Hillary Email Problems/News

[Kathianne]

server.

Maybe she will be indicted?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/11/fbi-has-hillary-clinton-emails-from-home-server-official-says/


Clinton campaign says email server to go to Justice Dept amid report it contained 'top secret' emails <time itemprop="datePublished" pubdate="" datetime="2015-08-11T18:26-04:00" style="font-weight: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 3px; padding: 0px; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(153, 153, 153); line-height: 1.5; display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: initial;">Published August 11, 2015
</time> Associated Press (http://www.ap.org/)



WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton will turn over the personal email server she used while serving as secretary of state to the Justice Department, her campaign spokesman said Tuesday.


The decision advances the investigation into the Democratic presidential front-runner's use of a private email account as the nation's top diplomat, and whether classified information was improperly stored on her home-brew email server.


Clinton had previously refused demands from Republican critics to turn over the server to a third party.


Spokesman Nick Merrill said Clinton has "pledged to cooperate with the government's security inquiry, and if there are more questions, we will continue to address them."


Also Tuesday, Clinton gave to the Justice Department thumb drives containing copies of emails sent to and from her personal email addresses via that server.


Clinton's lawyer, David Kendall, gave three thumb drives containing copies of roughly 30,000 emails to the FBI after the agency determined he could not remain in possession of the classified information contained in some of the emails, according to a U.S. official briefed on the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly.

The State Department previously had said it was comfortable with Kendall keeping the emails at his Washington law office.

The FBI is looking into the security of the Clinton email arrangement. There is no evidence she used encryption to shield the emails or her personal server from foreign intelligence services or other prying eyes.

Word that Clinton had relented on giving up possession of the server, which she has previously said she wiped clean, came as Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa said two emails that traversed Clinton's personal system were deemed "Top Secret, Sensitive Compartmented Information" — a rating that is among the government's highest classifications.

Grassley said the inspector general of the nation's intelligence community had reported the new details about the higher classification to Congress on Tuesday.
...




The campaign is trying to say it's voluntary, it's not. This was uncovered with the investigation.

[NightTrain]

She handed over tens of thousands of classified emails to her attorney, who does not have top secret clearance... seems like a slam dunk to me, just in that act.

Since it's political season, maybe this will stick. Maybe.

[Kathianne]

More:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article30714762.html


AUGUST 11, 2015
‘Top Secret’ emails found as Clinton probe expands to key aides
Four former aides have turned over personal emails
Senior senator skeptical of the extent of the review
Intelligence investigators say they have yet to see aides’ emails

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article30714762.html#storylink=cpy





BY ANITA KUMAR, MARISA TAYLOR AND GREG GORDON
McClatchy (akumar@mcclatchydc.com) Washington Bureau

As pressure builds on Hillary Clinton (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article24782737.html) to explain her official use of personal email while serving as secretary of state, she faced new complications Tuesday. It was disclosed her top aides are being drawn into a burgeoning federal inquiry and that two emails on her private account have been classified as “Top Secret.”


The inspector general for the Intelligence Community notified senior members of Congress that two of four classified emails discovered on the server Clinton maintained at her New York home contained material deemed to be in one of the highest security classifications - more sensitive than previously known.


The notice came as the State Department inspector general’s office acknowledged that it is reviewing the use of “personal communications hardware and software (https://oig.state.gov/system/files/esp-15-04-05.pdf)” by Clinton’s former top aides after requests from Congress.


“We will follow the facts wherever they lead, to include former aides and associates, as appropriate,” said Douglas Welty, a spokesman for the State Department’s inspector general.


Despite the acknowledgment, the State Department inspector general’s office has left numerous unanswered questions, including exactly who and what is being investigated. The office initially declined to comment and referred questions to the Intelligence Community inspector general’s office, which said it is not currently involved in any inquiry into aides and is being denied full access to aides’ emails by the State Department. Clinton, herself, is not a target.

...

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article30714762.html#storylink=cpy

[darin]

Obama will pardon her.

[Kathianne]

Obama will pardon her.
So true.

[NightTrain]

Even if he does, that Deep Sixes her chances at President. No way she could survive that.


Then Biden the Gaffe Machine will lurch into the spotlight. Fun times will be had.

[Rat]

This big deal. Top Secret highest level classification not used by NSA. Hard to believe she would have this kind sensitive material on unsecured server. Scary thought. No good. I think she in lot of trouble.

[Kathianne]

Indeed. Reminds me much of Watergate. The problem arose before the election, but steamed ahead after. Once the government investigators started, it rolled up. Things move faster now:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/08/13/hillarys_private_emails_the_vice_slowly_tightens_1 27758.html


Hillary's Private Emails: The Vice Slowly TightensBy Charles Lipson (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/charles_lipson/) - August 13, 2015

The political class is seriously underestimating the impact of Hillary Clinton’s email controversy. They see it mainly as a problem of public opinion and electoral politics, where it has been increasingly costly but not yet fatal. The political damage—the drip, drip, drip of revelations—has been bad, but there is worse to come.


Hillary Clinton’s big problem now is legal, and it could well be insurmountable politically. Here’s why. Once a “political” issue finally moves into the legal system, as the Clinton email server has, it moves forward with an independent logic. That logic will slowly ensnare Secretary Clinton.

...

[Kathianne]

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/250937-poll-most-want-criminal-probe-of-clinton-emails


Poll: Most want criminal probe of Clinton emails By Julian Hattem (http://thehill.com/author/julian-hattem) - 08/12/15 12:00 PM EDT


More than half of registered voters say a criminal investigation should be launched into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email system while serving as secretary of State, according to a new poll.


The Monmouth University survey, released Wednesday, was conducted before Tuesday evening’s revelation (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/250896-clinton-will-turn-over-email-server-to-justice-department) that Clinton had turned over to the government her personal email server and USB thumb drives containing copies of the emails, following news that at least two emails had been classified as “top secret.”



According to the poll (http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/c3a37c69-f8c1-466c-871d-5da4ab4cfddb.pdf), 52 percent of voters say that Clinton's emails “should be subject to a criminal investigation for potential release of classified material.”

Republicans overwhelmingly supported a criminal probe, and Democrats were largely against it. Fifty-four percent of independents said that they supported the investigation, a sign of political vulnerabilities Clinton faces in the Democratic presidential nominating contest.


Despite the desire for a criminal inquiry, the poll indicated that 51 percent of voters believed Clinton’s use of an in-home email system was a matter of convenience, compared with 38 percent who thought she may have been trying to hide something.
...

[jimnyc]

It's clear to everyone that she took far too many chances with emails that didn't belong to her. When working FOR the country, those emails belong TO the country, and they need to be taken with care. But she thinks she is above that.

She definitely won't see jail time for screwing up national security data, but she should. Others before her have, but admittedly not many. She should definitely be fined as many others have definitely been before her, but I doubt we'll see that happen either. She shouldn't be above the law. Hopefully, someone like Issa, and others, will push, push and push this until Nov of '16, along with her Benghazi BS. At the VERY very least, hopefully we will see her lose the primaries, and hopefully disappear from office afterwards.

Will the Clinton machine be strong enough to make yet another of their scandals be forgotten?

[Kathianne]

I tend to agree about the jail time, but one never knows. Obama and her? No love loss. Problem is other folks in the administration might also be implicated.

[jimnyc]

I tend to agree about the jail time, but one never knows. Obama and her? No love loss. Problem is other folks in the administration might also be implicated.

I say let it flow, indict anyone involved, D or R. Security is of utmost importance. I wonder what her stances have been over the past 20-25 years when it comes to national security? On previous leaks and other issues? I'm hoping her own words from the past come to bite her in the ass.

And I also hope that the good questions are starting to be thought of right now, and they should be asked first at the debate.

[Kathianne]

I say let it flow, indict anyone involved, D or R. Security is of utmost importance. I wonder what her stances have been over the past 20-25 years when it comes to national security? On previous leaks and other issues? I'm hoping her own words from the past come to bite her in the ass.

And I also hope that the good questions are starting to be thought of right now, and they should be asked first at the debate.

I don't know about her own words, but Bill might or not be happy when his criticized Bush for commuting Libby's sentence:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/us/politics/04clintons.html?_r=0

[Kathianne]

It's looking more and more like Hillary isn't going to be the nominee this time either:

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/251008-dems-near-clinton-panic-mode


Dems near Clinton panic mode By Niall Stanage (http://thehill.com/author/niall-stanage) and Kevin Cirilli (http://thehill.com/author/kevin-cirilli) - 08/13/15 06:00 AM EDT


Democrats are worried that the furor over Hillary Clinton’s private email server will be prolonged and intensified after her sudden move to hand it to the FBI.



The Clinton campaign’s decision to give up the server and a thumb-drive containing back-up copies of emails left Democrats scratching their heads as to why the former secretary of State had resisted turning over the server for months. ​(It was 'give up the server' or have an FBI raid.)



Coupled with new polls that suggest Clinton is vulnerable, Democrats are nearing full-on panic mode.


“I’m not sure they completely understand the credibility they are losing, by the second,” said one Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “At some point this goes from being something you can rationalize away to something that becomes political cancer. And we are getting pretty close to the cancer stage, because this is starting to get ridiculous.”



“Look, this is a classic example of the cover-up being ten times worse than the so-called crime — though in this case there wasn't a crime,” said another progressive strategist.



“The culture of secrecy that has surrounded the Clintons — understandably in some cases — has now yielded a situation where she did something that wasn't necessary and looks nefarious.”

...

[Kathianne]

Huma:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-email-probe-turns-to-huma-121314.html

If there was a 'conspiracy':

<header style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">Hillary Clinton email probe turns to HumaClinton's top aide is likely to face more questions, not least from congressional investigators, about her access to Clinton’s system.
</header><footer class="meta" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">By Rachael Bade (http://www.politico.com/reporters/RachaelBade.html)
<time datetime="2015-08-13T05:05-05:00" style="box-sizing: border-box;">8/13/15 5:05 AM EDT</time>
</footer>

Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s most trusted confidante, is increasingly becoming a central figure in the email scandal that’s haunting her boss on the campaign trail, as Republicans and federal judges seek information about Clinton’s communications while she was running the State Department.

...

Abedin has hired a team of lawyers, one of whom is a former Clinton aide, who are responding to information requests from the courts and State. They’ve denied any wrongdoing on the part of their client and said Abedin is cooperating with requests for official emails in her possession, aiming to turn over all her correspondence by the end of August.

...

But Steven Aftergood, who directs the Federation of American Scientists’ project on government secrecy, said Abedin’s potential access to secret materials could be a problem.


“What happens if [a former government employee] still retains access through a prior server, to information that was justified by a previous position? That’s not supposed to happen — and that’s one of the anomalies that are created by the private server,” Aftergood said.


Classified materials with national security implications are supposed to be stored in a place where no one can gain access to them unless they have special clearance.


...

[Kathianne]

From the 'Couldn't Make This Up File':

http://abcnews.go.com/beta/Politics/tips-deleting-emails-email-book-hillary-clinton-wanted/story?id=33046042


Tips on Deleting Emails From Email Book Hillary Clinton Wanted to Read

JONATHAN KARL

SUMMER FIELDS


Aug 12, 2015, 7:03 PM ET





The last batch of Hillary Clinton (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/whitehouse/hillary-clinton.htm) emails released by the State Department (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/us/state-department.htm) included one from Clinton asking (https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_JulyWeb/Web_050/DOC_0C05765814/C05765814.pdf) to borrow a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe.


Clinton has not said why she requested the book, but it includes some advice that is particularly interesting in light of the controversy over her unconventional email arrangement at the State Department and her decision to delete tens of thousands of emails she deemed to be purely personal.


The copy that ABC downloaded for $9.99 had some interesting revelations.


Take, for example, Chapter Six: “The Email That Can Land You In Jail.” The chapter includes a section entitled “How to Delete Something So It Stays Deleted.”


“Some people are hoarders, some are checkers,” the authors write. “The main thing to consider is that once you do decide to delete, it’s like taking the garbage from your kitchen and putting it in your hallway. It’s still there.”


The chapter advised that to truly delete emails may require a special rewriting program “to make sure that it’s not just elsewhere on the drive but has in fact been written over sixteen or twenty times and rendered undefinable.”


But Shipley and Schwalbe warn that deleting emails could lead to future legal troubles.
...

[NightTrain]

This does get better and better.

And I'm pretty sure that the server has been worked over with a vengeance. All that needs to be done now is find the IT geek that she hired to wipe that server... but I'm guessing he was paid a princely sum in small unmarked bills to keep his mouth shut and get lost.

I'm actually kind of surprised it hasn't been in a catastrophic house fire yet, but the investigation is still young.

[Little-Acorn]

Hillary wanted a book on how to delete emails? Particularly emails that might land her in jail?

Say it ain't so!

----------------------------------------------------

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/08/13/no-really-hillary-wanted-a-book-about-how-to-delete-emails-n2038590

No, really: Hillary requested book containing advice on deleting emails "that stay deleted"

by Katie Pavlich
Aug. 13, 2015

Now why in the world would Hillary Clinton want a book about how to permanently delete emails?

According to a new report from ABC's Jon Karl, the former Secretary of State requested a book about how to delete email before leaving her position in early 2013. Bolding below is mine.

The last batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department included one from Clinton asking to borrow a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe.

Clinton has not said why she requested the book, but it includes some advice that is particularly interesting in light of the controversy over her unconventional email arrangement at the State Department and her decision to delete tens of thousands of emails she deemed to be purely personal.

The copy that ABC downloaded for $9.99 had some interesting revelations.

Take, for example, Chapter Six: “The Email That Can Land You In Jail.” The chapter includes a section entitled “How to Delete Something So It Stays Deleted.”

“Some people are hoarders, some are checkers,” the authors write. “The main thing to consider is that once you do decide to delete, it’s like taking the garbage from your kitchen and putting it in your hallway. It’s still there.”

The chapter advised that to truly delete emails may require a special rewriting program “to make sure that it’s not just elsewhere on the drive but has in fact been written over sixteen or twenty times and rendered undefinable.”

[NightTrain]

Threads merged.

[Elessar]

Even if he does, that Deep Sixes her chances at President. No way she could survive that.


Then Biden the Gaffe Machine will lurch into the spotlight. Fun times will be had.

I had a TS/NATO.

She should be fried.

[Elessar]

It's clear to everyone that she took far too many chances with emails that didn't belong to her. When working FOR the country, those emails belong TO the country, and they need to be taken with care. But she thinks she is above that.

She definitely won't see jail time for screwing up national security data, but she should. Others before her have, but admittedly not many. She should definitely be fined as many others have definitely been before her, but I doubt we'll see that happen either. She shouldn't be above the law. Hopefully, someone like Issa, and others, will push, push and push this until Nov of '16, along with her Benghazi BS. At the VERY very least, hopefully we will see her lose the primaries, and hopefully disappear from office afterwards.

Will the Clinton machine be strong enough to make yet another of their scandals be forgotten?

Issa is no slouch,

Where is Gabby to defend this idiot....something I would scrape off the bottom of my foot.??

[Russ]

Just how strong was the electromagnet that was passed over the hard drives of Hillary's email server? Or how big was the hammer that whacked it a few times?
More likely the server that Hillary turned over doesn't have the same hard drives that it did when the inquiries began. Or maybe it's not even the same email server that Hillary had when the inquiries began.
The only chance they will find anything on the email server she turned in is if it is still the same hard drives, and Hillary underestimated how many data-recovery tools the forensic technicians have at there disposal. Which I guess is possible - after all, she thought it was secure when it was at her "home" (actually Bill's office in Harlem), and apparently it didn't even have up-to-date firewall and antivirus patches on it.
But I think the most likely scenario is that they will say there is no data on the email server at all.

[NightTrain]

Just how strong was the electromagnet that was passed over the hard drives of Hillary's email server? Or how big was the hammer that whacked it a few times?
More likely the server that Hillary turned over doesn't have the same hard drives that it did when the inquiries began. Or maybe it's not even the same email server that Hillary had when the inquiries began.
The only chance they will find anything on the email server she turned in is if it is still the same hard drives, and Hillary underestimated how many data-recovery tools the forensic technicians have at there disposal. Which I guess is possible - after all, she thought it was secure when it was at her "home" (actually Bill's office in Harlem), and apparently it didn't even have up-to-date firewall and antivirus patches on it.
But I think the most likely scenario is that they will say there is no data on the email server at all.


The Clintons have a good ground game when it comes to dodging legal bullets. I suspect as soon as this began to get traction she stopped the IT Amateur Hour and had the best IT guy her people could find to make sure nothing was recoverable.

That won't save her, though. The evidence on the server would have been nice to have, but all those other email addresses in the strings ensure they're still there on other servers and she'll be hammered for it.

[Kathianne]

Server turned over 'blank'? Raises new questions:

http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/14/if-hillarys-server-was-blank-why-was-it-kept-at-a-data-center-in-new-jersey/


If Hillary’s Server Was ‘Blank,’ Why Was It Kept At A Data Center In New Jersey?
http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/chuckRoss.jpgCHUCK ROSS
(http://dailycaller.com/author/chuck-ross/)Reporter
(http://dailycaller.com/author/chuck-ross/)





12:07 AM 08/14/2015


The new revelation that Hillary Clinton’s private server was made “blank” in June 2013 — but nonetheless stored at a data center in New Jersey — raises a slew of new questions about the former secretary of state’s handling of her emails.


The attorney for Platte River Networks, the Denver-based cybersecurity company Clinton hired shortly after leaving office to handle the server, says that she does not know why the hardware would have been stored in a New Jersey data center if it was “blank.”


“The server that was turned over to the FBI voluntarily yesterday to our knowledge has no information on it,” the attorney, Barbara Wells, told The Daily Caller in a brief phone interview.



On Wednesday, after Platte River Networks gave the server to the FBI, Wells told The Washington Post that the information from it “had been migrated over to a different server for purposes of transition” in June 2013.

“To my knowledge the data on the old server is not available now on any servers or devices in Platte River Network’s control,” Wells told the paper.


“To my knowledge the data on the old server is not available now on any servers or devices in Platte River Network’s control,” Wells told the paper.

That revelation is significant because until now, most observers have assumed that Clinton wiped her server clean sometime after October, when the State Department sent a letter requesting that she hand over all of her emails. Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi in late March that the server had been wiped clean.


But the new claim that the server has been useless for more than two years indicates that when Clinton finally did produce her emails in December — 55,000 pages worth — they were drawn from a different device.

...

Clinton hired Platte River Networks to handle her server shortly after she left the State Department in Feb. 2013. Prior to that, the server resided in the basement of Clinton’s Chappaqua, N.Y. home. When Hillary Clinton was tapped to head the State Department, she hired one of her presidential campaign’s IT department staffers to beef up the system so she could use it in an unprecedented manner at the agency.


Clinton’s hiring of Platte River Networks came around the time that the Romanian hacker Guccifer hacked the email account of Clinton’s longtime friend, Sidney Blumenthal. The hack revealed Clinton’s private email address, HDR22@clintonemail.com. At the time it was not known that that was the email account Clinton used to send all work-related and personal emails as secretary of state, a violation of federal regulations.
...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Obama will pardon her.

Yes, because he is neck deep in a lot of it. I think he will do his best to try to limit how much negative exposure he gets from her criminality.
I'd be shocked if he allows her to be charged and have to testify in court.
That is unless a deal has already been cut by the two of them in a worse case scenario.
I know he wants somebody other than her to follow him in office-somebody that has not as much contempt for him as do the Clintons...-Tyr

[Kathianne]

Yes, because he is neck deep in a lot of it. I think he will do his best to try to limit how much negative exposure he gets from her criminality.
I'd be shocked if he allows her to be charged and have to testify in court.
That is unless a deal has already been cut by the two of them in a worse case scenario.
I know he wants somebody other than her to follow him in office-somebody that has not as much contempt for him as do the Clintons...-Tyr
There can be not pardon or commutation without courts. This is a sticky wicket for certain.

[Kathianne]

From self-acknowledged liberal leaning Ron Fournier, this devastating column:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/parsing-clinton-deflection-deception-and-untruths-20150813


Parsing Clinton: Deflection, Deception, and UntruthsBreaking down the campaign's talking points on her email fiasco.


BY RON FOURNIER (http://www.nationaljournal.com/reporters/bio/13)

...

[Kathianne]

A bit of mix of technology and legal ramifications:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/422513/hillary-clinton-email-server-blank-fbi

[Little-Acorn]

There can be not pardon or commutation without courts. This is a sticky wicket for certain.

Nonsense.

Nixon got pardoned without courts, or even a conviction for anything.

"....a full Presidential pardon for any crimes he MIGHT HAVE COMMITTED during the period from this date until that date...."

All 0 has to do is Xerox that one and change the name and date.

Actually that's true for a lot of Nixon documents and various members of the 0 administration.

[Kathianne]

Nonsense.

Nixon got pardoned without courts, or even a conviction for anything.

"....a full Presidential pardon for any crimes he MIGHT HAVE COMMITTED during the period from this date until that date...."

All 0 has to do is Xerox that one and change the name and date.

Actually that's true for a lot of Nixon documents and various members of the 0 administration.

You're correct. Did a lot of harm to the nation in many ways. On the other hand, closed the controversy.

Related:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/07/preemptive_presidential_pardons.html

[Russ]

Here's a conversation I can picture between Hillary Clinton and the PC guy installing her email server -

PC Guy: Why do you want to run your own personal email server?
Hillary: To keep my emails out of the hands of the enemy.
PC Guy: Who do you mean? The Russians? Al-Quaida? ISIS?
Hillary: No, the Republicans
PC Guy: Well, you have to keep this email server secure by installing a sophisticated firewall, and…
Hillary: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Don’t worry. I have a Secret Service detail.
PC Guy: That’s not the kind of security I meant. Besides, do they even know it’s here and they’re supposed to be watching it?
Hillary: Umm, well, uh… stop with the questions! I know what I’m doing! What are you – conservative or something?
PC Guy: This is serious stuff. The Russians and Chinese will compromise this server in minutes if you don’t secure it properly. If they get your emails, someone’s going to get blamed big-time.
Hillary: Not a problem – I know how to make sure everyone BUT me get blamed. Just ask Vince Foster. Say, what did you say your name was?
PC Guy: Umm, I just remembered I have another appointment. See ya.

[Abbey Marie]

Here's a conversation I can picture between Hillary Clinton and the PC guy installing her email server -

PC Guy: Why do you want to run your own personal email server?
Hillary: To keep my emails out of the hands of the enemy.
PC Guy: Who do you mean? The Russians? Al-Quaida? ISIS?
Hillary: No, the Republicans
PC Guy: Well, you have to keep this email server secure by installing a sophisticated firewall, and…
Hillary: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Don’t worry. I have a Secret Service detail.
PC Guy: That’s not the kind of security I meant. Besides, do they even know it’s here and they’re supposed to be watching it?
Hillary: Umm, well, uh… stop with the questions! I know what I’m doing! What are you – conservative or something?
PC Guy: This is serious stuff. The Russians and Chinese will compromise this server in minutes if you don’t secure it properly. If they get your emails, someone’s going to get blamed big-time.
Hillary: Not a problem – I know how to make sure everyone BUT me get blamed. Just ask Vince Foster. Say, what did you say your name was?
PC Guy: Umm, I just remembered I have another appointment. See ya.

:laugh2: That was awesome!

[Russ]

Just one more thing about Hillary's email server. It used the email domain "clintonemail.com", so its email addresses were hillary@clintonemail.com and hrc@clintonemail.com, etc.


Here's the current public record of that email domain:

Whois query for clintonemail.com...

Results returned from whois.internic.net:
Whois Server Version 2.0

Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered
with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net (http://www.internic.net/)
for detailed information.

Domain Name: CLINTONEMAIL.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 2
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://networksolutions.com (http://networksolutions.com/)
Name Server: NS15.WORLDNIC.COM
Name Server: NS16.WORLDNIC.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 04-mar-2015
Creation Date: 13-jan-2009
Expiration Date: 13-jan-2017


Most of this information has already been changed, to protect the guilty. But the Creation Date and Updated Date remain, and they are curiouser and curiouser. This email domain was created on January 13th, 2009 - during Hillary's confirmation hearings as Secretary of State. It was NOT created years earlier for Bill to use when he was President. Also, notice that the email domain was updated for some reason on March 4th, 2015. That was long after Hillary was no longer Secretary of State, but it was only two days after the email scandal broke in the New York Times. What a coincidence! :rolleyes:

[Abbey Marie]

Wait, what? Are you saying you don't believe Mrs. Clinton is innocent?

[gabosaurus]

Where is Gabby to defend this idiot....

If you had been paying attention (something you obviously don't often do), you would know that I have never defended either of the Clintons.
Unlike many Republicans, I don't blindly defend any slug with a (D) in front of their name.
In fact, I have told this forum multiple times that Hillary would never make it to primary season.

Personally, I think Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot by chasing Hillary out of the race. If I was one of the current GOP candidates, I would want to run against Clinton.
I would not want to run against Elizabeth Warren.

[Kathianne]

Just how strong was the electromagnet that was passed over the hard drives of Hillary's email server? Or how big was the hammer that whacked it a few times?
More likely the server that Hillary turned over doesn't have the same hard drives that it did when the inquiries began. Or maybe it's not even the same email server that Hillary had when the inquiries began.
The only chance they will find anything on the email server she turned in is if it is still the same hard drives, and Hillary underestimated how many data-recovery tools the forensic technicians have at there disposal. Which I guess is possible - after all, she thought it was secure when it was at her "home" (actually Bill's office in Harlem), and apparently it didn't even have up-to-date firewall and antivirus patches on it.
But I think the most likely scenario is that they will say there is no data on the email server at all.

I feel like I've been educated somewhat on wiping drives this week. Seems the hard drive would have to be wiped, then written over many times to actually clear it from getting retrievable fragments. This would indicate a dedicated effort, then the question becomes why, since the content belonged to 'the people.'

[Kathianne]

Nonsense.

Nixon got pardoned without courts, or even a conviction for anything.

"....a full Presidential pardon for any crimes he MIGHT HAVE COMMITTED during the period from this date until that date...."

All 0 has to do is Xerox that one and change the name and date.

Actually that's true for a lot of Nixon documents and various members of the 0 administration.

Related for discussion:

http://freebeacon.com/columns/pardon-hillary-now/

[Kathianne]

7 reasons this won't go away. My favorite is #3, 'all three branches now involved':

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/08/15/seven_reasons_hillarys_email_problems_wont_go_away .html


Seven Reasons Hillary's Email Problems Won't Go AwayBy Alexis Simendinger (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/alexis_simendinger/) - August 15, 2015

It is hot in Iowa, to which Hillary Clinton returned on Friday. On Saturday she will stroll past the booths and exhibits at the Iowa State Fair, pose for selfies with voters (and answer reporters’ questions beforehand). One prediction seems as certain as the ritual corn dog she’s sure to hold in her hand:


Clinton’s email controversy is not going away. With every leaked detail about a blank email server, the FBI’s hunt for “top secret” communications that may (or may not) have migrated across the country (or onto the State Department website for public airing), plus Capitol Hill testimony expected from the Democratic frontrunner in October, the list of questions grows longer.

...

The email storyline has an uncertain outcome, and here’s why:

1) Clinton can blame herself. ...

2) Clinton stoked a pre-existing narrative. ...

3) The sphere of inquiry and investigation has widened since spring, an ominous sign for any presidential candidate. Involved are three branches of government and the private sector. ...

4) The words “top secret” and “classified” guarantee prolonged scrutiny. ...

5) A House select committee expects Clinton to answer questions Oct. 22 (http://benghazi.house.gov/news/press-releases/select-committee-confirms-date-for-appearance-by-former-secretary-of-state) ...

6) Republican and Democratic presidential candidates ...

7) Truth and consequences will add up ...

[Kathianne]

Hmmm:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/15/fox-poll-two-percent-of-voters-think-hillary-told-the-truth-about-e-mail-server-and-only-three-percent-of-democrats/

[Kathianne]

Might see some legal action:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/15/hmmm-petraeus-investigator-managing-doj-probe-into-hillary-server/


Hmmm: Petraeus investigator managing DoJ probe into Hillary server

POSTED AT 2:31 PM ON AUGUST 15, 2015 BY ED MORRISSEY


The investigation into The Saga of the Secret Server took a couple of interesting turns yesterday evening. Many critics of the slow response from the Department of Justice to Hillary Clinton’s exclusive use of an unauthorized and unsecured secret server have wondered why the Obama administration seemed much more interested in prosecuting former CIA Director and Iraq War genius David Petraeus for a less-impactful exposure. The Washington Post’s Carol Leonnig, Karen Tumulty, and Rosalind Helderman noted at the bottom of their late-afternoon roundup (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-clintons-team-went-from-nonchalant-to-nervous-over-e-mail-controversy/2015/08/14/347f1066-405e-11e5-9561-4b3dc93e3b9a_story.html?postshare=6091439585951193 ) that the pressure may be picking up after all:


The investigation is being overseen by two veteran prosecutors in the Justice Department’s National Security Division. One of them helped manage the prosecution of David H. Petraeus, the retired general and former CIA director who was sentenced to probation earlier this year after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified materials. He was also fined $100,000.

The Post also noted that Hillary’s initial public declarations on this have turned out to be “false,” in their terminology:



The FBI’s interest in Clinton’s e-mail system arose after the intelligence community’s inspector general referred the issue to the Justice Department on July 6. Intelligence officials have expressed concern that some sensitive information was not in the government’s possession and that Clinton’s unusual e-mail system could have “compromised” secrets.
That investigation, still preliminary, is focusing on how to contain any damage from classified information that might have been put at risk. Officials have said that Clinton is not a target. But, according to legal experts, this type of security review can turn into a criminal investigation if there is evidence that someone intentionally mishandled government secrets. …
The issues around Clinton’s e-mails have also intensified as it has become clear that a number of her statements defending her actions now appear to be false.



...

USA Today notes a few more cases (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/08/14/if-your-name-isnt-hillary-the-hammer-for-mishandling-secrets) that demonstrate a double standard if Hillary’s allowed to skate on this scandal:

Low-level diplomats who do so much as leave a document of low classification on a guarded embassy desk, Van Buren says, risk demerits that jeopardize future job prospects.
“I cannot conceive any other person in government being able to do what she did without being punished,” he says. “Lots of people have lost their clearances, lost their jobs and in some cases lost their freedom and gone to jail” for allegedly being careless in protecting classified documents. …
Mishandling classified documents often is alleged when authorities seek to punish embarrassing leaks to the press, but also appears in lesser-known cases, such as the prosecution of Arabic translator James Hitselberger, who was fired and criminally charged for printing two classified documents and attempting to leave a Bahrain naval base. He pleaded guilty to mishandling documents last year.
Hitselberger admitted to (http://fas.org/sgp/jud/hitsel/062414-defsent.pdf) unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents to spare himself a potentially lengthy prison sentence, maintaining he was innocent of purposeful wrongdoing. He offered an explanation similar to Clinton’s justification for using a person email server: convenience. He wanted to read them at home.
“When a Master Sergeant who was standing nearby told Mr. Hitselberger that he needed the computer and Mr. Hitselberger would have to sign off, Mr. Hitselberger decided to read the documents in his living quarters,” his attorneys wrote in court documents after his guilty plea. “He then – in full view of the Master Sergeant and with other military personnel in the surrounding area – printed the documents, put them in his backpack and walked out of the secured area. For doing so, he already has been severely punished, and no additional punishment is necessary.”
Hitselberger was stopped a short distance from the printer and two documents were taken from him. His public defender who brokered the plea deal, Mary Petras, did not respond to a request for comment on how the case compares to the Clinton email controversy.


The FBI probe is concentrating on two tracks, according to the New York Times’ Michael Schmidt and David Sanger (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?referrer=&_r=0). The first is how the classified material ended up in an unauthorized and unsecured system, and the other is an assessment of whether the material ended up in hostile hands:

...

[Abbey Marie]

Perhaps Hillary's loosey-goosey email handling would land her in jail, if one of them outed Valerie Plame

:rolleyes:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Hmmm:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/15/fox-poll-two-percent-of-voters-think-hillary-told-the-truth-about-e-mail-server-and-only-three-percent-of-democrats/


Both two and three percent seem mighty high. Yet, knowing how dumbed down this nation has been deliberately taught perhaps I should have expected a higher number of fools believing her! :laugh:-Tyr

[NightTrain]

I feel like I've been educated somewhat on wiping drives this week. Seems the hard drive would have to be wiped, then written over many times to actually clear it from getting retrievable fragments. This would indicate a dedicated effort, then the question becomes why, since the content belonged to 'the people.'


I'll wager Hellary is sweating bullets as she sits and waits for what the FBI turns up. They're extremely good at retrieving information from attempted wipes - when they want to be.

I'm wondering if there's a quiet order in effect urging them not to be thorough.

I'm also curious as to if those are the actual hard drives. Swapping out hard drives is a very simple matter and unless they have the MAC addresses of the drives from the period of when they were in use, they can't know that they are investigating the right ones.

Jim could probably answer that question as to whether or not the MAC address is recorded in normal backups to compare... as far as I know, they're not and this is probably a wild goose chase.

[Russ]

I'll wager Hellary is sweating bullets as she sits and waits for what the FBI turns up. They're extremely good at retrieving information from attempted wipes - when they want to be.

I'm wondering if there's a quiet order in effect urging them not to be thorough.

I'm also curious as to if those are the actual hard drives. Swapping out hard drives is a very simple matter and unless they have the MAC addresses of the drives from the period of when they were in use, they can't know that they are investigating the right ones.

Jim could probably answer that question as to whether or not the MAC address is recorded in normal backups to compare... as far as I know, they're not and this is probably a wild goose chase.

NT: I can say that a MAC address actually identifies an ethernet or wireless interface, not a hard drive, but I believe (not sure) that depending on the type of backup, it might identify the type of hard drive. Jim can probably answer this better. - Russ

[Kathianne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=0


F.B.I. Tracking Path of Classified Email From State Dept. to Hillary Clinton

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/michael_s_schmidt/index.html) and DAVID E. SANGER (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/david_e_sanger/index.html)<time class="dateline" datetime="2015-08-14" style="font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.75rem; font-family: nyt-cheltenham-sh, georgia, 'times new roman', times, serif; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); margin-left: 12px;">AUG. 14, 2015

</time>
WASHINGTON — F.B.I. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_bureau_of_investigation/index.html?inline=nyt-org) agents investigating Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/13/us/elections/hillary-clinton.html?inline=nyt-per)’s private email server are seeking to determine who at the State Department passed highly classified information from secure networks to Mrs. Clinton’s personal account, according to law enforcement and diplomatic officials and others briefed on the investigation.

...

Well they should:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/17/state-dept-finds-17855-missing-hillary-clinton-adviser-emails/


STATE DEPT. FINDS 17,855 MISSING HILLARY CLINTON ADVISER EMAILS by JOHN SEXTON (http://www.breitbart.com/author/john-sexton/)17 Aug 2015





More than two years after the State Department claimed there were no emails responsive to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request about a close Hillary Clinton adviser’s contact with the media, the Department has informed a judge it has located 17,855 emails that appear to match the criteria.


The website Gawker filed a FOIA request (http://www.scribd.com/doc/213366921/John-Cook-FOIA-Appeal-Letter-Reines-Emails) in 2012 seeking any emails between Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Philippe Reines (a top Hillary Clinton adviser) and a list of 33 major media outlets. Interest in Reines’ correspondence with the media was prompted by an angry email exchange (http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeedpolitics/hillary-clinton-aide-tells-reporter-to-fuck-off#.ik0gy61oML) between Reines and journalist Michael Hastings. In the exchange, Reines lost his temper and told Hastings to “f-ck off.”


In July of 2013, the State Department responded to Gawker’s request with a letter which stated (http://www.scribd.com/doc/213366921/John-Cook-FOIA-Appeal-Letter-Reines-Emails), “After a thorough search…no records responsive to your request were located.” Earlier this year Gawker filed a lawsuit (http://politburo.gawker.com/gawker-v-department-of-state-1691327528) asking a judge to force State to produce documents which were responsive to its initial FOIA request.


Finally, in a “court-ordered status report” the State Department has admitted to having located 81,159 emails belonging to Reines. Of those, State found 22 percent may be responsive to the FOIA request made back in 2012. “The Department believes that it will need to conduct a line-by-line review of an estimated 17,855 emails for applicable FOIA exemptions,” the status update (http://documents.gawker.com/court-document-state-department-finds-17-000-philippe-1724542777) reads.

...

[Kathianne]

Investigations by FBI and Congress tend to branch out:

http://theweek.com/articles/572379/contagious-toxicity-hillary-clintons-email-scandal


The contagious toxicity of Hillary Clinton's email scandal


Edward Morrissey (http://theweek.com/authors/edward-morrissey)
August 18, 2015




Until this summer, Democrats mostly figured that Hillary Clinton's email scandal was one big nothingburger. This nonsense is nothing more than an unjustified conservative attack on a highly accomplished individual who is all but assured of being elected America's first female president, they insisted. The whole thing will soon fade from the headlines, they blindly assured themselves.
Oops.

...

As for copying the State Department on her communications, the State Department itself couldn't find any evidence for this claim. It turns out that their archival processes were mostly failing during this period of time anyway, a point that Team Hillary tried to use in her favor last week (http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/11/great-news-china-probably-can-corroborate-hillarys-testimony-on-e-mails/). That, however, ignores the fact that Hillary Clinton was the secretary of state when these State Department systems were failing, and apparently did nothing about it.

...



Indeed, a new reversal by the State Department in a FOIA case risks painting the entire Democratic establishment with the same scandal-red brush. And it may be that an internet scandal sheet will be the prime mover.

In 2013, Gawker filed a FOIA demand to access the emails between Philippe Reines, deputy assistant secretary of state and a longtime Hillary Clinton aide, and various news media outlets and reporters. At the time, the State Department answered in court that they could find no documents responsive to the FOIA demand. Gawker spent significant amounts of time and resources suing the State Department for the data (http://gawker.com/state-department-finds-thousands-of-philippe-reines-ema-1724560491?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_twitter&utm_source=gawker_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow), which should have been publicly available through the Federal Records Act. Last week, the State Department finally admitted to the court (http://documents.gawker.com/court-document-state-department-finds-17-000-philippe-1724542777#_ga=1.116999174.1425910670.1439411848) that they had found more than 81,000 of Reines' emails, and that over 17,800 of them were "likely responsive" to the FOIA demand.

These emails did not come from the private Clinton email server, from which Reines produced 20 cartons of printed emails (http://hotair.com/archives/2015/07/30/clinton-e-mails-had-classified-data-from-five-intel-agencies-including-nsa/) for State to archive and inspect. The 17,800-plus emails identified by State in its court filing came from its own systems, which State had in its possession all along. Any explanation for the sudden discovery of so many emails after a blanket denial, other than willful obstruction, would beggar belief.

This is a really big deal. Until now, the transparency and honesty issue has focused solely on Hillary Clinton. However, by early 2013, Clinton had left the State Department. John Kerry had taken over as secretary of state. If the lack of transparency was limited to the State Department under Hillary Clinton's direction, then why did it continue under Kerry — and in such an obviously clumsy way?

It is entirely possible, and frankly likely, that the lack of transparency didn't start and end with Hillary Clinton, although she may have pushed it to the point of damaging national security. Though liberals are loathe to admit it, the Obama administration has too often suppressed transparency, be it the Department of Justice in the Operation Fast and Furious scandal or the IRS or now the State Department.

And because of that, Clinton's scandal could stick to the two men getting the most mention as possible emergency replacements for her in the Democratic primary. John Kerry's State Department seemed perfectly willing to hide Clinton's potential issues from public oversight. How could he take the 2016 mantle from her? And if Joe Biden ran for president, the argument for his candidacy would explicitly rest on continuity from the Obama years — years in which those in power tried to manipulate courts and avoid legitimate oversight.

If this scandal gets any worse, Democrats may have no one left to rescue them from a disaster of their own making.

[Kathianne]

Problems on the new Hillary excuse of 'always been differences on what and how to classify':




http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821



Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:17am EDT Related: POLITICS, AEROSPACE & DEFENSE
Exclusive: Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest
NEW YORK | BY JONATHAN ALLEN


For months, the U.S. State Department has stood behind its former boss Hillary Clinton as she has repeatedly said she did not send or receive classified information on her unsecured, private email account, a practice the government forbids.


While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as "Classified," it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it.


But the details included in those "Classified" stamps — which include a string of dates, letters and numbers describing the nature of the classification — appear to undermine this account, a Reuters examination of the emails and the relevant regulations has found.


...

[Russ]

Here's how I picture Hillary getting prepped by her PR lawyer, to be ready to testify before Congress in October:

PR Lawyer: "I'm here to rehearse you for your upcoming testimony, and I..."
Hillary (shuffling through index cards): "WHAT DOES IT MATTER NOW ANYWAY!"
PR Lawyer: "What the... I can assure you this testimony rehearsal is very important."
Hillary: "No, that's the first thing I plan on saying while testifying"
PR Lawyer: "Oh, ok, well I don't think that one will work anymore"
Hillary (flipping cards): "THIS IS ALL A WITCH HUNT!"
PR Lawyer: "Too vague, you need to say something more specific."
Hillary: "Ok - THIS IS ALL A VAST, RIGHT-WING WITCH HUNT!"
PR Lawyer: "I'm not feeling it. What else do you have?"
Hillary (flipping to the last card): "Here's one I've been saving for an emergency - 'HUMA DID IT'!"
PR Lawyer: "You do realize you will be under oath?"
Hillary: "Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah"

:rolleyes:

[Abbey Marie]

Here's how I picture Hillary getting prepped by her PR lawyer, to be ready to testify before Congress in October:

PR Lawyer: "I'm here to rehearse you for your upcoming testimony, and I..."
Hillary (shuffling through index cards): "WHAT DOES IT MATTER NOW ANYWAY!"
PR Lawyer: "What the... I can assure you this testimony rehearsal is very important."
Hillary: "No, that's the first thing I plan on saying while testifying"
PR Lawyer: "Oh, ok, well I don't think that one will work anymore"
Hillary (flipping cards): "THIS IS ALL A WITCH HUNT!"
PR Lawyer: "Too vague, you need to say something more specific."
Hillary: "Ok - THIS IS ALL A VAST, RIGHT-WING WITCH HUNT!"
PR Lawyer: "I'm not feeling it. What else do you have?"
Hillary (flipping to the last card): "Here's one I've been saving for an emergency - 'HUMA DID IT'!"
PR Lawyer: "You do realize you will be under oath?"
Hillary: "Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah"

:rolleyes:

Lol, I think you've got Hillary's number

[Kathianne]

Could it be that the Platte River company was set up 'just in case?' In the Byzantine machinations of Hillary, anything is possible. The choice of this company was always questioned, as being too small, too removed to be a player in this extraordinary set up:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hillary-email-timeline-suggests-second-server-may-exist/article/2570663


Email timeline suggests second server may exist

By SARAH WESTWOOD (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/author/sarah-westwood)
• 8/22/15 10:51 AM

Conflicting accounts of when data was removed from Hillary Clinton's private server indicate copies of emails known to contain classified information may reside on a device other than the one presently in FBI custody.


She may have printed 55,000 pages of emails for submission to the State Department from a different device than the one presently in FBI custody.


Platte River Networks, the company that managed Clinton's email network after she stepped down from her post as secretary of state, indicated it transferred data (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/where-did-hillarys-personal-emails-go/article/2570175) off the original server in mid-2013.


An attorney for Platte River said there is likely "no useful data" remaining on the server.


But the Clinton campaign has suggested the former secretary of state did not erase emails she deemed personal until January (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/briefing/factsheets/2015/07/13/email-facts/) of this year, raising questions as to where the emails were located when her staff sifted through them to determine which were related to her government service.


A Clinton spokesman did not return a request for comment, nor did an attorney for Platte River Networks.


The discrepancy further obscures the timing of Clinton's decision to erase 30,000 emails she claimed were unrelated to State Department business.


Dr. Marcus Rogers, head of computer information technology at Purdue University, said the fact that the data was migrated off Clinton's server in 2013 doesn't mean it was erased from the server at that time.


"There's pretty definite time stamps when you move information from one computer to another," Rogers said. "Somebody knows exactly when this happened because those time stamps are there."

...

[Kathianne]

Detroit News calls for Special Prosecutor:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2015/08/21/edit-clinton-probe-special-prosecutor/32123901/


...FBI agents are trying to reconstruct some of the deleted emails, and may or may not be successful. Clinton should be asked under oath what those emails contained, and why she deleted them.

She should also have to answer why she willfully violated State Department rules in maintaining the unsecured private server. What was she hiding?


It's unfortunate the investigation is unfolding in the heat of the presidential campaign. But Clinton brought that on herself by not being forthcoming when the private server was discovered.



Those investigating Clinton's use of the server and whether she compromised national security in doing so should not have to worry about being throttled by politics. The only way to assure that is to appoint a special prosecutor.

...

[Kathianne]

Seems there's been a few:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/20/jed-babbin-hillary-clinton-email-scandal-needs-spe/?page=all

http://observer.com/2015/08/the-countless-crimes-of-hillary-clinton-special-prosecutor-needed-now/

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/081415-766712-a-special-prosecutor-is-called-for-in-clinton-scandal.htm

[Kathianne]

for both Hillary and State?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/24/dhs-has-no-record-state-dept-giving-info-for-clinton-server-audit-despite-rules/


DHS has no record of State Dept. giving info for Clinton server audit, despite rulesBy Malia Zimmerman (http://www.foxnews.com/archive/malia-zimmerman)
<time itemprop="datePublished" pubdate="" datetime="2015-08-24T09:45-04:00" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 3px; padding: 0px; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(153, 153, 153); line-height: 1.5; display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; background: 0px 0px;">Published August 24, 2015




</time>
The State Department does not appear to have submitted legally required information regarding Hillary Clinton's secret computer server to the Department of Homeland Security during her term as secretary, FoxNews.com has learned.


All federal government agencies are mandated to submit a list of systems, vulnerabilities and configuration issues to DHS every 30 days. The department then performs a "cyberscope audit" to ensure security (http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/177895), a responsibility the agency has had since 2010.


FoxNews.com learned of the lapse as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request submitted June 11. It is not clear if State Department officials in charge of compliance with the DHS audits knew of their boss's server, which has been shown to have included "top secret" information in emails.

...

[CSM]

and now the IRS admits Ms. Lerner used a private email account to conduct business.... ya just caint make this stuff up!

[Kathianne]

and now the IRS admits Ms. Lerner used a private email account to conduct business.... ya just caint make this stuff up!


Indeed. Related: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?48794-Learner-Emails-Now-Part-of-Criminal-Probe&p=759081#post759081

[Kathianne]

It took a pardon by Guess Who...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-ominous-precedent-for-hillary-clinton/2015/08/24/f0bbe762-4a5a-11e5-846d-02792f854297_story.html


An ominous precedent for Hillary Clinton By Marc A. Thiessen (http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/marc-a-thiessen) August 24


Hillary Clinton likes to point out that she is not the first senior national security official to conduct official business on a home computer system. She’s right about that, but the precedent should not give the Democratic presidential front-runner much comfort.


Former CIA director John Deutch was also found to have stored classified documents — including top-secret intelligence — on computers in his homes in Bethesda and Belmont, Mass., leading to an investigation by the CIA inspector general and a criminal investigation by the Justice Department. Deutch was stripped of his security clearance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/2000-02/23/018r-022300-idx.html) and ended up reaching a plea agreement admitting to his crimes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20010124/aponline163741_000.htm) — but was saved by a last-minute pardon from none other than . . . President Bill Clinton.

...

[NightTrain]

It took a pardon by Guess Who...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-ominous-precedent-for-hillary-clinton/2015/08/24/f0bbe762-4a5a-11e5-846d-02792f854297_story.html

[/FONT][/COLOR][/h]


lol, yep! Bill probably knew how this was all going to shake out months ago.

Kind of a sticky situation. Pardoning Hillary will scuttle her campaign and give Biden a shot, but will also tarnish Biden in the process.

Or, if he throws her to the wolves, then Biden can proceed without the pardon scandal attached.

Either way, she's finished IMO.

Biden / Warren ticket inbound.

[Perianne]

Way back before Obama became president, big Democrat donor David Geffen said this about the Clintons.


Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it’s troubling.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/opinion/21dowd.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/opinion/21dowd.html?_r=0)

[Kathianne]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/26/exclusive-state-dept-released-clinton-email-had-classified-intel-from-3/?intcmp=hpbt1


Exclusive: State Dept.-released Clinton email had classified intel from 3 agencies, in possible violation By Catherine Herridge (http://www.foxnews.com/archive/catherine-herridge)
<time itemprop="datePublished" pubdate="" datetime="2015-08-26T03:15-04:00" style="font-weight: normal; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 3px; padding: 0px; font-size: 14px; color: rgb(153, 153, 153); line-height: 1.5; display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: initial;">Published August 26, 2015
</time>

One of the emails that triggered the FBI probe into Hillary Clinton’s server contained classified intelligence from three different agencies, Fox News has learned – which could mean the State Department violated a President Obama-signed executive order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information) by authorizing its release.


That 2009 order, EO 13526, lays out the rules for "classifying, safeguarding and declassifying national security information." It states that the authority to declassify rests with the intelligence agency that originated the information.


"Information shall be declassified or downgraded by … the official who authorized the original classification ... [or] the originator's current successor," the order says.


One of the two emails that sparked the FBI probe was an April 2011 email from Clinton confidant Huma Abedin that, Fox News has learned, contained intelligence from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Security Agency (NSA), and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), which oversees aerial imagery, including satellites.


Despite this fact and despite the executive order, the State Department publicly released the email and its intelligence -- which was not theirs to declassify -- onto its website in May as part of the initial release of documents on the 2012 Benghazi attack.


Fox News is told that in late spring, all three agencies confirmed to the intelligence community inspector general that the intelligence was classified when it was sent four years ago by Abedin to Clinton's private account, and remains classified to this day.

...

[Kathianne]

It took a pardon by Guess Who...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-ominous-precedent-for-hillary-clinton/2015/08/24/f0bbe762-4a5a-11e5-846d-02792f854297_story.html

[/FONT][/COLOR][/h]


and another:

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-schindler-emailgate-20150825-story.html

[Russ]

Here's another conversation I could see taking place in Hillary's campaign headquarters...

Hillary: "Huma, the campaign is tanking! We need to print up a whitewash of my time as Secretary of State that glosses over all my sketchy email schemes while at the same time portraying me as some kind of leader. And we need to pretend it's factual!"
Huma: "You want to publish another one of your psuedo-biography books'? Can we afford that? We had to buy most of the copies of 'Hard Choices' ourselves through hidden shell companies."
Hillary: "Ha, ha, Huma, always the kidder. What should we call this book? How about 'Hard Choices 2'?"
Huma: "Not very compelling."
Hillary: "No? What about the truthful approach, such as 'My Plan to Tax Conservatives Back to the Stone Age while Giving Free Stuff to Dem Voters'?"
Huma: "No, a book with that title could have been written by any Democrat. You need something that's you."
Hillary: "'Mein Kampf'?"
Huma: "I think that title's already been used."
Hillary: "Dam! All the good titles are taken. How about 'Illegal Crap I Did for Barack Obama'? I could make more money just by not publishing that one."
Huma; "Hmmm...."

[Kathianne]

Very interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/staffer-who-worked-on-clintons-private-e-mail-server-faces-subpoena/2015/09/02/8b1e6438-51c2-11e5-8c19-0b6825aa4a3a_story.html?postshare=9271441241742808


Staffer who worked on Clinton’s private e-mail server faces subpoena By Carol D. Leonnig (http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/carol-d-leonnig) and Tom Hamburger (http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/tom-hamburger) September 2 at 8:49 PM



A former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private e-mail server tried this week to fend off a subpoena to testify before Congress, saying he would assert his constitutional right not to answer questions to avoid incriminating himself.


The move by Bryan Pagliano, who had worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009, came in a Monday letter from his lawyer to the House panel investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.


The letter cited the ongoing FBI inquiry into the security of Clinton’s e-mail system, and it quoted a Supreme Court ruling in which justices described the Fifth Amendment as protecting “innocent men . . . ‘who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances.’ ”


The FBI is investigating whether Clinton’s system — in which she exclusively used private e-mail for her work as secretary of state — may have jeopardized sensitive national security information.

...

[Gunny]

server.

Maybe she will be indicted?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/11/fbi-has-hillary-clinton-emails-from-home-server-official-says/



The campaign is trying to say it's voluntary, it's not. This was uncovered with the investigation.

Y'think maybe just a little?

There are people in prison for less.

[Rat]

I think only reason Clinton no indicted yet is because Democrat in White House. I suspect Obama telling FBI and DoJ to slow walk this and take time. Obama would improve image if he let these agencies do job without them in fear of retribution. When I was in Army I often exposed to classified intel. If I did fraction what Hillary did I be in Fort Leavenworth now. Should no be two standards. You do the crime you do the time. No free passes.

[Kathianne]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/02/will-hillary-clinton-s-emails-burn-the-white-house.html


09.02.157:15 PM ET
Will Hillary Clinton’s Emails Burn the White House?
Counterintelligence specialists suspect that the former secretary of state wasn’t the only member of the Obama administration emailing secrets around.


<section class="content-body article-body-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Georgia, Times, serif;">Hillary Clinton’s email problems (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/09/01/hillary-wrote-and-sent-classified-emails.html) are already causing headaches for her presidential campaign. But within American counterintelligence circles, there’s a mounting sense that the former secretary of state may not be the only Obama administration official in trouble. This is a scandal that has the potential to spread to the White House, as well.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation can be expected to be tight-lipped, especially because this highly sensitive case is being handled by counterintelligence experts from Bureau headquarters a few blocks down Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House, not by the FBI’s Washington Field Office. That will ensure this investigation gets the needed “big picture” view, since even senior FBI agents at any given field office may only have a partial look at complex counterintelligence cases.

And this most certainly is a counterintelligence matter. There’s a widely held belief among American counterspies that foreign intelligence agencies had to be reading the emails on Hillary’s private server (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/03/how-safe-were-hillary-clinton-s-secrets.html), particularly since it was wholly unencrypted for months (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/07/hillary-s-secret-email-was-a-cyberspy-s-dream-weapon.html). “I’d fire my staff if they weren’t getting all this,” explained one veteran Department of Defense counterintelligence official, adding: “I’d hate to be the guy in Moscow or Beijing right now who had to explain why they didn’t have all of Hillary’s email.” Given the widespread hacking that has plagued the State Department, the Pentagon, and even the White House during Obama’s presidency, senior counterintelligence officials are assuming the worst about what the Russians and Chinese know.
</section>
EmailGate has barely touched the White House directly, although it’s clear that some senior administration officials beyond the State Department were aware of Hillary’s unorthodox email and server habits, given how widely some of the emails from Clinton and her staff were forwarded around the Beltway. Obama’s inner circle may not be off-limits to the FBI for long, however, particularly since the slipshod security practices of certain senior White House officials have been a topic of discussion in the Intelligence Community for years.

...

[Kathianne]

Very interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/staffer-who-worked-on-clintons-private-e-mail-server-faces-subpoena/2015/09/02/8b1e6438-51c2-11e5-8c19-0b6825aa4a3a_story.html?postshare=9271441241742808

[/FONT][/COLOR][/h]

Well now, http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/04/cnn-aides-fifth-amendment-declaration-sure-makes-the-hillary-server-fiasco-look-criminal-huh/


CNN: Aide’s Fifth Amendment declaration sure makes the Hillary server fiasco look criminal, huh?

POSTED AT 12:41 PM ON SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 BY ED MORRISSEY

You think? CNN’s Elise Labott noted yesterday that Bryan Pagliano’s decision to plead the Fifth rather than testify before Congress — and even, as it turns out, cooperating with the FBI — makes it appear that the 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign aide that set up her secret server is afraid of criminal charges in the scandal. Team Hillary says it urged everyone to cooperate with investigators and profess to be mystified as to why anyone would worry about an indictment, but that spin isn’t selling:

Michael Isikoff first reported (https://www.yahoo.com/politics/clinton-aide-has-rebuffed-fbi-and-state-department-128271848515.html?Source=GovD&nf=1) on Pagliano’s refusal to cooperate with any part of the probe. It also sets up a potential indicator of just how serious this investigation will get. The one way around a Fifth Amendment claim is immunity, which would mean that “extremely serious” FBI investigators will have convinced Department of Justice prosecutors to get “extremely serious,” too:

The former aide to Hillary Clinton who helped set up and maintain her private email server has declined to talk to the FBI and the State Department inspector general’s office, as well as a congressional committee, invoking his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, sources familiar with the investigation confirmed to Yahoo News.


The move by Bryan Pagliano, who served on Clinton’s 2008 campaign and later as a technology officer in the State Department, to decline to cooperate in two federal probes considerably raises the stakes in the Clinton email investigation, the sources said. It confronts the Justice Department with a decision about whether to grant him immunity in exchange for his testimony — a move that could be taken only were the department to escalate the probe into a full-scale criminal investigation, the sources said.




Former federal prosecutor Joseph DiGenova tells McClatchy (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article33827619.html) that this may force the DoJ into empaneling a grand jury, a move with dire political and legal consequences for Hillary Clinton and her aides:

One former Republican U.S. attorney predicted Thursday that the development will compel the Justice Department to set aside the FBI’s limited inquiry into whether Clinton’s emails breached national security, empanel a federal grand jury and conduct a criminal investigation.

“Obviously, if he’s not going to cooperate, all of these people who were on her email are all going to get subpoenas now,” Joseph diGenova said. “It is fairly abundant that the setting up of the server – unencrypted, without State Department input – was done partially surreptitiously. And this gentleman who was part of that process could be criminally exposed for violating the espionage statutes, especially for the grossly negligent handling of classified information, which is a 10-year felony.” …

As U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia from 1983 to 1987, diGenova prosecuted Israeli spy [Jonathan] Pollard. He said he still has a security clearance above top secret because he represents clients in national security cases.

“When people like this little guy start taking the fifth,” diGenova said, “it means that a lot of other people along the way are going to do the same thing. This happened because she wanted to have an unencrypted server to protect her privacy, and in the course of doing that, she compromised national security information for four years, whether she wants to admit it or not.”


If Pagliano refused to cooperate after a grant of immunity, he would go to jail for contempt — perhaps as long as the investigation lasts, or in some cases as long as the presiding judge remains on the bench. Will Pagliano want to fall on that sword under these circumstances? Perhaps, but the desire to do so may indicate just how much Pagliano might have to say if he felt like talking. In the meantime, Pagliano can kiss any career in classified areas goodbye, at least for now. A failure to cooperate in a probe of potential nat-sec breaches should end any hope he’d have of getting a clearance in the foreseeable future, if for no other reason than being a bad risk.

...

[Rat]

I can no see her campaign lasting much longer with this scandal. It already looks bad but now her staff is taking fifth. Not good

[Kathianne]

They are so 'free' with their money:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-personally-paid-state-department-staffer-to-maintain-server/2015/09/04/b13ab23e-530c-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html?postshare=3851441420685618


Clintons personally paid State Department staffer to maintain server By Rosalind S. Helderman (http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/rosalind-s-helderman) and Carol D. Leonnig (http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/carol-d-leonnig)September 5 at 12:07 AM



Hillary Rodham Clinton and her family personally paid a State Department staffer to maintain the private e-mail server she used while heading the agency, according to an official from Clinton’s presidential campaign.


The unusual arrangement helped Clinton retain personal control over the system that she used for her public and private duties and that has emerged as an issue for her campaign. But, according to the campaign official, it also ensured that taxpayer dollars were not spent on a private server that was shared by Clinton, her husband and their daughter as well as aides to the former president.


That State Department staffer, Bryan Pagliano, told a congressional committee this week that he would invoke his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination instead of testifying about the setup.


The private employment of Pagliano provides a new example of the ways that Clinton — who occupied a unique role as a Cabinet secretary who was also a former and potentially future presidential candidate — hired staff to work simultaneously for her in public and private capacities.

...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

They are so 'free' with their money:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-personally-paid-state-department-staffer-to-maintain-server/2015/09/04/b13ab23e-530c-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html?postshare=3851441420685618

It was hiring a fall guy and a shield in case of a worse case scenario.
Also, this guy could come up dead and much of it would be blamed on him..
We should watch for that since so many people involved with the Clintons were murdered.
I just bet he was paid very, very handsomely .. -Tyr

[Kathianne]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/us/politics/second-review-says-classified-information-was-in-hillary-clintons-email.html?src=twr


Second Review Says Classified Information Was in Hillary Clinton’s Email

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/michael_s_schmidt/index.html)<time class="dateline" datetime="2015-09-07" style="font-size: 0.6875rem; line-height: 0.75rem; font-family: nyt-cheltenham-sh, georgia, 'times new roman', times, serif; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); margin-left: 12px;">SEPT. 7, 2015

WASHINGTON — A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/04/13/us/elections/hillary-clinton.html?inline=nyt-per) received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/atomic_weapons/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

On Monday, the Clinton campaign disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence review and noted that agencies within the government often have different views of what should be considered classified.

Mrs. Clinton’s work-related emails from when she was secretary of state are slowly being released by the State Department.

</time>“Our hope remains that these releases continue without being hampered by bureaucratic infighting among the intelligence community, and that the releases continue to be as inclusive and transparent as possible,” said Nick Merrill, a campaign spokesman.

...

[Perianne]

THE HACKERS BEHIND the Ashley Madison breach have been contracted by the FBI to retrieve Madam Hillary's 35,000 yoga emails that were scrubbed from her personal server.

On the heels of being stonewalled and lied to by the former Sec. of State, the bureau has determined that a bigger batch of deletions were unretrievable unless true experts, such as the Ashley Madison hackers, were contracted to retrieve the wiped correspondences.


fbi-hires-ashley-madison-hackers-to-retrive-clinton-emails-t16869.html (http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/fbi-hires-ashley-madison-hackers-to-retrive-clinton-emails-t16869.html)