FBI Handing Out Clinton Immunity Deals “Like Candy”

 

5_262016_clinton-cheryl-mill8201_c0-123-4196-2569_s885x516From the Washington Times:

A congressman says Hillary Clinton’s former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and two other staff members were granted immunity deals in exchange for their cooperation in the now-closed FBI investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, tells the Associated Press that Mills gave federal investigators access to her laptop on the condition that findings couldn’t be used against her. Chaffetz says, “No wonder they couldn’t prosecute a case. They were handing out immunity deals like candy.”

Chaffetz says the two others granted immunity were John Bentel, then-director of the State Department’s Office of Information Resources Management, and Clinton aide Heather Samuelson. Two other people were previously identified as receiving immunity deals.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 29 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    So that’s why “no reasonable prosecutor” would  bring charges. There’s nobody left to charge.

    • #1
  2. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Oh ha. Like Cheryl Mills or any of them would ever blab. Who wants to be found dead of mysterious causes?

    • #2
  3. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    No lawyer here, but I thought one had to have–and give damaging information against the subject of the investigation in order to receive immunity. Whatever valuable information was gained from the granting of immunity to Brian Pagliano and the IT guy that deleted her emails was never, to my knowledge, made clear.

    • #3
  4. Matt Upton Inactive
    Matt Upton
    @MattUpton

    Special Investigator Oprah: “Now everyone look under your seats. You get an immunity deal, and you get an immunity deal, and you get an immunity deal.”

    So why wasn’t a subpoena or warrant sufficient to get access to the laptops?

    • #4
  5. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Matt Upton:Special Investigator Oprah: “Now everyone look under your seats. You get an immunity deal, and you get an immunity deal, and you get an immunity deal.”

    So why wasn’t a subpoena or warrant sufficient to get access to the laptops?

    Agree. Nobody is even trying, including the useless Republicans. It’s absurd. If these were Republicans, people would already be in prison.

    • #5
  6. rico Inactive
    rico
    @rico

    Hah! As if life-long Hillary defender Cheryl Mills would have delivered the goods under any circumstances. The entire investigation appears to have been devised to shut off all avenues to the truth.

    • #6
  7. tigerlily Member
    tigerlily
    @tigerlily

    So, the investigation was a scam from the start.

    • #7
  8. Publius Inactive
    Publius
    @Publius

    Some animals are more equal than others.

    • #8
  9. Arthur Beare Member
    Arthur Beare
    @ArthurBeare

    I  was under the impression that only a prosecutor (e.g., DOJ or a DA) or congress could grant immunity, not a law enforcement agency (e.g., the FBI), and it was usually conditional on full cooperation.  On or both of these impressions is apparently not so.

    So what are the rules?

    • #9
  10. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    These folks are too smart for Republicans to beat.  Why has no one in Congress, which has oversight of these criminals, any balls?

    • #10
  11. Joe P Member
    Joe P
    @JoeP

    Matt Upton:Special Investigator Oprah: “Now everyone look under your seats. You get an immunity deal, and you get an immunity deal, and you get an immunity deal.”

    So why wasn’t a subpoena or warrant sufficient to get access to the laptops?

    Just a guess: they may have needed to compel production of an encryption key to gain access. It’s an emerging area of law, but there is precedent that you can’t be compelled to cough up an encryption key or password under certain circumstances, because those are protected forms of speech and could be self incriminating. I forget the nuances of it, but it revolves around whether or not law enforcement has prior knowledge of exactly what it wants off of your hard drive.

    The above assumes the immunity deals aren’t inherently corrupt, of course.

    • #11
  12. BD Member
    BD
    @

    James Comey pulled a grandstand play in the election year of 2004 by threatening to resign as Deputy Attorney General.  He worked with Democrats and their media allies to help defeat George W Bush that year.

    Then Republicans turned around and helped him get confirmed 93-1 as FBI director in 2013.  Why, because he retained a vestigial Republican voting registration?

    • #12
  13. Dad of Four Inactive
    Dad of Four
    @DadofFour

    BD:James Comey pulled a grandstand play in the election year of 2004 by threatening to resign as Deputy Attorney General. He worked with Democrats and their media allies to help defeat George W Bush that year.

    Then Republicans turned around and helped him get confirmed 93-1 as FBI director in 2013. Why, because he retained a vestigial Republican voting registration?

    Everything I heard (or read) prior to his grandstanding was that Comey was someone who could be trusted to follow the law.   The audacity of this lie leaves me flabbergasted!  I feel like the kid in the wheelchair in the horror movie.  I am moving down the hallway, but my worst nightmares (except for the cheerleader) are only baselines.

    • #13
  14. Bill Nelson Inactive
    Bill Nelson
    @BillNelson

    The FBI cannot provide immunity. That is for the prosecuting office. And even then, they are not open ended, and a judge can decide that the “deal” no longer holds or was never valid.

    • #14
  15. Metalheaddoc Member
    Metalheaddoc
    @Metalheaddoc

    Why not just zip right to the end and give Hillary an immunity deal? She will get away with everything anyways.

    • #15
  16. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Why waste it?  There’s a pardon in the offing.

    • #16
  17. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Arthur Beare:I was under the impression that only a prosecutor (e.g., DOJ or a DA) or congress could grant immunity, not a law enforcement agency (e.g., the FBI), and it was usually conditional on full cooperation. On or both of these impressions is apparently not so.

    So what are the rules?

    With apologies to Eli Wallach:  “Rules? We don’t need no stinkin’ rules.”

    • #17
  18. Jules PA Inactive
    Jules PA
    @JulesPA

    Arthur Beare: So what are the rules?

    I think the point is, there are no rules where HRC is involved.

    • #18
  19. Israel P. Inactive
    Israel P.
    @IsraelP

    If God forbid Hillary is elected, the Senate should make clear that they will not even discuss, much less confirm, any appointee who has either hidden behind the Fifth Amendment or been given immunity.

    • #19
  20. Mountie Coolidge
    Mountie
    @Mountie

    I no longer have any faith in the Justice Department or the FBI which means that I no longer believe that we live under the rule of law. And I don’t see Trump fixing that. In fact, he may exacerbate it by using the DOJ for vendettas against his detractors.

    • #20
  21. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    The bureaucracy is liberal.  I can see it going along if Trump goes after those Republicans he views as enemies.  I can’t see them going after one like Koskinen.  They’ll figure out a way to avoid it regardless of what Trump wants.

    • #21
  22. Publius Inactive
    Publius
    @Publius

    Mountie:I no longer have any faith in the Justice Department or the FBI which means that I no longer believe that we live under the rule of law. And I don’t see Trump fixing that. In fact, he may exacerbate it by using the DOJ for vendettas against his detractors.

    The FBI made it official that there are two sets of rules now.  If you did what Hillary Clinton did with classified information, you’d get a full serving of rule of law. If you were a protected member of the oligarchy, not so much.

    Like I said before, some animals are more equal than others.

    • #22
  23. rico Inactive
    rico
    @rico

    Mountie:I no longer have any faith in the Justice Department or the FBI which means that I no longer believe that we live under the rule of law. And I don’t see Trump fixing that. In fact, he may exacerbate it by using the DOJ for vendettas against his detractors.

    All true. Perhaps new, non-corrupt leadership at the top can bring these institutions back into lawfulness at some point in the not-too-distant future. Perhaps. Let’s hope that a few responsible, moral men have influence within Trump’s inner circle.

    • #23
  24. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Mountie:I no longer have any faith in the Justice Department or the FBI which means that I no longer believe that we live under the rule of law. And I don’t see Trump fixing that. In fact, he may exacerbate it by using the DOJ for vendettas against his detractors.

    But first he will no doubt figure out how to use the “nuclear football” and blow up the world. Then he will use the Justice Department to carry out vendettas…probably go after you second, after he blows up the world.

    • #24
  25. Mountie Coolidge
    Mountie
    @Mountie

    cdor:

    …probably go after you second, after he blows up the world.

    I’m seriously thinking about going dark after the election. At least until I can figure out how the wind blows. And no, I am not a tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorist. I’ll bet  this lady wasn’t either and she still got “the visit”.

    • #25
  26. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Mountie:

    cdor:

    …probably go after you second, after he blows up the world.

    I’m seriously thinking about going dark after the election. At least until I can figure out how the wind blows. And no, I am not a tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorist. I’ll bet this lady wasn’t either and she still got “the visit”.

    Her story is incredible and very very frightening. You know I was joking with you a few posts back, but what happened to her most definitely gives one pause. And then there are the just plain ordinary vicious democrats who will throw eggs at cars with Trump bumper stickers and throw rocks at houses with yard signs. My wife won’t let me put one up.

    • #26
  27. Mountie Coolidge
    Mountie
    @Mountie

    cdor:

    Mountie

    I’m seriously thinking about going dark after the election.

    My wife won’t let me put one up.

    And that is how they suppress free speech

    • #27
  28. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Correct

    • #28
  29. Jules PA Inactive
    Jules PA
    @JulesPA

    Mountie:

    cdor:

    Mountie

    I’m seriously thinking about going dark after the election.

    My wife won’t let me put one up.

    And that is how they suppress free speech

    And demonstrate tolerance…

    • #29
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.