Is Hillary Clinton Above the Law?

Exclusive: Secretary of State Clinton was harsh on subordinates who were careless with classified information, but those rules apparently weren’t for her, a troubling double standard, says ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.

By Ray McGovern

“Enough of the emails,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders in Brooklyn-ese, while turning to Secretary Hillary Clinton during their first debate on Oct. 13, 2015. Sanders won loud applause for what seemed a gentlemanly gesture in withholding criticism for her use of a private email server for classified information.

But when Sanders said “The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails,” I had a flashback to a House hearing three decades ago on large liberties taken with the law during the Iran-Contra affair under President Ronald Reagan. Beginning his testimony, then-Secretary of State George Shultz made the mistake of saying, in effect, who cares about laws being violated: “The American people are tired of hearing about Iran-Contra.”

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Rep. David Obey, D-Wisconsin, was quick to respond: “Mr. Secretary, I did not take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States until I got tired.”

Well, we intelligence professionals also took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. There was no “until we got tired” – or even “until we retired” in that oath. It has no expiration date. Congressman Obey’s persistence and tenacity offer a model for patriots.

It has been six months since Sanders’s magnanimous gesture let Clinton off the hook for playing fast and loose with laws passed to protect classified information. During subsequent debates, everything but the kitchen sink has been hurled at the candidates, but there has been little appetite for asking Secretary Clinton what she thought she was doing, and why she decided to ignore security safeguards. (The reason often given – because she liked her Blackberry so much – does not withstand close scrutiny.)

While “mainstream” media have largely avoided the issue, it did get mentioned during the March 9 debate in Miami. Longtime news anchor for Noticiero Univision, Jorge Ramos, asked Secretary Clinton whether she would quit the presidential race if she were indicted for putting classified information on her private email server. She replied: “Oh, for goodness sake, it’s not going to happen. I’m not even answering that question.”

Ray McGovern and Scott Ritter will participate in Teach-ins regarding the foreign policy positions of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders at Judson Church Assembly Hall, 55 Washington Square South, New York, from 7-10 p.m. on Sunday, April 17, and at SUNY Purchase Multicultural Center at noon on Monday, April 18.

Ray McGovern and Scott Ritter will participate in Teach-ins regarding the foreign policy positions of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders at Judson Church Assembly Hall, 55 Washington Square South, New York, from 7-10 p.m. on Sunday, April 17, and at SUNY Purchase Multicultural Center at noon on Monday, April 18.

But this is too important an issue to sweep under the rug. It is not only we veteran intelligence professionals who are alarmed at what appears, at best, to be Clinton’s carelessness and, at worst, her deliberate attempt to conduct her affairs in complete secrecy, avoiding the strictures of, for example, the Freedom of Information Act, which can give the people and historians access to public records in the future so they can understand how government decisions were made. So researchers who care about democracy care.

It is also the FBI that cares, and the National Security Agency, which is responsible for ensuring secure communications, cares. And so do all who may have sent a sensitive piece of intelligence to her that she, in turn, might have put on her unclassified system. If Americans at large were briefed on the potential national security implications, they too would care.

One of the distinct advantages of the collegial way we operate in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) is that when, as now, one of us needs input from tried and trusted specialists, it is immediately at hand. So, I consulted several of my colleagues with special knowledge of these matters.

A Severe Compromise

For technical commentary on this issue, I turned to a specialist VIPS colleague named William Binney, who worked for NSA for 36 years. Binney co-founded NSA’s SIGINT (Signals Intelligence) Automation Research Center, and retired from NSA as Technical Director. He said he shares my very strong feelings on the issue. He told me the following:

“The email issue with Secretary Clinton is one of the most severe compromises of security I have ever known. After all, if the Chinese, Russians and other hackers can penetrate the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) servers and take the records of over 21 million U.S. citizens that over the years have applied for security clearances, then penetrating Hillary Clinton’s private server would be a piece of cake. Such penetration would yield insight into decision making at the highest level of the U.S. government, including what might be revealed in emails with the President.

“This is worse that the compromise of predominantly lower-level data by Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning and gives insight into planning at the highest levels in Washington – something that even all the torrent of data exposed by Edward Snowden could not provide. Reports that Clinton instructed subordinates to delete the security classification line on sensitive reports and email them to her, suggests a total disregard for the need to protect classified information and arrogance in deeming herself above lawful regulations governing the handling such data.

“We might as well have had an in-place mole at the highest level of our government. The FBI/Department of Justice would have already indicted lesser officials for less. Certainly, Clinton is receiving special treatment. It is a safe guess that FBI investigators are seething over their inability, so far, to pursue the case against Hillary with the vigor it merits.

Former National Security Agency official William Binney sitting in the offices of Democracy Now! in New York City. (Photo credit: Jacob Appelbaum)

Former National Security Agency official William Binney sitting in the offices of Democracy Now! in New York City. (Photo credit: Jacob Appelbaum)

“The case of Gen. David Petraeus comes immediately to mind. There was mucho seething at the FBI, when Petraeus gave his mistress classified documents of extreme sensitivity, lied about it to FBI investigators, and was let off with a slap on the wrist.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Gen. Petraeus: Too Big to Jail.”]

Operational Perspective

With the aim of getting expert commentary from an operational perspective, I turned to Scott Ritter, who served on Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf’s staff during the first Gulf war, before he became chief U.N. weapons inspector for Iraq. Here’s what Ritter had to say:

“I can say that NSA/JSOC (and even U.N. teams such as the one I was running in Iraq) would LOVE for a foreign official at the secretary-of-state level to use a private server for official communications. One need simply to mimic a cell tower (the Stingray technology in vogue today would suffice) and you instantly have access to everything such an official does/says/types on a cell phone. That senior official would no longer have the unique identifiers and encryption that an official server would provide.

“By the way, it is no longer a secret that we targeted the unencrypted communications that Saddam Hussein and his closest advisers sent out, not just the encrypted ones. Any communications traffic analyst will tell you that simply reading the unclassified traffic provides a plethora of actionable intelligence – particularly since the communications intercepted are in real time.”

In the Field

So what can happen in the field – in combat areas and in places like Kabul – when regulations governing the handling of classified information are disregarded? For perspective on this, I turned to Matthew Hoh, Marine Captain in Iraq and later a senior State Department official in Afghanistan. He answered:

President Barack Obama shakes hands with U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

President Barack Obama shakes hands with U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

“Ordinary Americans need to know how serious this is. Just last week we witnessed one example of what could have happened when Secretary of State John Kerry was visiting Kabul and the Taliban tried to attack him with rockets. Whenever the President, Vice President, Secretary of State or Defense, Joint Chiefs Chairman, or a congressional delegation visits Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iraq, the planning and arrangements are secret. But this is the type of information that could be sent over Clinton’s personal email, hacked, and gotten a senior American official killed.

“Another example would be Clinton discussing information relating to intercepts of foreign leaders. It’s possible in her correspondence she could mention something regarding Putin, Cameron, Modi, et al. that we capture via SIGINT. That would not only be an embarrassment; it would blow that capability for such access (and squander the millions of dollars spent in creating it). Fortunately for the other world leaders, they don’t seem to have been as arrogant or dumb (or both of the above) in insisting on using non-secure communications.

“Was it not amazing that Clinton protégé, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, plotted the Feb. 22 coup in Ukraine with the U.S. Ambassador in Kiev on an insecure telephone! Wonder where Nuland got the idea that was all right.

“Only transmitting and sharing classified information via email through the secure email and internet system used by the U.S. government also prevents accidental transmission of secret information to people who should not receive secret information. It’s a closed system. Only those with the approved clearance and an authorized email account can receive the email. So you can’t accidentally type in the wrong name of a contact who is not trusted, is not a U.S. citizen, does not have a security clearance, etc. and send them an email with classified information.

“We’ve all done that with our email, type in the wrong name and send someone an email by accident. Or we’ve forwarded an email string with a chain of information somewhere down the body of the message that you didn’t want the recipient to see. By transmitting classified information via her personal email account Hilary Clinton could have very easily sent classified information to someone by accident. Of course, as everyone who uses email knows, once you send a message you have no control over where that message gets sent after you hit send. So, once she forwarded an email with classified information that information could be sent to anyone, anywhere in the world whether on purpose or on accident. That’s why you don’t transmit classified information outside the secure system.

“Another question: What information regarding her dealings outside of her official capacities may have been targeted? What I mean is besides U.S. government secrets that she possibly exposed were Clinton’s own secrets – perhaps a quid pro quo or two regarding foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation. Such information could be used against her as political blackmail. What information could have been captured by a foreign power that could be used if/when Hillary Clinton came to office as President to gain leverage over her?

“Undoubtedly, if she wins election, her first priority will be re-election. So, my concern is not just for information that she could have compromised as Secretary of State that would have harmed the U.S. from 2009-2013, but what information has been compromised that could be used against her as blackmail if she is in the Oval Office?”

Clinton’s Judgment

So whether Sen. Sanders is right or not – that “the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails” – Hillary Clinton’s carelessness and entitlement in brushing aside the lawful security rules that apply to other government officials is an issue that bears on whether she has the character and judgment to be President.

U.S. Army Pvt. Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning.

U.S. Army Pvt. Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning.

In December 2011, when then-Secretary of State Clinton was busy denouncing Pvt. Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning for leaking evidence of U.S. government wrongdoing, Clinton declared: “I think that in an age where so much information is flying through cyberspace, we all have to be aware of the fact that some information which is sensitive, which does affect the security of individuals and relationships, deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so.”

For leaking mostly low-level classified information to the public so the people could know about illegal or questionable acts by the government – none of the data top secret, the level that some Clinton emails have now been stamped – Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison.

But it seems that the applicable legal standard — or double standard — is that the more sensitive the security breach and the higher the status of the offender the lighter the punishment. For instance, Gen. David Petraeus divulged top-secret/code-word information to his biographer/mistress and lied to the FBI about it, but received only a misdemeanor citation (a fine and probation but no jail time) for mishandling classified material.

If that pattern is followed – and since Secretary of State Clinton outranked Gen. Petraeus – she might well expect even more lenient treatment, but her behavior might be something that the American voters would want to consider before giving her a promotion to U.S. President.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). He was an Army infantry/intelligence officer and then a CIA analyst for a total of 30 years.

image_pdfimage_print

38 comments for “Is Hillary Clinton Above the Law?

  1. Mark Thomason
    April 17, 2016 at 12:29 pm

    Also relevant is her stated determination to destroy Edward Snowden. He revealed HER secrets, and she means to get him for it. She has said so in repeated ravings.

    • April 17, 2016 at 12:47 pm

      Yes, she is known to be vengeful as is Cheney, others. Mrs William Clinton is known for having no integrity. She demonstrated that truism since her husband first entered politics successfully, in the Governor’s mansion in Arkansas. Such a profile, no matter how airbrushed out, would seriously diminish the respect shown to the office of the United States President. That is a global office.The politics of hate, produce hate. Erasing diplomacy in all it’s forms. As shown by the Russian Federation President and Foreign Minister, diplomacy is mandatory to reach a resolution of national and international differences

    • mark
      April 18, 2016 at 4:01 am

      We’ the people of America finally decided to buy our own president, we have more money in combine than they can (1%) dream of .please send Bernie Sanders few dollars, this will be the last time anyone will be able to buy a president in this country. when Bernie Sanders is a president, he will over turn the Citizens United just to begin with and will force campaign finance reform and it will pass with our backing of Bernie. please few dollars, $10-20-30 anything you can effort ,he buys adds , unfortunately it has to be this way for now, l beg all of you ,for our children( 88% voting for their Grandpa )and for their future . l , this grandpa will vote with my kids and with my grandchildren, they are wanting a political revolution . after all this is more of their future than ours, Bernie Sanders American president. who is with me give me thumbs up if you agree and lets show them he can be elected, Write a latter to CNN feedback and let them know CNN became Clinton News Network Time Warner owns CNN and they are the 7th biggest contributors to Hillary campaign, BOYCOTT CNN -AND TIME WARNER COMPANIES -Turn it off , stop reading their news in Internet, copy post this massage in every site let Bernie supporters get involved .lets show CNN this is going to cost them money AND We have to make sure GANGS OF NEW YORK do NOT steal the Votes from BERNIE,AND CLICK in every Hillary add lets deflate her money

  2. incontinent reader
    April 17, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    Ray- Superb commentary. Now when will the Administration (and the Democratic Party – and Republican Party- leadership) get the message and put aside politics and demand accountability on an issue of such import.

    • Shafiq
      April 18, 2016 at 4:50 am

      Mark, I agree. Clinton or Cruz as president would bring more wars, killing hundreds of thousands if not millions more people. The dominance of Wall Street, the MIC, big energy and big pharma will only increase because she will push through TPP and protect the banksters. I hope the people of New York vote for Sanders and give him a shot at the presidency.

  3. Bill Bodden
    April 17, 2016 at 1:04 pm

    But, President Obama has said on many occasions that no one is above the law. He wouldn’t be bullshitting us, would he?

    • Kiza
      April 17, 2016 at 10:27 pm

      Well, you know the old communism quip – everyone is equal, but some (the party officials) are just more equal than others. Likewise, in the US Communism for the Rich and the Powerful, no one is above the law, but the law sometimes sinks low for some individuals. It is up and down law, you know. Just for the Clintons the law finds itself at the bottom of the Washington sewerage.

  4. Dr. Ip
    April 17, 2016 at 2:00 pm

    Hillary obviously stars
    in the newest season of
    HOUSE – OF – CRUDS
    The Reality Show

    Serpents shed their skin to grow larger, but the poison is still in those sacks behind their fangs.

  5. John Puma
    April 17, 2016 at 2:25 pm

    The more we hear about HRC’s official peccadilloes the more it seems that she is perfectly suited to be what has become the model of the US president: arrogant, mendacious, money-serving, murderous hypocrite-in-chief.

    Sending a death squad after Snowden will be the second act of her presidency, immediately after a preemptory self-pardon for all crimes, known, to be revealed and to be committed.

    She is absolutely correct that an indictment “is not going to happen.” The ultimate decision on that issue is up to the man who can hardly restrain himself from endorsing her for his job.

  6. radkelt
    April 17, 2016 at 6:15 pm

    ” perhaps a quid pro quo or two regarding foreign donations to the Clinton ” … campaign.
    given the extravagant remuneration for boilerplate speeches it’s certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.

  7. alexander
    April 17, 2016 at 6:30 pm

    Thank god for people like you, Mr McGovern,

    For whom their oath to our country, has no expiration date.

    The day the culture of impunity ends, most especially for the Neocon “oligarchs” and their crop of bought and paid for politicians, such as our darling Ms. Clinton, is the day our country will be free again.

    They have done such unconscionable damage to our nation, and the world, one hopes that day greets us soon.

    Very soon.

    • TellTheTruth-2
      April 18, 2016 at 9:25 am

      Your comment reminded me of “THE OATH” I took to DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES when received a Notary Public commission. Until then, I had never raised my right hand and taken an actual oath. After I thought about it for a few seconds, I realized I had defended the Constitution all my life and taking the oath was just a matter of putting it into words. Sadly, the NWO people (Ted Cruz and his wife included) want to eliminate the Constitution and MERGE the USA into a North American Union NWO state.

      Today the neoCON controlled people seem more loyal to Israel than the USA; but, the Zionist’s ability to call anyone who disagrees with them ANTI-SEMITE is so powerful even sites like antiwar.com BAN PEOPLE who speak out and, in doing so, protect the neoCONs from criticism. In truth, antiwar.com NEEDS WAR to have a reason to exist. Like you, I will defend the Constitution of the United States and speak out against the neoCON traitors.

  8. Vic Ashley
    April 17, 2016 at 7:15 pm

    Nice to read these views, although you have not included one of the biggest issues of all — that the emails likely reveal that the Clinton Foundation is a money laundering operation, which explains her need to hide it at her house and keep total control of it. FBI agents on the case were (reportedly) instructed to read Clinton Cash for a reason, and it wasn’t about whether emails were classified or not.

    What do you think will happen with that aspect of the case?

    When a US Sec of State sells contracts to the highest bidder for personal profit, isn’t there a consequence? What happens when uranium is involved? Nothing?

    Recommended reading:

    The Mystery of Hillary’s Missing Millions
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2015/09/29/the-mystery-of-hillarys-missing-millions/#1e6f01c15505

    The Tangled Clinton Web
    New details regarding foreign money flowing into the Clinton Foundation and the sale of a uranium company to Russia connected to the Clinton Foundation
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUMUo5QM00A&feature=player_embedded

    • TellTheTruth-2
      April 18, 2016 at 9:28 am

      Exactly .. you’ve nailed it. I’ve always suspected the Clintons SOLD that spy plane to China and Bush Jr delivered it right after he replaced Bill Clinton as President. My studies have convinced me Bill Clinton is, and has been, a Lieutenant in the Bush Crime Family for years and years.

      • Brad Benson
        April 19, 2016 at 6:37 am

        Did I hear a little shout out to the great Mike Malloy in that comment somewhere? ; )

  9. John
    April 17, 2016 at 8:11 pm

    The law is…..the neocons win at any price……. And we the people of the constitution just stand by and watch…..Don’t you know it’s Israel first silly goons !! Lots of talk …but that about it…..Don’t look now paw, the house is burning down

    • TellTheTruth-2
      April 18, 2016 at 9:32 am

      Thank you for saying it. The neoCON Zionists are the problem. Americans need to Google THE GREATER ISRAEL PROJECT to understand people who were willing to give us 911.

  10. Joe Tedesky
    April 17, 2016 at 8:19 pm

    What should concern the U.S. Government the most, is what kind of precedent are they already sending to the troops, by their so far lackadaisical treatment of Hillary Clinton. Presidential Candidate Hillary acts like this was no big deal. She even makes sure to point out how Colin Powell, and Condi Rice did it to. From everything I’ve read so far, Powell and Rice accidentally send a couple to a few messages via unsecure servers, whereas Hillary send over thirty thousand emails. Let’s face it, Hillary was attempting to prevent any reporter from using under the Freedom of Information Act access to her correspondence. More than likely she was trying to hide things, which she felt would ruin her chance to becoming America’s First Female President. Her security breach should be dealt with in the most strictest way possible. Laws are based on precedent, so what will it be?

  11. Bill Bodden
    April 17, 2016 at 8:53 pm

    “Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” Debbie Wasserman Schultz (un-Democratic Party National Committee Chairwoman)

    There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton agrees with this concept of undermining what little is left of democracy in our republic. If there were a law against such activity, she and other members of the ruling oligarchy would be above it. And, to think all of our schools encourage the children in their care to believe in the myth that ours is “… one nation, … , with liberty and justice for all.”

  12. April 17, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    As Justice Brandeis wrote in his decision in United States vs. Olmstead, 277 U. S. 438 (1928): “Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law, it invites every man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy.”

    An observation that nowadays is seemingly honored more in the breach than the observance.

    It is only through the moral action of persons like Snowden, Manning, Sterling, Kiriakou and others that we even know of such breaches of the regulations and laws by public officials, who have always tried to cloak their lawlessness by stamping it “top secret”.

  13. Zachary Smith
    April 17, 2016 at 9:29 pm

    I’ve found an essay which claims that the “classified/not classified” content of Hillary’s emails is totally Irrelevant. The author is supposedly a law professor in Texas.

    Law makes clear DOJ should prosecute Clinton for mishandling ‘national defense information,’ classified or not.

    The applicable statute, 18 USC 793, however, does not even once mention the word “classified.” The focus is on “information respecting the national defense” that potentially “could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” 793 (f) specifically makes it a crime for anyone “entrusted with … any document … or information relating to the national defense … through gross negligence (to permit) the same to be removed from its proper place of custody.” A jury (not a Democrat or Republican political administration) is, of course, the best body to determine gross negligence on the facts of this case.

    The courts have held repeatedly that “national defense information” includes closely held military, foreign policy and intelligence information and that evidence that the information is classified is not necessary for a prosecution

    If that is correct, Hillary Clinton ought to be prosecuted. It’s my guess that she figures she’s above the law, and that she’s probably correct with that assumption.

    Still, it’s all reason enough for Sanders to stay the course in the unlikely event a decision is made that somebody besides the “little people” ought to go to jail for a gross violation of Federal statutes.

    • dahoit
      April 18, 2016 at 11:06 am

      Well,her abject and pitiful shout out to Zion shows US who the law is.
      Trump for POTUS.
      Our only way out of this madness.

  14. Kiza
    April 17, 2016 at 11:05 pm

    We should all look at this on the bright side.

    When would we have found out, for example that $5B on the tax payers funds has been “invested” into propping up the regimes in the failed state of Ukraine, that Yats was our guy or that the EU puppets should be f*cked?

    Thus, thanks to the won-ton attitude to information security by the representatives of the Ziocon Deep-State (Clinton, Nuland etc) and thanks to FSB preparedness to publish such information, we got a functional replacement for the sidetracked Freedom of the Information Act and for the whistle-blowers that the Obama cracked down hard upon (in the most transparent Government ever) . Otherwise, we could have remained pleasantly deluded that the US is an exceptional force for good in this World. Thus, their loose lips open the eyes of the citizens and the taxpayers (although they may also sink ships or get someone killed).

    Also, the Russian FSB and the Chinese MSS must be rubbing their hands for more Hilarious Clinton in the US Administration. If she gets away with it this time, there will be more of the similar guaranteed.

  15. April 17, 2016 at 11:37 pm

    Berta Cáceres, Honduran Environmental prize awardee, was

    tinyurl.com/BertasMurder -ed March 3, 2016 by US-supported

    tinyurl.com/DeathSquadsHonduras … they have killed many,

    before and since then. They were trained in the USA. Sec. of

    State Hillary Clinton supported the 2009 Honduras coup d’etat!

    tinyurl.com/HoldHillaryResponsible !! Kick her butt, New York!

    tinyurl.com/BertaLaureate

    facebook.com/VivaBertaCaceres/

  16. Tin Drum
    April 17, 2016 at 11:45 pm

    The evidence that the Chinese hacked Clinton’s email server is where? Not on this web page. All we are left is here a circle jerk club for tin foil hatters. Enjoy

    • Kiza
      April 18, 2016 at 1:06 am

      The sweetest thing about this is that the harpy in question actually signed a commitment that she would not do what she did. Now for me, the tin foil hatter, and you, the Ziocon aficionado, the law applies even when we do not know about it – not knowing the law is not an excuse for braking it. But for the chosen, even the signatures do not apply.

      If you had any knowledge you would understand that even if there was a break-in into the Hilarious’ private email server, without a good level of system security it is extremely difficult to even find out that a break-in ever happened (unless the hackers are total dills). Unprotected systems do not have the logging and tracking that professional, let alone high-security, system have. Obviously nobody bothered to explain this simple fact to you – the authorities do not know because they cannot know the level of damage done!

      Finally, one simply does not do the things that you Presidential champion did – turned down by relevant authority from using her own Blackberry she simply went around the security system and set up her own system. But I think I know who she learned such chutzpah from. The same people who are bailing her out now – her owners.

    • TellTheTruth-2
      April 18, 2016 at 9:36 am

      To Tin Drum … A typical neoCON Zionist reply!

      • dahoit
        April 18, 2016 at 11:08 am

        Tin drummers have tin ears.

  17. doucmeasicu
    April 18, 2016 at 4:27 am

    She’s Mossad.

  18. Deschutes
    April 18, 2016 at 5:47 am

    Most depressing thought of the day: you can look forward to 8 years of Hillary Clinton news articles once she is anointed president by the DC oligarchy. :-( :-( :-( :-( :-( :-( :-(((((((((…..

  19. TellTheTruth-2
    April 18, 2016 at 9:00 am

    Once again, Ray McGovern speaks truth to power. During the Brooklyn Debate with Sanders, I observed Hillary was speaking louder than usual and attempting to overpower Bernie by speaking over him and drowning him out to the point I felt almost embarrassed for him. In the end, will Hillary be able to overpower the truth? In truth, her Email is just the tip of the iceberg. After years of Benghazi hearings the gutless Republicans (they’re involved too .. see pictures of John McCain with ISIS leaders) have failed to make the real case about Benghazi. OBAMA AND HILLARY WERE MOST LIKELY AWARE OF ILLEGAL HEAVEY WEAPONS BEING SHIPPED TO SYRIA IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, something that could get them shipped to the Hague if the US even followed international law. Until the Neoconservatives who lied us into wars for Israel (that are not understood by Americans who have not studied THE GREATER ISRAEL PROJECT) are put into prison for starting war after war, Hillary’s Email will continue to be a side show and a tip of the iceberg. In hindsight, Cindy Sheehan was 100% correct: HER SON DIED FOR ISRAEL. And, if Hillary is elected President, Netanyahu will have a pliable tool to start more wars for him.

    • dahoit
      April 18, 2016 at 11:10 am

      So did all the 9-11 victims,Iraq and Afghan war victims and our Constitution.,Dead for Zion.Yahoo says Golan is Israels forever.sheesh.

  20. Alan8
    April 18, 2016 at 11:11 am

    In answer to the title question, YES, she is above the law. I’m surprised there’s any question about this, when many others, lower in status and power than Hillary are also above the law. Not recognizing this obvious fact is delusional.

    Yet another reason I’m voting Green Party if Hillary wins the nomination.

  21. John
    April 18, 2016 at 12:42 pm

    Could it be we’re asking the wrong questions and seeking short term answers ? Hillary or any other American president elected will simply be a pawn in hindering or assisting the real very long term agenda of the religions of the middle east…..Some better questions would be ;

    Is there really a plan for Greater Israel that includes a rebuilt Temple ?

    Why would Israel need a temple in the first place ? Tourist attraction ?

    What does Islam know about the Jewish temple ?

    Why did Islam build a holy site right where the sacrifices were performed so Yahweh could visit this planet ? Do they know something we should know ?

    Religions with their sacred sites and secret rituals are the REAL AGENDAS to be exposed………

    • Zachary Smith
      April 18, 2016 at 9:18 pm

      Why did Islam build a holy site right where the sacrifices were performed so Yahweh could visit this planet ? Do they know something we should know?

      Simple answer – Islam didn’t. While looking for a building site it was discovered that the site of the second temple was a trash dump, and had been such for centuries. Clearing it out would have been an awful lot of trouble, and besides, it was well down the hillside. Putting a Muslim temple on the top of the hill would make it a lot more visible.

      Why was the old site a dump? Because the Romans had totally destroyed it – all the way down to the foundation stones! This was a known fact when Matthew 24 was written, and Jesus was supposed to have predicted this. Be that as it may, it happened. By way of contrast, the hill-top site still had substantial foundations in place. And why not? That was the site of the huge Roman fort in Jerusalem, and they wouldn’t have destroyed their own building. The big foundation stones under the Muslim mosque (Wailing Wall) have zilch to do with the 2nd Temple.

      Anybody who has ever done any slaughtering work knows it’s a gory business. A full-grown bull has about six gallons of blood, and even a chicken can make an awful mess when you cut its throat or chop off its head. The sacrifices in the Temple were at an industrial scale – there would have been dozens or hundreds of large animals, and hundreds or thousands of smaller ones. In a very short time the place would have been filthy, stunk to high heaven, and not been very holy at all. As a kid I’d never thought about the practical aspects – but I’m not a kid these days. The old Hebrews had running water, and an awful lot of it. That kept the temple clean and pure.

      Why else was the Jerusalem site inhabited since the stone age? It had a good supply of water, and it could be fortified. Other than that, it was just another scrubby set of hills.

      I’ve had my copy of Letter of Aristeas for a long, long time, but until recently I saw nothing interesting about it. Only when pointed towards the fact it described a cleaning system in the Temple did it become interesting.

  22. Tom
    April 18, 2016 at 1:17 pm

    If Hillary is indicted, how will Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the DNC Powers that Be deny Sanders the nomination?

    • Zachary Smith
      April 18, 2016 at 9:26 pm

      Easy – just chant an indictment isn’t a conviction a few hundred times. Repeat as necessary on the idiot box.

      Poor Hillary is being stalked by the Republican Noise Machine, and that’s all there is too it.

  23. TG
    April 19, 2016 at 12:07 am

    Yes.

Comments are closed.