something is up with the emails and they are holdi

Quote:

---

something is up with the emails and they are holding back on something big.

---

Or it is simply a thorough investigation winding down to the end stages.

The 'server guy' was the guy Clinton wanted to testify before
the Gowdy committee. Not the expressed wish of someone
worried about what he has to say.

Server guy took one look at that committee and said f*ck this.

I 'get' all of the wishful thinking underway on the board RE this matter but the facts may turn out to be more benign that many of you hope for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics...cking.html

Quote:

---

The question of whether Mrs. Clinton’s server was hacked is separate from whether a crime occurred. But if the information was never compromised, it provides a basis for her supporters to portray Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private account as a mistake, but ultimately an inconsequential one.

Barring any changes, the F.B.I. investigation could end by early May. Then the Justice Department will decide whether to file criminal charges and if so, against whom.

Federal law makes it a crime to knowingly remove classified information from secure government channels or to allow classified information to be removed through “gross negligence.”

Many of the “secret” and “top secret” emails were written or forwarded by Mrs. Clinton’s senior aides. None of the emails were marked classified at the time.

Mr. Pagliano, who last year invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify before Congress, cooperated with the F.B.I. under a limited immunity deal. Limited immunity, which means that prosecutors may not use Mr. Pagliano’s words against him, is a far more narrow agreement than what is commonly known as “blanket immunity,” in which the government promises not to prosecute someone for crimes.

Mark MacDougall, Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, said in an email that the limited immunity deal allowed his client to answer specific questions from investigators freely. “That’s all there is to it,” Mr. MacDougall said in an email. “Every citizen has that right. The government has the authority to grant immunity in order to obtain answers. In this case, they exercised that authority, we reached an agreement, and Bryan answered the questions.”

It is common for lawyers to request — and receive — such deals before allowing their clients to cooperate. Independent lawyers say that is true even in cases in which witnesses have nothing to hide.

“Any good lawyer is going to say ‘I want immunity before I talk,’” said Barbara Van Gelder, a Washington lawyer with the firm Cozen O’Connor, who has represented numerous witnesses in high-profile congressional and Justice Department investigations. “Just because someone gets immunity isn’t indicative of guilt. It’s just protection.”

Mrs. Clinton is the front-runner in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. While aides see a clear path to the convention in July, the fallout from her emails is likely to create distractions in the weeks ahead. F.B.I. agents could seek to question her closest aides, and possibly Mrs. Clinton herself before they close their case. Mrs. Clinton has offered to meet with investigators and has encouraged her aides to cooperate.

---