Huff Post: 2/29: FBI's Investigation of Clinton Makes Bernie Sanders the Real Front-Runner

[amborin]

The FBI's Investigation of Clinton's Emails Makes Bernie Sanders the True Democratic Front-Runner

.....
Truth be told, you couldn't get a job at McDonalds if you were linked to an FBI investigation.

Today, Hillary Clinton is linked to an ongoing FBI investigation, because she used a private server for "convenience." The former Secretary of State and her supporters believe she's the best qualified candidate for the presidency. This state of affairs exists, in spite of the fact 100 FBI agents are investigating the "convenience" of storing Top Secret intelligence on what Wired refers to as a "Security Fail."

Something tells me that the words "Commander in Chief" and "ongoing FBI investigation" shouldn't be uttered in the same sentence.

If you find it odd that America's top diplomat would need to circumvent government networks, then your viewpoint likely coincides with the 100 FBI agents currently working on this case.

In reality, Clinton could do well on Super Tuesday, and beyond, however there's only one Democrat not linked to an FBI investigation in 2016. There used to be an era in American politics where running for president, and being linked to an FBI investigation was a bad thing; no longer, we've evolved from that point to a new way of governing.

The reality is that Bernie Sanders is the true Democratic front-runner in 2016, not only because he defeats Trump by a wider margin than Clinton (he beats Trump by 6 points, while Clinton only beats Trump by 2.8 points), but because his candidacy and presidency won't be halted by the FBI. Bernie Sanders is the only leading candidate with positive favorability ratings, whereas 67% of Americans distrust Hillary Clinton. Most importantly, Clinton's email server most likely jeopardized national security. Thus, the former Secretary of State's quest for convenience could easily derail her campaign very soon.

snip

1. The former chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency believes Hillary Clinton should "drop out" of the race.

Washington (CNN)President Barack Obama's former top military intelligence official said Hillary Clinton should pull out of the presidential race while the FBI investigate her use of a private email server for official government communication while secretary of state.

Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the retired chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, made the call in an interview with Jake Tapper on "The Lead."

"If it were me, I would have been out the door and probably in jail," said Flynn, who decried what he said was a "lack of accountability, frankly, in a person who should have been much more responsible in her actions as the secretary of state of the United States of America."

2. This FBI probe involves two data companies that were unaware of one another's role in storing Clinton's data.

Two data companies, Platte River and Datto, were involved in storing Clinton's data. Most disturbing is that even the companies involved with Clinton's IT infrastructure sensed something bizarre.

The Washington Post quotes one employee email stating "Starting to think this whole thing really is covering up some shaddy [sic] shit." Furthermore, miscommunication between both companies is highlighted in a Denver Post article titled Denver firm in Clinton e-mail mess didn't know of cloud backups:

Platte River Networks learned in August that its backup service Datto was storing Hillary Clinton's e-mail in the Cloud two years after contact began...

The company was told the e-mail server was for the Clinton family and personal staff -- not for classified information.

If one company believed it was storing personal data, and not classified information, then insufficient security protocol could have resulted from this miscommunication.

3. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates believes the "odds are pretty high" that Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton's server.

One top U.S. official believes that classified data is already in the hands of other nations, as stated in an article in The Hill titled Ex-Pentagon chief: Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton server:

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he believes foreign countries like Russia, China and Iran may have hacked the private email server Hillary Clinton used while secretary of State.

Gates said he agreed with former acting CIA Director Mike Morell's claim that the server had probably been hacked by either Russia, China or Iran.

4. Bryan Pagliano pleaded the Fifth, therefore investigators don't know the full extent of Clinton's security disaster.

Since Pagliano is the person who "installed and maintained" Clinton's private email network, and won't currently talk, there's no way to know the entire story behind Clinton's homebrew server. According to CBS News, "IT professional Bryan Pagliano was paid $5,000 for computer services by the Clintons before he joined the State Department staff, the Washington Post first reported."

5. Edward Snowden believes it's "ridiculous" to think Clinton's emails were secure.

According to The Guardian, "Edward Snowden has branded as 'completely ridiculous' the idea that Hillary Clinton's personal email server was secure while she was secretary of state."

James Comey's FBI clock is ticking on the Clinton campaign, and I explain the severity of this and other issues during my recent interview on CNN New Day. It will be interesting to see how people react to the reality Hillary Clinton engaged in questionable practices as Secretary of State. Remember, yo

u don't want a buffoon as president, and I stated this on CNN. However, you also don't want a candidate with an ongoing FBI investigation facing this buffoon on November 8, 2016. For this reason, and many more, Bernie Sanders is poised to become Democratic nominee. Most importantly, polls already show Bernie defeats Trump by a much wider margin than Clinton.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/the-fbis-investigation-of-clintons-emails-_b_9346140.html

[Godhumor]

1. I was wondering when Ha was going to pop back up

Good times. Thanks for the link.

[wildeyed]

59. I missed HA.

I looked HA up on my own today after the dumb Counter Punch article. HA is so much HA-ier than that guy. If I'm going to read mindless, fact free propaganda by Liberal Democrats for Rand Paul, it's gotta be HA. I will take no imitations of the imitation Democrat

[datguy_6]

2. K&R...

[LexVegas]

3. That Goodman guy has been nothing but right so far. nt

[vdogg]

5. Lol

[lunamagica]

26. ROTFL!

[sufrommich]

8. I can't wait to see his meltdown after this is over.

It's going to be epic.

[wildeyed]

60. They disappeared the one

where Clinton was going to come in third in IA And the one where Killer Mike would deliver the AA vote.

[vdogg]

4. And Sanders supporters continue to cling

To a right wing fishing expedition. Must be getting desperate.

[NWCorona]

12. Say what you will

But this is all Hillary's doing.

[saidsimplesimon]

13. FBI investigations are not a

left or right wing "fishing expedition". Until we hear the all clear from the lead investigators, we can not assume anything.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[amborin]

64. +100

[riversedge]

6. Sanders fans pushing HA Goodman again. Shameful.

[NCTraveler]

7. Starting to really feel for Goodman. What a wreck he is.

Poor right wing stooge tried to make money off ratfucking and isn't getting the audience he thought he could.

Check this out.

hagoodman.com

[zappaman]

9. You're trying too hard

[sabrina 1]

10. That's why Repubs are not talking about this right now, not in the debates. They will wait

hoping she gets the nomination, and then all hell will break loose and Dems will simply stay home as they did in SC.

[Go Vols]

20. Yep

Any R will not be as quiet about this as Bernie is.

[SidDithers]

11. Goodman. LOL...

Sid

[MattP]

14. How do you go from slobbering over Rand Paul to Bernie

I mean where is this guy coming from?

[amborin]

15. LOL! lots of "shoot the messenger" here; when you can't defend against the charges, target the medi

um

[MattP]

16. I support Bernie but this guys message sucks

[MattP]

17. Almost none of his articles are pro Bernie its anti Hillary

Im pro Bernie not anti-Hillary and this board should be pro not anti, it's very negative around here lately

[deurbano]

34. My position, in a nutshell.

[Octafish]

18. NSA spying on America -- no problem.

NSA spying on Sec State -- that's a problem.

[0rganism]

19. i think there is real potential for a problem here

even granting that the Obama administration is unlikely to support an indictment against the Democratic frontrunner/nominee, i am edgy about the possibility that an indictment drops in September-October, esp. in conjunction with another round of terrorist attacks in NATO countries (let alone the USA).

how will the HRC campaign handle this situation? i am not optimistic, it could be an automatic win for the GOP

[Codeine]

21. But remember kids,

Sanders supporters really don't think Lord HaHaGoodman is right, at least they all insist that when we mock his idiotic bullshit.

What a maroon he is.

[angrychair]

40. throw the Goldman article out

Is the head of the DIA someone we should mock? The FBI? A federal judge? The former Sec. Of Defense? Both companies that were doing her IT services that were being kept in the dark and what they were doing being misrepresented to them?

Who isn't involved in your vast right-wing conspiracy you have formed?

[great white snark]

22. Goodman. Predictions that fall so flat might as well be Goodyear.

Keep tryin' though!

[99th_Monkey]

23. And it's not just about the emails

it goes even deeper, to the nefarious pay-to-play arms deals that "just happened"
to be championed by Hillary as SoS, while receiving huge donations from these
entities to the Clinton Foundation.

I think this ^ is where these investigations are headed, and it's going to get more
and more ugly the longer it drags out. drip drip drip.

[thereismore]

28. The appearance of quid pro quo is strong in the SOS-Foundation dealings but I wonder how you could

prove causation. No one involved will be willing to admit it. The states are just too high. Huma Abedin is completely loyal to Hillary. After all, both women went through hell with their husbands. Then again, Al Capone was taken down on tax charges.

[99th_Monkey]

33. All good questions ..

I don't have much in the way of answers for you.

But when the FBI dispatches 100 agents to investigate someone, it's more than
a little note-worthy if that someone is a Presidential candidate -- and I suspect
they know what they're looking for.

How it plays out in the M$M of course is anyone's guess..

It's just bizarre to me how the Clinton gravy train is all "la-la-la .. we're winning,
so who cares" .. like there are no principles or positive values at work there, or
very few. It's all about winning the Primary and burying Bernie, never mind
that she runs horribly against GOP nominees, never mind a possible indictment,
never mind that she's corrupt to the core.

It's a breath-taking spectacle.

[JDPriestly]

46. I have the impression that the investigation is over nothing, but the statement from

Snowden if true is giving me second thoughts.

I don't know much or understand much about computers, so I haven't seen this scandal as particularly important.

And, if we all were protected from NSA spying and FBI spying, then Hillary's e-mail servers would also have been protected. If, and I repeat, if, the accusation that the Russians or some other foreign power read her e-mails is true, (and so far we have seen only insinuations and accusations but no facts supporting that claim), then they can read all our e-mails and personal data. We know that some of the government's computerized information has been hacked -- even personal employee information. So the question would be whether Hillary's private e-mail arrangement caused any damage or whether perhaps the damage was called by the government, the NSA itself, which discourages even makes impossible, real privacy on the internet even for government employee records.

If you eat spaghetti, you have to prevent the sauce from getting on your clothes.

If you really want computer privacy, you have to make it impossible to hack computers. Our government has to make up its mind. Which is more important? Being able to put all kinds of people, any person and their computer(s) under surveillance or protecting secrets. Can't have it both ways.

We cracked the codes of the Germans and to some extent the Japanese during WWII. That we knew their strategies was a major reason for our success during that war. And here we are -- generally requiring Americans to use insecure computers.

My source on the breaking of the codes is Ike's Spies if you are interested. I don't think that fact is in dispute.

http://www.amazon.com/Ike%C2%92s-Spies-Eisenhower-Espionage-Establishment/dp/1578062071

I am a Bernie supporter, but I think that Hillary will not be indicted for this any more than Bush and Cheney were indicted for war crimes. And I don't think she should be/

But I don't know all the facts so this is a story to watch.

[99th_Monkey]

54. For the sake of the Party, I hope I'm wrong

but my sense is that the Clinton Foundation books read like Whose Who
of the USA's Buying Influence Guide.

[Omaha Steve]

24. K&R!

[MaggieD]

25. LMAO - knew this was HA Goodman from the thread title

[revbones]

27. It's interesting that in all the replies, there is not one disputing any facts in the investigation

Hillary supporters are falling over themselves to scoff at the author, but regardless of who writes it you cannot dispute facts.

A good way to see if you're being silly in an argument is to slip in a different supposed antagonist.

Would the facts remain if the author was different? Yes.
Would Hillary supporters still call it a fishing expedition if the email scandal involved Trump instead of Hillary? No.

While I understand that Hillary has suffered an onslaught of fictitious scandals, becoming immune to the truth or dismissing any possible hint of impropriety on her part is not the correct response and only shows team-based politics and ignorance. As someone who has handled Top Secret materials before, there is legitimacy to this issue and there are people currently in jail serving 3-10 years for less.

[thereismore]

31. Oh but they were plebeians. I am actually shocked that the investigation is proceeding under

the Obama admin. I am shocked he hasn't put a stop to it already. Looks to me like Obama is one guy who don't want to take a fall for her.

[Gwhittey]

67. Watergate

Obama would not stop a investigation because Watergate is still fresh even after so many years.

[Land of Enchantment]

45. Ditto,

as a recovering accountant I know how these things go...there is a trail and all they have to do is to patiently put the pieces together and tie it to the $. Anyone so reckless to have taken these actions is either a) not as brilliant as they portray themselves to be or b) so arrogant as to believe their actions would never be questioned.

Where there is smoke.....

[LuvLoogie]

29. He's like Tokyo Rose.

[revbones]

30. Does that change any of the facts?

[jalan48]

32. So let's say Hillary wins the Presidency.

Does then mean endless investigations and impeachment hearings by the Republicans who control Congress? Why wouldn't they? What a grand distraction it will be while important issues like the TPP or Wall Street theft go unnoticed by the gullible public. It will be better than OJ!

[rtracey]

35. as soon

As soon as you mentioned Edward Snowden, you lost any credibility with me....

[Helen Borg]

36. As soon as you mentioned Edward Snowden...

I believed there is something important to this story.

[revbones]

41. Immunity to facts doesn't change them.

Plus Snowden is a hero.

[rtracey]

44. pssssssh

Snowden is a thief who ran to Russia. He deserves to stay where he is. Ohhh of course for DU (IMO)...can't forget that

[revbones]

50. very patriotic there. Personally I want my country to keep improving

so when it screws up, I want it known and fixed.

[rtracey]

65. it is

It is patriotic. See I get to say my opinion where many other places on this earth you could not. My opinion is Snowden is a thief. Not only a thief, but a thief that ran.... even worse...again IN MY OPINION.....

[revbones]

66. Unfortunately he didn't really have any option.

And feel free to continue burying your head in the sand and giving up your freedoms in the name of whatever they're selling it as tomorrow.

[rtracey]

68. Excuse me

You don't know me, what gives you the right to say what I think and believe are non patriotic or I give up freedoms. Take your Trump shit to another site. I have a different opinion on Snowden then you. I am NOT the only democrat that thinks he is a thief. I work in medicine, I know what regulations do. I hate many regulations, and you can say he is or is not a hero. How about next time you are in your hospital, a worker decides to violate HIPPA regulations and releases your medical records to your insurance company.

[revbones]

69. Excellent response. But you should things up before commenting.

Whistleblowers do not enjoy normal whistleblower protections offered regarding classified matters or national security matters. Snowden did try what little avenues were available to him prior to what he did.

I hope others would stand up for the ideals of this country rather than allow it to be turned into some 1984 travesty.

Whether you consider yourself patriotic or not is no concern of mine. Obviously I personally don't feel your stance toward Snowden is very patriotic at all, and supports the lessening of our civil liberties and freedom. I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me.

And throwing out bs about HIPPA regulations doesn't help your case either since it's totally something different. One is something the government is doing illegally against you. The other is someone sharing your medical history. Now that I've typed that out, I can't understand why you'd used that at all. Snowden points out illegal activities of the government. You cite an example of someone doing something illegal to show Snowden was wrong. Wow.

[rtracey]

70. Well

well we agree to disagree.. Good luck, I hope you candidate wins.

[Cryptoad]

37. citing Huff Blog as source,,,,,,,thats funny

[revbones]

38. Doesn't change the facts cited or the links provided in the blog post

I'm sorry that you are immune to facts because of the overdose of scandals she's been involved in.

[PatrynXX]

42. huffington post yeah totally Hillary run site

I have them on ignore

[PatrynXX]

39. pretty much have given into the position that if Bernie loses we all lose in November. money wins

Donald wins in a Reagan landslide Is this what Women wanna be known for? They should wait for the right person to come along. whether it's a woman or not.

[SusanLarson]

43. Lets try these actual federal laws.

It wasn't for convenience it was to circumvent the open records laws. It let her decide what would get released, if it would get released, and when it would get released. It was a criminal conspiracy to violate federal law.

18 U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy

Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.


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

Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the United States or any department or agency thereof; or

Whoever receives, conceals, or retains the same with intent to convert it to his use or gain, knowing it to have been embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; but if the value of such property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case, does not exceed the sum of $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

The word “value” means face, par, or market value, or cost price, either wholesale or retail, whichever is greater.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 725; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), (L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 606(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3511; Pub. L. 108–275, § 4, July 15, 2004, 118 Stat. 833.)

18 U.S. Code § 1361 - Government property or contracts

Whoever willfully injures or commits any depredation against any property of the United States, or of any department or agency thereof, or any property which has been or is being manufactured or constructed for the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or attempts to commit any of the foregoing offenses, shall be punished as follows:

If the damage or attempted damage to such property exceeds the sum of $1,000, by a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both; if the damage or attempted damage to such property does not exceed the sum of $1,000, by a fine under this title or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 764; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, § 320903(d)(1), title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), (L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2125, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§ 601(a)(3), 605(e), 606(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3498, 3510, 3511.)

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 795; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title V, § 552(a), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1566; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(I), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Then we have the classified issue. Irregardless of the fact that it wasn't marked as classified she was the head of the department and knew what the classification regulations stated. She should have known upon seeing it that the information was classified marked or not.

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

(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

(b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a).

(c) In this section, the term “classified information of the United States” means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.

(Added Pub. L. 103–359, title VIII, § 808(a), Oct. 14, 1994, 108 Stat. 3453; amended Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, § 4002(d)(1)(C)(i), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1809.)

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

(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

(b) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense; or

(c) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or

(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, 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; or

(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.

(h)
(1) Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law, any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from any foreign government, or any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, as the result of such violation. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.

(2) The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1) of this subsection.

(3) The provisions of subsections (b), (c), and (e) through (p) of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853(b), (c), and (e)–(p)) shall apply to—
(A) property subject to forfeiture under this subsection;
(B) any seizure or disposition of such property; and
(C) any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property,
if not inconsistent with this subsection.

(4) Notwithstanding section 524(c) of title 28, there shall be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund in the Treasury all amounts from the forfeiture of property under this subsection remaining after the payment of expenses for forfeiture and sale authorized by law.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 736; Sept. 23, 1950, ch. 1024, title I, § 18, 64 Stat. 1003; Pub. L. 99–399, title XIII, § 1306(a), Aug. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 898; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147; Pub. L. 103–359, title VIII, § 804(b)(1), Oct. 14, 1994, 108 Stat. 3440; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 607(b), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3511.)

36 CFR 1236.22 - What are the additional requirements for managing electronic mail records?

§ 1236.22 What are the additional requirements for managing electronic mail records?

(a) Agencies must issue instructions to staff on the following retention and management requirements for electronic mail records:
(1) The names of sender and all addressee(s) and date the message was sent must be preserved for each electronic mail record in order for the context of the message to be understood. The agency may determine that other metadata is needed to meet agency business needs, e.g., receipt information.
(2) Attachments to electronic mail messages that are an integral part of the record must be preserved as part of the electronic mail record or linked to the electronic mail record with other related records.
(3) If the electronic mail system identifies users by codes or nicknames or identifies addressees only by the name of a distribution list, retain the intelligent or full names on directories or distributions lists to ensure identification of the sender and addressee(s) of messages that are records.
(4) Some e-mail systems provide calendars and task lists for users. These may meet the definition of Federal record. Calendars that meet the definition of Federal records are to be managed in accordance with the provisions of GRS 23, Item 5.
(5) Draft documents that are circulated on electronic mail systems may be records if they meet the criteria specified in 36 CFR 1222.10(b) of this subchapter.

(b) Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.

(c) Agencies may elect to manage electronic mail records with very short-term NARA-approved retention periods (transitory records with a very short-term retention period of 180 days or less as provided by GRS 23, Item 7, or by a NARA-approved agency records schedule) on the electronic mail system itself, without the need to copy the record to a paper or electronic recordkeeping system, provided that:
(1) Users do not delete the messages before the expiration of the NARA-approved retention period, and
(2) The system's automatic deletion rules ensure preservation of the records until the expiration of the NARA-approved retention period.

(d) Except for those electronic mail records within the scope of paragraph (c) of this section:
(1) Agencies must not use an electronic mail system to store the recordkeeping copy of electronic mail messages identified as Federal records unless that system has all of the features specified in § 1236.20(b) of this part.
(2) If the electronic mail system is not designed to be a recordkeeping system, agencies must instruct staff on how to copy Federal records from the electronic mail system to a recordkeeping system.

(e) Agencies that retain permanent electronic mail records scheduled for transfer to the National Archives must either store them in a format and on a medium that conforms to the requirements concerning transfer at 36 CFR part 1235 or maintain the ability to convert the records to the required format and medium at the time transfer is scheduled.

(f) Agencies that maintain paper recordkeeping systems must print and file their electronic mail records with the related transmission and receipt data specified by the agency's electronic mail instructions.

She's guilty as sin and should be charged.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. Yup

but people will keep saying there is nothing until there are charges.

here a far better article than the OP used, and came out today

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/02/29/hillarys_victories_mean_painful_legal_choices_for_doj_wh.html

It does list the violations as well

[liberal_at_heart]

47. Unfortunately there are separate set of rules for those in high a position as Hillary is in.

The Republicans will no doubt start impeachment proceedings if she wins the nomination, but I don't think the investigation alone will keep her from getting the nomination. Those in power have already decided they want Hillary, and that means the rules that apply to everybody else do not apply to her.

[DemocraticWing]

48. I'm convinced Goodman is a planned satire of fervent Bernie supporters.

He's been grasping at straws and dealing in fiction for months.

[Blue_Tires]

49. 5. Who gives a flying fuck what that cowardly traitorous shit thinks?

Especially since Putin's hand is up his ass every time he talks? Let the special snowflake handicap the Russian elections instead...

[Gothmog]

52. HA Goodman can always be counted on for a laugh

Why do Sanders supporters keep citing this idiot?

[farleftlib]

53. We ignore this at our peril

What she did was a serious breach of national security. Just because she hasn't been charged (yet) is no indication that this is something that is going to go away. Just the opposite. K & R.

[rbrnmw]

57. ....

[wildeyed]

62. Okeydoke!

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Uncle Joe]

55. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, amborin.

[rbrnmw]

56. HAHAHA Goodman

[Jitter65]

58. So, if Russia, China, Iran got into her server...what did they do with the info?

Iran was still sanctioned
China still cooperated with US on NK
Russia still came to the table over Iran, Libya.

What did they learn and when did they learn it? I think they got much more information from the so-called "secure" systems of the Pentagon, WH etc. At least Snowden did.

[Beacool]

61. Either Goodman lives in a parallel world or he's starting to get desperate.

[wildeyed]

63. Truth be told,

something tells me that the words "journalist" and "HA Goodman" shouldn't be uttered in the same sentence.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]