Good day all. Fox News just put a story up a while ago saying that the investigation into Cankles email issues is “expanding.”
Now they are looking into whether or not Cankles may have made false statements to the investigators. Here are the details from Fox News:
The FBI has expanded its probe of Hillary Clinton’s emails, with agents exploring whether multiple statements violate a federal false statements statute, according to intelligence sources familiar with the ongoing case.
Fox News is told agents are looking at U.S. Code 18, Section 1001, which pertains to “materially false” statements given either in writing, orally or through a third party. Violations also include pressuring a third party to conspire in a cover-up. Each felony violation is subject to five years in prison.
This phase represents an expansion of the FBI probe, which is also exploring potential violations of an Espionage Act provision relating to “gross negligence” in the handling of national defense information.
“The agents involved are under a lot of pressure and are busting a–,” an intelligence source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, told Fox News.
Oh boy, Hillary and her cronies are looking at serious trouble now. Violations of the Espionage Act? Granted, that’s a pretty broad brush, but since Cankles has been caught out “Misstating the truth” regarding classified documents sent through her email server, (Never mind the issues about using a private server for government work), I’m beginning to think the FBI is going to dump a case on the desk of Loretta Lynch so tight that she won’t be able to broom it under the rug.
The section of the criminal code being explored is known as “statements or entries generally,” and can be applied when an individual makes misleading or false statements causing federal agents to expend additional resources and time. In this case, legal experts as well as a former FBI agent said, Section 1001 could apply if Clinton, her aides or attorney were not forthcoming with FBI agents about her emails, classification and whether only non-government records were destroyed.
I’m no lawyer, but it seems to me that they are looking at a possible “Destruction of Evidence” charge.
Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said the same section got Martha Stewart in trouble with the FBI. To be a violation, the statements do not need to be given under oath.
Martha Stewart didn’t run classified information through an unsecured private email server either.
“This is a broad, brush statute that punishes individuals who are not direct and fulsome in their answers,” former FBI agent Timothy Gill told Fox News. Gill is not connected to the email investigation, but spent 16 years as part of the bureau’s national security branch, and worked the post 9/11 anthrax case where considerable time was spent resolving discrepancies in Bruce Ivins’ statements and his unusual work activities at Fort Detrick, Md. “It is a cover-all. The problem for a defendant is when their statements cause the bureau to expend more time, energy, resources to de-conflict their statements with the evidence,” he said.
I’ll freely admit I don’t like that part. Of course, if the FBI is investigating you, get a lawyer and keep your mouth shut. Cankles seems to have forgotten that part. Additionally, the FBI is still digging through all the email they’ve recovered to date and are now going directly to the originating agencies to determine if they were classified or not.
“You want to go right to the source,” Gill said. “Go to the originating, not the collateral, authority. Investigative protocol would demand that.
A U.S. government official who was not authorized to speak on the record said the FBI is identifying suspect emails, and then going directly to the agencies who originated them and therefore own the intelligence — and who, under the regulations, have final say on the classification.
Things are starting to come together and I think there is a better than even chance Hillary Rodham Clinton will face criminal charges. The only question will be, will the Obama regime protect her and help her into the Oval office, or will they cut their loses and bury her in Fort Marcy Park? You would think that Cankles would recall that it wasn’t the break in at the Watergate that sank Nixon, (He didn’t know about it), it was the coverup afterward. But then, Hillary Clinton has never considered herself to be bound by little things like Ethics, and the Law. Now, she might actually pay for her arrogance.
Thatisall
~The Angry Webmaster~
[yasr_visitor_votes size=”medium”]
Everyone who accesses classified has to sign an OF-312 first.
The wording:
Intending 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 of Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive order or statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of information 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 Sections 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4(e) of Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive order or statute that requires protection for such information in the interest of national security. I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information, special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States Government.
Hillary is going to jail if there is ANY Justice left. . .
She should along with her cronies.
There isn’t so she walks into the Oval Office.
I do think the FBI is working on two things. The actual investigation and wrapping this thing up so tight that when they drop it on Lynch’s desk, if she buries it, she’s going to be looking at criminal charges in the next administration, not to mention spending the rest of her life in front of assorted congressional committees.