Oh No! Not a Special Prosecutor

[RobertEarl]

If you remember Whitewater like I do, you remember how the Special Prosecutor just kept digging until they hit Clinton dirt.

Damn if it isn't beginning to look like another one is gonna have to be appointed. Obama can't get involved, he needs to protect his legacy, and if the FBI finds intent, then it's gonna be a big mess.

How in the hell did this happen? Obama has been clean as a whistle. I guess he's facing some really difficult choices in the near future. Just what he needs, eh? One of his employees is under investigation and it ain't going away any time soon.

Damn!!

[hrmjustin]

1. These ops seem to be getting more desperate.

[George II]

49. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

[uponit7771]

71. +1

[awake]

2. Well your memory is a bit off it was "whitewater" not "watergate"

Whitewater involved the Clitons and Watergate involved Nixon

[RobertEarl]

4. Thanks, fixed

I was more focused on the meat of the OP.

[SFnomad]

15. Funny, because I don't see ANY meat in that OP whatsoever .. just more BS innuendo n/t

[RobertEarl]

18. You want Obama in trouble?

He has to wash his hands of this. Either way, indict or not, H's enemies will be on the attack just like with Whitewater, and that lead to impeachment!

[SFnomad]

24. FFS, you people really are desperate, aren't you? Sounds like something you'd hear on Faux "News" nt

[amborin]

79. this quotes NYT saying HRC gets her military advice from Fox news pundit:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511889539

[leveymg]

27. intent isn't necessary to conviction under those parts of Sec 793

Relevant parts of the Espionage Act are like DUI. You don't have to intend to break the law to end up in jail. Hillary needs to hand the keys to someone else.

[RobertEarl]

31. I bow to your wisdom and knowledge

It would be a real shame to see Obama get crucified because of this, this Servergate business.

[leveymg]

34. Time to bring this to the only possible conclusion.

Release her delegates and pardon her already.

[RobertEarl]

36. Pardon?

If Obama did that he would be in real trouble. However, if she just retired, it may blow over?

[leveymg]

41. After she releases her delegates because she is no longer viable

to run as the Democratic candidate after the FBI finds she violated her security clearance by mishandling classified materials. Yes. Pardon. Just like Bill Clinton pardoned his ex- CIA Director John Deutch for hooking up classified laptops to his home internet. That's the way it has been done.

[RobertEarl]

42. But this seems worse than Deutch

I mean her server was hacked by foreign spies if you believe the stories leaking out.

[leveymg]

51. It may be worse , but legally it's the same crime.

The outcome will probably be much the same.

[Bob41213]

66. No real doubt about it. If foreign spies didn't get in, they're probably in a prison right now

I put the odds of the Chinese and Russians at well over 95%. Hillary used her unencrypted server via blackberry on her trip to China a month or so into her service as SOS. Do you think the Chinese were monitoring cell phone traffic? Do you think they saw the server? I bet there are classified Chinese documents laughing about her server setup.

[George II]

52. Wash his hands of WHAT? You still haven't said, just vague innuendo in an apparent....

....desperate attempt to discredit "someone" in favor of another.

[Bill USA]

98. the mechanism of a McCarthyist campaign -- innuendo. "Who needs evidence?"_RNC

[George II]

47. Meat?

[msongs]

3. your memory of watergate is...faulty. watergate was about nixon, not clinton

[Fawke Em]

6. The FBI doesn't even need to find intent.

You either mishandle national defense data or you don't.

People who have unintentionally leaked national security information have been prosecuted.

[RobertEarl]

8. True that

But H is special. She's rich, she's famous and is powerful.

That means a Special Prosecutor is what's in store.

[Stallion]

12. That's Utter Nonsense

where did you get your legal degree

[dchill]

77. Do you need a degree...

To know a thing is illegal?

[Betty Karlson]

78. This ^

[jberryhill]

7. The special prosecutor law expired in the Bush administration

There is no statutory authority for appointment of special prosecutors anymore.

[RobertEarl]

11. How'd they get Libby?

That was special.

[Demsrule86]

17. He leaked

information to the media about Valerie Plame. How is that even relevant?

[Art_from_Ark]

58. Correction-- he was the fall guy for the Plame affair

The real culprit was Dick Cheney. It wouldn't look good to have Cheney admit to wrongdoing, so Libby was offered up as the sacrificial lamb, on the condition that Bush would commute his sentence, which he did, sparing Libby any actual jail time.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/06/libby.juror/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/02/AR2007070200825.html

[JDPriestly]

81. Libby supposedly got in trouble for lying, not for leaking as I understand it.

[SFnomad]

23. Scooter wasn't prosecuted by the US Office of the Independent Counsel ...

the one that searched for years for a crime and eventually found a consensual affair. You might want to do some research and figure out who actually prosecuted Scooter. .... hint, as was already said, it's not by special prosecutor.

[RobertEarl]

28. No time for that

If Obama asks for someone special I'm sure he can get one.

None of this is helping Obama. He;s between a rock and a hard place. He needs to wiggle out and someone special can help him.

[SFnomad]

30. He can't .. but don't let facts get in the way of your spew

"No time for that", eh? So you'd rather just continue to display your ignorance ... ok, gotcha.

[hrmjustin]

26. US Attorney.

[JDPriestly]

80. Libby got in trouble for lying, not for a security breach.

Please forgive me if I have misunderstood what you were writing. But I want to clarify that Libby got in trouble for perjury, not for something else that he did.

[hrmjustin]

25. There you go posting facts like that.

[Hoyt]

9. What exactly would her "intent" be? You think she was trying to disseminate secret info to

enemies?

[AgingAmerican]

22. To anyone without proper clearance

Would be my guess....

[Hoyt]

60. And why would she do that? IF there was anything going on, I think it will be some staffers, not

Clinton. But that's doesn't fit the agenda of Sanders getting the nomination.

[AgingAmerican]

72. I have no clue why

All I know is if she gets the nomination, and anyone gets indicted for her email problem, then the Democrats are history in 2016

[MrMickeysMom]

75. Not quite up to following through with following safeguards...

... goes with the responsibility. You're either up to it or you're not.

That seems to be her problem in a nutshell.

I'm sure she's a very nice mother, though.

[Hoyt]

88. Heck, Sanders has probably never read a really important national security email.

[MrMickeysMom]

90. Interesting that you're saying having access to information trumps knowing how to handle it...

Heck, she certainly hasn't passed the litmus test with how to handle the information that results in advising the President on foreign policy. I think that skill set puts her at risk for representing the United States abroad. As a lawyer, she should have at least had the legal competence in knowing how to handle information, but she didn't.

Bernie Sanders has demonstrated what to do with transparency of the budget process as a member of the Committee on Budget. Same to his work on the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, in where knowing WHAT to do with that information DIRECTLY affects working Americans.

His ability to read, comprehend, disseminate and legislate what was not previously made transparent resulted in progressive legislation that resulted in much needed transformation of the VA. That is because he KNEW how to handle access to what affects Committee on Veterans Affairs and the Joint Economic Committee.

She doesn't appear to CARE that she lacks those basic competencies.

[Hoyt]

91. Since there is no evidence information was compromised, she handled it well.

[MrMickeysMom]

92. Well, I suppose in YOUR mind, anyway...

... which is where most of these precious things tend to harvest the kind of compliments you send. You're counting on no due process, I see, except .....for what you think there is no evidence against. Got it.

Good luck with everything you deal with in life, included clinging on to that hope of another Chamelion nestled in the Bushes.

[left-of-center2012]

10. There's no mention of a Special Prosecuter

Is that a Trump talking point?

[RobertEarl]

13. Obama has got to be real careful

The last thing any of us want to see is Obama getting caught up in this gawd-awful mess. He needs to stay clean.

[tularetom]

14. He's the one who hired her and looked the other way while she ran a rogue State Dept.

He knew she was a snake when he appointed her.

I don't feel sorry for him. If he gets in a wringer over this he brought it on himself.

[Art_from_Ark]

63. "He knew she was a snake when he appointed her.

I don't feel sorry for him. If he gets in a wringer over this he brought it on himself."

My gut feeling is that he made a deal with her to avoid a convention floor fight-- Hillary wouldn't accept anything less than SoS. It's no surprise to me that Hillary was gone (one might even say "dismissed&quot soon after Obama was sworn in for his 2nd term.

[RobertEarl]

65. Really, she was not qualified for SoS

Except for Bill's knowledge.

Kerry has been running around putting out fires from her term.

[HereSince1628]

85. One of the problems of relying on staff to overcome weaknesses is

that there are a lot of 'Victoria Nulands' hanging around government. They have their personal policy views and are committed to achieving them. If a leader is poorly qualified they can be over-influenced by such people.

Cheney and the NeoCons did this to the nation during the W administration.

Although that sort of thing was diminished in the Obama administration the post-cold war philosophy of crowding the Russians aggravated them and blew up as the disaster on HRC's watch in Ukraine wrought by Nuland's machinations.

[JDPriestly]

82. My opinion also.

[Demsrule86]

16. So desperate

and so ridiculous.

[Demsrule86]

19. Do you have a link or is this just

fantasy?

[Dem2]

20. Wingnuttery

This is ridiculous hypothetical silliness.

[JoePhilly]

38. +1

[Demsrule86]

21. Whitewater was a bust for the GOP

And bill was elected twice...despite the GOP just like Obama and just like Hillary will be.

[MFM008]

29. Not a word on this anywhere

Therefore its crap.

[Trust Buster]

32. This is a truly ignorant thread. Kenneth Starr spent millions investigating the Clinton's as a

Special Prosecutor. HE FOUND ABSOLUTELY NOTHING !! He then violated federal law by sending an aide to meet with a prosecutor working on an unrelated case in Atlanta that involved Paula Jones. This led to Lewinski. For a poster on DU to make the false allegation that a special prosecutor found illegal behavior with respect to Whitewater when he didn't is beyond the pale. DU needs to lock this thread if they care to have a stitch of integrity. (Drop mic)

[Samantha]

33. Why did you say this? I am interested because that is also where I believe this is going

A special prosecutor takes Loretta Lynch off the hook. It will also delay a finding for probably two years. If Hillary wins the Democratic primary and should triumph over Trump, sitting in the Oval Office as President will give her a certain protection she does not now have. While the talk of a Republican impeachment rattles around, perhaps those spreading this do not realize a President can only be impeached for conviction of crimes committed during his or her term in office. A President cannot be impeached for a crime committed during the time frame before he or she took office. That is not to say a President cannot be forced out via other means; for instance, Nixon was talked into resigning based on the fact if he did not, the votes were there to impeach him. Nixon's crimes however were committed while he was in office.

The point is Hillary once she assumes her role as President (if she does in fact) cannot be impeached over crimes committed prior to her presidency. I do not see how a Special Prosecutor's investigation would be concluded before Inauguration Day. In other words, appointing a Special Prosecutor would be a stall tactic by the DOJ to drag this matter out so long it would simply fizzle from a lack of gas.

I heard the info from a Constitutional expert about the crime must have been committed during the President's term in office, not before. It was an interview some time ago, and I believe it was Jonathan Turley. I have found this which seems to back that up:

Relating to the President’s Official Duties

The fourth view is that an indictable crime is not required, but that the impeachable act or acts done by the President must in some way relate to his official duties. The bad act may or may not be a crime but it would be more serious than simply "maldministration." This view is buttresses in part by an analysis of the entire phrase "high crimes or misdemeanors" which seems to be a term of art speaking to a political connection for the bad act or acts. In order to impeach it would not be necessary for the act to be a crime, but not all crimes would be impeachable offenses.
- See more at: http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-system/presidential-impeachment-the-legal-standard-and-procedure.html#sthash.GuEPMiqj.dpuf

litigation.findlaw.com/legal-system/presidential-impeachment-the-legal-standard-and-procedure.html

In other words, this is a wordy way of saying what is a simple concept: drag the thing out until it dies on its own.

Sam

[RobertEarl]

40. They Impeached a Clinton once already

You think legal terms will stop them from another one?

The thing is, if Obama gets too caught up in this, he gets hurt. He needs to step clean away. Whether a special prosecutor or not a special prosecutor, he needs to do something, and do it fast!

[Samantha]

54. Legal terms won't stop them but a good Constitutional lawyer can

I have been worried about Obama getting caught up as well. In the cache of things dumped, I saw one thing that I knew could backfire on him and that is the last thing I want to see. I hope he is able to finish out his term without the stress of this debacle attaching to him.

Nothing gets done fast in Washington. It is the way it works. Mind numbing, isn't it?

Sam

[RobertEarl]

61. I'm pulling for Obama

I know for some that is not popular. Just look here on this thread with the H supporters denying he can get hurt. It's as if they don't even care about Obama!

[Samantha]

69. I voted for Obama both times

I have supported some of the things he has done vigorously and been disappointed with a couple of things, especially the TPP.

He has lent a lot of dignity to the Office, as well as the rest of his family being a wonderful example of a fine First Family. He has tried hard to do well, and he deserves a lot of credit for stepping in at a really bad time and working so hard to turn things around after the 2008 recession.

My hope for him is that he is able to finish his last term without scandal attaching and then having a wonderful, long vacation to try and recover some semblance of normalcy to his life.

Sam

[JDPriestly]

83. True but it is easy to find an excuse to impeach an unpopular president.

And if Hillary cannot handle this scandal, and thus far she has not handled it well, we could have a problem.

Nixon's Watergate seemed like nothing when it first was made public. Then it ballooned into something very large.

Impeachment is for actions that qualify for impeachment and occur during office.

But if a president were to be found to have violated the Espionage Act prior to taking office, we could have the same kind of mess we had with Watergate.

The problem with the e-mails is that they may incriminate Hillary and Bill Clinton for malfeasance having to do with money, with exchanges of money that might appear to be associated with doing favors or paying them. We have to wait and see, but there appear to be some possible problems involving donations to the Clinton Foundation, Bill's speeches, the timing of those speeches and business being done by the State Department. Hillary should have been extremely careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. Surely she understands how important that is. She is, after all, trained as an attorney.

So impeachment might not be the problem, but something equally harming could happen. The Democratic Party could find itself in a nightmare of a problem.

I remember when the news of the break-in at the Watergate broke. My neighbors thought it was nothing. It's only when a number of wrongs became apparent because of and in the course of the Watergate investigation that Nixon came to the point at which he had to resign.

I really thought Hillary's e-mails were unimportant. I am less sure of that now.

There is a tremendous show of anxiety and anger in the Hillary DUers right now. I don't know what is setting it off, but there maybe some news that we haven't heard yet, or they could be worried about West Virginia tomorrow and some of the remaining primaries.

Bernie will do well in California I think. At least in my area.

[hrmjustin]

35. This thread is comedy gold.

[rusty fender]

73. It is!

I laughed myself silly reading this

[Recursion]

37. Special Prosecutors don't exist anymore (nt)

[SidDithers]

39. ...

Sid

[George II]

43. Why do you post this garbage? Who? What? Why? Do you really think this.....

.....is going to change anything?

[Andy823]

59. The hate is strong in some posters

They hated Obama, the Democratic party, anyone that disagrees with their "thinking", and now of course Hillary. It's an addiction where they can't go very long without spewing some kind of insane hate. I also think they want to keep the board full of their asinine paranoid posts so that nobody can post things about Bernie. Lots of things are coming out about him, and his promises that they don't like, so they want to push everything off the board that sheds a bad light on the chosen one.

Also I really think they need a new supply of these:

[JDPriestly]

84. Are you old enough to remember Watergate? I am.

At first it seemed an inconsequential matter. But then the investigation of Watergate revealed a lot of activities that were possibly illegal and the public trust in Nixon evaporated to the point that he had to resign.

The problem for Hillary is whether there might have been some sort of pay to play going on or the appearance of pay to play.

In some countries in the world, that kind of corruption is expected. We do not allow it at least officially. But if the investigation or the documents show some financial hanky-panky or the appearance of corruption or conflicts of interest, then Hillary could be an unviable candidate.

When I see the venom coming out of the more strident Hillary supporters this evening, I honestly wonder whether some bad news is expected. Maybe they are just upset about possible primary victories for Bernie is some of the upcoming states, but I don't know.

I really thought the e-mail scandal was another Republican hissy-fit. I'm not so sure at this point.

[George II]

87. Yes, I was in my mid-20s at the time. As much as you people TRY to make this like....

Watergate, it's just not going to happen.

Face reality, it's NOT going to happen, and as destructive as his supporters try to be, Sanders will never get the nomination.

All that is being accomplished is giving Donald Trump a better chance of winning, but that's not going to work either.

[JTFrog]

44. Lol. Ok. This thread shows you are really really knowledgeable about these things.

Not.

[RobertEarl]

46. Not ok for Obama

His AG already warned the WH to step away.

Obama needs to leap away. You want him hurt?

[JTFrog]

50. Your stupid OP is taking a turn for the worse isn't it? Might want to do a little research. n/t

[whatchamacallit]

45. The Clintons have suggested Philip Zelikow

[RobertEarl]

48. Of course they would

He is a fixer.

[bigwillq]

53. Fitzmas!

[Samantha]

55. Back to my original question

what prompted you to say this?

Sam

[RobertEarl]

56. A little birdie

Landed on my lectern. Looked me in the eye and did a birdie mind meld. Birds are amazing. Some can even talk.

[hrmjustin]

57. .

[grasswire]

62. Hillary did it to him.

She either thought so little of him or so highly of herself that she ran a secretive rogue foreign policy out of his sight.

Now his administration and his legacy are at risk because of her recklessness.

[RobertEarl]

64. That's the point I tried to make

He could be in trouble if his loyalty makes him do the wrong thing.

[grasswire]

95. why would he feel any loyalty to her?

Why?

She screwed him over in the most cynical and despicable manner. More than once.

He can't trust her to protect his legacy.

[okasha]

67. Oh. You again.

Still think Bernie would send US forces to invade Japan to fix Fukushima?

[hrmjustin]

68. I remember that thread.

Was that the same thread where they said we don't have Bernie in our heart?

[okasha]

70. That thread was pretty hard to forget.

And it was also the one that brought out the true evangelical streak in Bernieism.


According to the brethren, you and I are headed straight for hellfire, friend.

[RobertEarl]

94. Invade?

You have just proven that you have no clue about much of anything.

Invade Japan?

Japan is occupied by thousands of US troops and has been since the end of WW2.

And you show how out-of-touch you are with attacking me about invading?

I often wonder how people can embarrass themselves so much on DU and continue to post. How do they do that? You seem to be an expert at it.

[okasha]

96. Nice try, but too many people remember that thread.

You're always good for a laugh, Robert, you little ray of sunshine, you.

[RobertEarl]

97. The rays coming from Fukushima

Those rays are killing the sea life of the coast of North America.

I get you either don't know, and if you do, don't care, but some of us are scientifically literate and do care about the damages.

Invade Japan? Troops are already there, all they have to do is take care of business, because the Japanese sure are not.

One can get more info about Fukushima at ENEnews.com .... But be warned, there is no good news.

[LexVegas]

74. Don't lose mad. Just lose. nt

[mikehiggins]

76. Congratulations! This is today's craziest OP.

Nobody is talking about appointing a Special Prosecutor. In fact, I believe it isn't even legal to appoint one anymore.

First there has to be a crime to be investigated and/or prosecuted. The FBI is doing the investigating and the Justice Department will handle any prosecution if any Federal laws have, in fact, been violated.

So far, outside of the fumblings and mumblings on the right, nothing has been brought forth that rises to the level of criminality. Sure, using a private server may show a level of bad judgment but a criminal act? Not at all.

As a Sanders supporter I have a whole thumb drive crammed full of reasons to oppose her but this? Its just as much bullshit as Benghazi.

She is not a crook. She just represents a way of political thought that I opposed. That's okay.

[NCTraveler]

86. I don't see how we aren't witnessing the Sanders campaign last desperate push.

This is just wild. Things like this are feeding down from rhetoric at the top. Feels good being a Clinton supporter and not having to do this crap.

[hobbit709]

89. I'm waiting for the "I am not a crook" statement.

[pdsimdars]

93. The AG can appoint a Special Council now days.