Summit Treestands
Would you lie to the FBI?
Community
Contributors to this thread:
Mint 28-Jan-19
Owl 28-Jan-19
Spike Bull 28-Jan-19
bigswivle 28-Jan-19
Woods Walker 28-Jan-19
Woods Walker 28-Jan-19
kentuckbowhnter 28-Jan-19
Will 28-Jan-19
HedgeHunter 28-Jan-19
Grey Ghost 28-Jan-19
bad karma 28-Jan-19
Rocky 28-Jan-19
JTV 28-Jan-19
bad karma 28-Jan-19
Rhody 28-Jan-19
longbeard 28-Jan-19
slade 28-Jan-19
TD 28-Jan-19
Thumper 28-Jan-19
Shuteye 28-Jan-19
KSflatlander 28-Jan-19
Mint 28-Jan-19
HedgeHunter 28-Jan-19
bad karma 28-Jan-19
HedgeHunter 28-Jan-19
Dale06 28-Jan-19
HA/KS 28-Jan-19
Rocky 28-Jan-19
mn_archer 28-Jan-19
spike78 28-Jan-19
Annony Mouse 28-Jan-19
HedgeHunter 28-Jan-19
HA/KS 28-Jan-19
Trial153 28-Jan-19
Annony Mouse 28-Jan-19
JTV 28-Jan-19
Annony Mouse 28-Jan-19
TT-Pi 28-Jan-19
Woods Walker 28-Jan-19
WV Mountaineer 28-Jan-19
HedgeHunter 29-Jan-19
HA/KS 29-Jan-19
Trax 29-Jan-19
Annony Mouse 29-Jan-19
Grey Ghost 29-Jan-19
Annony Mouse 29-Jan-19
Grey Ghost 29-Jan-19
TD 29-Jan-19
JTV 29-Jan-19
JTV 29-Jan-19
HDE 29-Jan-19
Rocky 30-Jan-19
JTV 30-Jan-19
Woods Walker 30-Jan-19
Annony Mouse 30-Jan-19
Grey Ghost 30-Jan-19
itshot 30-Jan-19
JTV 30-Jan-19
Grey Ghost 31-Jan-19
BIGHORN 03-Feb-19
K Cummings 03-Feb-19
HedgeHunter 03-Feb-19
Woods Walker 03-Feb-19
bad karma 03-Feb-19
JTV 03-Feb-19
JTV 03-Feb-19
JTV 03-Feb-19
Annony Mouse 09-Feb-19
Annony Mouse 12-Feb-19
From: Mint
28-Jan-19
In listening to Jerome Corsi tell his story about the FBI and Robert Mueller I find myself easily being in his shoes. He says the FBI and independent counsels office questioned him and he gave answers to the best of his ability about emails he received over a year ago. He then willingly gave those emails to them. They found a couple of emails that didn't jive with his answers and now they are charging him with lying.

I get anywhere from 60 to 125 work emails a day. So that's average out 25,000 emails each year. There is no way I can remember all of them accurately. What if I were questioned?

From: Owl
28-Jan-19
With today's FBI, it may be wise to plead the 5th on what you ate for breakfast. But, yeah, for me, there would be a bunch of "I don't recall"s just to keep from inadvertently misrepresenting myself.

28-Jan-19
Be interesting to see what juries decide. If regular folks see their testimony as innoncent lapses in memory, hopefully these types of charges will be shutdown.

28-Jan-19
Apparently it would not matter whether you actually told an untruth or not. If you open your mouth you will have lied if they say you lied.

From: bigswivle
28-Jan-19
Then prepare for a Bin laden style raid on your house

From: Woods Walker
28-Jan-19
The American Gestapo will throw the book at you and ruin your life because of political reasons and yet people who's very presence in America on a daily basis are based on disregard for our laws not only get a free pass, but they can go to certain cities and states where they are shielded from federal law. Tyranny in full force. How much more will we tolerate???

From: Woods Walker
28-Jan-19
But to answer the question, I wouldn't say a single word to the FBI without an attorney at my side. And even then they'll probably find some minor glitch they can nail you on.

And yet Hillary hasn't even been questioned under oath. Wonder why?

T Y R A N N Y !!!!!!

28-Jan-19
When will people learn that you never talk to the FBI when you are a target of an investigation.

From: Will
28-Jan-19
Not intentionally. In the example of correctly answering email detail from years ago... or 6 months. Dont think i could do it and I'd just have to tell them straight up that I suspected my recall of that time frame would stink, and I'd do my best. May not be good enough, but its all I could do.

28-Jan-19
Goes to court, Stone's doctors testify the normal degradation of memory that occurs with aging and that he may have entered the first stages of early on-set dementia, he wins.

From: HedgeHunter
28-Jan-19
Lets see?

Not Wittingly.

HH~

From: Grey Ghost
28-Jan-19
I would not lie to the FBI. If I was the least bit fuzzy on my recollection, I would say so.

If you actually read the Stone indictment, his lies went far beyond simple memory lapses.

Matt

From: bad karma
28-Jan-19
Having been interviewed by the FBI, and having had clients interviewed, nobody is forced to speak to them. And if they are thinking of using you as a witness for the prosecution, or reaching a plea deal, they'll put you on the polygraph.

That being said, I've never had anyone charged with lying to the FBI. Now, I did have one client who was believing his own BS on the polygraph exam, but they expected that. that client took a plea.

From: Rocky
28-Jan-19
I have been subpoenaed by the FBI and the Grand Jury and on one particular investigation, questioned many times. My best advice is to wear your attorney as cuff link when you are questioned in their office. The Grand Jury is a different ballgame. Your on your own sitting in that box with no help from your attorney who is not in the room. You can ask for relief and see your lawyer waiting in the hallway outside the room if you are confused about a question or want to run it by your attorney on how to answer. The FBI guys are slick and you best be on top of your game. My advice from my experience: answer ONLY the question posed and in as little words as possible...no...I don't know...I don't remember.....I'm drawing a blank....and of course "yes" and ONLY "yes" if you have placed yourself in that position previously. Otherwise you are a deaf mute.

The Rock

From: JTV
28-Jan-19
being "fuzzy" on one memories dosnt cut it... the FBI will still burn you .... it is not IF you told the truth, it is if you told the truth in the version they have or they want to hear ... with any 'interrogation' never say a word and get an attorney ... the the saying goes "Any thing you say can be used against you in a court of law" ....

From: bad karma
28-Jan-19
Well, no...I suspect that the issues that result in a charge of lying to the FBI are material to the case, and the kind of stuff that would be hard to forget. At least that has been my experience with some federal investigations. Now, I have only dealt with a $34mm bank fraud case, and a few large drug cases....but my experience in Colorado and Nebraska was with some very professional people. In the DC area, it's probably more of a viper's den.

From: Rhody
28-Jan-19
They only want to burn you if some higher up is afraid of the political fallout. Enron was Political. Andrew Weisman is the orchestrator of destroying people by prosecutorial misconduct and the most overturned.

From: longbeard
28-Jan-19
Yes Andrew Weisman is the orchestrator of sometimes made up laws to fit his agenda. Hence his record of being over turned by the higher courts. However, that all comes after he ruins the intended target(s) life.

From: slade
28-Jan-19
Follow the queen of deceptions model " I don't Recall" over and over and over.

From: TD
28-Jan-19
Was just gonna say..... "I don't recall" or "I don't remember" would seem to be the answer de jour...... even from the FBI top brass...... and that wasn't just "questioning" that was under oath.....

28-Jan-19
exactly. it's hard for me to understand why anyone would lie to them when you are perfectly entitled to say nothing.

From: Thumper
28-Jan-19
I can't remember.

From: Shuteye
28-Jan-19
I don't recall.

From: KSflatlander
28-Jan-19
I’m with GG on this one. It’s interesting to hear bad karma’s take on this since he obviously has the most and relevant experience. I have none and would like to keep it that way. If it goes the other way I’m calling bad karma before I say anything.

From: Mint
28-Jan-19
I'm assuming ALL of them would have said I don't recall plenty of times and apparently forced to talk to the FBI or independent council. Otherwise why else would they talk to them?

From: HedgeHunter
28-Jan-19
You don't talk to Fed's. Assume they've been collecting on you long before you ever get scooped up. They cant waterboard anymore you and even when the boyz could it aint gonna kill ya. If you've ever been in the big washer and held under for a set? That's worse than WBing, way worse. If your weak in the mind and never swam or dived it's gonna scramble yer egg.

Was it Cohen who went in and open his yap without even counsel before they even indicted him? They didn't even have to Sleep Dep that sh!tball. Pure walking talking puss head.

HH~

From: bad karma
28-Jan-19
I'm pretty sure that only a few people who post here are qualified to give any legal advice. I seldom advise people to speak to any investigator. But there are times where that is the best option.

As to what Hedgehunter wrote, even Google translate didn't help.

From: HedgeHunter
28-Jan-19
Terd-Bonics

Get that translator APP

HH~

From: Dale06
28-Jan-19
Do what Hidabeest did, say, “I don’t recall” , or “ I just can’t remember”

From: HA/KS
28-Jan-19
"Be interesting to see what juries decide."

For the most part. people are pleading because they are financially ruined long before it gets to a jury so they plead something just to stop the bleeding. These prosecutors are counting on exactly that.

"In the DC area, it's probably more of a viper's den."

See my above comment.

From: Rocky
28-Jan-19
bk,

In Philly the "vipers den" is putting it mildly. When they came to my door they were as gracious as a Maitre D' at a free buffet. I asked for I.D. and allowed them entry. I asked them whats up?.... and the response was "we would like to ask you a few questions" and they were smiling. "About what"?....."Is your uncle..."..."Hold it right there", I need to call my attorney." Their mood changed immediately and their voice was "matter of fact"....."we'll be getting back to you." See ya fellas. There were not kidding because they did get back to me and put me through the ringer, but, with my attorney present who kept me safe, or as safe as he could. If EVER approached by the FBI don't say the sky is blue without your attorney present. Better yet just say I have to make a call. Whatever DON'T say a word singalo. You have been warned even if you THINK you have no involvement what so ever. If they are there, they are there for a reason.

The Rock

The Rock

28-Jan-19
Amazing how all of these "law and order" guys and lovers of law enforcement are all for "can't recall" "Dont talk to the Feds" etc etc.

and condoning lying to Law enforcement?

From: mn_archer
28-Jan-19
my take on law enforcement has drastically changed over the last 30 years.

There was a time when I was in the camp that said if you don't have anything to hide you don't have any reason to not let them search your vehicle or answer their questions.

At this point in time I would never let a police officer search my vehicle without a warrant And I sure as heck am not talking to them if there's any slight chance that they're investigating me for any reason even if I am innocent. If I if I was the witness to a crime or something like that I would certainly help them out any time and I'm not going to impede any investigation or disrespect them in any way but I am not going to just dish myself out on a silver platter

28-Jan-19
I am not convinced that all of the guilty pleas are the result of a fincial calculation. Let's see all of the evidence, then decide.

From: spike78
28-Jan-19
I agree^^^. I watched plenty of real life shows where Detectives and prosecutors did whatever it took to convict someone even if their was evidence that they were innocent. Scary crap out there.

From: Annony Mouse
28-Jan-19

Annony Mouse's Link
Corruption at DOJ, FBI and media...

From: HedgeHunter
28-Jan-19
Is it really Putz puller?

Why? When you have FBI stormtroopers taking out old civilians like Communists Party Henchmen.

Think about it.

HH

From: HA/KS
28-Jan-19
Yes, Mouse the 4th estate has become the 5th column.

From: Trial153
28-Jan-19
A Democrat darling lies and all the party hacks fall all over themselves defending it.

A Republican darling lies and all the Republicans party hacks fall all over themselves defending it.

Same shit. Different smell.

From: Annony Mouse
28-Jan-19
"To serve and protect the Clintons"...new motto?

Court Hides Reason For Whistleblower Raid On Clinton Whistleblower

So it’s ok to go after a whistleblower and we aren’t allowed to know why. Why isn’t Chris Wray stopping this?

Via Daily Caller:

A federal court refused to unseal government documents that permitted the FBI to raid the home of a reportedly recognized whistleblower who, according to his lawyer, delivered documents pertaining to the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One to a presidentially appointed watchdog.

The U.S. District Court of Maryland’s Chief Magistrate Judge Beth P. Gesner, a Clinton appointee, also sealed her justification for keeping the documents secret in a single-page Dec. 20 order.

On Nov. 15, federal Magistrate Judge Stephanie Gallagher authorized the raid on Dennis Cain’s Union Bridge, Maryland, home. She sealed the government documents justifying it.

The Daily Caller News Foundation asked Gallagher on Nov. 29 to unseal the documents, noting that Cain’s attorney has said his client, a former employee of an FBI contractor, is a recognized whistleblower. The documents should be released in light of “an urgent public interest” surrounding the case, TheDCNF wrote.

Keep reading…

From: JTV
28-Jan-19
PutZ would lie in a heartbeat, it is what he does ....

From: Annony Mouse
28-Jan-19
Who does the FBI raid?

Hillary Clinton? No. Nikolas Cruz? No. Clinton Foundation? No. Fusion GPS? No. Boston Bombers? No. San Bernardino terrorists? No. John Podesta? No. Susan Rice? No. Paul Zeidan? No.

Roger Stone? Yes. Michael Cohen? Yes. Paul Manafort? Yes.

Justice is no longer blind.

From: TT-Pi
28-Jan-19
"I always tell the truth, even when I lie" I would ask: " if I told you I am always lying, would you believe me? "

And leave it at that.

From: Woods Walker
28-Jan-19
"PutZ would lie in a heartbeat..."

"Would"??? More like DOES.......everytime it makes a post here on the CF where it promised it would leave when Trump got elected. All lies.

28-Jan-19
When being questioned by any LEO for anything seriously, where there is one hair's chance that you could be mistakenly accused or, a 100% chance you can't immediately disprove their suspicions, don't say anything but, "I want to talk to an attorney". Nothing but that. No matter what they say or, threaten you with. No matter how innocent it may seem, No matter how bad you want to set the record straight, leave all that to the Lawyer. Most are very good at what they do.

From: HedgeHunter
29-Jan-19
Oh, that's right he was leaving for greener liberal pastures. That pile is still here.

HH~

From: HA/KS
29-Jan-19
"A Republican darling lies and all the Republicans party hacks fall all over themselves defending it."

Ask Nixon if this is true.

In general, if a Republican messes up (or is even accused of doing so) they are immediately abandoned by other republicans. OTOH democrats see it as a resume enhancement and (along with the press) continue to support dems no matter what they are proven to have done (even drown a woman).

Trump is the first big exception to this rule and dems, leftists of all stripes, and the press are apoplectic about it.

From: Trax
29-Jan-19
It isn't just that Trump is a Republican. I believe that is far lesser a point to the simple fact that President Trump does not play the game and can not be controlled by the old school establishment power. The shadow government if you prefer. President Trump is a threat to them, so they are mitigating the threat. He is the first president to oppose and fight them since they seized control of both Parties. In the past presidents who opposed them just tried to ignore and work around them. President Trump is shafting them and they don't like it. He needs to expose them more than he has. It is a dangerous game.

From: Annony Mouse
29-Jan-19
It depends on just who you are and your politics when it comes to lying to the FBI. If part of the Obama-Clinton Cabal, one gets a pass. If not...release the hounds!

FBI Ignored Major Lead on Clinton Emails, Closed-Door Testimonies Suggest

From: Grey Ghost
29-Jan-19
Good grief, can we please stop with the "but the Clintons..." defense? It's so stale.

Matt

From: Annony Mouse
29-Jan-19
Ah...but that includes so many of the FBI players still in the game...

From: Grey Ghost
29-Jan-19
So what? What part of "two wrongs don't make a right" do you struggle with, Mouse?

Matt

From: TD
29-Jan-19
What do you have against the equal application of the law across the board?

From: JTV
29-Jan-19

JTV's Link
it sure seems the FBI does it own share of lying ...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-fbi-ignored-major-lead-on-clinton-emails-closed-door-testimonies-suggest_2782019.html/

From: JTV
29-Jan-19

JTV's Link
naaaah, the upper echelons of the FBI isnt biased, this was the dbag they had working on the Clinton Emails ...

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-22/meet-mystery-fbi-agent-5-who-sent-anti-trump-texts-while-clinton-taint-team

From: HDE
29-Jan-19
The part in the Miranda Rights about what you say tells me the correct answer is "I don't know" or "can't recall", and even "I have no recollection"...

From: Rocky
30-Jan-19
Matt,

Hillary Clinton committed high crimes. End of story and I believe you know that. This was not speculation nor devoid of evidence to the contrary. The evidence was overwhelming to prosecute. If ever there was a time to raid "offices" with a regiment of FBI agents including her residence and all her cohorts without warning at the same exact time this was it. There is no comparison to the danger she placed this nation and its people in great danger. Two wrongs don't make a right? Where is the proof and evidence in the history of this nation that compares? You may be content with politicians and their children be protected from presecution and my children being thrown to the slaughter, but I am not. Everything about this government smells to the high heavens and the more crimes that are revealed in crumbs to the media, the more the vast majority of them are concealed.

Don't play the puppet Matt. You and I are getting bent over everyday. "Well just let it go now" is not good enough for me, until it also concerns me, which will never occur. Only the golden tower has that power.

The Rock

From: JTV
30-Jan-19
GG dont give a rats ass, hell, he didnt even vote, so he shouldnt have a voice .... if you dont vote, then STFU ...

From: Woods Walker
30-Jan-19
"Would you lie to everyone on the CF, repeatedly?"

For Sybil, that's a big yes....HELL YES!

From: Annony Mouse
30-Jan-19
What we are seeing is that Lady Justice is no longer blind...she has become an operative of the TDS deep state. There is being demonstrated a two level system of justice where there is a demonstrated "protected class" and a "target class".

Whoa Nellie, More Leaked Transcripts – Nellie Ohr Researched Trump Kids While Working for Fusion GPS…

From: Grey Ghost
30-Jan-19
"Hillary Clinton committed high crimes. "

Present your case, Rocco. The case that no criminal attorney has been able to present, yet. Otherwise, I'll lump you in the same category as JTV.

Matt

From: itshot
30-Jan-19
geeG, the rock's case is well presented , just above, by mouse

From: JTV
30-Jan-19
Im sure GG never took the time to watch that great explaination of Bongino on that vid either .... the evidence is there, some are just to f'n daft to see it ..

From: Grey Ghost
31-Jan-19
Let me see if I have this straight. The evidence to convict Hillary is widely known, especially by the right who loathes her. Yet, out of thousands of brilliant right-leaning criminal attorneys in our country, not a single one has been able to piece together a case to convict Hillary, because of some global conspiracy to protect her. Is that the narrative?

Matt

From: BIGHORN
03-Feb-19
I wouldn't lie to anyone or for anyone!

From: K Cummings
03-Feb-19
“Let me see if I have this straight. The evidence to convict Hillary is widely known, especially by the right who loathes her. Yet, out of thousands of brilliant right-leaning criminal attorneys in our country, not a single one has been able to piece together a case to convict Hillary...”

I’m no legal expert so maybe BK can weigh in but it’s my understanding that “criminal attorneys” don’t build cases or bring charges against anyone. In Hillary’s case that would take a federal prosecutor, in the proper jurisdiction.

KPC

From: HedgeHunter
03-Feb-19
Yeah,

She not even electable. Thats why DJT wants her in race so bad. Even if elected it will cause an immediate constitutional crisis.

She cant resist running, perennial losers are like this.

She will pull a Stunt and pick AOC for VP if she runs at all. Nuttin says she cant be VP.

HH~

From: Woods Walker
03-Feb-19
If Hellary thought it would get her elected, she'd pair up AOC (or anyone/anything else) in a nano-second. Her "whore factor" makes Monica look like Mother Teresa's.

From: bad karma
03-Feb-19
Federal prosecutions are brought by the US attorney for the area, and investigated by federal agencies such as the FBI or DEA. Private attorneys have nothing to do with it. And as I've written at least twice before, prosecuting intelligence leak cases is tough because then the intelligence is all given to the defense, and shown to the public at a trial, Public trials, with a hell of a lot of TV coverage in this case. '

Given how cavalierly Hillary disregarded the security of the information, using her own insecure private server, she should be prosecuted. Any normal stiff would be. But she likely won't. Trump was right in removing her security clearance. She should never be given another one.

From: JTV
03-Feb-19
and as GG, the non-voter has always been in denial, get this thru your thick skull for once .. the criminal charges against Clinton ARE THERE should an AG with some balls decide to do so... the reason she still walks free is all because of Politics and the power of the Clinton's, that is THE reason no charges have been brought ... Comey was a Minion of Obama and the Dems, there was no way he was going to ruin the Dems chance of have her run at the POTUS seat.... Sessions was a feckless turd and a full blown swamper, he was lucky if he could tie his shoelaces ..... I have my doubts in the Barr guy, he is close to Mueller it has been said .... The charges are there if he decides to make the case ....

https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/406500-dont-blame-the-fbi-hillary-clinton-was-never-going-to-be-charged

"With the exception of President Trump, few inspire otherwise rational people to erupt into vicious debate quite like Hillary Clinton. It is this juxtaposed sentiment of admiration and vitriol that led to the three reasons the FBI’s investigation into the former secretary of State’s alleged use of a personal server was never going to result in charges.

First, the Democrats didn’t want her charged. The FBI should be, and is, apolitical. In fact, it would be bad form for a president to appoint a political ally to lead the FBI. However, this nonpartisan gesture is disingenuous given the appointment of the attorney general (AG) is not made with the same care. The FBI is the investigative arm of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the AG is the head of the DOJ. Thus, FBI investigations do not result in federal charges without the approval of the DOJ and, by extension, the AG.

That is why the June 2016 meeting between former President Clinton and former AG Loretta Lynch on the tarmac in Phoenix was so significant. It was unconscionable that the AG would meet with the spouse of someone under federal investigation in such a manner. Though touted as an unexpected meeting, that is inconceivable. The two security details, Lynch’s and Clinton’s, would have learned during their security advance of the other being on the tarmac about the same time. This would result in prior notification to the protectee. Finally, assurances by the AG that their discussion was unrelated to the investigation is irrelevant."

From: JTV
03-Feb-19
the list of the 11 Federal laws that Clinton and her minions broke.....

The following are 11 federal laws that Hillary Clinton and her associates have been accused of violating, whether at The State Department or in connection with The Clinton Foundation:

U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information

U.S. Code § 1031 — Major fraud against the United States

U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense

U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”

U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records

U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television

U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations

18 U.S. Code § 793 — Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

now if Barr has balls to do so, it is from these Clinton could be charged with... remember, some of her minions were given immunity by the Comey/Rice group and no one knows why, so they may get away with federal crimes ..... also remember Clinton was under subpoena to produce Emails, but she/her team destroyed them, thus destroying evidence, this is FACT .... so yes, she DID break laws, but only the AG can make the decision to prosecute.... I hope this new one does, if Barr has the the balls and believes in equal law for all, he should prosecute ....

From: JTV
03-Feb-19
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/hillary-clinton-emails-could-still-face-charges

June/2018 Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information is getting another look with the release Thursday of a Justice Department inspector general report scrutinizing the FBI's investigation into whether she committed crimes using a private email server as secretary of state.

Although it would be controversial, the Justice Department is able to reopen the Clinton email case, and experts say President Trump's 2016 adversary arguably could be charged until March 2025 — after Trump would leave office even if he wins a second term.

Sloppy workers, leakers, whistleblowers, and spies face a variety of criminal charges for mishandling classified records. But there are leading options available to prosecutors, with varying statutes of limitations.

One law, 18 U.S. Code § 1924, forbids “unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material.” It carries up to five years in prison, with a five-year statute of limitations. Former CIA contractor Reynaldo Regis pleaded guilty in May to violating the law by taking home about 60 notebooks with classified information. There's no allegation he shared them.

Former CIA Director David Petraeus also pleaded guilty under this law in 2015 after sharing highly classified information with his mistress and biographer.

But prosecutors favor the more severe 18 U.S. Code § 793, which is part of the notoriously tough Espionage Act. The law restricts possession or retention of information “relating to the national defense" and carries a possible 10 years in prison, with a 10-year statute of limitations.

The tougher law is sometimes used even if there's no allegation information was deliberately shared. For example, former Navy sailor Kristian Saucier was indicted and pleaded guilty in 2016 under the law for taking six cellphone photos inside a nuclear submarine in 2009. The phone was discovered at a Connecticut dump in 2012.

The information in Saucier’s photos was deemed confidential, the lowest level of classification. Although some photos depicted the sub’s nuclear reactor, he argued they were innocent keepsakes to remember his employment. By contrast, at the time the FBI closed its investigation, it found 110 emails in 52 email chains on Clinton's server containing classified information. Eight emails chains contained top secret information, and 36 others had secret information.

Non-leak cases charged under the tougher law include Harold Martin III, the Maryland NSA contractor who agreed to plead guilty in January after improperly storing massive amounts of classified information at his home.

Because of the passage of time, it’s possible Clinton cannot be charged under the gentler statute. She left office in February 2013, and the law’s specific wording covers when someone "knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain" them — written in such a way that the clock may begin when removal happens.

“I think that under this statute, the proscription is on the removal and it would run from removal,” prominent defense attorney Barry Pollack told the Washington Examiner.

But under the harsher law, the 10-year countdown arguably started in late March 2015, when tech aide Paul Combetta had what he told the FBI was an “oh shit” moment and deleted stored emails using the software BleachBit, after forgetting to do so months earlier.

Under the tougher law, "I would think its statute [of limitations] would not start to run as long as the person has the documents,” Pollack said. “It has a ten-year limitations period, not five.”

Pollack, who represents WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange and defended jailed journalistic source Jeffrey Sterling, said he believes that “it would be a stretch to claim that any of Hillary’s emails contained national defense information, but that term has been interpreted broadly.”

Under a broad reading of the law, Clinton can face prosecution until 2025, he said.

Jesselyn Radack, a prominent whistleblower defense attorney, agreed with Pollack’s reading of the laws.

“The Espionage Act’s statute of limitations should shortened, especially because it’s a strict liability law that does not consider the intent of the person charged,” said Radack, who has represented former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, former NSA senior executive Thomas Drake, and former CIA operative John Kiriakou.

In 2016, FBI Director James Comey closed the bureau's investigation of Clinton's email server by concluding she was “extremely careless” in handling classified information, but that no prosecutor would charge her because they could not prove criminal intent. Comey’s decision to usurp traditional Justice Department processes to announce he would not seek charges is a likely subject of the new inspector general report. A memo written last year by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein blasted Comey's decision, and was cited by Trump in firing Comey.

People recently charged under the tough 18 U.S. Code § 793 include alleged journalistic sources Reality Winner, a former NSA contractor, and former FBI agent Terry Albury. Winner, arrested in June 2017, is jailed without bail pending trial for allegedly mailing The Intercept a document describing unsuccessful Russian attempts to hack election systems. Albury pleaded guilty in April and is believed to have sent The Intercept an FBI guide to informant recruitment and rules for seizing records from journalists.

Although he told Clinton during a 2016 debate that she would be in jail if he were elected president, Trump’s Justice Department does not appear to have taken action against her, frustrating Trump, who routinely mentions her case on Twitter.

“People like Hillary Clinton and General David Petraeus rarely get treated harshly, while low-level whistleblowers are prosecuted for espionage," Radack said, arguing that the Espionage Act ultimately should be repealed. "Obama started the trend but Trump has worsened it by putting alleged whistleblowers in jail."

David Kendall, an attorney for Clinton who represented her during the email probe, declined to comment.

It’s unclear who will suffer most from any fallout caused by the inspector general report. It's possible former investigators, led by Comey and his then-deputy Andrew McCabe, will suffer the worst backlash, rather than Clinton.

Comey’s personal handling of classified information, in memos he wrote after talks with President Trump and shared with a friend to be leaked, has received significant political attention recently. McCabe's alleged lies to FBI agents and Comey about his decision to authorize a leak was skewered in a separate Justice Department inspector general report this year, resulting in his firing."

From: Annony Mouse
09-Feb-19
Lying to the FBI is worse than being a major drug dealer, M13 gang member or gun runner.

From: Annony Mouse
12-Feb-19

Annony Mouse's Link

  • Sitka Gear