Eight Laws Hillary Clinton Could Be Indicted For Breaking

DailyCaller

Eight Laws Hillary Clinton Could Be 

Indicted For Breaking

Kenneth P Bergquist, Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret)


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 information18 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 States18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television18 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).

msn

More Clinton emails released, including some she deleted

By Michael Biesecker and Stephen Braun

WASHINGTON — An additional 165 pages of emails from Hillary Clinton's time at the State Department surfaced Monday, including nearly three dozen that the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee failed to hand over last year that were sent through her private server.

The latest emails were released under court order by the State Department to the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch. The batch includes 34 new emails Clinton exchanged through her private account with her deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin. The aide, who also had a private email account on Clinton's home server, later gave her copies to the government.

The emails were not among the 55,000 pages of work-related messages that Clinton turned over to the agency in response to public records lawsuits seeking copies of her official correspondence. They include a March 2009 message where the then-secretary of state discusses how her official records would be kept.

"I have just realized I have no idea how my papers are treated at State," Clinton wrote to Abedin and a second aide. "Who manages both my personal and official files? ... I think we need to get on this asap to be sure we know and design the system we want."

In a blistering audit released last month, the State Department's inspector general concluded Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup violated federal records-keeping standards and could have left sensitive material vulnerable to hackers.

The audit also cited a then-unreleased copy of a November 2010 email Clinton sent Abedin in which the secretary discussed using a government email account, expressing concern that she didn't want "any risk of the personal being accessible."

Clinton never used a government account that was set up for her, instead continuing to rely on her private server until leaving office in 2013. Though Clinton's work-related emails were government records, she didn't turn over copies until more than 30 lawsuits were filed, including one by The Associated Press.

Before providing her correspondence, Clinton and her lawyers withheld and subsequently deleted tens of thousands of messages that she claimed were personal, such as emails about her daughter's wedding plans, family vacations, yoga routines and condolence notes.

With the new release Monday, more than 50 work-related emails sent or received by Clinton have since surfaced that were not among those she provided.

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon did not immediately respond Monday to a message seeking comment. Last week, Fallon told AP that Clinton had provided "all potentially work-related emails" that were still in her possession when she received the 2014 request from the State Department.

"Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have," Fallon said.

Fallon declined to say whether Clinton deleted any work-related emails before they were reviewed by her legal team.

Dozens of the emails sent or received by Clinton through her private server were later determined to contain classified material. The FBI has been investigating for months whether Clinton's use of the private email server imperiled government secrets. Agents recently interviewed several of Clinton's top aides, including Abedin.

As part of the probe, Clinton turned over the hard drive from her email server to the FBI. It had been wiped clean, and Clinton has said she did not keep copies of the emails she choose to withhold.

In a report released Monday by Democrats on the House select panel probing the 2012 attacks on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, Republican congressional investigators asked questions about Clinton's use of the private email server in interviews with her close aides.

Abedin told interviewers that she was aware of Clinton's heavy use of private emails from the start and that Clinton continued a practice that she had developed as a U.S. senator for New York and as a 2008 presidential candidate. "It was a natural progression from what she was doing previously, and she continued to do so."

Asked repeatedly who serviced Clinton's private server in the basement of her New York home, Abedin identified Justin Cooper, a technology staffer at that time for former President Bill Clinton, and Bryan Pagliano, a State Department technology official who is cooperating with an FBI investigation of Clinton's private server under an immunity deal with prosecutors. Abedin was hazy about Pagliano's role at the agency and his private work overseeing Clinton's server in New York.

Pagliano, who previously worked for Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, invoked his constitutional right against self-incrimination and declined to answer the committee's questions. In a sworn deposition last week, Pagliano also refused to answer questions posed by lawyers from Judicial Watch, including who paid for the system and who else at the State Department used email accounts on it. Pagliano also would not answer whether he discussed setting up a home server with Clinton prior to her tenure as secretary of state, according to a transcript.

Other State Department officials told congressional investigators that Clinton never responded to internal offers to set her up with an official State account and an agency computer. Patrick Kennedy, the undersecretary for management at the State Department, said Clinton did "not know how to use a computer to do email. So it was never set up."

___

Hillary’s Obscene Reaction to the Orlando Shootings

by John V. Walsh / June 12th, 2016

Hillary Clinton’s statement on the mass murder in Orlando is mostly a confection of the empty, saccharine pieties for which the entire American political class is known – but it concluded with a revealing statement.

There she said: “This is the deadliest mass shooting in the history of the United States and it reminds us once more that weapons of war have no place on our streets.”  (Emphasis, jw)

But those “weapons of war” have been used on the streets of Iraq and in midnight raids on the civilian population in the war there that Hillary so ardently backed.

Does she even grasp what she is saying?  She is saying that it is an atrocity to use such weapons on Americans – but not on the brown people, civilians in their homes, in Iraq and throughout the greater Middle East and North Africa in U.S. wars of aggression and the occupation.   To be horrified by the use of those weapons on Americans but not on Arabs qualifies as racism of the basest sort.

And what about the causes of the atrocity in Orlando?  In attempting to discuss the cause, she mentions the lack of gun control and the discrimination against the LGBT community. But she forgets to say in her statement that ISIS laid claim to the atrocity, lauding one of its American followers for carrying out the deed.  So ISIS is responsible, and the hatred of America on which ISIS thrives is responsible.

But where does ISIS come from?  It did not exist before the war on Iraq that Hillary and her fellow neocons peddled so assiduously with lie upon lie.  The war on Iraq, the divide and conquer tactic that the US invaders used to set Shia against Sunni to cripple the population are the factors that brought ISIS into being.  The civil war in Syria, another pet project of Hillary’s, gave a further opening and impetus to ISIS.

And Barack Obama had pretty much the same message as his evil ex-Secretary of State. Gun control and LGBT rights were front and center, but nary a word about the devastation the U.S. Empire has wrought in the Middle East that brought about the rise of ISIS.

The word “blowback” was not to be found in Hillary’s or Obama’s statements.

But, of course, it goes deeper than that.  The U.S. has long backed Saudi Arabia where the ideology for ISIS was concocted and promoted.  Saudi Arabia and the other medieval monarchies of the Gulf who have so ardently supported ISIS have long been supported by the U.S.  The secular governments in the region like those of Gaddafi, Hussein and now al-Assad, in contrast, are targets for regime change ops – brutal ones at that.  These are the very governments that fought the Islamic fundamentalists – and the US has attacked every one of them.  How deep does the hand of the U.S. government, or parts of it, go in the rise of ISIS? It is a question that needs to be answered by a full Congressional investigation, but chances of that are nil while Obama and Hillary and their neocon buddies are in charge.

Finally the U.S. alliance with Israel and the backing of the apartheid Jewish state in its long, slow genocide of an entire Arab people, the Palestinians, also stirs hatred for the U.S.  Does Hillary think that has nothing to do with the hatred ISIS expresses for the U.S?  She apparently thinks “the price is worth it,” to quote a protege of hers. Thus Hillary in her obeisance to AIPAC and the rest of the Israeli Lobby puts herself in the front ranks of those who have given birth to events like the ones in Orlando.

Atrocities breed atrocities.  Or as Andrew Kopkind remarked in another context, the skies were dark in Orlando this past weekend with the chickens coming home to roost.

John V. Walsh can be reached at john.endwar@gmail.com. Read other articles by John V..

This article was posted on Sunday, June 12th, 2016 at 10:20pm and is filed underBlowback, Guns, Iraq, Israel/Palestine, LGBTQ, Obama, Opinion, Racism, Saudi Arabia, Syria.

SALON


FRIDAY, JUN 10, 2016 12:30 PM EDT

FBI criminal investigation emails: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

WSJ: FBI is investigating Hillary's classified emails on State Dept. approval of CIA drone killings in Pakistan

BEN NORTON


TOPICS: CIA, CLINTON EMAILS, DRONE PROGRAM, DRONES, FBI, HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT,ELECTIONS NEWS, NEWS, POLITICS NEWS

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton checks her phone in October 18, 2011 (Credit: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

The FBI has been conducting a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information for months.

An explosive new report reveals just what it is that the FBI is looking to: emails in which then-Secretary of State Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations in Pakistan with her cellphone.

From 2011 on, the State Department had a secret arrangement with the CIA, giving it a degree of say over whether or not a drone killing would take place.

The U.S. drone program has killed hundreds of civilians in Pakistan and other countries.

Under Sec. Clinton, State Department officials approved almost every single proposed CIA drone assassination. They only objected to one or two attacks.

The emails that are at the heart of the FBI’s criminal investigation are 2011 and 2012 messages between U.S. diplomats in Pakistan and their State Department superiors in D.C., in which the officials approved drone strikes.

Clinton’s aides forwarded some of these emails to her personal email account, on a private server in her home in suburban New York.

These are the revelations of a report by The Wall Street Journal, based on information provided by anonymous congressional and law-enforcement officials who were briefed on the FBI’s probe.

The State Department revealed in January that 22 of the emails that were on Clinton’s private server at her home contained top-secret information. These messages were not publicly released, and an investigation was eventually launched.

The White House acknowledged in a press briefing on Thursday that the FBI probe into Clinton’s handling of classified information is a “criminal investigation.” President Obama endorsed Clinton for president on the same day.

Hundreds of civilians in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan and more have been killed by U.S. drones.

Pakistan is the site of more U.S. drone strikes than any other country. The Obama administration has carried out more than 370 drone attacks in Pakistan, killing as many as 1,000 civilians, including up to 200 children, according to data collected by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

The exact number of civilians killed is unknown, because the U.S. is very secretive about its program, and because it essentially redefines militant to mean any man of military age in a targeted area.

In 2011, some Pakistani officials pushed back against the U.S. drone assassination program, leading the U.S. State Department to ask the CIA to be more “judicious” about the timing of drone attacks. Clinton’s State Department did not oppose the CIA’s specific choice of targets, just their timing.

This led to a compromise in which the CIA gave the State Department some voice in the drone assassination process. Beginning in 2011, CIA officers began notifying diplomats in the U.S. embassy in Islamabad of planned attacks. The diplomats then conveyed the information to senior State Department officials.

This agreement gave then-Secretary of State Clinton and her aides personal say in U.S. drone killings.

The Wall Street Journal report provides more insight into the State Department’s coordination with the CIA on the secretive drone program.

State Department officials were given notice before a planned attack, sometimes with a narrow timeframe of as few as 30 minutes. Officials told the FBI that they used a less-secure system of communication when they had to make a decision quickly before a drone killing and were not at the office.

Roughly half a dozen times, State Department officials sent emails on their smartphones in order to approve a drone assassination when they were away from secure communications systems.

The U.S. is very secretive about its covert CIA drone campaign. Strict U.S. classification rules bar officials from discussing drone killings publicly and outside of secure communications systems.

Given this secrecy, law-enforcement and intelligence officials told the Journal that State Department discussion of the covert CIA drone program should have been conducted via a more secure communications system.

The criminal investigation into Clinton’s emails has often been a right-wing talking point, but the scandal has much wider implications.

Reflecting on the Journal’s report, award-winning journalist Jeremy Scahill, one of the world’s leading experts on the secretive CIA drone program, commented, “So many liberals poo poo the Hillary email scandal for totally partisan reasons. If it was a Republican, they would be going bananas.”

“People claiming emails on Hillary’s private server were not classified do not understand how classification works,” Scahill added. “It’s an HRC talking point.”

“It’s acceptable to mishandle classified info on your bathroom server and share classified info with your mistress, just don’t blow any whistles,” he quipped, referencing the fact that the Obama administration has waged an unprecedentedly harsh crackdown on whistleblowers.

The FBI is expected to interview Clinton this summer about the scandal. Law-enforcement officials told the Journal they don’t think criminal charges will be filed against her after the investigation.

Clinton herself has repeatedly confidently insisted that she is not going to be charged.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner refused to speak about the emails or the investigation.

Ben Norton is a politics staff writer at Salon. You can find him on Twitter at@BenjaminNorton.

SALON


TUESDAY, JUN 14, 2016 05:59 AM EDT

The unexpected side effect of Hillary 2016: How she transformed Democrats into “new” Republicans

The Clinton campaign has drained many of the ideals Democrats have long stood for

SOPHIA A. MCCLENNEN

Hillary Clinton (Credit: Reuters/Gary Cameron)

On Oct. 30, 2010, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert held a rally on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.

Despite the fact that midterm elections were right around the corner, the main goal of the rally was not openly to affect the vote. Instead, the idea was to use satire and comedy to “restore sanity” to the political dialogue in a nation that had become overwhelmed by fear, irrationality, and prejudice.  Stewart ended the rally with a “moment of sincerity” where he criticized the polarizing press, the panic incited by pundits, and the increasing inability of citizens to find any sort of reasonable compromise.

The idea wasn’t to point fingers; it was to encourage a more respectful and productive dialogue among people who hold differing views.  It was a historic moment when two of the nation’s most important political comedians publicly intervened to improve the course of politics.  There were about 215,000 people at the rally. Two million watched it on Comedy Central live and another half million saw it live via the internet feed.

It all feels like ages ago.

Today, both comedians have left their Comedy Central posts and many have speculated that if they had continued we wouldn’t be in this mess.

But that’s not the real change that matters. Now the change is over who in this nation is driven by fear and who is ruled by sanity.  When Colbert and Stewart took the stage, they didn’t openly associate reason with Democrats and fear with Republicans.  They didn’t have to.

Ever since the post 9/11 era of George W. Bush the nation had increasingly witnessed a turn in the Republican party from conservative values to hysterical ones.  There were numerous studies that showed that the Republican brain was less open to nuance, critical thinking, and reason. One study showed how Republicans would hold on even more fervently to their beliefs even when presented with bipartisan evidence to the contrary.

One party could process facts. One party considered them a conspiracy.

One party voted rationally. One voted illogically.

Well, the 2016 election shattered that neat little breakdown.

Now it has to be said that there were always flaws to the system that suggested that the left was reasonable and the right was dogmatic.   There are plenty of reasonable Republicans who have mourned the Tea Party era and the havoc it has played on the GOP.  And there are plenty of lefty moonbats who are a quite kooky in their positions.

But the fact that study after study revealed real differences in brain patterns and decision-making was revealing.  One study by Scientific American asked folks to complete a triad task where they had to indicate which two were more closely connected –panda, banana, monkey.  Liberals connected the abstract category of animal—panda, monkey. Conservatives connected the monkey to the banana since the monkey uses the banana.  The study concluded that liberals had higher cognitive function.

Or at least they used to.

While there seems little doubt that the entire Donald Trump campaign is based on hype, hysteria, and sensationalism; it’s worth noting the very real ways that the Hillary Clinton campaign has also been dominated by binary thinking, irrationality, and panic.

First of all, the number one reason that Bernie Sanders supporters are told they should vote for Hillary is to stop Trump. Nowhere is there an argument about the merits of her platform.  If the primary argument to vote for Hillary is out of fear—then the Democrats have now joined with the GOP in promoting a politics of hysteria.

And for what it’s worth, some voters today think that the lesser evil is still plenty evil.  They’d rather sit it out or vote green.  The Hillary camp simply has no counter-argument for that.

Second of all, there is a real allergic reaction to truth in the Clinton camp.  If Hillary had joined with Bernie and called for investigations into the many, many, many reported cases of election fraud, the political environment on the left would be drastically different.   But rather than deal with the facts, the Hillary camp chose to ignore the rights of voters and describe the calls for fairness as the ravings of lunatics searching for a conspiracy.

And they were joined by the mainstream media who basically refused to take seriously the idea that there were any significant election irregularities at all. We had to leave it the alternative media like Democracy Now and to brave political comedians like Lee Camp to even cover the story.  (Watch one of his clips on election fraud from RedactedTonight here.)

Outside of these alternative, anti-establishment spaces no one seemed to notice that the way that Clinton supporters ignored election fraud was pretty much identical to what happened on the Bush-Gore vote.  Except this time there is a huge difference– now the fight is within the same party.

But there’s more. Because within the Clinton campaign there is a real issue with “the woman card.” Of course, it is historic that she may well be the Democratic nominee. But that fact has nothing to do with whether or not she is feminist. It just means she is a woman who broke a barrier.

Margaret Thatcher broke that barrier in her nation in 1975 and no one confused that with an advance for feminism.  Having Clinton supporters like Gloria Steinem suggest that women who don’t support Clinton are just looking for sex,suggests that the Clinton camp has some pretty confused ideas about what feminism means.

Then, of course, Madeleine Albright suggested there was a “special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” I’m pretty sure that wasn’t a reference to Hillary’s questionable record supporting victims of her husband’s sexual harassment.  While feminism is a broad term that can mean many things, for some of us, feminism requires standing up for the victims right in front of you. And that’s not even taking into account her flip-flopping on same-sex marriage rights.

Regardless of whether Hillary should be held to account for her own treatment of women, there seems little doubt that this campaign has constructed a narrow and aggressive view of what it means to advocate for women’s rights.  What may be a historic achievement for a woman in this nation is being overshadowed by a view of “feminism” that basically requires women to support Hillary or be sluts that are going to hell.  And while it is easy to let Trump’s misogyny distract us, we have to recognize that the Clinton version of feminism lacks critical complexity and smacks of dogmatism.

But there’s more. Despite cries of “Bernie bros,” it is the Clinton camp that has adopted tactics of bullying, trolling, and shaming. Led by the efforts of David Brock, a Clinton super PAC launched Correct the Record to spend $1 million “on paid internet trolls to pounce on anyone who dared to criticize their presidential candidate.”   And while there are ardent supporters of each of the candidates, we now have significant evidence that it is Clinton supporters that have been more aggressive and threatening than Sanders supporters.  Trump’s fans win, but that’s no surprise.

We are literally watching the Clinton campaign drain any claim to nuance, critical thinking, reasoned logic, and attention to facts from the Democratic party.

Those who justifiably reject the two-party system won’t find any of this remotely novel as a concept, but I would caution that throwing those who “think” they are on the left under the bus is not a useful exercise here.   There is a real difference in the aggressive, hawkish, illogical tone of the Clinton campaign that differentiates it from those of Democrats in the last decades.

The fact that Clinton is now the favorite of many on the right, with endorsement after endorsement pouring in, should be evidence enough of a real merging of the right and the “left.” What we have more clearly on view is a breakdown between the political elite and the people.

This of course, is why the reasoned tone of Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders is resonating with those of us in this nation who would rather vote to restore sanity than to keep fear alive.  Defending a two-party system that has abdicated any connection to reality simply seems insane.

Sophia A. McClennen is Professor of International Affairs and Comparative Literature at the Pennsylvania State University. She writes on the intersections between culture, politics, and society. Her latest book, co-authored with Remy M. Maisel, is, Is Satire Saving Our Nation? Mockery and American Politics.

Secret Service agent to release tell-all book about the Clinton White House and the culture that 'sickened' him

Secret Service agent to release tell-all book about the Clinton White House and the culture that 'sickened' him 

• Gary Byrne says he was posted outside Bill Clinton's Oval Office in 1990s
• 
  
• Was one of the agents who testified to a grand jury about Monica Lewisnky
• 
  
• Complained about her behavior and 'out of hours' access to the West Wing 
• 
  
• Releasing book so voters understand the 'real' Clinton before the election
• 
  
• Reports say his expose is causing deep concern in the White House 
• 
  
• The release of the book comes a month before the Democratic convention 
• 
  
• Secret Service agents have openly discussed protecting Hillary in the past 
• 
  
• Investigative journalist Ron Kessler said agents detested Hillary
• 
  
• See more of the latest Hillary Clinton news at www.dailymail.co.uk/hillary
• 
  

By WILLS ROBINSON FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 06:00 EST, 5 June 2016 | UPDATED: 10:35 EST, 6 June 2016

A Secret Service agent who protected Hillary Clinton is set to publish a tell-all book. 

Gary Byrne says he was posted outside Bill Clinton's Oval Office in the 1990s and that what he saw 'sickened him'.

His expose is causing deep concern in the White House, according to Drudge Report, and its release comes as Hillary comes within touching distance of securing the Democratic nomination. 

The book titled Crisis of Character: A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience with Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate is set to hit shelves on June 28. 

The Democratic convention, where Hillary could be confirmed as the nominee, will take place a month later.

+4

Hillary Clinton is braced for an expose from a Secret Service agent who protected her during Bill's 1990s administration. She is pictured during a campaign event in California on Saturday ahead of the primary  

According to Drudge, specific details of the book are being kept under a tight embargo.  

A description of the book reads: 'Posted directly outside President Clinton's Oval Office, Former Secret Service uniformed officer Gary Byrne reveals what he observed of Hillary Clinton's character and the culture inside the White House while protecting the First Family. 

'Now that a second Clinton administration threatens - their scheme from the very beginning -- Byrne exposes what he saw of the real Hillary Clinton.

'While serving as a Secret Service Officer, Gary Byrne protected President Bill Clinton and the First Family in the White House and outside the Oval Office. 

'There, he saw the political and personal machinations of Bill and Hillary Clinton and those who were fiercely loyal to them. 

+4

Gary Byrne, the man behind the expose, says he was posted outside Bill Clinton's Oval Office in the 1990s and that what he saw 'sickened him'

'In CRISIS OF CHARACTER Byrne provides a firsthand account of the scandals - known and unknown - and daily trials ranging from the minor to national in scale.

+4

Byrne, who was one of the agents who complained about Monica Lewinsky's behavior, says he wants voters to see the 'real' Hillary before they head to the polls 

'Having witnessed the personal and political dysfunction of the Clinton White House - so consumed by scandal and destroying their enemies, real and imagined - Byrne came to understand that, to the Clintons, governing was an afterthought. 

'He now tells this story - before voters go to the polls - in the hopes that Clinton supporters will understand the real Hillary Clinton.'

Byrne was one of the Secret Service agents questioned by a Grand Jury about Bill's dealings with Monica Lewinsky in 1998.

According to the Washington Post article published on the hearing Byrne complained to then-White House deputy chief of staff Evelyn S. Lieberman about Lewinsky's actions in 1996.

A short time later Lewinsky was removed from her position because of 'immature and inappropriate behavior'.

He claimed that he saw Lewinsky in the West Wing of the White House when she was not authorized to be there.

The New York Times reported that Mr Byrne also expressed concerns about Ms Lewinsky's after-hours access to the West Wing, which houses the President's Oval Office and the work spaces of the most senior White House aides 

Since her husband's administration ended, Secret Service agents assigned to Hillary have slammed her behavior.

In investigative journalist Ron Kessler's explosive book, The First Family Detail, he claims that agents saw her as one of the most detested assignments and believed her marriage to Bill was 'fake'.

It reveals how both current and former agents strongly dislike being on Mrs Clinton's detail, while also revealing how they felt about protecting Chelsea Clinton and Bill Clinton.

+4

His expose is reportedly causing deep concern in the White House and its release comes as Hillary comes within touching distance of securing the Democratic nomination

In the book, Kessler presented Chelsea as someone who not only respected and appreciated her agents, but also was a model protectee.

LIST OF CHAPTER TITLES  

Chapter 1 - The Vase

Chapter 2 - The Air Force Security Police

Chapter 3 - Club Fed

Chapter 4 - To The White House

Chapter 5 - Meet The New Boss

Chapter 6 - The Boy From Hope, Arkansas

Chapter 7 - 'Billary'

Chapter 8 - Clinton World

Chapter 9 - Oklahoma City

Chapter 10 - Mole

Chapter 11 - Wild Bill

Chpater 12 - USSS Work Environment

Chapter 13 - Tours And JJRTC

Chapter 14 - Mud Drag: Part 1

Chapter 15 - Mud Drag: Part 2

Chpater 16 - *Commerce Firing*

Chapter 17 - New Skies

Chapter 18 - Cyprus

(Source: Drudge Report) 

The former president is described as a difficult chief executive who is also easygoing in the book.

However, Hillary is exposed as being the complete opposite of her husband and daughter, and instead is reportedly very rude and acted nasty toward a number of agents.

'Hillary was very rude to agents, and she didn't appear to like law enforcement or the military,' former Secret Service agent Lloyd Bulman recalled to Kessler.

'She wouldn't go over and meet military people or police officers, as most protectees do.

'She was just really rude to almost everybody. She'd act like she didn't want you around, like you were beneath her.'

On another occasion, a member of the uniformed Secret Service once cheerfully greeted Mrs Clinton by saying 'Good morning, ma'am.'

'F*** off,' is how she replied, according to Kessler's book.

Kessler explained in the book that when Mrs Clinton is in public, she smiles and acts graciously.

'As soon as the cameras are gone, her angry personality, nastiness, and imperiousness become evident,' he wrote.

'Hillary Clinton can make Richard Nixon look like Mahatma Gandhi.'

His book also revealed how Mrs Clinton allegedly didn't like the attire military aides wore.

'Hillary didn't like the military aides wearing their uniforms around the White House,' one former agent recounted to Kessler. 

Dan Emmett, who began covering President Clinton on his first day in office in January 1993, said Hillary was arrogant, never said 'thank you' to the agents and treated them like 'hired help'. 

In his 20014 book, Unlimited Access, he says Bill was a gentleman in comparison.