I believe that as the case evolves we are going to find out two things - there are additional classified documents involved that are to secret that their very existence cannot be revealed in a public filing. How the prosecution will handle this in front of Judge MAGA Cannon and Trump's strip mall ambulance chasers is going to be a challenge. Secondly, we will also find out, either during the trial or because of the work of some intrepid journalist, that the Dumpster sold secrets to foreign governments. Frankly, I have no doubt Smith already has the evidence, but is sitting on it because of the real disruption that would cause to the American psyche.
Sunday’s edition of The Charlotte Observer contained a column by Ken Bell, a former assistant U.S. attorney, who challenges FBI Director James Comey’s conclusion that no reasonable prosecutor would indict Secretary Clinton.
Although I’m sure that Mr. Bell was a conscientious U.S. attorney, he was a Republican nominee for Congress in 1990, so his partisan perspective on the investigation cannot be overlooked
. In contrast to Mr. Bell’s conclusion based on a “five-minute Google search,” Director Comey’s decision not to indict was the result of an investigation “requiring thousands of hours of effort.”
Mr. Bell quotes Comey’s comment that “only facts matter,” so let’s examine the facts: Secretary Clinton’s testimony before the Benghazi Committee confirmed that she used a secure system to transmit items known to be classified. The intense focus on her emails relates to communications on her personal account, which was never intended for classified communications.
State Department rules for marking classified items require specific headings and other markers to indicate classification status. As Comey noted, it was reasonable for Secretary Clinton to conclude that emails that did not contain such markers were not classified. Out of the thousands of emails received from hundreds of professional diplomats, not a single one contained all required markings indicating classified status. Although the FBI review indicated that 110 emails (out of over 30,000) “should have been” classified at the time, none of those emails sent and received by those professionals contained the required markings.
Clinton was not the first Secretary of State to use a personal e-mail account. Secretary Powell has acknowledged using a personal e-mail account for communicating about State Department matters. The State Department Inspector General report stated that Secretary Powell did not retain those e-mails. Secretary Clinton, on the other hand, has provided tens of thousands of e-mails. The Inspector General also noted that Secretary Powell and staff working for Secretary Rice received classified e-mails on personal accounts.
Mr. Bell asserts that Secretary Clinton “intended to keep classified e-mails on unsecured servers.” There is absolutely no evidence to support that claim. As conceded by Comey, Secretary Clinton had every reason to rely on the determinations made by career diplomats that the materials did not require classification. .
Mr. Bell claims that “Clinton placed her compulsion for privacy and personal convenience above the security interests of the country.” Again, there is no evidence to support such a claim – just as there is no reason to believe that Secretary Powell did so.
It is unfortunate that the enemies of Secretary Clinton find it necessary to fabricate a claim about her veracity based on insignificant marks embedded in three out of 30,000-plus emails. It is my hope that the American people will see through those efforts and see her as a distinguished public servant who, in the words of President Obama, is the most qualified person ever to run for President.
@Dean Obeidallah Even before the indictment came out, the idea that what Trump allegedly did was comparable to Joe Biden or Hunter Biden or Hillary Clinton was silly. Criminal charges against an ex-president are unprecedented, yes. An ex-president committing felonies that put US National Security at risk is too. But the norm is what it's always been: Ex-presidents deserve deference (and Trump repeatedly got it), but ultimately no one is above the law.
Though the special counsel, Jack Smith, begins the proceedings with some significant pluses, he faces a much tougher road than prosecutors typically do.
If you ignore Trump’s lawless behavior. His danger to democracy. His betrayal of U.S. national security interests, trading secret document to foreign. You are left with a crude, ignorant, lying, abusive fellow.
The chief clerk of the federal court system South Florida, Angela E. Noble, confirmed that Judge Aileen M. Cannon would continue to oversee the case unless she recused herself. Certain factors increased the odds she'd get it. Cannon has the case for the duration absent any recusal.
Trump legal woes by the numbers:
17 (felonies for which his business was convicted)
5 million (dollars ordered to pay for sexually abusing Jean Carroll)
34 (New York felony counts)
37 (federal felony counts)
2 (potential future indictments)
Countless (former Trump lawyers)
Essentially all that prosecutors need to show is that he knew he had sensitive stuff, that the government asked for it back, that he refused to givenit all back, and that he lied about not giving it all back, and he’s guilty on all 37 felony counts. Smith has multiple times the evidence he needs to prove these felonies beyond a reasonable doubt. He (TRUMP) kept intelligence documents because those secrets could be used in a transaction...He may not have known how and when he would cash in this currency, but there can be little doubt that he was determined to retain the ability to do just that.
I believe that as the case evolves we are going to find out two things - there are additional classified documents involved that are to secret that their very existence cannot be revealed in a public filing. How the prosecution will handle this in front of Judge MAGA Cannon and Trump's strip mall ambulance chasers is going to be a challenge. Secondly, we will also find out, either during the trial or because of the work of some intrepid journalist, that the Dumpster sold secrets to foreign governments. Frankly, I have no doubt Smith already has the evidence, but is sitting on it because of the real disruption that would cause to the American psyche.
Agreed. Apples and oranges. Yes. They’re both fruits, but different.
Trump f’d up!
Can’t wait until he’s jailed and this nightmare ends.
me too!!!
A column I wrote in 2016 explains the absence of a case against Clinton: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article89697407.html
David- your article has a paywall or I would gladly read it
Sunday’s edition of The Charlotte Observer contained a column by Ken Bell, a former assistant U.S. attorney, who challenges FBI Director James Comey’s conclusion that no reasonable prosecutor would indict Secretary Clinton.
Although I’m sure that Mr. Bell was a conscientious U.S. attorney, he was a Republican nominee for Congress in 1990, so his partisan perspective on the investigation cannot be overlooked
. In contrast to Mr. Bell’s conclusion based on a “five-minute Google search,” Director Comey’s decision not to indict was the result of an investigation “requiring thousands of hours of effort.”
Mr. Bell quotes Comey’s comment that “only facts matter,” so let’s examine the facts: Secretary Clinton’s testimony before the Benghazi Committee confirmed that she used a secure system to transmit items known to be classified. The intense focus on her emails relates to communications on her personal account, which was never intended for classified communications.
State Department rules for marking classified items require specific headings and other markers to indicate classification status. As Comey noted, it was reasonable for Secretary Clinton to conclude that emails that did not contain such markers were not classified. Out of the thousands of emails received from hundreds of professional diplomats, not a single one contained all required markings indicating classified status. Although the FBI review indicated that 110 emails (out of over 30,000) “should have been” classified at the time, none of those emails sent and received by those professionals contained the required markings.
Clinton was not the first Secretary of State to use a personal e-mail account. Secretary Powell has acknowledged using a personal e-mail account for communicating about State Department matters. The State Department Inspector General report stated that Secretary Powell did not retain those e-mails. Secretary Clinton, on the other hand, has provided tens of thousands of e-mails. The Inspector General also noted that Secretary Powell and staff working for Secretary Rice received classified e-mails on personal accounts.
Mr. Bell asserts that Secretary Clinton “intended to keep classified e-mails on unsecured servers.” There is absolutely no evidence to support that claim. As conceded by Comey, Secretary Clinton had every reason to rely on the determinations made by career diplomats that the materials did not require classification. .
Mr. Bell claims that “Clinton placed her compulsion for privacy and personal convenience above the security interests of the country.” Again, there is no evidence to support such a claim – just as there is no reason to believe that Secretary Powell did so.
It is unfortunate that the enemies of Secretary Clinton find it necessary to fabricate a claim about her veracity based on insignificant marks embedded in three out of 30,000-plus emails. It is my hope that the American people will see through those efforts and see her as a distinguished public servant who, in the words of President Obama, is the most qualified person ever to run for President.
Thanks for posting
Al Gore was at least tied with her as the most qualified person to run for president.
@Dean Obeidallah Even before the indictment came out, the idea that what Trump allegedly did was comparable to Joe Biden or Hunter Biden or Hillary Clinton was silly. Criminal charges against an ex-president are unprecedented, yes. An ex-president committing felonies that put US National Security at risk is too. But the norm is what it's always been: Ex-presidents deserve deference (and Trump repeatedly got it), but ultimately no one is above the law.
Though the special counsel, Jack Smith, begins the proceedings with some significant pluses, he faces a much tougher road than prosecutors typically do.
If you ignore Trump’s lawless behavior. His danger to democracy. His betrayal of U.S. national security interests, trading secret document to foreign. You are left with a crude, ignorant, lying, abusive fellow.
The chief clerk of the federal court system South Florida, Angela E. Noble, confirmed that Judge Aileen M. Cannon would continue to oversee the case unless she recused herself. Certain factors increased the odds she'd get it. Cannon has the case for the duration absent any recusal.
Trump legal woes by the numbers:
17 (felonies for which his business was convicted)
5 million (dollars ordered to pay for sexually abusing Jean Carroll)
34 (New York felony counts)
37 (federal felony counts)
2 (potential future indictments)
Countless (former Trump lawyers)
Essentially all that prosecutors need to show is that he knew he had sensitive stuff, that the government asked for it back, that he refused to givenit all back, and that he lied about not giving it all back, and he’s guilty on all 37 felony counts. Smith has multiple times the evidence he needs to prove these felonies beyond a reasonable doubt. He (TRUMP) kept intelligence documents because those secrets could be used in a transaction...He may not have known how and when he would cash in this currency, but there can be little doubt that he was determined to retain the ability to do just that.
https://prada.substack.com/p/trump-vs-strzok-vs-solomon-bigger