Why Hillary Clinton Isn’t Getting Indicted

With the announcement today by FBI Director James Comey that no prosecution or indictment of Hillary Clinton would be recommended by the FBI in respect to the partially media manufactured "e-mail scandal," it goes without saying that the GOP and right wing talk radio noise machine immediately laundered into over drive claiming that the system was "rigged."  Naturally, Donald Trump, perhaps the most unfit candidate for the White House in memory, tried to jump on the bandwagon trashing Hillary Clinton, James Comey and all things smacking of the Washington, DC, political establishment.   Such rants and posturing, of course, ignore the realities faced by would be federal prosecutors, including the burden they would of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt and how Clinton's conduct would stack up against that of some of her predecessors who likewise failed to follow strict compliance wit Department of State requirements.  Why worry about proving the case and prevailing in  any potential prosecution when the chance for demagoguery and dishonestly is so readily at hand.  Here are excerpts from Think Progress:

Tuesday morning, FBI Director James Comey announced that his agency’s investigation into Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s handling of a private email server while she was Secretary of State has come to a close. He also added that the FBI will recommend against criminal charges for Secretary Clinton, stating that “no reasonable prosecutor” could determine that charges were warranted here. It’s an announcement that will surprise no one who is familiar with the underlying law and ordinary Justice Department practices in a case such as this one.

Nevertheless, in part because calls for a Clinton indictment were amplified by Republicans at the highest levels, and in part because of what Josh Marshall described as the media-industrial complex’s quest for “wingnut page views,” the idea that Clinton may face criminal charges has lingered for months. Here’s what you need to know about why such charges were never a realistic possibility. 

Clinton, like her two most recent predecessors Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, maintained at least two email accounts: one specifically set up to receive classified information and the other for other communications. Clinton’s non-classified email was hosted on a private server (as opposed to Powell’s non-classified email address, which was an AOL account), while the classified email could only be accessed if Clinton complied with a byzantine array of security rules. 

Clinton says that the emails she received at her non-classified address “were not marked classified,” although she acknowledges that “there are disagreements among agencies on what should have been perhaps classified retroactively.” Government officials also confirm that “none of the emails the State Department redacted, or any other emails made public, contained classification markings at the time they were sent.” Although the FBI determined that 110 emails did contain classified information.

This matters because of a legal concept called mens rea. As a general rule, most crimes require prosecutors to prove that an individual acted with a particular state of mind before they can be convicted of a specific crime. Most federal laws dealing with classified information require someone to “knowingly” violate that law in order to sustain a conviction. Thus, Clinton cannot be charged with transmitting or receiving classified information based on that fact alone.

[A]s ABC News Legal Analyst Dan Abrams explains, several key words in this provision also weigh against charging Clinton. For one thing, a 1941 Supreme Court decision interprets the phrase “relating to the national defense” to require “‘intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation.’ This requires those prosecuted to have acted in bad faith.” That’s a high bar — there’s no apparent evidence that Clinton had reason to believe that her use of a private server would cause information to be obtained that advantaged a foreign nation or that would have caused injury to the United States.

Additionally, the phrase “gross negligence” also requires prosecutors to clear a high bar — “a lack of care that demonstrates reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people’s rights to safety.”

Indeed, as Comey noted in his announcement, the FBI could not “find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts” as “all the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an interference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.”   “We do not see those things here,” he added.

Setting aside the bare language of the law, there’s also a very important practical reason why officials in Clinton’s position are not typically indicted. The security applied to classified email systems is simply absurd. . . . ndicting Clinton would require the Justice Department to apply a legal standard that would endanger countless officials throughout the government, and that would make it impossible for many government offices to function effectively.

U.S. Pulls Embassy Out of the Vatican

I have long thought it a farce that the United States - not to mention many other countries - has an embassy to the Vatican in recognition of the Mussolini/Pope Pious XII brokered deal that created the fiction that the Vatican is a separate sovereign nation.  The Vatican is the headquarters of a church, plain and simple and if the U.S. were to be consistent, there should be embassies for Islam - perhaps in Mecca - and other world religions.  Thus, it make sense that the U.S. is closing its separate freestanding embassy to the Vatican and down grading it to the status of an annex to the Embassy to Italy.  A far better move would be to simply close the embassy to the Vatican completely and relegate the Catholic Church to the status of other world religions.  Needless to say, far right American Catholic are NOT happy campers. A piece in The Daily Beast looks at the move:

Citing security concerns without naming a specific threat, the U.S. State Department is planning to shutter its embassy to the Holy See inside the lush Villa Domiziana overlooking the Circus Maximus and Palatine Hill in central Rome.

The embassy, which has been in operation since 1984 when Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II signed an accord, will essentially be swallowed up by the larger, more influential U.S. embassy to Italy.

After the move to the American embassy to Italy, scheduled for January 2015 when remodeling work is expected to be completed, the embassy to the Holy See will inhabit a small annex with a separate entrance, but it will be far less independent than it is in its current position across town. 

The move is not sitting well with conservative Catholics who prefer to maintain diplomatic distance from United States policy on issues in direct defiance with Catholic teachings, including same-sex marriage and abortion. Vatican expert John Allen, who first broke the news of the downsize this week in his column in the National Catholic Reporter, quotes a former American ambassador to the Holy See calling the move “a massive downgrade.” . . .  Though unconfirmed, the Holy See ambassador is reportedly being shunted to an apartment not far from the embassy.

Creating a larger American diplomatic compound on Rome’s swishy Via Veneto will follow the lead of other major countries that have also consolidated their diplomatic properties. Israel has always had consolidated embassies, even sharing staff and services. In 2006, the United Kingdom moved its embassy to the Holy See to its embassy to Italy grounds, creating a similar uproar among British Catholics who wanted to maintain diplomatic distance. A few years later the Netherlands followed suit. In 2011, Ireland closed their embassy to the Holy See entirely, and rely on visiting envoys to keep up diplomatic ties.

The Vatican has not publicly commented on the reports of the American diplomatic consolidation, but given Pope Francis’s own reform-minded approach to running the Catholic Church, it is unlikely he will object to the shake-up.

Visas Are Now Available For Same-Sex Couples

Among the clear winners in the aftermath of the Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Windsor are bi-national same sex couples who had heretofore been unable to get visas for the non-U.S. spouse and often faced having to move abroad to stay together.  Yesterday, the State Department announced that effective immediately same sex spouses would be treated equally and have the same visa rights as heterosexual couples.  We can expect flying spittle and hyperventilating among the Christofascists in reaction to this development.  Metro Weekly has details:

In a policy change announced Friday by Secretary of State John Kerry, the United States will begin processing visa applications for same-sex couples effective immediately. 

"If you are the spouse of a U.S. citizen, your visa application will be treated equally. If you are the spouse of a non-citizen, your visa application will be treated equally. And if you are in a country that doesn’t recognize your same-sex marriage, then your visa application will still be treated equally at every single one of our 222 visa processing centers around the world," Kerry said during an appearance at the U.S. embassy in London.

The announcement is the latest repercussion following the Supreme Court's June decision striking down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

"Now, as long as a marriage has been performed in a jurisdiction that recognizes it so that it is legal, then that marriage is valid under U.S. immigration laws, and every married couple will be treated exactly the same, and that is what we believe is appropriate," Kerry added.

According to Freedom to Marry, sixteen countries permit same-sex marriage — Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, Argentina, Denmark, France, Brazil, New Zealand, Uruguay and Britain — while certain regions of the U.S. and Mexico also allow same-sex couples the right to marry.

The new State Department policy will also impact the children of the foreign national spouse by considering them "step-children" of the parent who is a U.S. citizen.

"Today, the State Department, which has always been at the forefront of equality in the federal government, I'm proud to say, is tearing down an unjust and an unfair barrier that for too long stood in the way of same-sex families being able to travel as a family to the United States."

Hillary Clinton Strikes Back at Amnesia Burdened GOP Senators

Apparently worried that Hillary Clinton may run for president in 2016 and whip the GOP's ass, in a hearing before Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Republican senators went out of their way to try to bloody Hillary Clinton.  In the process, however, these disingenuous GOP senators displayed shocking levels of amnesia in terms of GOP lies and dropped balls under the watch of Chimperator George W. Bush and Emperor Palpatine Cheney.  For those who need to be reminded of GOP misdeeds, let us not forget (i) Bush/Cheney's failure to stop the 9-11 attacks even though intelligence reports existed that warned of the attacks and (ii) the deliberate lies that Bush/Cheney used to drag America into the fiasco known as the Iraq War, a war that took over 4,000 American lives and help create the nations burgeoning budget deficit.  And if the security of American embassies and consulates is really an issue as GOP senators pretended, lets not forget the $300+ million cut from the State Department budget by the GOP controlled House of Representatives.  The Daily Beast looks at Hillary's counter attack on lame and disingenuous GOP senators.  Here are some highlights:

Throughout the hearing Wednesday, Clinton was often poised, marshaling the complex facts of the government assessment and investigation of the incident with flair. In her opening statement, she got a little choked up, recalling the events that killed Ambassador Stevens. 

In a back and forth with Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, Clinton’s voice rose slightly when asked why the American people were not told what the diplomatic security officers knew at the time of the attack—that it wasn’t a spontaneous protest tied to an anti-Islam film.

Clinton responded, “With all due respect, the fact is, we had four dead Americans. Was it because there was a protest or was it because there were guys who went out for a walk one night who decided they would kill some Americans?” she asked. “What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and to do everything we can to make sure it never happens again.”

In her testimony, Clinton made the point that her top priority in those first days after the attacks was to figure out how to keep U.S. diplomats safe. She said the State Department didn’t want to interfere with the FBI investigation or question diplomatic-security officers who were witnesses to a crime scene. She explained that on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 she was dealing with protests at U.S. embassies throughout the Muslim world.

But she was adamant that there was no cover-up. The closest Clinton came to voicing contrition for the public statements about Benghazi after the attack was when she faulted the administration for not explaining how unclear the picture was on the evening of the attack. “I understand trying to figure out what was going on and why were we told this, that, and the other,” she told Sen. Jeff Flake, a Republican from Arizona. “I can only assure you, as the information came to light, we tried to share it, but that took some time.”

Clinton also responded to questions about last week’s hostage crisis in Algeria, including reports suggesting that some of the Benghazi attackers may have participated. Clinton said she could not confirm those reports. “It’s coming from the Algerian government related to some of the terrorists who they took alive. We don’t have anything to confirm it yet,” she said.

What the GOP senators sought to do today goes hand in hand with the repeated lie that Barack Obama is a big spender when in fact, the most explosive increases in spending over the last 15 years occurred under Bush/Cheney, not the Obama administration.  Like their Christofascist masters, the GOP senators seem incapable of telling the truth.

  

John McCain Bitch Slaps Michele Bachmann for Anti-Muslim Lies

There are times that I wonder why Michele Bachmann isn't in a mental institution.  The same question applies to the lunatics and apparent knuckle dragging voters in her district who continue to vote this mentally ill loon into Congress.   Michele Bachmann's latest fixation - she's apparently taking a brief break from her anti-gay jihad - is the fantasy that Muslim terrorists are infiltrating the government with a goal of imposing Sharia law, i.e., the Islamic equivalent of the Christian dictatorship that Bachmann and her fellow Christofascist nutcases want to inflict on all Americans.  Bachamnn's lunacy was so unfounded and over the top that John McCaim felt compelled to bitch lap Bachmann on the Senate floor.  First these highlights from Think Progress followed by a video clip of McCain taking Bachmann to task:

On the floor of the Senate Wednesday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) repudiated Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-MN) McCarthyesque witch-hunt to root out the alleged Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the U.S. government. The flap started when Bachmann all but directly accused Secretary Hillary Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin of working on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood in a letter with four colleagues to the State Department’s Inspector General demanding an investigation.

Enter McCain, who put his foot down today and chided his fellow Republicans for the accusations against Abedin. McCain brought up his personal relationship with Abedin, adding that she “represents what is best about America.” He noted Bachmann’s letter and its sourcing to a report from notorious Islamophobe Frank Gaffney‘s Center for Security Policy (CSP). He then said:

To say that the accusations made in both documents are not substantiated by the evidence they offer is to be overly polite and diplomatic about it. It is far better, and more accurate, to talk straight: These allegations about Huma Abedin, and the report from which they are drawn, are nothing less than an unwarranted and unfounded attack on an honorable citizen, a dedicated American, and a loyal public servant.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) lead the charge against Bachmann, demanding “credible, substantial evidence” to back up her accusations. Bachmann then penned a long letter responding to Ellison, which he rightly dismissed as “16 pages worth of repeated false allegations. Just regurgitated nonsense.”

Bachmann responds in a statement on her website: “The letters my colleagues and I sent on June 13 to the Inspectors General of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and the Department of State – and the follow up letter I wrote to Rep. Ellison on July 13 – are unfortunately being distorted.” 

  

U.S. Recruited and Assisted Former Nazis - Another Blow to Supposed American Exceptionalism

I am not anti-American by any means, but it disturbs me greatly when xenophobes Sarah Palin and many in the Kool-Aid drinking Tea Party ranks depict the United States as some type of God-favored nation while glossing over the sordid and often morally deficient aspects of the nation's past. A new report, “Hitler’s Shadow: Nazi War Criminals, U.S. Intelligence and the Cold War,” is anything but complimentary or supportive of America's alleged exceptionalism. Indeed, the report based on materials declassified in the National Archives shows that all too often barbarous murderers were allowed to escape justice or were brought to America if they were deemed to have useful knowledge and/or skills. To me, the only way to avoid repeating dishonorable deeds is to admit that the nation is not perfect and in no wise chosen by God as something special. Such an honest look at our history may not be good for jingoists, but if true morality is supposed to matter, the ugly truth needs to be recognized and never repeated. Here are highlights from the New York Times on the new report:
*
After World War II, American counterintelligence recruited former Gestapo officers, SS veterans and Nazi collaborators to an even greater extent than had been previously disclosed and helped many of them avoid prosecution or looked the other way when they escaped, according to thousands of newly declassified documents.
*
“When the Klaus Barbie story broke, about his escaping with American help to Bolivia, we thought there weren’t any more stories like that, that Barbie was an exception,” said Norman J. W. Goda, a University of Florida professor and co-author of the report with Professor Richard Breitman of American University. “What we found in the record is that there were a fair number, and that it seems more systematic.”
*
“Hitler’s Shadow” adds a further dimension to a separate Justice Department history of American Nazi-hunting operations, which the government has refused to release since 2006 and which concluded that American intelligence officials created a “safe haven” in the United States for certain other former Nazis.
*
Like earlier reports generated by the group, this one paints a grim portrait of bureaucracy, turf wars and communication gaps among intelligence agencies. It also details blatantly cynical self-interested tactical decisions by Allied governments and a general predisposition that some war crimes by former Nazis and their collaborators should be overlooked because the suspects could be transformed into valuable assets.
*
Among them was Rudolf Mildner, who was “responsible for the execution of hundreds, if not thousands, of suspected Polish resisters” and as a German police commander was in Denmark when Hitler ordered the country’s 8,000 Jews deported to Auschwitz.
*
The report cites other cases that parallel the experience of Klaus Barbie, known as the Butcher of Lyon. He cooperated with American intelligence agents who helped him flee to Argentina. One of those cases involved Anton Mahler, who as a Gestapo anti-communist agent interrogated Hans Scholl, the German underground student leader who was beheaded in 1943. Mr. Mahler also served in Einsatzgruppe B in occupied Belarus, which was blamed for the execution of more than 45,000 people, mostly Jews.
*
In 1952, the report says, the C.I.A. moved to protect Mykola Lebed, a Ukrainian nationalist leader, from a criminal investigation by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. He would work for American intelligence in Europe and the United States through the 1980s, despite being implicated in guerrilla units during the war that killed Jews and Poles and being described by an Army counterintelligence report as a “well-known sadist and collaborator of the Germans.”
*
It is not a pretty picture, but Americans need to open their eyes to the truth rather than patting themselves on the back and convincing themselves that they and the USA are special or even favored by God.

Our Embassy in Afghanistan Is Guarded by Sexually Confused Frat Boys

As a long time advocate for the repel of Don't Ask Don't Tell, I find the recent revelations about the sexually explicit hazing popular with certain elements of the heterosexual security contractors in Afghanistan most enlightening. The whole alleged purpose behind DADT and the exclusion of LGBT citizens from the military is to maintain morale and unit discipline, yet the conduct of these straights would embarrass most drunk fraternity boys. To me, the whole breaking scandal helps to underscore that the REAL reason behind DADT is the legalization of religious based discrimination and pandering to the Christo-fascists of the far right. The Gawker has a telling article and some very illuminating photos of what gay fearing straights do to one another. Here are some story highlights:

*

Wonder what it's like to guard State Department facilities in Kabul? In photos first published by Gawker, security contractors get their kicks peeing on one another, simulating anal sex, doing "butt shots," and "eating potato chips out of ass cracks."

*
These photos were provided to us by the Project on Government Oversight, which has just written a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton detailing its investigation into the "Lord of the Flies environment" that has overtaken the private contractors who guard State Department employees in Kabul, Afghanistan. According to POGO, employees of ArmorGroup North America—a unit of contracting giant Wackenhut—get their jollies off by "deviant hazing [that] has created a climate of fear and coercion, with those who declined to participate often ridiculed, humiliated, demoted, or even fired."

*

What sort of hazing? The traditional desperately homoerotic frat boy kind, mostly involving eating and drinking things off of other men's butts. Also some nipple-biting, as you can see below. One POGO whistle blower described it thusly [PDF link]: "They have a group of sexual predators, deviants running rampant over there. No, they are not jamming guys in the ass per say [sic], but they are showing poor judgenment [sic]." Most of it appears to have been voluntary, but those who didn't really want to drink vodka shots out of the clenched butt-cheeks of their male co-workers were penalized and reported barricading themselves in their rooms.

*

So anyway, these are the people who are guarding our national security in Afghanistan, being paid vast multiples of what soldiers, sailors, and marines get with your tax dollars. Are these guys asking, or telling?

*

Honorable LGBT servicemembers get drummed out of the military but this bullshit is allowed? It certainly shows how hollow the arguments in favor of DADT have become when heterosexuals freely engage in such conduct.

More Cruel Murders of Iraqi Gays

I continue to be disgusted that Obama and the State Department appear to be doing absolutely nothing to pressure the Iraqi government to clamp down on the wanton murder of gays in Iraq. I guess I shouldn't be surprised now that it increasingly appears that Obama doesn't want anyone prosecuted for torture based war crimes- even the authors of the memos that were utilized to justify torture for which those from other countries have been tried and convicted. Details on the sadistic manner in which gays are being killed that now are leaking out are horrifying. As with "men of God" in this country, the anti-gay clerics are proving themselves to be better described as agents of Satan. Here are some highlights from an UAE-based media network, Alarabiya, as translated at Towleroad:

*

"A prominent Iraqi human rights activist says that Iraqi militia have deployed a painful form of torture against homosexuals by closing their anuses using 'Iranian gum.' ... Yina Mohammad told Alarabiya.net that, 'Iraqi militias have deployed an unprecedented form of torture against homosexuals by using a very strong glue that will close their anus.' According to her, the new substance 'is known as the American hum, which is an Iranian-manufactured glue that if applied to the skin, sticks to it and can only be removed by surgery. After they glue the anuses of homosexuals, they give them a drink that causes diarrhea. Since the anus is closed, the diarrhea causes death.

*

Videos of this form of torture are being distributed on mobile cellphones in Iraq.' According to this human rights activist, for the past 3 weeks a crackdown on homosexuals has been going on based on a religious decree that demands their death; dozens have been targeted. She says that the persecution of homosexuals is not confined to the Shiite clerics. Some Sunni leaders have also declared the death penalty for sodomy on satellite channels."

*

As I have noted before, I suspect that religious based hatred has caused more deaths than many forms of disease over the course of history. There are definitely times that I believe banning all religions might not be such a bad idea.

Rice Tries To Quell Revolt Over Forced Iraq Assignments

While the Chimperator and Emperor Palpatine Cheney try to convince the American public that things are improving in Iraq (personally, I take everything they say as a lie at this point), a veritable revolt has broken out in the State Department where diplomats are on verge of refusing to accept assignments in Iraq. One senior diplomat described assignment to Iraq as a "potential death sentence." Hmm, seem to me as if the folks within the State Department would have some feel for the reality on the ground. (We know that the Chimperator surely does NOT). If they do NOT want to go, I suspect things are in fact pretty bad. Here are some highlights from the Washington Post's coverage (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/31/AR2007103101626.html?hpid=topnews):

Uneasy U.S. diplomats yesterday challenged senior State Department officials in unusually blunt terms over a decision to order some of them to serve at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad or risk losing their jobs.

At a town hall meeting in the department's main auditorium attended by hundreds of Foreign Service officers, some of them criticized fundamental aspects of State's personnel policies in Iraq. They took issue with the size of the embassy -- the biggest in U.S. history -- and the inadequate training they received before being sent to serve in a war zone. One woman said she returned from a tour in Basra with post-traumatic stress disorder only to find that the State Department would not authorize medical treatment.

Yesterday's internal dissension came amid rising public doubts about diplomatic progress in Iraq and congressional inquiries into the department's spending on the embassy and its management of private security contractors. Some participants asked how diplomacy could be practiced when the embassy itself, inside the fortified Green Zone, is under frequent fire and officials can travel outside only under heavy guard. Service in Iraq is "a potential death sentence," said one man who identified himself as a 46-year Foreign Service veteran. "Any other embassy in the world would be closed by now," he said to sustained applause.

In notices e-mailed to Foreign Service officers around the world late Friday night, Thomas wrote that State had decided to begin "directed assignments" to fill an anticipated shortfall of 48 diplomats in Iraq next summer. Separate e-mail letters were sent to about 250 officers selected as qualified for the posts. If enough of them did not volunteer, the letters said, some would be ordered to serve there. Foreign Service officers swear an oath to serve wherever the secretary of state sends them, but no directed assignments have been ordered since the late 1960s, during the Vietnam War.

Amid the anger expressed, the woman who was stationed in Basra said she had "absolutely no regrets" about serving in Iraq. "I wanted to go to a place where I knew it was important for my country to be," she said, "even though I had a lot of questions about the origins of the war to begin with." But citing her own medical situation and sounding near tears, she said: "The more who serve in war zones, the more that will come back with these sorts of war wounds. . . . Now that you are looking at compulsory service in war zones . . . we have a moral imperative as an agency to take care of our people."

First the Chimperator destroys Iraq and the U. S. military (especially the Army) and now he and Rice are on the way to destroying the diplomat corp too. One heck of a job, Chimpy.