You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Vet Group Urges DOJ To Take Action Against Beest For E-mail violations
2016-01-11
[Daily Caller] A veterans advocacy group that has sued the State Department over its failure to turn over Hillary Clinton's emails is asking Attorney General Loretta Lynch to take action against the former secretary of state for ordering one of her top advisers to strip classification markers off of a set of talking points and send them through unencrypted channels.

In the letter, Veterans for a Strong America (VSA) executive director Joel Arends points to federal statute 18 USC 793, which he asserts Clinton violated when, in a June 17, 2011 email, she ordered adviser Jake Sullivan to strip a document containing talking points of its "identifying heading and send nonsecure" instead of sending via secure fax. (RELATED: Bombshell Emails Shows Hillary Instructed Adviser To Strip Markings From Sensitive Talking Points)

As Arends notes, 18 USC 793 states that it is a federal crime punishable by fine and up to 10 years in prison to "cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted...to any person not entitled to receive [classified information], or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it."

Gross negligence is also punishable under the statute. A person having knowledge that classified material was illegally removed from its "proper place of custody" and "fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction" has violated that portion of the law.
Posted by:Besoeker

#6  I suspect this has more staying power, but who knows.
Posted by: Besoeker   2016-01-11 18:01  

#5  ...unless there were foreign sourced classified material. Then the offended country could ask for extradition for prosecution. Presidential pardons are for domestic violations.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2016-01-11 17:57  

#4  Not if there's a Presidential pardon in January 2017.
Posted by: Pappy   2016-01-11 17:54  

#3  The next AG can proceed if Lynch fails in her duty.
Posted by: Sven the pelter   2016-01-11 17:22  

#2  The judgement of history? I have some doubt Sven. These people hunt in packs, unhindered by the moral law.

"Two things fill the mind with new and increasing admiration and awe. The more often we reflect on them: The Starry heavens above me and the 'moral law' within me.
Immanual Kant
Critique of Practical Reason (1778)


I find no inspiration in the likes of Lynch or in those who have placed her in a position of power and authority. We know why she was placed there. She is a tool of those who would take the law unto themselves, the Clintons, Obama, and the rest. Disgust yes, inspiration no.
Posted by: Besoeker   2016-01-11 17:18  

#1  Lynch hasn't tipped her hand. I wonder if the judgement of history is weighing on her.
Posted by: Sven the pelter   2016-01-11 17:04  

00:00