Sh*t getting real. If he has immunity, then refusal to testify = contempt and jail. Stay away from Ft. Marcy Park
The Justice Department has granted immunity to the former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary 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.
As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents will likely want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.
The inquiry comes against a sensitive political backdrop in which Clinton is the favorite to secure the Democratic nomination for the presidency.
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. no, nothing to see, go about your bizness
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/03/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11125 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"You have to ask, at this point, what difference does it make?"
#2
Amazing how WaPo and NYT just don't seem to care. Remember this when they start throwing rocks at Republicans.
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
03/03/2016 0:52 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The words are clear indicators. Immunity...Immunity from prosection, not immunity from a mere inquiry. Immunity is not offered unless the prosecutor has established probable cause in his/her mind that a crime has occurred. You can conclude that the Justice Department has physical evidence that they wish to be corroborated by Pagliano. He will have to cooperate fully to maintain the immunity...or face charges. The odds of a grand jury have increased immeasurably.
#6
He may also testify that he told Hillary everything was secure. That it was he who violated the policy and that she never ordered him to do anything illegal. After all he has immunity and she has control of a huge charitable foundation.
I've been thinking that they would stall and dither till after the election, but, you're idea may be the first one I heard as a way to get all the Demorats out of this mess.
WaPo and NYT will scream this to the world if that's the way it goes. Hillary uber alles!!
#8
Interesting theory, but if the Feds to have evidence to confirm, and his testimony flies in the face of other data, I suppose they'd hang him out to dry for perjury?
Hillary and Co. can't be any smarter than the Underworld Kingpins (to avoid ethnic stereotypes).
Posted by: Bobby ||
03/03/2016 8:32 Comments ||
Top||
#9
They're running this business to ground far too close to the election. If she is removed from the running prior to the election, will the candidacy default to Sanders? Will a new candidate have time emerge and prepare. Will the 22nd be set aside permitting the Champ an extension ?
If she loses the election and is brought up on charges imediately afterward, will the Trump hating 'beltway party' claim the election was spoiled by scandal and seek to have it declared invalid ?
If she wins the election in November, will Champ simply pardon her and her evil minions before he leaves office.
I smell a potential train wreck of epic proportion.
#10
Gotta love CNN - The FBI reviewers oversaw the process that upgraded the emails now known to be highly sensitive ....
As if the SAP stuff needed to upgraded. Most of the info on the emails was classified the BEFORE it migrated to the unclass network. Why can't CNN understand that?? So in the tank for the Beast - who keeps calling this a security review or inquiry. She knows exactly what this is and knows she's into up to her neck.
Posted by: Bangkok Billy ||
03/03/2016 8:36 Comments ||
Top||
#11
They're probably ALL 'back-channeling' classified material on UNCLAS systems to avoid FOIA, and have been for years. And if the Russians, Chinese, did I mention the Chinese? ....and others have not been hacking every keystroke, shame on them as well.
The assumption must be made that foreign intelligence services gained full access. How could any competent damage assessment effort assume otherwise? Could there have possibly been a higher priority target? I think not.
My guess is, this thing is much, much bigger than Clinton, and the wrong doing is spread across both political parties.
#12
Sorry Bobby but I think you're making one mistake.
Hillary and Co. can't be any smarter than the Underworld Kingpins
Smarter? No. More connected? By the power of 100.
Don't approach this as though Hillary and the Feds are on opposite sides. This is nothing more than an inrarmural squabble. They're keeping it all in the family so to speak
#13
Hilda is an expert in the dance to avoid prosecution through the use of language and pleas of ignorance. Someone(s) already being primed to plead out to the stripping and support Hildies' claim of no marking. Leniency promises and a fat career post conviction plus the dangle of a pardon will be the icing. Mills or Sullivan or some dupes most likely. Not Huma, she has too important a personal role and will be in residence at 1600.
#14
Yup, that's why I come here - to be cheered up! \sarc
Posted by: Bobby ||
03/03/2016 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#15
It would seem Mr. Pagliano's immunity suggests the proceedings for a grand jury are underway or possibly already convened. It's also quite likely others have been offered simmilar protections. Sec. Clinton's visit to a Federal building is not a if but a when. The outcome of these sitdowns is still very much in question.
#16
Weird thing is that if anything happens to this guy, or any of his family, no matter how innocent and explainable, Hillary will be blamed (even if not prosecuted).
#17
Could be a weird way to blackmail her. Give me $ or ? or we'll whack the guys wife and the world will assume it was you Hillary. Think about that as you transfer the money to the account our people will send to you.
#20
The FBI slow walking this investigation is either comforting (they are that isolated from politics?) or frightening (the Justice department is that corrupt?).
When do they plan to act?
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
03/03/2016 18:55 Comments ||
Top||
#21
@Besoaker - The Donk Convention will open with a vote of the delegates to adopt the rules of the convention as set forth the day before by the rules committee. If the Hildebeeste is indicted and it's getting a bit too hot said rules committee can simply set forth a rule that, for example, prohibits anyone under active federal indictment from being nominated. All her delegates would free up and it would be game on from there.
#23
Getting ready to say the same thing: the FBI is very careful about offering immunity. They do it when
1) they have a pretty good idea what you're going to say
2) they have a pretty firm hold on your manly/lady parts
That they've offered immunity to Mr. Pagliano says that the FBI knows (and his lawyer knows) that he's going down the river. They don't need his testimony or his cooperation to convict him. They can convict him at any point in time after an indictment has been proffered. They know it. He knows it.
They offered him a chance to sing, and he's going to sing. He's already agreed and likely is (and has been) singing; otherwise the immunity deal wouldn't have been made. The FBI already knew what he was going to say -- he can't take all the blame now because if he tries the FBI will then indict him -- for perjury. That will then invalidate the immunity agreement, and he gets EXTRA time in prison.
He's singing. Who's next up on the food chain?
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/03/2016 20:58 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Setting up a server isn't a crime, so I don't quite get the immunity thing.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
03/03/2016 21:10 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Setting up a server to circumvent established secure communications rules/laws is, EC. This isn't a plumber or electrician. Who directed him?
I'm hoping Cheryl Mills, Patrick Kennedy, and Huma discover that orange isn't really the new black, it's a fricking jumpsuit, not unlike their bosses' Dr Evil pantsuits
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/03/2016 21:17 Comments ||
Top||
#26
I would be very surprised if Hillary told him that he was going to set up a server for that purposes.
But then again I don't know what the law says in that regard (regarding the administrator).
Hillary almost certainly broke the law. The consequences could be important.
Polls currently give Sanders a better chance to beat Trump.
Posted by: European Conservative ||
03/03/2016 21:26 Comments ||
Top||
Welcome to the NEW WHIG PARTY! Romney enjoy killing the Whig er Republican party. BECAUSE, OBVIOUSLY, The opinion of the voters does not matter to you elites.
Mitt Romney delivered a sweeping broadside against Donald Trump on Thursday, laying into the Republican presidential front-runner with a sharper attack than any of the party's 2016 contenders have made against the billionaire business mogul.
"Here's what I know: Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud," Romney said. "His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He's playing members of the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House, and all we get is a lousy hat."
#1
"Here's what I know: Donald Trump Champ is a phony, a fraud," Romney said. "His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He's playing members of the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House, and all we get is a lousy hat health care plan/tax."
And had you been elected, Mitt, I suspect a lot of us would still feel the same way.
Posted by: Bobby ||
03/03/2016 12:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Donald Trump to speak about Romney attack at 1:30PM ET
#5
My thoughts are that Rubio has placed the word "con artist" there as part of larger strategery, along with a couple other suspicious nuggets over the last few days. Romney, apparently an establishment tool, has assembled these pieces along with other items (such as Trumps returns, which I don't care about) that just don't seem to die no matter how much Trump disavows or explains. Things like making up stories about how everyone calls him "The Donald" as a badge of disrespect. I thought Melania came up with that, and it doesn't seem disrespectful. Or I'm sure Trump would have said something about it long ago.
AFAIAC, we are heading towards socialism. Rather than let the planners get their "share", I'll take the chance that the whole thing burns to the ground rather than they get anything. Personally, I don't think Trump would let that happen.
#8
And if The Donald is any kind of KKK Grand Wizard, why did Romney accept his endorsement years ago? After all, according to Romney's own words, accepting such an endorsement would be horrible. All The Donald wanted to do was look into who was behind a couple of obscure groups before he made a decision, which is more than I can say of the current PoS inhabiting the Whitehouse.
#9
If Romney had said "Gee, you know, Trump's an OK-ish guy, but I really like Cruz" it might have actually accomplished something. But saying "OMG! This Nazi actually means what he said when he endorsed me four years ago!" isn't going to do jack shit but add to Trump's vote totals.
#12
If you listen to Romney's speech in its entirety, you will agree with him. Unless of course you are really a Hillary supporter.
The bulk of his speech addressed real issues. Snippets of broad conclusions sound like and are no better than Trump's comments about his rivals, but are not the important content of the speech; unless reason and facts have nothing to do with the election.
Hard to say if this is accurate or even when it was said, but it makes it sound like Trump may have been telling a falsehood when he said he'd release his taxes when the audit was over.
#15
Lions don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep.
Posted by: regular joe ||
03/03/2016 15:05 Comments ||
Top||
#16
If you listen to Romney's speech in its entirety, you will agree with him. Unless of course you are really a Hillary supporter.
For people who live in the fantasy of the old republic. It's over. It's done. It's not about Democrats vs Republicans or socialists vs conservatives. It's about power and how the ruling caste walked away from the bulk of the political body to impose their view of the world by dividing and in doing so alienated so many they created the situation they face now. The outer party and proles are realizing their choice is in a leader who will at least articulate their frustrations and address them, cause the ruling caste has refused to even though empowered to do so. Lip service. It's now a choice of Caesar, Pompey or Crassus.
#18
The Republican leadership has been increasingly out of touch with voters since they turned their backs on Barry Goldwater.
At that time they were called Rockefeller Republicans and while the names changed the Noblesse Oblige attitude remained the same. "They are my people...I love them. PULL!"
#19
Neil Cavuto said that today something he had never seen before. When Trump started his speech the traders on the floor quit trading and watched the speech - for the whole 50 mins!
#20
Releasing tax returns is just smoke and mirrors for the rubes when real assets are parked in corporations and trusts (legit) and foundations (dodgy).
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/03/2016 16:29 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Romney's message is pure desperation and continuation of how out of touch the republican leadership is with voters.
I thought pretty highly of the man until recently. I hope he's not being coached by the RNC.
#22
Neil Cavuto said that today something he had never seen before. When Trump started his speech the traders on the floor quit trading and watched the speech - for the whole 50 mins!
I've been watching market reaction as well. As Trumps nomination solidified, an upturn would not surprise me much.
#24
lblis, I have been scratching my head trying to figure out what Romney was doing. A 3rd party run doesn't make sense; Mitt would lose. Are the do nothing Congressmen and Senators so afraid of losing their perks that they would rather have the Democrats continue to control the WH?
The party eating itself is just plain stupid. What a bunch of idiots. There is no justification for this; none.
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
03/03/2016 18:47 Comments ||
Top||
#25
You forget that under a Donk, the Senators and Congresscritters still get perks. They're protected. They threw us over the side a long time ago.
#26
Its got to be Cruz...or Trump. Anything else will just be 4 more years of the same bullshit PLUS a loss of momentum that will end with a Dem in the White House again in 4 years. Cruz and...Trump...are the only 2 guys who even pretend to give a damn about "the rest of us".
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
