Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary

Pagliano

23 Comments

He is reportedly a “devastating witness” in the Hillary email case. Setting up a perjury trap for Hillary.

[Update in the afternoon]

The one email that may be the smoking gun that proves she violated the Espionage Act.

Beyond that, of course, she’s under investigation for public corruption. The FBI is putting together the entire chain, with Pagliano’s help, that will almost certainly show some quid pro quos with foreign governments in exchange for donations to the foundation.

[Sunday-afternoon update]

Oh, look another IT guy, at the State Department, who doesn’t want to talk.

I’m sure he has absolutely nothing to hide.

[Bumped]

23 thoughts on “Pagliano”

  4. I hope if he has a cat he’s stashed it in an undisclosed location before the Clintonista “plumbers squad” pay Kitty a visit.

  6. The “perjury trap” angle is IMHO enormous.

    Hillary Clinton won’t know what her IT guy told the FBI. She also won’t know what, if anything, the FBI recovered off her server (the deleted e-mails, for example).

    The FBI will surely seek to interview Clinton soon. When they do, Clinton’s only wise choice from a legal standpoint is to take the 5th and refuse to answer. Otherwise, even if, hypothetically, she’s innocent, she runs a grave risk of lying (intentionally or not) to the FBI (Remember Scooter Libby?). A criminal defense lawyer would surely advise her to take the 5th (why run a risk to no gain?)

    However, politically, taking the 5th would be very harmful to her campaign, so I suspect she won’t.

    Indictment? I’d say more likely than not, even without the perjury trap angle. If the JD was really going to run interference for her, IMHO they would not have granted immunity to the IT guy.

    2. I think it’s all for naught. Loretta Lynch has already said that whatever the FBI finds isn’t actionable by law and that rather the whole thing is just a procedural matter. Sure, I guess Congress could force the DOJ to do something. But it’s just more opportunity for stalling until the election is over and it all won’t matter. Call me jaded, but after 2012 I’m pretty certain all of this is just window dressing for Clinton to waltz into the White House.

      1. I think that’s beside the point. If the FBI recommends indictment, Clinton will not win and (if it’s soon enough) will not be nominated. It doesn’t matter what the DOJ does.

        1. “IF”. Just because crime happened doesn’t mean that an indictment will be recommended. They’re still under the thumb of Obama, a nominal Clinton ally.

        2. “They’re still under the thumb of Obama, a nominal Clinton ally.” Could be. I really have no certainty that the FBI will do its job. But I think it’s possible. They have a proud tradition, and it seems a lot of them are _angry_ that these people should treat national secrets as a joke. They spend their lives guarding these classifications, and along comes the Clinton crew… We’ll have to wait and see.

          1. Didn’t the FBI spy on the Clintons’ enemies during the 90’s or was it that they just provided all of their existing files to them?

        3. A procedural question: does the FBI ever officially announce or confirm that it has recommended prosecution, in cases where the DOJ has declined to proceed? Or is it the sort of thing that would only come out via leaks?

      1. Are you telling me that a mangled hard drive with the cables still dangling from it will be found in someone’s bed?

  7. “that will almost certainly show some quid pro quos with foreign governments in exchange for donations to the foundation.”

    They should see if the Clinton Foundation’s H1B visas have a relationship with donations.

  8. Good grief. Does anyone seriously think the Donk infested DOJ under this Administration is ever going to touch Hillary?

    1. Again, it’s much more important what the FBI will do. Not that I know that either, but they do seem to be making a real investigation of it. But we’ll see.

      1. “…it’s much more important what the FBI will do. ”

        Especially if the DOJ chooses to ignore the FBI recommendation.

  9. This sounds very naive, given the Clintons’ history with the FBI. It was the Clinton Adminsitration that protected the FBI when its agents burned women and children in Waco. Many of those agents are no doubt still working there, in senior positions by now. Only the Stupid Party would expect a fair and thorough investigation.

    The FBI has always been politicized. I’ve never understood why Republicans love the agency so much. They seem to think Ephram Zimbalist Junior really works there. Republicans say they don’t trust big government. Except for the FBI, NASA, the Border Patrol, INS… and all the other agencies that they trust implicitly.

    (And in today’s news… the FBI may “request” Apple source code so they can create malware “updates” that are installed on phones surreptitiously. If anyone else did that, it would be called cyberterrorism.)

    1. Source code to iOS won’t help much in cracking an iPhone unless it includes the signing key. And Apple has every reason to fight tooth and nail to protect their signing key.

      1. If Apple’s forced to turn over the source code, they’ll surely be forced to turn over the signing key as well.

        Of course, the stupid party will say such spying should only be done with a court order — as if the judiciary branch is incapable of corruption.

Comments are closed.