have to wonder about the supporters who do the Shit stirring. Are they really Bernie or Hillary supporters? Most of the Bernie supporters that I know don't hate Hillary, i'll gladly vote for her if she wins ( I sure as hell don't want a rethug in). Till then my money is on Bernie. Lets be safe and sane out there.

[nikto]

62. I agree-----Most Bernie supporters will still vote for Hillary against the GOP

I suspect many of the ones who express abject HATRED against Hillary are GOP/RW trolls seeking to sew division.

I do have problems with Hillary (always issue-based), but the GOP and RWers are just plain EVIL, and could never be
an option to vote for, for me, in a trillion years.

[gwheezie]

28. As a HRC supporter I respect the campaign Bernie is running

He's got a great message and stays on point. If he gets the nomination it will be because he ran a better campaign. I can't get mad at him.

[nikto]

63. Thank you

[Hekate]

26. KnR

[SoapBox]

29. This is only an Opinion column.

Unfortunately, this is only her opinion.

Also unfortunate, she is a Clinton supporter.

"Anne M. Tompkins is a partner at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft and former United States attorney for the Western District of North Carolina. She is a donor to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign."

[840high]

30. Thanks - you beat me to it.

[pnwmom]

40. The fact that she supports Clinton financially adds weight to her essay.

She believes in Clinton -- and her innocence -- enough that she donated to her campaign.

A US Attorney wouldn't take this public stance, backed up by a campaign donation, if she believed that HRC had done anything wrong.

[OnyxCollie]

31. Michael Mukasey?

Was Alberto Gonzalez not available for comment?

[Raymondo22]

51. NPR headline: "Mukasey Refuses to Call Waterboarding Torture"

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15413635

I would not want Mukasey's public support if I were running for office.

[DesertRat]

33. k&r

[former9thward]

35. LOL

As the link points out she is a contributor to the Clinton campaign. Not exactly neutral.

[pnwmom]

41. Why should she be neutral? She looked at HRC's record, including the email kerfuffle

and the Benghazi snooze, and decided that HRC was worthy of her financial support.

She's not taking money FROM Clinton, she's giving it TO her. And she wouldn't have done that, and continue to publicly speak for her, if she thought HRC had done something wrong.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. LOL

As the link points out she also prosecuted General Petraeus for violating 18 U.S.C. §1924


Can we stipulate she is in a better position to discuss the elements that need to be proven of the said statute than a random internet poster?

Thank you in advance.

[Justice]

52. The fact that she prosecuted Petraeus IS the point.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. Did you read the article?

Petraeus violated USC 18 -924 because he knowingly shared classified information with someone who didn't have a security clearance.

If I wasn't at the library I would copy and paste the statute but it's too time consuming...

In order for there to be a prosecution a person knowingly has to send classified information...

There is no evidence that Hillary Clinton knowingly sent classified information to someone without a security clearance.

[pnwmom]

55. The fact that she prosecuted Petraeus AND wouldn't prosecute Hillary

based on difference in their cases.

[former9thward]

61. Petraeus is a Republican.

She is a Democratic contributor. Clinton is a Democrat. I would rather have the views of someone neutral. That's just me I guess.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

66. Well

Does Hillary Clinton have a serious legal problem because she may have transmitted classified information on her private e-mail server? After talking with a half-dozen knowledgeable lawyers, I think this “scandal” is overstated. Using the server was a self-inflicted wound by Clinton, but it’s not something a prosecutor would take to court.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-hillary-clinton-e-mail-scandal-that-isnt/2015/08/27/b1cabed8-4cf4-11e5-902f-39e9219e574b_story.html

As to the alleged mishandling of classified information, once again, the relevant law is crystal clear. The pertinent federal statute requires “knowingly” transferring classified information to an unauthorized location. Transmitting information that wasn’t known to be classified — even if the failure to classify was an obvious mistake — is not a crime under this statute. The latest reporting makes clear that even the emails the CIA now contends contained Top Secret information had no classification markings and did not reference any sensitive intelligence methods or contain any other hallmarks of classified sourcing.

Some partisans and pundits trying to find a way around this obstacle are hoping to find a way to convict without the requisite knowledge and intent, perhaps by arguing that negligence should be good enough. But the deeper they dig into antiquated and inapt statutes involving the theft of battle plans and the like, the more obvious it becomes that no crime was committed here. And all the wishful thinking in the world from opportunist political opponents can’t change that.

Politics is a contact sport and it’s no surprise that those looking to keep a controversy in the news turn to ever more hyperbolic language and inflammatory charges. But that doesn’t make it right. Voters looking to evaluate these candidates should not have to wade through rivers of mud and phony outrage.

Republicans hoping to beat Hillary Clinton aren’t going to be bailed out by some mythical criminal prosecution in a case where there is clearly no evidence of any kind of crime. Perhaps they should spend a bit more time developing policies that might appeal to middle class Americans and a bit less on fantasy indictments and hysterical talking points that speak only to their extremist base.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/21/clinton-email-state-server-column/32042775/

[former9thward]

67. There was an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal

last week by the former Attorney General Michael Mukasey which stated the exact opposite. I know, people will say "He is a Bush appointee!". So that's why I want to see people who are 1) neutral and 2) knowledgeable about the specific facts in this case. Since the FBI is still investigating no one outside is familiar with all the facts.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

69. The text is clear

18 U.S.C.
United States Code, 2011 Edition
Title 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 93 - PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
Sec. 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov

§1924. Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a).
(c) In this section, the term “classified information of the United States” means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.
(Added Pub. L. 103–359, title VIII, §808(a), Oct. 14, 1994, 108 Stat. 3453; amended Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, §4002(d)(1)(C)(i), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1809.)
Amendments
2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–273 substituted “under this title” for “not more than $1,000,”.

There was an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last week by the former Attorney General Michael Mukasey which stated the exact opposite. I know, people will say "He is a Bush appointee!". So that's why I want to see people who are 1) neutral and 2) knowledgeable about the specific facts in this case. Since the FBI is still investigating no one outside is familiar with all the facts.


Michael Mukasey was the consigliere for a fascist junta. I couldn't care less what he thinks and I suspect Barack Obama's Department Of Justice holds him in similar low esteem.

[riversedge]

72. thanks for this. will keep for future reference.

[freshwest]

42. 42nd Rec. Let's see if any miods are changed. n/t

[blackspade]

43. The M$M is desperate to turn out another 'scandal'

[CTyankee]

47. sharing with my husband who is a staunch Hillary supporter but is not on DU...

I'm in Bernie's camp but this is good news...no downside to this story. I didn't want my guy to miss it...

[cynzke]

48. All This Article Refers To.....

is the CURRENT FBI INQUIRY to whether or not Clinton KNOWINGLY leaked classified information. It is a NARROW, confined inquiry. People get so wound up that they fail to see the CONTEXT of this issue. Whether or not Clinton is guilty of a myriad of crimes or not, the only thing the FBI is tasked to do in this inquiry is to examine this one question and one question ALONE. What happens after this at this point is speculation.

[Justice]

53. There is only one FBI inquiry - what the heck does this post MEAN?

Sounds like the poster is speculating!

[pnwmom]

56. So? That's because this is the only part of the whole kerfuffle that hasn't already

been thoroughly discredited.

The broad swath of unconfined inquiry is just a witch hunt. That is the real context.

[Raymondo22]

49. "...based on the known facts...."

That's a key qualification.

[pnwmom]

57. If they find out tomorrow that Hillary killed Vince Foster, that would

change everything even more.

So what?

They won't find anything wrong in either case. This is just part of the unending witch hunt that began decades ago, when Hillary first said she didn't come to the White House to bake cookies.

[Raymondo22]

58. Well, not that. But other problems might surface.

More classified or "should-be-classified" messages of a more serious nature, for example.

Worse still, some of her opponents have suggested that emails might be recovered showing that she might have traded State Department favors for contributions to the Clinton Foundation or to Bill for his speeches.

Of course, I am not endorsing these suggestions, which are probably "over the top" as someone explained that phrase to me.

[pnwmom]

64. Anyone MIGHT make any claim, against ANY of our candidates.

It's up to us to stop unfair attacks against any of them.

So far, you just seem to want to highlight them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. Raymondo - do you think we will finally learn what happened at Mena Intermountain Municipal Airport

Raymondo - do you think we will finally learn what happened at Mena Intermountain Municipal Airport ?

SARCASM

[ismnotwasm]

50. Sweet!

[asiliveandbreathe]

59. Why now Mukasey -

Jeb Bush foreign policy advisor - Media Matters has a great article -

www.mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/24/major-media-outlets-fail...

The team, which he/Bush unveiled in February, reflects a broad cross-section of GOP thinking, including two former secretaries of state, George Shultz and James Baker; two former CIA directors, Porter Goss and Michael Hayden; former attorney general Michael Mukasey and Paul Wolfowitz, a former deputy defense secretary and lead architect of the Iraq war. [The Washington Post, 4/10/15]

Why now???? -

[kelliekat44]

70. These are two absolutely different cases. The General actually should be in prison for what he did

intentionally.

[Calista241]

71. I can see it now

The pundits and commercials saying if she did it on purpose; it would have been a crime, but since she didn't, she's merely incompetent.

Can we please get Bernie the nomination. He's got the mojo with young people.