The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Napolitano Archive
She's Back
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton is back front and center now that the FBI has released proof that her failure to safeguard state secrets caused the secrets to fall into the hands of foreign governments, some of which wish the United States ill.

Even though the case against her — which was closed and then reopened and then closed again — is old news and she obviously is no longer a candidate to become president of the United States and has been staying below the radar for the past two months, recent developments have regenerated the case.

Here is the back story.

On July 5, FBI Director James Comey announced publicly that the FBI would recommend against seeking an indictment of Clinton for espionage — the failure to safeguard state secrets that had been entrusted to her. He argued that though the case against her was strong — as secretary of state, she had been extremely careless with secrets; exposed hundreds of materials that were confidential, secret and top-secret; and used non-secure mobile devices while in the territory of hostile governments — no reasonable prosecutor would take the case.

Why was the decision of whether to prosecute Clinton left to Comey?

The FBI’s job is to gather evidence of federal crimes and to present that evidence to career prosecutors in the Department of Justice for evaluation. The FBI has numerous investigative tools available to it. One of those tools is presenting evidence to a grand jury and requesting subpoenas from it. Another is presenting evidence to a federal judge and requesting search warrants from the judge. A third is obtaining the indictment of someone who is in the inner circle of the person who is the true target of the investigation and then persuading that indicted person to become a government witness.

None of those tools was used in the Clinton case.

As well, a major interference with the case occurred when Attorney General Loretta Lynch agreed to meet privately with former President Bill Clinton. He was — and still is — also the subject of an FBI criminal investigation. Though both Lynch and Mr. Clinton denied talking about the investigations, the attorney general took herself and senior DOJ management off the Hillary Clinton case, leaving the FBI director with the authority to decide whether to prosecute. So based on Comey’s decision that no reasonable prosecutor would take the case against Mrs. Clinton, it was closed.

The case was briefly reopened 11 days before Election Day. The FBI announced it had stumbled upon a potential treasure-trove of emails contained in a laptop jointly owned and used by Hillary Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin, and her husband, former Rep. Anthony Weiner. The FBI believed at the time that the laptop contained nearly every email Abedin had received from Clinton. Weiner was under investigation for various sexual crimes, and the FBI had obtained the laptop in its search for evidence against him.

Then, a week later, the FBI announced that it had found nothing among the 650,000 emails in the laptop that would cause it to reopen the Clinton case, and it closed the case a second time.

ORDER IT NOW

Donald Trump argued during the last weeks of the presidential election campaign that Clinton had exposed state secrets to hostile foreign governments. FBI agents who disagreed with their boss’s decision not to seek the indictment of Clinton made the same arguments. Clinton denied vehemently that she had caused any state secrets to pass into the hands of hostile foreign governments.

Then Trump was elected president of the United States.

Then Clinton left the public scene.

Then, last Sunday evening, during the NFL playoff game between the New York Giants and the Green Bay Packers, the FBI posted on its website more than 300 emails that Clinton had sent to an unnamed colleague not in the government — no doubt her adviser Sid Blumenthal — that had fallen into the hands of foreign powers. It turns out — and the Sunday night release proves this — that Blumenthal was hacked by intelligence agents from at least three foreign governments and that they obtained the emails Clinton had sent to him that contained state secrets. Sources believe that the hostile hackers were the Russians and the Chinese and the friendly hackers were the Israelis.

Last Sunday’s revelations make the case against Clinton far more serious than Comey presented it to be last summer. Indeed, Sen. Jeff Sessions, who has been nominated by Trump to be attorney general and who has been a harsh critic of Clinton’s, told the Senate Judiciary Committee this week that he would step aside from any further investigation of Clinton, thereby acknowledging that the investigation will probably be opened again.

One of the metrics that the DOJ examines in deciding whether to prosecute is an analysis of harm caused by the potential defendant. I have examined the newly released emails, and the state secrets have been whited out. Yet it is clear from the FBI analysis of them that real secrets were exposed by the nation’s chief diplomat — meaning she violated an agreement she signed right after she took office, in which she essentially promised that she would not do what she eventually did.

The essence of the American justice system is the rule of law. The rule of law means that no one is beneath the law’s protections or above its obligations.

Should Clinton skate free so the Trump administration can turn the page? Should the new DOJ be compassionate toward Clinton because of her humiliating election loss and likely retirement from public life? Of course not. She should be prosecuted as would anyone else who let loose secrets to our enemies and then lied about it.

Copyright 2017 Andrew P. Napolitano. Distributed by Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Hillary Clinton 
Hide 32 CommentsLeave a Comment
32 Comments to "She's Back"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. dearieme says:

    This needs careful consideration, weighing up the pros and cons, determining what’s in the interest of the US republic. Let there be no rush to judgement.

    And then lock her up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /anapolitano/shes-back/#comment-1723850
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Anyone who thinks that the Clintons represent no threat to the Republic,or that they have no further political ambitions, are delusional. Jeff Sessions or Congress, or both, should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate every aspect of the Clintons’ conduct, and prosecute them for every crime that they’ve committed. States should also be encouraged to open investigations for criminal activities under state laws. The Clintons should spend the rest of their lives responding to subpoenaes, facing trials, paying fines and serving prison time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Maybe that's the position that Christie and/or Guiliani have been saved for.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. woodNfish says:

    HRC, Billy boy, Loretta Lynch, Comey, Lois Lerner and the many other criminals and thugs in the obama, bush and clinton administrations need to be prosecuted to show there is accountability in government.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Anyone who has had a job involving the handling of classified material knows that Clinton’s actions violated the law. I appreciate Judge Napolitano’s update on this case but remain mystified as to why the issue even needs to be discussed.

    Furthermore, the matter of motive seldom gets mentioned in public discussions. While Clinton’s e-mails were left in an unsecured state, the Clinton Foundation was getting tens of millions in “donations” from the Russians and others, and former President Clinton was getting paid handsomely for delivering a speech in Russia.

    Not only is it reasonable to ask whether she — no, they — committed actual treason, it’s unreasonable not to ask!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    Donations from the Russians? Which Russians? We do know that the Clinton Foundation was getting donations from the Saudis, followed by Clinton approving a massive arms deal with them as Secretary of State. Those same arms are being used for the slaughter in Yemen.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Skeptikal says:

    “She should be prosecuted as would anyone else who let loose secrets to our enemies and then lied about it”

    Especially since similar accusations are being lobbed at Trump. Not identical, of course, but they can be compared—Trump putatively traitorously associated with Putin.

    What’s sauce for the gander . . .

    But I don’t understand this:

    “Sen. Jeff Sessions, who has been nominated by Trump to be attorney general and who has been a harsh critic of Clinton’s, told the Senate Judiciary Committee this week that he would step aside from any further investigation of Clinton, thereby acknowledging that the investigation will probably be opened again.”

    Why would Sessions step aside? And why would that mean that the investigation will probably be opened again?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Thirdeye says:
    @The Grate Deign
    Anyone who has had a job involving the handling of classified material knows that Clinton's actions violated the law. I appreciate Judge Napolitano's update on this case but remain mystified as to why the issue even needs to be discussed.

    Furthermore, the matter of motive seldom gets mentioned in public discussions. While Clinton's e-mails were left in an unsecured state, the Clinton Foundation was getting tens of millions in "donations" from the Russians and others, and former President Clinton was getting paid handsomely for delivering a speech in Russia.

    Not only is it reasonable to ask whether she -- no, they -- committed actual treason, it's unreasonable not to ask!

    Donations from the Russians? Which Russians? We do know that the Clinton Foundation was getting donations from the Saudis, followed by Clinton approving a massive arms deal with them as Secretary of State. Those same arms are being used for the slaughter in Yemen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    These Russians: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0


    And you're making my point for me. Thanks!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Cyrano says:

    I wish Hillary wasn’t so modest and declared openly what motivated her to act as she did. The reason why she used private email server is not because she is dumb, but because she is super smart. You see, she foresaw the Russian hacking of the American election and took steps to minimize the damage.

    What would you do if you were Russian hacker – what is the first place that you would look in for top secret files? The government run servers of course. You see how smart Hillary was? She hid those sensitive documents in the last place any self-respecting hacker would look – on a private server.

    This shows how everybody misunderastimated Hillary. She was far ahead of the game and showed ability of strategic thinking unmatched by anyone. I think that Americans made grave mistake for not electing her as president and that US would have benefited greatly from having such a superpatriot, not to mention visionary, as leader. I am also disappointed that the MSM didn’t come up with this most logical of explanations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
    You forgot to take your pills again.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Thirdeye
    Donations from the Russians? Which Russians? We do know that the Clinton Foundation was getting donations from the Saudis, followed by Clinton approving a massive arms deal with them as Secretary of State. Those same arms are being used for the slaughter in Yemen.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. “the friendly hackers’ (Israelis )” sounds like it’s a page from the same book as “moderate rebels”.

    Is there a name for this language?

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
    I think he was referring to the fact that all countries spy on all other countries. Some of them are enemy countries. The rest are intended by the shorthand, "friendly hackers." And nobody does more "friendly" spying and hacking than the USA.
    , @HBM
    Hasbara
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @Diversity Heretic
    Anyone who thinks that the Clintons represent no threat to the Republic,or that they have no further political ambitions, are delusional. Jeff Sessions or Congress, or both, should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate every aspect of the Clintons' conduct, and prosecute them for every crime that they've committed. States should also be encouraged to open investigations for criminal activities under state laws. The Clintons should spend the rest of their lives responding to subpoenaes, facing trials, paying fines and serving prison time.

    Maybe that’s the position that Christie and/or Guiliani have been saved for.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @NoseytheDuke
    "the friendly hackers' (Israelis )" sounds like it's a page from the same book as "moderate rebels".

    Is there a name for this language?

    I think he was referring to the fact that all countries spy on all other countries. Some of them are enemy countries. The rest are intended by the shorthand, “friendly hackers.” And nobody does more “friendly” spying and hacking than the USA.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Cyrano
    I wish Hillary wasn’t so modest and declared openly what motivated her to act as she did. The reason why she used private email server is not because she is dumb, but because she is super smart. You see, she foresaw the Russian hacking of the American election and took steps to minimize the damage.

    What would you do if you were Russian hacker – what is the first place that you would look in for top secret files? The government run servers of course. You see how smart Hillary was? She hid those sensitive documents in the last place any self-respecting hacker would look – on a private server.

    This shows how everybody misunderastimated Hillary. She was far ahead of the game and showed ability of strategic thinking unmatched by anyone. I think that Americans made grave mistake for not electing her as president and that US would have benefited greatly from having such a superpatriot, not to mention visionary, as leader. I am also disappointed that the MSM didn’t come up with this most logical of explanations.

    You forgot to take your pills again.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cyrano
    You don't seem to have gotten the dosage right either, jizzman - it's that your favorite hobby?
    , @jacques sheete

    You forgot to take your pills again.
     
    Hey jazzie, you don't do sarcasm well, do you?

    Mensa? Snicker, snicker.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. HBM says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    "the friendly hackers' (Israelis )" sounds like it's a page from the same book as "moderate rebels".

    Is there a name for this language?

    Hasbara

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill Jones
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Cyrano says:
    @Authenticjazzman
    You forgot to take your pills again.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    You don’t seem to have gotten the dosage right either, jizzman – it’s that your favorite hobby?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Begemot says:

    I expect Hillary Clinton will get a pardon from Obama. All of this will then become moot. Unfortunately. Prosecuting and jailing our masters sets a bad precedent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    But the Clinton Foundation will still be up for demolition.
    , @another fred

    I expect Hillary Clinton will get a pardon from Obama.
     
    I don't think he can pardon her as she has not been convicted. He would have to grant her immunity from prosecution. I don't think that is in his enumerated powers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Svigor says:

    Begemot: yes, the probability that Clinton has serious dirt on Hussein is high.

    Sources believe that the hostile hackers were the Russians and the Chinese and the friendly hackers were the Israelis.

    Lol, cute. Russian, Chinese hackers, penetrating US gov’t and stealing US gov’t secrets: “from Hell’s heart, I hack at thee.” Israeli hackers, penetrating US gov’t and stealing US gov’t secrets: “I’m only doing this because I love you.”

    Why would Sessions step aside? And why would that mean that the investigation will probably be opened again?

    I take it that Napolitano’s reading of the tea leaves is that Sessions will appoint an independent investigator.

    Is there a name for this language?

    Newspeak.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Svigor says:

    I think he was referring to the fact that all countries spy on all other countries. Some of them are enemy countries. The rest are intended by the shorthand, “friendly hackers.” And nobody does more “friendly” spying and hacking than the USA.

    More like acknowledging the fact that being clear about not lumping Israel in with Russia and China is good for one’s future prospects in the media business. Napolitano’s got a wide truth-telling streak, so simply not mentioning the Israelis wasn’t good enough.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. @Authenticjazzman
    You forgot to take your pills again.

    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    You forgot to take your pills again.

    Hey jazzie, you don’t do sarcasm well, do you?

    Mensa? Snicker, snicker.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. What sort of clown thinks that Israel is less of an enemy of the US than China or Russia?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. @Begemot
    I expect Hillary Clinton will get a pardon from Obama. All of this will then become moot. Unfortunately. Prosecuting and jailing our masters sets a bad precedent.

    But the Clinton Foundation will still be up for demolition.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Svigor says:

    What sort of clown thinks that Israel is less of an enemy of the US than China or Russia?

    I do. I’d trust the Israelis, before I trusted the Chinese. Not that that’s saying a whole lot. There’s a lot of daylight between my position and the “our greatest ally” position, but there’s some room between mine and the “Israel, China, Russia, same diff” position, too, I guess is what I’m saying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. @Begemot
    I expect Hillary Clinton will get a pardon from Obama. All of this will then become moot. Unfortunately. Prosecuting and jailing our masters sets a bad precedent.

    I expect Hillary Clinton will get a pardon from Obama.

    I don’t think he can pardon her as she has not been convicted. He would have to grant her immunity from prosecution. I don’t think that is in his enumerated powers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    From Wikipedia:

    In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites, and amnesties.
     
    Maybe amnesty. It will be interesting to see if he tries. She might have to admit guilt to get amnesty.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @another fred

    I expect Hillary Clinton will get a pardon from Obama.
     
    I don't think he can pardon her as she has not been convicted. He would have to grant her immunity from prosecution. I don't think that is in his enumerated powers.

    From Wikipedia:

    In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President “shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites, and amnesties.

    Maybe amnesty. It will be interesting to see if he tries. She might have to admit guilt to get amnesty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    Ford's pardon of Nixon who at that point in time had been convicted of nothing would, I think, qualify as an amnesty.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Svigor says:

    I don’t think he can pardon her as she has not been convicted. He would have to grant her immunity from prosecution. I don’t think that is in his enumerated powers.

    I looked into this recently, and apparently, the presidential pardon is not so limited by reason or logic. At least, it’s not clear that it is.

    Read More
    • Agree: Hibernian
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Dan Hayes says:

    A minor but perhaps telling point. Loretta Lynch recently admitted that contrary to her previous denials, Hillary’s emails and server were the subject of her infamous conversations with Bill Clinton on the airport tarmac.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    That is interesting. Do you have a link?
    , @Hibernian
    LOL
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Dan Hayes
    A minor but perhaps telling point. Loretta Lynch recently admitted that contrary to her previous denials, Hillary's emails and server were the subject of her infamous conversations with Bill Clinton on the airport tarmac.

    That is interesting. Do you have a link?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. She needs to be held accountable but that is unlikely. Trump has stated he does not intend to go after her. She is not retiring from politics. Her posse (and she has also stated she is considering this) want her to run for mayor of NY (and she has the backing and support for this). These same people have implied she will make another run for the White House in 2020.

    She is not going away.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Grate Deign

    She [Hillary] is not going away.
     
    It's likely her failing health will put her away.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifIAlft47bM
    , @RadicalCenter
    Please, Dems, run her again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @Ron Harwell
    She needs to be held accountable but that is unlikely. Trump has stated he does not intend to go after her. She is not retiring from politics. Her posse (and she has also stated she is considering this) want her to run for mayor of NY (and she has the backing and support for this). These same people have implied she will make another run for the White House in 2020.

    She is not going away.

    She [Hillary] is not going away.

    It’s likely her failing health will put her away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @Ron Harwell
    She needs to be held accountable but that is unlikely. Trump has stated he does not intend to go after her. She is not retiring from politics. Her posse (and she has also stated she is considering this) want her to run for mayor of NY (and she has the backing and support for this). These same people have implied she will make another run for the White House in 2020.

    She is not going away.

    Please, Dems, run her again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Hibernian says:
    @another fred
    From Wikipedia:

    In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites, and amnesties.
     
    Maybe amnesty. It will be interesting to see if he tries. She might have to admit guilt to get amnesty.

    Ford’s pardon of Nixon who at that point in time had been convicted of nothing would, I think, qualify as an amnesty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @another fred
    Good point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Hibernian says:
    @Dan Hayes
    A minor but perhaps telling point. Loretta Lynch recently admitted that contrary to her previous denials, Hillary's emails and server were the subject of her infamous conversations with Bill Clinton on the airport tarmac.

    LOL

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Hibernian
    Ford's pardon of Nixon who at that point in time had been convicted of nothing would, I think, qualify as an amnesty.

    Good point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Napolitano Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation