Obama: Clinton Didn't "Intentionally" Put America In Jeopardy;

[NWCorona]

"President Obama is quizzed about the investigation by the FBI Justice Department into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private server and non-government e-mail address by FOX News' Chris Wallace on this week's edition of FOX News Sunday. In the interview, Wallace confronted Obama if he can still say flatly that Clinton did not jeopardize America's secrets. Obama also guaranteed there is no political involvement in the ongoing investigation.

Obama contended she did not jeopardize America's national security, however was "careless" in terms of managing e-mails that she has owned. Obama said the scandal needs to be put in "perspective" as Clinton "served her country" and did an outstanding job.

"Here's what I know," Obama told Wallace. "Hillary Clinton was an outstanding Secretary of State. She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy."

"You were prepared to say she didn't jeopardize," Chris Wallace said.

"I continue to believe she has not jeopardized America's national security," Obama defended Clinton. "Now what I also said is that -- and she's acknowledged -- that there's a carelessness in terms of managing e-mails that she has owned. And she recognizes that. But I also think is important to keep this in perspective. This is somebody who served her country for four years as Secretary of State and did an outstanding job and no one has suggested that in some ways as a consequence of how she's handled e-mails that that detracted from her excellent ability to carry out her duties."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/04/10/obama_clinton_didnt_intentionally_put_america_in_jeopardy_i_guarantee_no_political_influence_in_server_probe.html


Damn Obama's good at his job! He almost has me believing Hillary is out of the woods lol!

[B2G]

1. What does he mean by 'emails that she owned'?

That is really weird phrasing.

She didn't 'own' emails that were work related.

[NWCorona]

4. I'm thinking her personal emails but that was a bit weird

This is the line of thinking I figured Obama would take and is consistent with his last sit down with Fox.

[notadmblnd]

6. "You were prepared to say she didn't jeopardize," Chris Wallace said.

He was prepared? Why would Obama have to be prepared to come on TV and say she hadn't jeopardized?

[riversedge]

105. haha. That is commom phrase--used a lot.

[thesquanderer]

117. Watch the video. Transcripts can be deceiving.

Chris Wallace was referring to how he seemed fine with saying "she did not jeopardize" in the earlier interview, back in October, yet seemed to be hedging somewhat this time. Read the word "prepared" more like "willing."

[Lizzie Poppet]

9. I believe he meant she owned the responsibility for the carelessness.

That is to say, she "owned up." Which is bullshit...but he's being a team player.

[2cannan]

60. Did you hear what she said on MTP last week?

She makes it sound as if she is the one who decided to release her emails (as if she wasn't required to) and that others should have to release their emails too! Huh? Who else was working as SoS and decided to set up an email server in her basement? She worked for us and we have a right to know what she did while working for us (except for the classified stuff).
--------------------
Fact-checking Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/apr/03/fact-checking-hillary-clinton-meet-press/

snip

Clinton’s emails

Clinton repeated her acknowledgment that her use of a private email server was a mistake, along with her assertion that all of her work-related correspondence was sent using government-operated email servers, which would mean that all of those emails should be sitting in government files somewhere.

In any event, she said, all of her emails have been released.

"I think that anybody who's actually looked at this has concluded that I have now put out all of my emails," she said. "Go and ask others for their emails. Ask everybody else who's in public office. I'm the one who's done it, and I did it because I thought it was the right thing to do."

So are all the emails out?

We rate the claim Half True.

[CorporatistNation]

17. AGREED! THEY ARE OUR FUCKING EMAILS!

Mr. President why are you "shilling" for Hillary?

[Hoyt]

54. I think it means on her server and that she has "owned up" to carelessness. Don't freak out.

[B2G]

61. Who's freaking out?

I just thought it was weird wording.

[Hoyt]

66. If you listen to the video, it's clear to anyone who can hear inflections.

[Avalux]

72. It's awkwardly written - he means she owns the carelessness.

As in owned up to it. He is saying that she's acknowledged she was careless about the emails.

[thesquanderer]

114. Watch the video. Transcripts can be deceiving.

That transcript would be improved by placing a comma after the word "e-mails." He was not saying she owned the emails, he was saying that she has owned (admitted, owned up to) the carelessness. It makes sense when you hear it.

[CoffeeCat]

127. It is an interesting choice of words

Obama didn't even know that she had a private email server.

He found out about it when the information went public.

Nice.

[leveymg]

2. Sounds like he would agree with charging her with this felony: 18 USC Sec. 793(f)

Please. see, http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251552653

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

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

. . .

(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.

[antigop]

30. I don't see "intent" as part of that statute. Am I missing something? nt

[pdsimdars]

32. Exactly, there doesn't have to be intent . .. .negligance is enough.

[Hoyt]

71. Well, the data has to be lost, stolen, etc. It "could have been compromised" is not in the statute.

[All in it together]

80. Well Hillary did have the server wiped, so she was trying to lose the emails.

The emails were supposed to be governmental property, not her's. We would have had the proper access if she'd used the government server.

[Hoyt]

81. Obviously, they were not lost. Not sure you'd have access even if they'd been on a govt server.

[leveymg]

84. They were lost except the NSA had a "backup" copy. When she sent classified info, she also broke

the law.

[Hoyt]

85. They weren't lost in the sense some spy from an enemy could use them to our detriment. Jeeez.

[leveymg]

88. Doesn't have to be lost. Only has 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"

By placing classified information on her uncertified server on 104 occasions, and by permitting and inducing others to do the same ("keep 'em coming to Blumenthal, strip headers and "send unsecure" to her aide), she removed and delivered classified information to others, and failed to promptly report that to State Dept. Diplomatic Security and to the security office of other agencies in the case of classified data she received from NSA and CIA sources. It doesn't matter that it wasn't stamped or that one might not prove it ended up in Russia.

As someone trained in handling and recognition of classified info, she had a duty that she failed to meet. She clearly violated Sec. 793 (f).

[Hoyt]

89. Don't think it was taken from it's proper place of custody.

[leveymg]

92. Nobody in gov't says she was authorized to place classified info on her private server. Nobody.

Her uncertified, private server wasn't a proper place of custody. The information was "abstracted." That's exactly what she instructed her aide, Jake Sullivan, to do when she instructed, "remove headers" and "send unsecure" to email her information taken off a classified system. She also told Huma Abedine to remove "identifying markings" and send on to others in the case of information received from Sid Bluementhal that was later determined to be TS/SAP NSA sourced information. Her response to that was "keep 'em coming."

There were more than 2,000 separate classified pieces of classified information found on her server. She broke the law.

[leveymg]

62. Bingo. Proof of intent is not an essential element of this felony charge.

She did it - that's all that has to be proved. She did it.

[CoffeeCat]

128. I wonder how this Executive Order fits into this equation?

Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f) of the federal code make it unlawful to send or store classified information on personal email.

Executive order was issued by President Obama on Dec 29, 2009.

[ky_dem]

49. I always liked Chief Justice Rugg's definitions

that the definitions of negligence, gross negligence, and recklessness draw the "distinctions among a fool, a damned fool, and a God-damned fool."

[Hoyt]

58. What "top secret" information was released/lost. Don't see in statute that it applies to it COULD

HAVE BEEN "removed from its proper place . . . . .lost, stolen, abstracted, . . . . . ." Sounds to me that it had to have been removed, stolen, etc. But then, that wouldn't fit with folks' agenda.

[leveymg]

74. The statute applies to all classified information that is lost, stolen, copied (abstracted), etc.

By placing classified information on an uncertified, unsecured server (she sent 104 classified emails), and inducing others to do so ("keep 'em coming response to Bluementhal, "send unsecure" to her aide) she violated subsection (f). It does NOT matter whether the classified information was stamped or not. That's in the first paragraph of her signed, sworn security agreement.

[Hoyt]

78. Don't think so because nothing was lost, etc. I'll leave it to the attorneys, but "intent" is

in (a). (f) says applies to information lost, stolen, etc. To my knowledge, that did not happen.

[leveymg]

79. Here's HRC's signed security agreement - "classified info is marked or unmarked classified info">

Note Sec. 793 is referenced at multiple places in her Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement:

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-05069 Doc No. C05833708 Date: 11/05/2015
! I RELEASE IN PART I
B7(C),B6
---------------------------------1REVIEW AUTHORITY:
CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT Barbara Nielsen, Senior
Reviewer
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN Hillary Rodham Clinton AND THE UNITED STATES
1. lntending to be legally bound. I hereby accept the obligations contained In this Agreement In consideration of my being granted access to classified information. As used in this Agreement, classified Information is marked or unmarked classified Information, including oral communications, that is classified under the standards or Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive order or statute that prohibits unauthorized disclosure of lnformation in the Interest of national security; and unclassified Information that meets the standards for classification and is in the process of a classification determination as provided In Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1A(e) of Executive Order 12958 or under any other Executive order or statute that requires protection for such information in the of national security. I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified lnformation special confidence and trust have been placed in me by the United States Government .
2. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security lndoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information, including the procedures to be followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I contemplate disclosing this Information have been approved for access to it, and that I understand these procedures.
3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified Information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will not divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it, or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) 1'9SJ) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that lf I am uncertain about the classification status of Information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the Information is unclassified before I may disclose It, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified lnformation.
4. I have been advised that any breach of this may result In the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or termination of my employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified lnformation by me may constitute a violation, or violations. of Untied States criminal laws, including the provisions of Sections 641. 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, Title 18, United States Code, and the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50,
United Slates code. and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing In the Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation..
5. I hereby assign to the United States Government all royalties, remunerations. and emoluments that have resulted, wiII result or may result from any disclosure, publication or revelation of classified Information not consistent with the terms of this Agreement
6. I understand that the United States Government may seek any remedy available to it to enforce this Agreement Including, but not but not limited to application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of Information In breach of this Agreement.
1. I understand that all classifled information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement will remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree that I shall return all classffled materials which have or may come into my possession or for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand by an authorized representative of the United States Government; (b) upon the conclusion of employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency that last granted me a security clearance or- that provided me access ID classifled Information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of Sections 793 and/or 1924, § 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law.
8. Unless and until I am released In writing by an authorized representative or the United States Government.. I understand that all conditions and obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply during the time I am granted access to classified lnformation, and at all times thereafter.
9. Each provision of this Agreement is severable. If a court should find provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, all other provisions of this Agreement shall remain In full force and effect.

[Hoyt]

86. Still wasn't lost, stolen, given to enemies, etc. Sorry.

[leveymg]

90. "removed from its proper place or delivered",or "abstracted" not just "lost, stolen, or destroyed."

"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"

See #82 above.

[Hoyt]

91. "Abstracted" means - hey Isis, I saw email that said something to effect we will invade on April 12.

Remove from proper place of custody means, she took it from where it landed and sent it to someone who might use it to our detriment.

Don't think any of that happened, but it's something you can have fun arguing.

[leveymg]

96. "Abstracted" means "Jake, remove headers and send unsecure." That's what "abstracted" means

Same with the similar, earlier incident when she instructed Huma Abedine to "remove identifiers and send on to others" from email received from Sid Blumenthal that was obviously classified, and in fact, had TS/SAP information that originated with NSA.

[Hoyt]

99. I think that is what "redacted" means. In any event, did Clinton remove such identifiers and send to

people who could use it to our detriment?

[leveymg]

103. The terms are analogous for this purpose. She had reason to believe it could be used to the

detriment. Don't have to show actual damage to national defense. Sec. 793 is a bitch, but it's the law. Others have made similar "harmless error" defenses in their cases, and have all lost.

[Hoyt]

104. But you do have to show it was lost, stolen, taken/given to others, etc. You haven't done that yet.

All you've offered is that she could have done those things. Heck, she could have done it if it was on the government's server. But she didn't.

[leveymg]

106. You haven't read all the possible ways the law can be violated. Also includes "communicates"

and " 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

And, as I said, actual damage to the US national security doesn't have to be shown. Read (e) below:

(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.

[leveymg]

82. When she sent classified uncertified server she: (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.

[DCBob]

111. "gross negligence" has a specific legal meaning.

gross negligence

n. carelessness which is in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, and is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil.

Read more: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=838#ixzz45SNJxQVQ

What Hillary did appears to be simple negligence, a few mistakes and a bit of carelessness. That is not illegal. You must know this by now since we have gone over this many many times.

[leveymg]

112. Instructing aides to strip classification headers and "send unsecure" is pretty grossly negligent.

So is her response to Blumenthal, "keep 'em coming" after she received information that was obviously classified, and in fact turned out to be Top Secret-SAP material that had been taken off a classified NSA server just hours earlier. She then told Huma Abedin to "strip identifiers" and forward this information to others. She violated her security agreement on many occasions. It only takes one to convict.

She, herself, sent 104 emails containing classified information. She's violate the law, and it looks like Sec. 793 (e) and (f) fit like a glove.

[DCBob]

113. Still desperately digging.

Give it up dude.. she's going to come out of this clean. The President knows this. It clearly shows in his comments today.

[JonLeibowitz]

115. It is the AG who determines whether to press charges, not The President.

[DCBob]

116. Of course.. but who would know better than the President if there was anything significant here.

[leveymg]

118. Actually, Obama said he "hasn't been paying attention to the details."

He'll probably do that before he ends up pardoning her. But, she won't be President because of this, and she only has herself to blame.

[DCBob]

119. If he had any suspicion the shit was going to hit the fan on this..

there is no way he would say what he said today.

[JonLeibowitz]

121. The FBI? Are you suggesting the FBI leaks details of active investigations or POTUS solicits it?

[DCBob]

123. No but Obama knows a helluva alot more about this than almost anyone else.

I am sure he and Hillary have spoken at length about this privately and I am sure he has discussed this with his legal advisers. I am convinced he knows what is going to happen even though he has no inside information from the FBI.

[notadmblnd]

3. I'd rather not take a chance on her NOT "Intentionally" putting America in Jeopardy

Last edited Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:03 AM - Edit history (1)

again.

Hillary is the sort of person who does not do anything politically without thinking it through. And I don't believe for a minute that carelessness and incompetence is only what she is guilty of.

[CorporatistNation]

19. AGREED! Mr. President Please Explain How Hillary Merits Your Comment As Being "Outstanding" As...

Secretary of State?

For example Mr President, do you consider the Libya move "outstanding?"

Do you consider the management of Benghazi as acceptable, much less outstanding?

What about all of those meetings that she had with her benefactors while Secretary of State?

Or for that matter acting as an "emissary" for the Fracking Industry while Secretary of State?

You therefor consider these actions and judgements as outstanding Mr President?

Should we therefor reconsider.... ?

[Bjornsdotter]

5. Bad judgement

...usually isn't intentional, but it is still bad judgement.

[2pooped2pop]

7. If you are told not to do something

And you know about classified material, and you go ahead and do it, then you most certainly did intentionally put the country at risk.
That's like saying when I drank heavily and got in my car and drove the wrong way on the interstate, I did not mean to kill those people that I hit. Except the drunk has the excuse that he was in an altered state while Hillary blatantly thought she was above the rules and laws.

Guilty.

[Autumn]

8. That kind of sounds like an "As far as I know" moment.

[Fumesucker]

10. Yes, that's it "As far as I know"

[reformist2]

24. Payback comes eight years later!

[Fumesucker]

36. And chilled to a Pluto-like temperature

[amborin]

11. maybe reading this too hastily but

sounds as if the fix is in

[noretreatnosurrender]

29. Sounded to me

like he was talking to the FBI via Fox

[amborin]

35. yes, exactly

isn't this interfering with an FBI investigation?

[noretreatnosurrender]

38. I was actually shocked

that he did this prior to the FBI completing it's investigation. It's like he was trying to send them a message. He obviously can't contact them directly so it looked like he was doing the next best thing. I think he chose to go on Fox because he knew they would ask about the emails. There is no way they wouldn't on FOX. I could be wrong but it really looked to me like this was the reason for this interview. He wanted them to ask about it so he could send his message.

[amborin]

43. totally agree:

this article today says he "guarantees" he will not interfere:

http://www.kcci.com/politics/obama-guarantees-he-will-not-interfere-with-clinton-email-investigation/38956136

but just by saying this and by his Fox statements, he is doing just that. He is basically dictating to the FBI how
this should be resolved

[noretreatnosurrender]

47. Getting Around the "strict line"

"That is institutionally how we have always operated: I do not talk to the attorney general about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line," he said.

Except when you talk to them via national TV, Mr. President. Looks like doing that goes over that strict line you talk about.

[awake]

129. So when he said she was careless with the emails was that the message to indict?

I read his statement as he has his hands off of this and the DOJ needs to go where ever the evidence leads them.

[noretreatnosurrender]

131. It's more complicated than that

He has no business opining on an open FBI investigation. He can talk all he wants when the investigation is over but a President should NEVER comment on an open investigation.

[awake]

132. Well he did say he had to be "careful" in what he said

But if as this part of this thread says "the fix is in" the question which
A) letting Hillary off the hook or
B) letting Hillary go down

Ether way Obama seems to be saying he wants to keep his hands clean of what ever goes down

Hopefully we will find out soon which way it will be.

[Nanjeanne]

12. Well that's a great campaign slogan.

VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON. SHE WONT INTENTIONALLY PUT AMERICA IN DANGER.

[pdsimdars]

33. ^^^^^^^^^^^

[Bjornsdotter]

51. Well done!

[azmom]

108. [phone]

[bvf]

122. Brava!! n/t

[Vinca]

13. There was an article on a computer site last week that said for the first couple of months

the server was in operation it was totally unencrypted. The writer of the article said she might just as well have put her communications on Facebook. There's a big difference between using private email and using private email with your own server. I wish the POTUS wouldn't answer questions about this because if she is cleared he's giving ammunition to the right to charge his administration with a cover-up. That puts us in a damned if you do, damned if you don't position in the general election.

[grasswire]

98. AND.....her mails were likely breached on the Asian trip during that time.

That's why there was the hurry to add the encryption at the time it was added. After the trip.

[reformist2]

14. WOW. "Careless" is really not that far from "negligent"... He kind of threw her under the bus.

[Waiting For Everyman]

15. So she ACCIDENTALLY set up her own server?

Of course she jeopardized security and of course it was intentional.

WTF stupid statement is that?

Covering for her is not a smart move at this point, because this is going to blow up whether his Dept. of Justice participates in it or not. He should know better.

All I can think is he's either being paid off, or they know something about him that he can't have them let out. How cowardly, and how fake!

And no, she did not do a good job as SoS. She spent her time as a bagman and fixer for the Clinton Foundation

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/01/30/clinton-system-donor-machine-2016-election/

[Fumesucker]

37. The implication is that Hillary is a clueless naif

Being Southern I can recognize a "Bless her heart" statement a mile away.

[restorefreedom]

95. the implication being that you slipped

and somehow fell into her lady parts?

[Abouttime]

16. Obama all but said

Hillary will be cleared as soon as she has the required number of delegates to secure our party's nomination.
There is absolutely no way the Obama controlled DOJ goes forward with criminal charges against Hillary right before a presidential election that she is assured to win.
Listen to what Obama has been saying, he just said a few days ago Trump will NOT be the next President. If Trump is the 'puke party nominee I look for him not Hillary to be charged with a crime. I think Obama has known all along that Hillary would be he nominee in 2016, he also sees the progressive wing of our party unhappy with the Clintons. I predict Liz Warren will be the VP, that will bring the party together and guarantee a victory in November.
No way in hell Obama hands this years election to the Republicans. A Clinton indictment would send a shockwave through our country as big as Watergate and it would be a stain on the stellar reputation of the Obama Presidency.
President Obama will not end his Historic presidency with a self inflicted mortal wound to his party.

[Skwmom]

21. But all of those FACTS are still out there which won't go away. And Obama and whoever the VP

is embracing it. That should really do wonders for his legacy.

[notadmblnd]

22. It is why they want Bernie out

If she gets the nomination- she won't be indicted.

And Comey let her off the hook before- there's no reason to believe that he won't do it again.

[awake]

46. Or once Hillary has the numbers then the hammer comes down

At witch time we flip her delegates to VP Joe.

[leveymg]

97. Something like that. "Drip, drip, drip", so sayeth a federal Judge. nt

[bvf]

124. Hmm.

President Obama will not end his Historic presidency with a self inflicted mortal wound to his party.

He did just that the moment he hired her as SoS.

If Clinton makes it to the GE, "Thanks, Obama" won't seem nearly as funny.

[Abouttime]

18. And to top it off

The media is in the bag for the Clintons.
Loretta Lynch will come out and state there was no criminality in Hillary's actions regarding her server. The media will report it and that will be the end of the story, case closed.

[grasswire]

100. Lynch has motive to do just that.

Lynch will remain AG in a Hillary administration -- just to hold the secrets close and guard the coverup.

[Skwmom]

20. Did an outstanding job? Really? n/t

[EndElectoral]

23. He lost me as truthful when he said, "as Secretary of State (she) did an outstanding job."

[NWCorona]

25. Agreed

But he really can't say the truth!

[agracie]

110. Better to say nothing.

[HooptieWagon]

27. It was his "Heckuva job, Brownie" moment.

[grasswire]

102. GMTA nt

[grasswire]

101. Like "Heckuva job, Brownie!"

SMH

[AgerolanAmerican]

26. it totally wasn't intentional

it was just a totally unintended side effect of her perpetual efforts to slake her unlimited greed for wealth and power

[HassleCat]

28. I think Obama is wrong.

I don't recall Clinton admitting to any carelessness concerning the emails. Or perhaps she admitted it to Obama, privately.

[antigop]

77. Here is what she said:

“That was a mistake. I’m sorry about that. I take responsibility.”

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/08/hillary-clinton-apologizes-private-email-server

[wendylaroux]

31. She did not "intentionally" do it, so she "stupidly" did it? that

would make her "not-qualified" to run anything.

Oh now I see what the prez is saying.

[kcjohn1]

34. Intentionally, interesting.

You only hear that defence with the rich and powerful. The rest of us its only the result that counts.

[antigop]

39. did she intentionally try to get around FOIA? nt

[leveymg]

94. Yes, and to evade subpoenas, and that was intentional. OOJ.

[antigop]

40. He referred to it as an "investigation", not a "security review". nt

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

41. Oh so it's not intentional... She's just incompetent

Is that supposed to be better?

[ViseGrip]

42. Of course she didn't, she just made ANOTHER BAD DECISION, according to her!

[Ferd Berfel]

44. Clinton Didn't "Intentionally" Put America In Jeopardy;

But did she give a rats-ass if she did?

Or
Did the possibility even enter her thinking on the matter?


Long history of lousy judgement?

[amborin]

45. if she is totally absolved, this is going to create an uproar

http://www.kcci.com/politics/obama-guarantees-he-will-not-interfere-with-clinton-email-investigation/38956136

because to any objective observer, this looks as if Obama is telling the FBI how the case should be resolved; and by making
this public statement about an investigation in progress, he is tantamount to interfering , at the same time he "guarantees" he is
not interfering

imagine if it were Bush saying this, about an investigation into Cheney.....what would everyone be thinking?

[DCBob]

48. There is a key legal meaning to that word.

If she did it intentionally that would be illegal.. if by mistake then its just a mistake.

I take all this to mean Hillary is going to come out this clean.. as I always thought.

[Punkingal]

50. The key word was intentional...

I thought he was defending her. i'm disgusted, with both of them. i thought it didn't have to be intentional to get you in trouble, though.

[leveymg]

126. Take that a step further: it's still a crime even if there is no actual harm to nat'l security

Look at subsection (e) of 793, posted above. The felony isn't in the intention to jeopardize national security or even in actual harm caused. One merely has to mishandle classified materials in one of a number of specified ways. This is an extremely draconian law, but it's the law.

[merrily]

52. How does Obama get to opine on the intent of someone else?

That would never be allowed in court.

And will the people who still think that the investigation by this administration's FBI is more than kabuki theater please raise his, her or their hand?

[DCBob]

55. Hillary worked for him.. in case you forgot.

I am also sure they have spoke at length about this issue.

[merrily]

57. Condescender, please. Employers have no special knowledge of an employee's intent.

As I said, that would never be allowed in court.

[DCBob]

63. Hes not testifying.. just providing his informed opinion.

Based on his personal experience and interactions with her. He probably knows more about this than anyone other than Hillary or those investigating the case.

[merrily]

65. No kidding, Sherlock. Yet nothing you posted negates a thing in my posts 52 or 57.

Please do not waste any more of your time purporting to explain to me things that don't need any explanation whatever, like Obama was her boss and he was not in court. Thanks in advance.

[DCBob]

73. Except that what you posted is totally irrelevant..

Watson.

[merrily]

76. Not irrelevant at all, but you apparently have a bad case of both Capt Obviouism and last wordism.

So have at it.

[carburyme]

53. You all Bernistas are hoping

There's something in this email hullabaloo.

Y'all trying so hard its disgraceful!

That a former Secretary of State who served the country who for 4 years of her life gets nothing but indignation and scorn from politically biased Bernie followers is really getting so tiresome.

[IdaBriggs]

59. Pretend it was Condaleeza Rice for one second.

Pretend her "foundation" received millions in donations from countries that she then allowed arms sales to - countries that then funneled those arms to ISIS.

Pretend she hid government records in her basement cursing FOIA laws to be broken.

Pretend she claimed dementia about "forgetting" she didn't actually turn in all of her work documents when she left.

Pretend she was asked by the State Department (who were under a Congressional subpoena) to return work product, told them she did, then deleted the work product before she received her own subpoena.

Pretend we are all waiting for the results of an FBI investigation into these actions, while the Republicans assure us there is nothing to see DESPITE involvement of two Justice Department prosecutors, a grand jury (presumed to be in session because of a witness being given immunity), and an international hacker with knowledge of potential evidence being extradited into our country.

This isn't about Bernie.

[IdaBriggs]

56. Obama says she's CARELESS and would never INTENTIONALLY jeopardize

our national security ---

It's a bus and someone is going under...probably the "careless" person!

[TCJ70]

68. Yeah, how is this good?

So she accidentally put American in a tricky national security spot? Man...

[BernieforPres2016]

64. As long as Hillary only put the U.S. in jeopardy unintentionally, what's the problem?

She was only Secretary of State, who could expect her to know or care about maintaining secure communications?

[onecaliberal]

67. Since she failed to keep a personal email she doesn't "own" any of it.

She also failed to turn over anything until it was under subpoena. Then she lied about previous SOSs doing the same, which they didn't.

[BernieforPres2016]

69. Which of these 2 takes more planning and effort?

1. Using your employer's email system on your email issued phones and computers.
2. Buying and setting up your own email server in your house.

[hobbit709]

70. there's an 8 lane smooth as glass superhighway to the gates of Hell paved with good intentions.

[libtodeath]

75. Maybe shrub didnt intentionally fuck up all he touched either.

[antigop]

83. he also admitted "I haven't been sorting through each and every aspect of this." nt

[winter is coming]

125. That's his out. He can look supportive now, and later be surprised by revelations.

He's trying to get in front of something and look like he believed nothing wrong was going on. (And perhaps he did.) If shit goes down, he can be saddened by Clinton's errors in judgement.

[awake]

130. Good point

I agree he made it clear that he has nothing to do with what goes down. What ever the DOJ does it is all on Hillary not him.

[Roaberner]

87. Sorry Obama.. If you have to explain.. and with a spin!

She compromised national security. This is truth.

She did this intentionally, because she went to lengths of using own private server. This is "gross negligence" just so that she can have "comfort". She is all about herself at the expense of people.

She does not own those emails, those belong to state department and every citizens of US.

The moment those emails made to her server, her personal server should become property of US as well. Deleting contents are unprecedented!!

I suspect secrets are shared with others for selfish gains. She should provide every detail, every file including emails including those contents personal or state government emails.

Hillary - can't trust you with national security. You are disqualified to receive my vote!

[merrily]

93. IOW, best case, she negligently put America's national security in jeopardy and, unless he's a mind

reader, nothing he says about her intent means anything--which, as a lawyer, he knows very well.

Why am I not psyched about a President who, best case, negligently put America's security at risk?

Why am I not psyched about a President who does not respond to a subpoena or an FOIA request until teams of lawyers scour everything for at least two years?

[grasswire]

107. He really, really ought to keep his mouth shut.

I can't imagine his attorneys allowing him to do this.......

...................unless......................

there's some risk for HIM if criminality is exposed.

[Arizona Roadrunner]

109. Why give republicans apportunity for impeachment?

By stating what he did, Republican's can now charge him with impeachment due to interfering with an FBI investigation and potential outcome. Stupid move on his part, big time!

[Ferd Berfel]

120. Obama Dodging the issue

The crime, President Obama, is not "jeopardizing our national security."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511699892