Dans cette abracadabrantesque ann\u00e9e \u00e9lectorale US, une des narrative<\/em> palpitantes est celle de l’emailgate<\/em>, la casserole la plus sonore que traîne derri\u00e8re elle l’ancienne secr\u00e9taire d’État. On notera que les plus r\u00e9cents bruits<\/a> de casserole, venus d’ABC.News<\/em> via ZeroEdege.com<\/em>, sont assez pr\u00e9occupants pour elle. L\u00e0-dessus, une interview donn\u00e9e<\/a> au Washington Examiner<\/em> par un ancien procureur nous a int\u00e9ress\u00e9s par son aspect exotique ; bien entendu, nous ne la donnons nullement comme une pr\u00e9vision ni comme une pr\u00e9diction, surtout pas de notre chef ; elle est l\u00e0 surtout pour nous faire mesurer un peu plus ce remarquable style abracadabrantesque-2016.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Matthew Whitaker, ancien procureur sous l’administration Bush, fait donc une projection selon ce qui semble assez probable, c’est-\u00e0-dire une recommandation d’inculpation du FBI introduite aupr\u00e8s du ministre de la justice. Whitaker juge que cette demande pourrait \u00eatre faite apr\u00e8s la convention d\u00e9mocrate de juillet (qui d\u00e9signerait Clinton comme candidate), c’est-\u00e0-dire autour du mois d’août. Si la demande \u00e9tait accept\u00e9e, estime Whitaker, le procureur en charge proposerait aussit\u00f4t \u00e0 la candidate un accord pour lui \u00e9viter un proc\u00e8s ; or, selon les mati\u00e8res jug\u00e9es, cet accord impliquerait n\u00e9cessairement, toujours selon Whitaker, une p\u00e9riode de probation pendant laquelle l’inculp\u00e9e s’engagerait \u00e0 ne pas consulter des documents class\u00e9s top-secret, dont l’usage par elle du temps de son passage au d\u00e9partement d’État est la cause du litige. « Cela serait vraiment \u00e9trange d’avoir une future pr\u00e9sidente des États-Unis<\/em> [une pr\u00e9sidente des Etats-Unis] \u00e0 qui il serait interdit de consulter les documents classifi\u00e9s jusqu’\u00e0 la fin de la p\u00e9riode<\/em>. » (Il n’est d’ailleurs pas \u00e9vident que cette situation serait si mauvaise pour la politique \u00e0 conduire…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n L\u00e0-dessus, le procureur Whitaker en rajoute une couche car il y a une deuxi\u00e8me inculpation possible d’Hillary, qui concerne les relations entre le d\u00e9partement d’État et la Fondation sous l’inspiration de sa haute comp\u00e9tence (celle d’Hillary). L’abracadabrantesque devient labyrinthique et kafka\u00efesque, quant aux possibilit\u00e9s l\u00e9gales pouvant s’exercer contre la quasi-future presque-pr\u00e9sidente. Pendant tout ce processus, garder \u00e0 l’esprit que le Congr\u00e8s peut toujours estimer que toutes ces magouilles sont une bonne raison pour engager un processus de destitution, puisqu’effectivement ces op\u00e9rations et arrangements sont l\u00e9galement justifi\u00e9es d’\u00eatre examin\u00e9es par lui dans ce sens…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n « \u00ab\u00a0I think it would be kind of uncharted territory,\u00a0\u00bb Matthew Whitaker, a former prosecutor under the George W. Bush administration’s Justice Department, told the Washington Examiner. \u00ab\u00a0Some of these statutes that could potentially <\/em>[have been<\/em>] violated certainly could bar somebody from future security clearances.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> […]<\/p>\n<\/p>\n » In the event Clinton is charged with a crime, there is a strong likelihood that federal prosecutors could offer her a plea deal instead of forcing a trial. That deal would include a probationary period, and could prevent Clinton from looking at classified information until the end of that period. \u00ab\u00a0There are a lot of unknowns,\u00a0\u00bb said Whitaker, who is now executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust. \u00ab\u00a0It would be really strange to have a future president of the United States who couldn’t look at some of the nation’s most important secrets that they would have to make policy on.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » In the event Clinton were to accept such an agreement, a judge could offer flexible terms in light of her difficult circumstances. In addition to exempting her from the drug testing or home visits that would normally be standard, it is possible that she could also be exempted from additional terms that would otherwise be standard.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » However, Whitaker said, Congress would still be able to look at whether an agreement constituted a \u00ab\u00a0high crime or misdemeanor\u00a0\u00bb worthy of impeachment. Yet something that could be even more problematic for Clinton are charges related to the Clinton Foundation, which the FBI is reportedly investigating over allegations of illegally coordinating with the State Department. If charges for that coordination came after a plea agreement is reached, it would present serious problems for Clinton. \u00ab\u00a0If you’re charged with another crime while you’re still on probation, that would enhance your ultimate sentence and could revoke the probationary period, and potentially result in jail time,„ Whitaker said. \u00ab\u00a0You would have to go through another process … but the mere charge could cause a revocation.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » That dynamic leaves Clinton, as well as her associates and former employees, with some difficult decisions to keep in mind as the FBI considers whether it will recommend an indictment to the Justice Department. When that recommendation will happen isn’t clear, though FBI Director James Comey has suggested it could come even after the Democratic National Convention in July<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n » Whitaker suggested that if the indictment came in August, the Democratic presidential front-runner would be looking at a trial potentially in November. In that event, Clinton could potentially resolve the issue more quickly by accepting a plea deal, or let it play out in court later on. That could leave her with some difficult choices to ponder in the days leading up to the FBI’s decision. \u00ab\u00a0Certainly you wouldn’t want that hanging over your head as you head into election day, so I think you’d want to resolve it quickly,\u00a0\u00bb Whitaker said. \u00ab\u00a0But the timing of a trial, if an indictment is issued that late, you could be timing a trial as late as the election, and that could be unpredictable.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> »<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Mis en ligne le 7 mai 2016 \u00e0 15H56<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Imaginez Hillary pr\u00e9sidente… Dans cette abracadabrantesque ann\u00e9e \u00e9lectorale US, une des narrative palpitantes est celle de l’emailgate, la casserole la plus sonore que traîne derri\u00e8re elle l’ancienne secr\u00e9taire d’État. On notera que les plus r\u00e9cents bruits de casserole, venus d’ABC.News via ZeroEdege.com, sont assez pr\u00e9occupants pour elle. L\u00e0-dessus, une interview donn\u00e9e au Washington Examiner par… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[8743,3889,4911,17320,2838,17482,3340,17483,6907,17484,11459],"class_list":["post-76558","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-breves-de-crise","tag-8743","tag-detat","tag-destitution","tag-emailgate","tag-fbi","tag-periode","tag-presidentielles","tag-probatoire","tag-secretaire","tag-top-secret","tag-whitaker"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76558","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=76558"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76558\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=76558"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=76558"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=76558"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}