The US Department of Justice (DOJ) will have to decide whether Hillary Clinton or any of her subordinates could face legal consequences for her use of a private email server, a decision whose timing is fraught with serious political repercussions.
One year ago, News media has reported discovery of Clinton’s private email server, which she ran in the basement of her home in New York, to use exclusively for her work-related emails while she was secretary of state. Clinton has emerged from the Super Tuesday primaries earlier this week as the presumptive Democratic nominee for the presidency.
A vast chunck of the email which have been declassified will be found at http://bit.ly/1nl6Y26.
Republican candidate Donald Trump has indicated he plans to target Clinton over the email investigations. Trump said Thursday he looked forward to running against Clinton, “assuming she’s allowed to run, assuming she’s not arrested for the email situation.” He added, “Let’s assume the Democrats will protect her.”
The FBI for months has investigated whether sensitive information that flowed through Clinton’s email server was mishandled. The State Department has acknowledged that some emails included classified information, including at the top-secret level, though Clinton has said she never sent or received anything that was marked classified at the time. The inspectors general at the State Department and the US intelligence community are separately investigating the matter.
US Attorney General Loretta Lynch last month said the investigation is being conducted without regard for politics. She told Fox News this week that there was no “artificial deadline” for completing the investigation.
FBI Director James Comey declined to discuss the case with Congress during an appearance on Capitol Hill this week, saying only that he was very close personally to the matter “to ensure that we have the resources we need, including people and technology.”
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the Justice Department has granted immunity to the staffer who set up the server, Bryan Pagliano, so that he would be willing to speak with investigators. A person familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss an ongoing investigation, confirmed that that Pagliano had been offered immunity “some time ago.” Pagliano had previously asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to refuse to answer questions from lawmakers investigating the server setup.
A spokesman for the Clinton campaign, Brian Fallon, said the campaign is pleased Pagliano is cooperating. Fallon said Clinton herself has offered to meet with investigators.
On Thursday, Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, chairmen of the Senate Judiciary and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committees, respectively, asked the DOJ for a copy of the immunity agreement.
Also complicating the timing of any decision or public announcement is the chance that Clinton or her former top aides could be deposed by private lawyers in coming weeks. A federal judge last week opened the door to such depositions as part of a lawsuit by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group. It’s not clear what impact, if any, those interviews might have on the Justice Department investigation, but presumably federal agents would be interested in whatever Clinton or others say under oath.
There’s no question there are obvious political sensitivities. Though it’s extraordinary for a presidential candidate to be implicated in a federal investigation, there are instances of it happening to elected officials during campaigns.
The late Senator Ted Stevens (Republican-Alaska), was indicted on ethics violations months before the 2008 election and found guilty just days before Election Day. He lost the race, and the Justice Department ultimately moved to reverse the conviction amid revelations of withheld evidence.