Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: WikiLeaks: Is This Email The FBI's Star Witness AGAINST Hillary Clinton? [View all]pnwmom
(109,388 posts)49. Here:
http://prospect.org/article/why-hillary-wont-be-indicted-and-shouldnt-be-objective-legal-analysis
Why Hillary Won't Be Indicted and Shouldn't Be: An Objective Legal Analysis
There is no reason to think that Clinton committed any crimes with respect to the use of her email server.
Richard O. Lempert is the Eric Stein Distinguished University Professor of Law and Sociology emeritus at the University of Michigan.
What follows reflects the knowledge and experience I have gained from working at the Department of Homeland Security from 2008 until 2011. While there, I took the lead in drafting a security classification manual for one of the divisions of the DHS science and technology directorate. In this discussion, I offer answers to questions about the former secretary of states email that have not been frequently asked, but should be.
SNIP
Is there one rule for agency heads like Clinton and another rule for the rest of us?
Yes, more or less. This is true both literally and as a practical matter. When it comes to classified information, agency heads have special responsibilities and special privileges. They have plenary authority to classify or declassify information. If rules regarding classified information are broken, they have the authority to determine administrative punishments. Unless they go so far as to break the law, no one is authorized to administratively punish them. But beyond this, rules are always different for those at the very top of organizations. Government leaders like business leaders are chosen for their judgment and discretion. They must be free to exercise both. In the public sphere, problems arise because laws and administrative rules and regulations are often written in ways that admit of no exception. Moreover, some laws, like laws against corruption or against spying, should admit of no exceptions. But for the most part heads of agencies do what they think best, and if we want an effective government, this is as it should be. If leaders behave badly, appropriate sanctions are less likely to be criminal sanctions than pressure to resign or even impeachment.
_______________________
And here:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information
PART 3 -- DECLASSIFICATION AND DOWNGRADING
Sec. 3.1. Authority for Declassification. (a) Information shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under this order.
(b) Information shall be declassified or downgraded by:
(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position and has original classification authority;
(2) the originator's current successor in function, if that individual has original classification authority;
(3) a supervisory official of either the originator or his or her successor in function, if the supervisory official has original classification authority; or
(4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official of the originating agency.
SNIP
Why Hillary Won't Be Indicted and Shouldn't Be: An Objective Legal Analysis
There is no reason to think that Clinton committed any crimes with respect to the use of her email server.
Richard O. Lempert is the Eric Stein Distinguished University Professor of Law and Sociology emeritus at the University of Michigan.
What follows reflects the knowledge and experience I have gained from working at the Department of Homeland Security from 2008 until 2011. While there, I took the lead in drafting a security classification manual for one of the divisions of the DHS science and technology directorate. In this discussion, I offer answers to questions about the former secretary of states email that have not been frequently asked, but should be.
SNIP
Is there one rule for agency heads like Clinton and another rule for the rest of us?
Yes, more or less. This is true both literally and as a practical matter. When it comes to classified information, agency heads have special responsibilities and special privileges. They have plenary authority to classify or declassify information. If rules regarding classified information are broken, they have the authority to determine administrative punishments. Unless they go so far as to break the law, no one is authorized to administratively punish them. But beyond this, rules are always different for those at the very top of organizations. Government leaders like business leaders are chosen for their judgment and discretion. They must be free to exercise both. In the public sphere, problems arise because laws and administrative rules and regulations are often written in ways that admit of no exception. Moreover, some laws, like laws against corruption or against spying, should admit of no exceptions. But for the most part heads of agencies do what they think best, and if we want an effective government, this is as it should be. If leaders behave badly, appropriate sanctions are less likely to be criminal sanctions than pressure to resign or even impeachment.
_______________________
And here:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information
PART 3 -- DECLASSIFICATION AND DOWNGRADING
Sec. 3.1. Authority for Declassification. (a) Information shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under this order.
(b) Information shall be declassified or downgraded by:
(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position and has original classification authority;
(2) the originator's current successor in function, if that individual has original classification authority;
(3) a supervisory official of either the originator or his or her successor in function, if the supervisory official has original classification authority; or
(4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official of the originating agency.
SNIP
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
WikiLeaks: Is This Email The FBI's Star Witness AGAINST Hillary Clinton? [View all]
Segami
Jun 2016
OP
Most of the reports of this incident say that there is no evidence that any email
pnwmom
Jun 2016
#41
She would have had the authority. But that's irrelevant unless she actually did so.
eomer
Jun 2016
#42
I was reading the comments on an editorial in the NYT the other day and people definitely
mindwalker_i
Jun 2016
#15
That E-Mail is Worse Than Iran/Contra, the Bombing of Cambodia, Starting War Against Wrong Country
Stallion
Jun 2016
#9
The person I was replying to said Hillary could declassify documents on the spot.
DesMoinesDem
Jun 2016
#56
Getting reeeeally desperate here. The secure fax went down, and you think Hillary is going
YouDig
Jun 2016
#43
She asked for what to be sent non-securely? There is nothing to indicate the doc was classified.
randome
Jun 2016
#60
I get the futility of splitting hairs over the actual outcome of the e-mail
libdem4life
Jun 2016
#67
So what if millions were donated to the CF? The money does not go to the Clintons.
randome
Jun 2016
#71