他没啥好是因为他根本没啥record, 他绝对是受了奥巴马的启示，在国会时间越长，你的（代表的special interrest)立场就越明显， 被人攻击的地方就越多， 早早出来竞选，paper white的，别人就很难攻击你的过去了， 然后选民就不会judge you based on your past, but based on your 口号！
As a former Justice Department official, I have, of late, been asked by both Democratic and Republican friends whether Hillary Clinton could be indicted for her email related actions. The simple answer is yes — she, and perhaps some of her senior staff, could be indicted for violating a number of federal criminal statutes. But for reasons that will be discussed later, it is unlikely that she will be. Nevertheless, it is well worth discussing the various criminal provisions of federal law that she and others may have been violated based on mainstream news reports. Remember that news reporting can be incorrect or incomplete — and that Hillary Clinton, and anyone else involved, deserves every presumption of innocence. Also keep in mind that an indictment is not a conviction but rather the informed opinion of a grand jury that probable cause exists to believe one or more violations of federal criminal statutes have transpired. This intellectual and legal research exercise should commence with a brief review of the basics of criminal jurisprudence: There are two elements of a criminal offense: the prohibited conduct as defined in statute; and the mens rea or mental intent of the individual or individuals engaging in the prohibited conduct. Thus, to gain a conviction on a criminal count in an indictment, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the prohibited conduct occurred, (2) the prohibited conduct was undertaken by the defendant, and (3) the defendant had the requisite mens rea or intent at the time. 1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information 18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information A federal prosecutor would naturally focus first on the most serious allegations: willfully transmitting or willfully retaining Top Secret and Compartmented (TS/SCI) material using a private server system. The individual who transmits and the individual who receives and retains TS/SCI information on a private server jointly share the culpability for risking the compromise and exploitation of the information by hostile intelligence services. The prosecutor’s charging document would likely include felony counts under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and under 18 U.S. Code § 798 against each transmitting individual as well as separate counts against each receiving and retaining individual. Violation of either provision of the U.S. Code cited above is a felony with a maximum prison term of ten years. The prohibited conduct is the insecure transmission of highly classified information, as well as the receipt and retention of highly classified information in an unapproved manner. The requisite mens rea is the willful commission of the prohibited conduct and the knowledge that compromised information could result in prejudice or injury to the United States or advantage to any foreign nation. Proof of intent to disclose the classified information is not required. 2.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material If the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and an accused person has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 798 may be “pled-down” to a single or to multiple misdemeanor counts under 18 U.S. Code § 1924. A misdemeanor conviction would probably result in a period of probation and a less significant fine. The prohibited conduct is the unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or its retention in an unauthorized location. The mens rea required is the intent to remove from government control or the intent to store the classified information in an unauthorized location.
3.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally To sustain a charge under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b), a federal prosecutor need only prove that the accused transferred and held the only copies of official government records (whether classified or not), the very existence of which was concealed from government records custodians. The mens rea required is that an accused knows that official government records were transferred or removed from the control of government records custodians. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) is a felony with a maximum prison term of three years. 4.) 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records Again, if the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and accused has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) can be “pled down” to a misdemeanor under 18 U.S. Code § 641. The prohibited conduct is the conversion of official records (whether classified or not) to the accused’s exclusive use and the mens rea is simply the intent to do so. Conviction on the lesser misdemeanor charge would likely result in a period of probation and the imposition of a fine. 5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena by a committee of Congress, the accused can be convicted of obstruction under 18 U.S. Code § 1505. The prohibited conduct includes destruction, concealment and withholding of documents, thereby impeding or obstructing the committee’s rightful pursuit of information. The mens rea is knowledge of the committee’s interest in obtaining the official records in the accused’s custody or control. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1505 is a felony with a maximum prison term of five years. 6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations If it can be proven that an accused knowingly concealed the existence of official records being sought by the Department of State Inspector General (DOS/IG) or by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), such accused can be convicted of obstruction. The prohibited conduct is the concealment and withholding of documents that impede or obstruct an investigation. The mens rea is the intent to conceal or withhold. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1519 is a felony with a maximum prison term of twenty years. 7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States 18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television 18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud” 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud. The prohibited conduct is having the United States pay an employee salary and/or official travel funds for performing private services on behalf of accused. The mens rea is simply the knowledge of the employee’s status as a public servant and that the government was not fully reimbursed for the costs to the government of such services. The wire fraud conviction can be sought if it can be proven that accused used electronic means of communication in undertaking such scheme or artifice to defraud. 8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense. Indictment? The old adage, that a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted, is bad news for any public servant who risks the compromise of classified information or otherwise violates any of the other federal criminal statutes listed above. Specifically, this Administration has a history of vigorously prosecuting and winning convictions in the mishandling of classified information and other criminal violations of the public trust. However, Hillary Clinton is anything but a ham sandwich; and she knows it. She and her senior aides will not even be formally investigated by this Justice Department, much less indicted. The president will allow Hillary Clinton and her aides to “tough it out” for as long it is politically possible. However, if and when the political and public opinion costs of a “tough it out” tactic become too great, President Obama will simply use that famous pen of his to issue a succinct pardon and make formal mockery of the concept of equal justice. Kenneth Bergquist served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the United States Department of Justice during the Reagan Administration and serves now as pro bono legal counsel to the Special Operations Education Fund (OPSEC).
As a former Justice Department official, I have, of late, been asked by both Democratic and Republican friends whether Hillary Clinton could be indicted for her email related actions. The simple answer is yes — she, and perhaps some of her senior staff, could be indicted for violating a number of federal criminal statutes. But for reasons that will be discussed later, it is unlikely that she will be. Nevertheless, it is well worth discussing the various criminal provisions of federal law that she and others may have been violated based on mainstream news reports. Remember that news reporting can be incorrect or incomplete — and that Hillary Clinton, and anyone else involved, deserves every presumption of innocence. Also keep in mind that an indictment is not a conviction but rather the informed opinion of a grand jury that probable cause exists to believe one or more violations of federal criminal statutes have transpired. This intellectual and legal research exercise should commence with a brief review of the basics of criminal jurisprudence: There are two elements of a criminal offense: the prohibited conduct as defined in statute; and the mens rea or mental intent of the individual or individuals engaging in the prohibited conduct. Thus, to gain a conviction on a criminal count in an indictment, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the prohibited conduct occurred, (2) the prohibited conduct was undertaken by the defendant, and (3) the defendant had the requisite mens rea or intent at the time. 1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information 18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information A federal prosecutor would naturally focus first on the most serious allegations: willfully transmitting or willfully retaining Top Secret and Compartmented (TS/SCI) material using a private server system. The individual who transmits and the individual who receives and retains TS/SCI information on a private server jointly share the culpability for risking the compromise and exploitation of the information by hostile intelligence services. The prosecutor’s charging document would likely include felony counts under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and under 18 U.S. Code § 798 against each transmitting individual as well as separate counts against each receiving and retaining individual. Violation of either provision of the U.S. Code cited above is a felony with a maximum prison term of ten years. The prohibited conduct is the insecure transmission of highly classified information, as well as the receipt and retention of highly classified information in an unapproved manner. The requisite mens rea is the willful commission of the prohibited conduct and the knowledge that compromised information could result in prejudice or injury to the United States or advantage to any foreign nation. Proof of intent to disclose the classified information is not required. 2.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material If the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and an accused person has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 798 may be “pled-down” to a single or to multiple misdemeanor counts under 18 U.S. Code § 1924. A misdemeanor conviction would probably result in a period of probation and a less significant fine. The prohibited conduct is the unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or its retention in an unauthorized location. The mens rea required is the intent to remove from government control or the intent to store the classified information in an unauthorized location.
3.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally To sustain a charge under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b), a federal prosecutor need only prove that the accused transferred and held the only copies of official government records (whether classified or not), the very existence of which was concealed from government records custodians. The mens rea required is that an accused knows that official government records were transferred or removed from the control of government records custodians. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) is a felony with a maximum prison term of three years. 4.) 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records Again, if the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and accused has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) can be “pled down” to a misdemeanor under 18 U.S. Code § 641. The prohibited conduct is the conversion of official records (whether classified or not) to the accused’s exclusive use and the mens rea is simply the intent to do so. Conviction on the lesser misdemeanor charge would likely result in a period of probation and the imposition of a fine. 5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena by a committee of Congress, the accused can be convicted of obstruction under 18 U.S. Code § 1505. The prohibited conduct includes destruction, concealment and withholding of documents, thereby impeding or obstructing the committee’s rightful pursuit of information. The mens rea is knowledge of the committee’s interest in obtaining the official records in the accused’s custody or control. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1505 is a felony with a maximum prison term of five years. 6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations If it can be proven that an accused knowingly concealed the existence of official records being sought by the Department of State Inspector General (DOS/IG) or by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), such accused can be convicted of obstruction. The prohibited conduct is the concealment and withholding of documents that impede or obstruct an investigation. The mens rea is the intent to conceal or withhold. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1519 is a felony with a maximum prison term of twenty years. 7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States 18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television 18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud” 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud. The prohibited conduct is having the United States pay an employee salary and/or official travel funds for performing private services on behalf of accused. The mens rea is simply the knowledge of the employee’s status as a public servant and that the government was not fully reimbursed for the costs to the government of such services. The wire fraud conviction can be sought if it can be proven that accused used electronic means of communication in undertaking such scheme or artifice to defraud. 8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense. Indictment? The old adage, that a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted, is bad news for any public servant who risks the compromise of classified information or otherwise violates any of the other federal criminal statutes listed above. Specifically, this Administration has a history of vigorously prosecuting and winning convictions in the mishandling of classified information and other criminal violations of the public trust. However, Hillary Clinton is anything but a ham sandwich; and she knows it. She and her senior aides will not even be formally investigated by this Justice Department, much less indicted. The president will allow Hillary Clinton and her aides to “tough it out” for as long it is politically possible. However, if and when the political and public opinion costs of a “tough it out” tactic become too great, President Obama will simply use that famous pen of his to issue a succinct pardon and make formal mockery of the concept of equal justice. Kenneth Bergquist served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the United States Department of Justice during the Reagan Administration and serves now as pro bono legal counsel to the Special Operations Education Fund (OPSEC).
The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records. FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information." The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress." Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.
The Federal Records Act
Addressing the Federal Records Act, NPR's Scott Horsley reported last month on the question of whether Clinton's exclusive reliance on a private email account violated it. Here's some of what he reported:
"A State Department spokeswoman says Hillary Clinton did not break any rules by relying solely on her personal email account. Federal law allows government officials to use personal email so long as relevant documents are preserved for history."
The law was amended in late 2014 to require that personal emails be transferred to government servers within 20 days. But that was after Clinton left office. Watchdog groups conceded that she may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it.
FOIA — You Can't Always Get What You Want
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
NARA The National Archives is where all government records eventually end up. There are several Archives rules and regulations that have been updated since Clinton left office. For example, it is now more explicit about guidance for use of personal email. Still, the use of private email and, even further, a private email server certainly limits Archives' call for "ready retrieval of electronic records," records that are "readily found when needed" and are easily scrutinized by Congress. Clinton allies argue that she is not the first secretary of state to use a private account. In fact, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said last month, "For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."
Section 1924 Of Title 18 — Classified Information
The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.
The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records. FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information." The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress." Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.
The Federal Records Act
Addressing the Federal Records Act, NPR's Scott Horsley reported last month on the question of whether Clinton's exclusive reliance on a private email account violated it. Here's some of what he reported:
"A State Department spokeswoman says Hillary Clinton did not break any rules by relying solely on her personal email account. Federal law allows government officials to use personal email so long as relevant documents are preserved for history."
The law was amended in late 2014 to require that personal emails be transferred to government servers within 20 days. But that was after Clinton left office. Watchdog groups conceded that she may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it.
FOIA — You Can't Always Get What You Want
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
NARA The National Archives is where all government records eventually end up. There are several Archives rules and regulations that have been updated since Clinton left office. For example, it is now more explicit about guidance for use of personal email. Still, the use of private email and, even further, a private email server certainly limits Archives' call for "ready retrieval of electronic records," records that are "readily found when needed" and are easily scrutinized by Congress. Clinton allies argue that she is not the first secretary of state to use a private account. In fact, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said last month, "For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."
Section 1924 Of Title 18 — Classified Information
The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.
To be honest, i am not surprised. I feel that he looks that way somehow. Good for American, if it is true and if he is elected, then they will have first latino and first gay president. Bravo!
To be honest, i am not surprised. I feel that he looks that way somehow. Good for American, if it is true and if he is elected, then they will have first latino and first gay president. Bravo!
This is a hit piece with a lot of innuendo. Rubio did graduate from UF the same year I did in 1993. Any of my old friends from UF ever hear of this: In order to prepare for the University of Florida, Rubio attended Santa Fe Community College in Gainesville. Republican sources have told WMR that Rubio, Barrios, and two other students shared a townhouse in Gainesville that was known locally as a “coke house,” where cocaine was readily available, as were almost non-stop parties in what amounted to an off-campus gay frat house. In 1987, Rubio’s brother-in-law, Orlando Cicilia, was busted by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for his role as a key figure in a cocaine smuggling ring in south Florida.
现在他替医生发声，就是争取啊，出了iowa, 神棍就不那么重要了，他和Carson的共同点非职业政客也是一个转移点
trump说他之前根本没有想到能在IOWA 有机会赢，所以没有像ted和rubio，bush这样花时间和钱去99个县市打电话，敲门等进行ground game，但是以结果来看，他花最少的钱得到第二名的选票，而且这次大选IOWA 共和党方面多了几万人投票，已经相当不错了，如果ted不用作弊的手段骗选票还不一定鹿死谁手呢，在Iowa这样的州能拿到第二觉得他已经很棒了。
对啊，搞了个大赦非移，先不说好不好，还失败了, 没有任何achievement. 职业政客里面还不如小胖和Kasich
MM辛苦了，对MM表达深深的敬意
Kasich好像也喜欢打仗？
我也其实觉得Kasich不错，应该是个实干家，跟rubio比我肯定选kasich, 虽然看着没有总统范儿但是人品信得过，政绩也不错，但是不出线没有办法。
我觉得他可以做VP。他的问题是嘴太笨，比Trump都差不少，这在选举里是硬伤啊
O8 visiting mosque, saying "Thank you" to muslim Americans for keeping us safe...
WTF!
能说是个笑话吗！还好老八没有一进去去白袍子加身，跪地上祈祷！
哈哈哈哈哈哈，想象这个场景，实在是太好笑了
可以理解成：感谢不杀之恩。。。
哦一开始没认出他，当时这个litaowan ID用另外一个马甲发帖支持sanders，讲一些很没营养逻辑的话，包括这句一字未改的收入声明（想证明他不是中国红卫兵式的穷人。。。）
我说假如他愿意用毒誓（或w2) 为他的收入背书，我就信他的收入，但他就是不肯啊。。。这人的发言当笑话看看就好，背景不明，没任何信用，居心叵测。。
或者你觉得大家一起在医院急诊室排队几个小时很光荣？
不用等明珠党上台，芝加哥平均工资$62000，你每年捐多少钱？希望共产平等的话，先把你多赚的都捐出来吧。
全美平均工资$52000。
就连他现在说的收入我都一个字不信，真正交税的人都气愤缴税养蛀虫，除非吃福利的才会说那种话
那才是真实的他吧，身不由己做卧底啊，真正的无间道高手在白宫
其实我对交税有些认命了，但是很不喜欢这些税被滥用。你说富人贪婪，很多所谓的穷人又何尝不是。。。
说的是啊，所以讨厌猪党，讨好两头富人和穷人，欺诈剥削中产，无耻至极
厚厚，一不小心露出马脚
你说什么呢？
能挑起第三次世界大战的人只能是cruz。
这几个人的特点是：senders，老好人，但计划风险太大（未必不好）
希拉里：喜欢做错事cover up, 死不认账。但目前为止没做故意害人的事情（除了那个什么强奸案辩护，这个有争议）
trump：无节操，但他会听选民的，可以三十六变，会搞政治show。对敌斗争经验不足，遇到阴的他就摸不着火候了。对内居然栽在cruz这种笑面虎手上。俄罗斯、中国的事情恐怕他是搞不定的
rubio: 理性有节操。他家古巴来的，痛恨古巴政府，热爱古巴人民。反政府，重人性。跟我们这种跑海外来有中国情节，但看不上中国政府的一个心思。这种人，人品根本不差好吧？
cruz: 有本事，有野心。I have a dream类型，未见的跟你美国老百姓有什么关系。懂玩人会玩人，自大，极端，好战，他只搞过内政，没有任何对世界局势更深入的了解。上台就撕伊朗协议，绝对战争狂人。
要说谁最像希特勒非cruz莫属。除了cruz，sanders有点太冒险，谁上台问题都不大
希拉里哪里违法？
trump是可以上台。我对他的期望是做齐桓公一样的人物。虽然自己像个老流氓（无贬义），但可以吸引一堆谋士。而且政治人物，会作秀就行了不需要那么多个人理想。
rubio那一张嘴是人家做了功课的一张嘴，和奥巴的排比句根本不是一回事。而且难道不应该拿墨裔的选票？trump要进入全国，他也会想拿劳模的选票，黑人的选票，傻子才不拿
问题是Rubio只有一张嘴，而且完全被金主控制
不知道美国有没有涉及国家机密的有关法律,原来这么重要位置的人想咋玩咋玩啊
头一回听说这不算个事
你要实在纠结这个就去查她邮件事件damage有多大。为了trump上台诋毁希拉里完全没有必要
这只代表你个人观点，希拉里的邮件门是个事实不是诋毁，违法国家安全，犯罪就是犯罪， period
As a former Justice Department official, I have, of late, been asked by both Democratic and Republican friends whether Hillary Clinton could be indicted for her email related actions. The simple answer is yes — she, and perhaps some of her senior staff, could be indicted for violating a number of federal criminal statutes. But for reasons that will be discussed later, it is unlikely that she will be.
Nevertheless, it is well worth discussing the various criminal provisions of federal law that she and others may have been violated based on mainstream news reports. Remember that news reporting can be incorrect or incomplete — and that Hillary Clinton, and anyone else involved, deserves every presumption of innocence. Also keep in mind that an indictment is not a conviction but rather the informed opinion of a grand jury that probable cause exists to believe one or more violations of federal criminal statutes have transpired.
This intellectual and legal research exercise should commence with a brief review of the basics of criminal jurisprudence: There are two elements of a criminal offense: the prohibited conduct as defined in statute; and the mens rea or mental intent of the individual or individuals engaging in the prohibited conduct. Thus, to gain a conviction on a criminal count in an indictment, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the prohibited conduct occurred, (2) the prohibited conduct was undertaken by the defendant, and (3) the defendant had the requisite mens rea or intent at the time.
1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information
A federal prosecutor would naturally focus first on the most serious allegations: willfully transmitting or willfully retaining Top Secret and Compartmented (TS/SCI) material using a private server system. The individual who transmits and the individual who receives and retains TS/SCI information on a private server jointly share the culpability for risking the compromise and exploitation of the information by hostile intelligence services. The prosecutor’s charging document would likely include felony counts under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and under 18 U.S. Code § 798 against each transmitting individual as well as separate counts against each receiving and retaining individual. Violation of either provision of the U.S. Code cited above is a felony with a maximum prison term of ten years.
The prohibited conduct is the insecure transmission of highly classified information, as well as the receipt and retention of highly classified information in an unapproved manner. The requisite mens rea is the willful commission of the prohibited conduct and the knowledge that compromised information could result in prejudice or injury to the United States or advantage to any foreign nation. Proof of intent to disclose the classified information is not required.
2.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
If the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and an accused person has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 798 may be “pled-down” to a single or to multiple misdemeanor counts under 18 U.S. Code § 1924. A misdemeanor conviction would probably result in a period of probation and a less significant fine. The prohibited conduct is the unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or its retention in an unauthorized location. The mens rea required is the intent to remove from government control or the intent to store the classified information in an unauthorized location.
3.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
To sustain a charge under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b), a federal prosecutor need only prove that the accused transferred and held the only copies of official government records (whether classified or not), the very existence of which was concealed from government records custodians. The mens rea required is that an accused knows that official government records were transferred or removed from the control of government records custodians. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) is a felony with a maximum prison term of three years.
4.) 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records
Again, if the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and accused has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) can be “pled down” to a misdemeanor under 18 U.S. Code § 641. The prohibited conduct is the conversion of official records (whether classified or not) to the accused’s exclusive use and the mens rea is simply the intent to do so. Conviction on the lesser misdemeanor charge would likely result in a period of probation and the imposition of a fine.
5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena by a committee of Congress, the accused can be convicted of obstruction under 18 U.S. Code § 1505. The prohibited conduct includes destruction, concealment and withholding of documents, thereby impeding or obstructing the committee’s rightful pursuit of information. The mens rea is knowledge of the committee’s interest in obtaining the official records in the accused’s custody or control. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1505 is a felony with a maximum prison term of five years.
6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations
If it can be proven that an accused knowingly concealed the existence of official records being sought by the Department of State Inspector General (DOS/IG) or by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), such accused can be convicted of obstruction. The prohibited conduct is the concealment and withholding of documents that impede or obstruct an investigation. The mens rea is the intent to conceal or withhold. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1519 is a felony with a maximum prison term of twenty years.
7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States
18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television
18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States
If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud. The prohibited conduct is having the United States pay an employee salary and/or official travel funds for performing private services on behalf of accused. The mens rea is simply the knowledge of the employee’s status as a public servant and that the government was not fully reimbursed for the costs to the government of such services. The wire fraud conviction can be sought if it can be proven that accused used electronic means of communication in undertaking such scheme or artifice to defraud.
8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense
If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense.
Indictment?
The old adage, that a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted, is bad news for any public servant who risks the compromise of classified information or otherwise violates any of the other federal criminal statutes listed above. Specifically, this Administration has a history of vigorously prosecuting and winning convictions in the mishandling of classified information and other criminal violations of the public trust.
However, Hillary Clinton is anything but a ham sandwich; and she knows it. She and her senior aides will not even be formally investigated by this Justice Department, much less indicted. The president will allow Hillary Clinton and her aides to “tough it out” for as long it is politically possible. However, if and when the political and public opinion costs of a “tough it out” tactic become too great, President Obama will simply use that famous pen of his to issue a succinct pardon and make formal mockery of the concept of equal justice.
Kenneth Bergquist served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the United States Department of Justice during the Reagan Administration and serves now as pro bono legal counsel to the Special Operations Education Fund (OPSEC).
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/21/eight-laws-hillary-clinton-could-be-indicted-for-breaking/#ixzz3z8soO088
所以她可以超越?晕。。还有这么个支持法的。。
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law
The Laws
In short:
The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.
The Federal Records Act
Addressing the Federal Records Act, NPR's Scott Horsley reported last month on the question of whether Clinton's exclusive reliance on a private email account violated it. Here's some of what he reported:
The law was amended in late 2014 to require that personal emails be transferred to government servers within 20 days. But that was after Clinton left office. Watchdog groups conceded that she may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it.
FOIA — You Can't Always Get What You Want
Clinton was the filter for what was relevant to work and what was not. Of course, before electronic communication, federal records were routinely filtered by individuals, who sorted their papers before handing over boxes to archivists. And, many federal workers, Capitol Hill staff, etc., use personal email accounts — in addition to their official accounts — and choose what, if anything, is turned over from those.
NARA
The National Archives is where all government records eventually end up. There are several Archives rules and regulations that have been updated since Clinton left office. For example, it is now more explicit about guidance for use of personal email.
Still, the use of private email and, even further, a private email server certainly limits Archives' call for "ready retrieval of electronic records," records that are "readily found when needed" and are easily scrutinized by Congress.
Clinton allies argue that she is not the first secretary of state to use a private account. In fact, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said last month, "For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."
Section 1924 Of Title 18 — Classified Information
The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.
因为法律不是为希拉里一个人定的，所以不可能别人违法就是违法，希拉里违法就可以跟人不一样在那里蹦达。她之所以现在能在那里蹦达，就是因为现在没人能确定她违法
你不是说这是人圈子里的玩法吗?这么高贵的圈子,显然不一样啊,要不是这圈子恐怕该确定的早确定了。一个拿国家机密当儿戏,处于被审查阶段有极大违法嫌疑的人竟然也被这样支持,真是开眼了。
希拉里邮件事件，嫌疑就是嫌疑，违法就是违法，不是你觉得嫌疑她肯定就违了法。法律不是为她一个人量身订的，也不是为你的偏好定的。
这个主要是因为Trey Gowdy太笨，搞了好几年了抓不住希婆子的把柄。Ps Gowdy 好像是挺Rubio 的呀，是不是等Rubio确定党内提名之后再办希婆子？我瞎猜啊。
我结论跟你一样希拉里untrustworthy
rubio: 理性有节操。他家古巴来的，痛恨古巴政府，热爱古巴人民。反政府，重人性。跟我们这种跑海外来有中国情节，但看不上中国政府的一个心思。这种人，人品根本不差好吧？
[color=#999999]真福神 发表于 2/3/2016 3:21:34 PM [/color][url=http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=1868851&postid=70657477#70657477][img]http://forums.huaren.us/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url][/quote]
你确定？他之前盗用公家信用卡不算人品差？还有节操？
这个三多瑞，真可恶
他竟然说是CNN的报道暗示Carson要退出,CNN 这下不买帐了
哎！恶心。
天哪,他在高中和大学期间竟然是个有名的同性恋,活跃在迈阿密的south beach和读大学的Gainesville,Florida一带
除了Trump, 体制外的还有医生Ben Carson不是政客。我觉得Carson人品不错，挺靠谱的，也没有个人特殊利益在里面。希望Carson的票以后也会多点。
你不是不知道这是Cruz造谣吧
手机党着急,贴不上来Facebook里有人发的
Wayne BesenJanuary 31 at 11:54am ·
This is a hit piece with a lot of innuendo. Rubio did graduate from UF the same year I did in 1993. Any of my old friends from UF ever hear of this: In order to prepare for the University of Florida, Rubio attended Santa Fe Community College in Gainesville. Republican sources have told WMR that Rubio, Barrios, and two other students shared a townhouse in Gainesville that was known locally as a “coke house,” where cocaine was readily available, as were almost non-stop parties in what amounted to an off-campus gay frat house. In 1987, Rubio’s brother-in-law, Orlando Cicilia, was busted by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for his role as a key figure in a cocaine smuggling ring in south Florida.
Wayne Madsen: Marco Rubio Homosexual Update — with Photos
January 29-31, 2016 — WMR REPORTING FROM FLORIDA — Rubio’s coke house, gayish dance troupe, and foam parties Republican insiders have…
PHIBETAIOTA.NET