Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览安德鲁·纳波利塔诺(Andrew Napolitano)档案
希拉里·克林顿和联邦调查局

书签 全部切换变革理论添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

2 月 XNUMX 日,联邦调查局 (FBI) 发布了对希拉里·克林顿 (Hillary Clinton) 调查的详细解释,以及针对她收集到的证据的摘要。它还发布了克林顿七月份联邦调查局审讯的摘要。

审讯在某些方面是标准的,但在其他方面却非常令人不安。这是标准的,因为她面对她发送或收到的电子邮件,并被问到她是否记得这些电子邮件,她对这些电子邮件的判断受到挑战。联邦调查局正在寻找她在保护国家机密方面的行为是否存在重大过失。

未能获取委托人保管的国家机密被称为间谍活动,而间谍活动是一种罕见的不需要检察官证明被告意图的联邦犯罪。他们只需证明被告有重大过失即可。

在审讯过程中,联邦调查局特工一度试图欺骗她,这是法律允许的。在审讯开始之前,特工拿走了克林顿发给助手的一封无害电子邮件的硬拷贝,并将其标记为“秘密”。

然后,在审问她时,他们问克林顿是否认识这封电子邮件及其内容。她说她不认识它,但她质疑这个“秘密”教派,并向特工指出,电子邮件中没有任何秘密。

通过检查电子邮件的内容,看看它是否包含国家机密(显然没有),克林顿表现出了对法律的认识,即文件或电子邮件的内容使其受到联邦机密的保护。法规,而不是寄件人所指定的面额。

这增加了对她的指控,因为她后来告诉联邦调查局,她从未关注过文件是否包含国家机密。在间谍起诉的奇怪世界中,这种否认意图就是承认有罪,因为国务卿的职责就是承认国家机密并将其保存在受政府保护的安全场所,而严重疏忽的失败这样做是犯罪行为。

联邦调查局 (FBI) 在审讯过程中记录了克林顿 39 次声称严重失忆的情况。她还声称不知道政府文件页边空白处的“C”是什么意思。页边空白处的“C”表示“机密”,是联邦国家机密的三级之一。另外两个级别是“秘密”和“绝密”。根据联邦法律,克林顿必须将这三类所有文件保存在安全的政府场所。联邦调查局发现她已经有数百次未能做到这一点。

否认她注意到了页边空白处指出存在秘密的注释,否认她在看到秘密时就认出了一个秘密,并否认计划中的无人机袭击地点是秘密(联邦调查局特工向她提出的一个明显的秘密) ),她成功避免了自证其罪。

但通过使自己免遭起诉,她可能注定了她的总统竞选失败。在这个危险的世界里,一个寻求总统职位的人怎么能对什么是秘密、什么不是秘密如此愚蠢、无知、冷漠、鲁莽或欺骗呢?

立即订购

上周公布的记录还显示,联邦调查局从一开始就被限制进行积极的调查。它没有向大陪审团提供任何证据。它没有向大陪审团索要任何传票,因此也没有送达任何传票。它没有向法官请求任何搜查令,因此也没有发出任何搜查令。它在案件中收集的数据和硬件是为了响应它提出的简单请求而提供给它的。

我在报告中数了一下,联邦调查局有五次哀叹它没有得到所需的东西。这是联邦调查局自己的错。联邦调查局这种不温不火的行为在现代联邦执法中是新颖的。它不利于公共安全和法治。这与联邦调查局高级官员在办公室的不当行为很接近。

有人制止了FBI。

联邦调查局没有向克林顿提出激进的后续问题。审讯者只是愉快地接受了她的答案。他们未能向她出示她签署的文件,这些文件与她告诉他们的内容相矛盾,特别是她在上任第一天签署的誓言,承诺在接触国家机密时承认这些机密,并将其保存在安全的场所。当她的律师告诉他们,如果她的回答被录音,她将不会回答问题时,特工们没有记录她的审讯,违反了司法部的政策。

现在,联邦调查局通过公布这些文件介入了总统竞选。尽管有大量证据表明克林顿有罪,但公布针对一个不会被起诉的人收集的证据是非常不恰当和极不公平的。此外,只公布部分证据——只公布特工希望公众看到的证据——而不是完整的文件是有倾向性的。然而,根据司法部的规定,所有这些证据都是秘密的。如果其中任何内容是供大陪审团使用或提交给大陪审团的,那么将其发布将构成犯罪。

这里发生了什么?联邦调查局严重失误,克林顿更担心的是被起诉,而不是输掉总统竞选。

显然,联邦调查局管理层中的一些人盲目地听从了他们被告知要做的事情——为希拉里·克林顿开脱。对于联邦调查局从一开始就未能使用其可用的普通执法工具,没有其他解释。然而,联邦调查局的一些人对这一结果并不满意。他们知道,由于政治原因,起诉和定罪的有力理由被忽视。

他们还知道什么?

版权所有2016 Andrew P.Napolitano。 由Creators.com分发。

 
• 类别: 思想 •标签: 2016选举, 希拉里·克林顿 
隐藏11条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. There never was any intent to investigate Ms. Clinton’s activity with the intent to prosecute if grounds for same were discovered. The FBI and DoJ performed a whitewashing exercise, and are now thoroughly discredited. Clinton ad her crowd laugh at the FBI like a dog in a hat, while people who used to count on the FBI to help them are horrified and afraid of what the Bureau has become.

    It is exceedingly unlikely that the FBI will ever need, want, or require anything from me. I am not a criminal or a public official, and I don’t do anything that is of any interest to them, or anyone else, for that matter. But… The FBI needs me desperately. They need people like me to give them the authority to perform investigations and be believed, even deferred to, when results of those investigations are released. They do not have me. I would not cross the street to help the FBI, or any organization associated with them. The FBI should be disbanded. They are unworthy of public trust, and are a threat to national security.

    They look past Clinton’s crimes. They will have no second thoughts about making one up out of whole cloth for anyone else. Disarm them, and send them on their way while we still can.

  2. woodNfish 说:

    The FBI, like the rest of the federal mafia, is a criminal organization. Anyone who doubted the truth of this before no longer has any reason to doubt it. Welcome to the fascist banana republic police state known as the USA.

  3. Napolitano says it best:

    “I counted five times in the report where the FBI lamented that it did not have have what it needed. This is the FBI’s own fault. This tepid FBI behavior is novel in modern federal law enforcement. It is inimical to public safety and the rule of law. It is close to misconduct in office by high-ranking FBI officials.

    “Someone restrained the FBI.”

    Remember that secret meeting at the Phoenix airport between “Blow Job Bill” Clinton and U.S. Shyster General Loretta Lynch? What did those two REALLY discuss, one wonders. . . .

  4. Rehmat 说:

    In July 2016, James Comey, FBI director accused Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton of “having been extremely careless” in handling classified information on her private e-mail server while serving as US secretary of state under Barack Obama’s first administration. Comey also recommended that the US Justice Department should not charge her for such petty crime.

    “Although the Department of Justice makes the final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to the department our views that no charges is appropriate in this case. Although there is evidence of potential violation of the statutes regarding the handling of the classified, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey said on TV relayed from FBI headquarters.

    Just imagine had it been Hillary Clinton’s so-called ‘Muslim aide’ Huma Abedin even though she is married to a disgraced Jewish sex-maniac and former Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner. The Jewish Lobby would have accused her of “stealing and passing the classified information to her father who allegedly was a former sympathizer of Jew-hating Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

    Last year James Comey refused to call Dylann Roof who killed nine worshippers at the Charleston church, a terrorist. Why? Because the term ‘terrorist’ is reserved for Muslim extremists (here).

    “科米对奥巴马政府及其强大的精英们的党派政治利益ko头,将加剧对美国体系的信念的侵蚀,并嵌入一个痛苦的党派关系,这将需要十年甚至更长的时间来弥合。 我敢肯定,他期待着一个愤怒的反应,他也应该期待着持续的愤怒。 公众对联邦政府的信任度接近历史最低点,而科米的决定是沉重的打击。 精英主义者应该为持续不尊重他们喜欢的法律做准备。 厌倦了裙带政府和裙带资本主义的美国人口中有很大一部分将开始尝试进行公民抗命。 作为前社区组织者,奥巴马总统无异议。”奥斯丁湾教授(德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校)在5月XNUMX日评论道。

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/07/06/fbis-comey-dont-indict-hillary-for-her-crimes/

    • 回复: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  5. 我无法理解的是,科米为什么要这么做?钱?未来的职业承诺?他不太可能竞选公职。某事的评判首席执行官

    尽管有这么多的批评,他知道其中大部分会落在他身上,但无论是什么对科米来说都一定很强大,但我无法想象它会是什么。

    • 回复: @Miles Long
  6. No reasonably intelligent person can believe her story.

    The woman is a liar!

    就这么简单。

    • 回复: @Orville H. Larson
  7. @Rehmat

    “Comey’s kowtow to the partisan political interests of the Obama Administration and its powerful elitists will add to the erosion of faith in the American system and embed a bitter partisanship that will take a decade or more to bridge. . . .” — Prof. Austin Bay

    I believe that Professor Bay is overly optimistic with his analysis. There won’t be a “decade or more” to bridge much of anything if this shrew become president.

  8. Miles Long 说:
    @Jim Sweeney

    吉姆·斯威尼……认为文斯·福斯特和你的问题可能会得到解答。

  9. comey is another in a long line of fakes. he runs through the gamut of lies & illegal behavior(but left out destroying evidence)to essentially cya. then embarks on another cya tactic: no prosecutor would take the case, so i won’t bother to follow up and recommend charges. how disingenuous.
    comey, like lynch – indeed, like the supreme court – is a politician.
    what’s law got to do with it?

  10. @Connecticut Famer

    “No reasonably intelligent person can believe her story.”

    Yeah, but are the American sheeple “reasonably intelligent”?

    • 回复: @Connecticut Famer
  11. @Orville H. Larson

    Good question, Mr. Larson, good question. I hope they are in this case—but I sure as hell wouldn’t count on it.

当前评论者
说:

发表评论-对超过两周的文章发表评论,将在质量和语气上进行更严格的判断


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有Andrew Napolitano评论