Clinton v. Brazile: Can the justice system start treating the Clintons, minions as a transnational crime gang?

The publication of former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee Donna Brazile’s book opened several conversations regarding her service to what many half-jokingly refer to as the Clinton Crime Family, especially her loyal service to Hillary Clinton.

In her new memoir titled, Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House, Brazile addresses the mysterious murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich, for whom she dedicates her book to the 27-year-old that many Americans believe was killed by hoods working for the Clintons.

Brazile backs off from making any statements regarding her own thoughts about what appears to be a phony “armed robbery” where the young man was first beaten, then shot in the head execution-style and then the alleged robbers took nothing from Mr. Rich. They left his wallet and money behind, failed to take his expensive watch, forgot to steal his house keys, and hadn’t even stolen one of his credit cards.

However, Brazile doesn’t dwell on the Seth Rich case but she does describe her fear of being the victim of a hitman — or hitwoman — or a murder-for-hire sniper. She mentions her home security system, her need for self-protection and her fears of retribution without accusing Bill and/or Hillary Clinton or any of their well-heeled “mob” such as John Podesta, former CIA director Leon Panetta, lawyer David Kendall, and others.

It’s no secret that people who know the Billary are deathly afraid of them. And these people know that if they should testify against the news media’s and  Democrats’ favorite power-couple, as witnesses they will have numbered their days.

“Even some of the upper-echelon FBI members are susceptible to Clinton Family intimidation. Why else would they give Hillary Clinton’s minions (Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, etc.) full immunity without getting anything even resembling evidence or court-testimony?” asked former police detective Mike Nelson Tennenate.

“Until law enforcement can find the will and the strategy to better protect witnesses, cops and prosecutors will continue to allow the federal, state and local governments to be run by wealthy men and women devoid of consciences, scruples and morality,” he added.

Witness Intimidation

Many police officers and prosecutors have become increasingly frustrated by their inability to investigate and prosecute cases successfully when key witnesses refuse to provide critical evidence or to testify because they fear retaliation by the defendant or his family and friends. Cops have also found it difficult to protect jurors or their family members from organized crime, street gangs or soulless politicians and powerbrokers..

Witnesses’ refusal to cooperate with investigations and prosecutions should be a major concern: it adversely affects the justice system’s functioning while simultaneously eroding public confidence in the government’s ability to protect citizens.

A number of law enforcement agencies and prosecutors’ offices across the country have already taken steps to prevent witness intimidation and jury tampering. These include increased use of traditional witness security measures such as routinely requesting high bail for known intimidators, aggressively prosecuting reported intimidation, closely managing key witnesses, expanding victim/witness assistance services, and sequestering jury members at an undisclosed location.

Unfortunately, at the federal level, it becomes more problematic if the occupants in the White House are involved in an investigation since in this day and age the nation’s President may also be a sociopath who is up to his or her neck in crime and corruption, claims a former attorney, now a political consultant, Michael Balker.

“Several jurisdictions have adopted innovative approaches, such as emergency and short-term relocation of witnesses methods to prevent intimidation in the courthouse and jails, and outreach programs to reduce community-wide fear and intimidation,” said Balker.

Hillary Clinton came before Congress to testify about her State Department’s bungling of Benghazi, and when pressed about how the administration misled about the causes of the raid coldly pronounced: “The fact is we have four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans. What difference, at this point, does it make?” The reaction of network anchors and reporters wasn’t to condemn the chilling dodge, but to herald it as a moment of righteous indignation.   – Geofrey Dickens, Media Research Center

Most innovative witness security programs include provisions for relocating genuinely endangered witnesses, and most of the prosecutors and law enforcement officers interviewed report that confidential witness relocation is the core protection service that all programs need to provide. Respondents identified three levels of relocation:

* emergency relocation — placing the witness and his or her family in a hotel or motel for up to a few weeks;

* short-term or temporary relocation — using a hotel or motel for up to a year or placing the witness with out-of-town relatives or friends; and

* permanent relocation — moving the witness between public housing facilities or providing a one-time grant to reestablish the witness in new private housing.

Gang members and associates of defendants often appear in court in order to frighten witnesses into not testifying. Since the threat may be very subtle and because judges often feel that the constitutional requirement of a public trial prevents them from removing such individuals from the courtroom, it is often difficult to stop this kind of intimidation. Nevertheless, a number of judges have taken steps to remove gang members from the courtroom, to segregate gang members and other intimidating spectators, or to close the courtroom entirely to spectators.

Incarcerated witnesses who are targets for intimidation in gang-and drug-related cases require special protection, including separation from the defendant within the same correctional facility or transfer to a nearby correctional facility, and separate transportation to court to testify.

An atmosphere of community-wide intimidation, even when there is no explicit threat against a particular person, can also discourage witnesses from testifying.

Prosecutors and police investigators try to reduce community-wide intimidation through community-based policing and prosecution strategies, vertical prosecution, and other strategies. (Vertical prosecution means a prosecutor handles a criminal case from the very beginning until conviction or acquittal.)

Prosecutors and police investigators recommend that a witness security program be structured carefully in order to maximize the use of shared resources, reduce prosecutor and police investigator involvement with time-consuming witness management tasks, and minimize civil liability of the prosecutor’s office and police department.