Softpanorama
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)

Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Shadow IT

News Danger of overcentralization Recommended Links Hillary Clinton email scandal Bureaucratic avoidance of responsibility  Bureaucracy as a Political Coalition
Bureaucracies Bureaucratic ritualism Bureaucratic Inertia   Bureaucratic Collectivism Number of Servers per Sysadmin
Parkinson Law The Peter Principle The Power Elite   Corporate bullshit as a communication method Unix flavors
Admin Horror Stories Tips History   Humor Etc

Contents


Introduction

Shadow IT can be defined as software and hardware solutions as well as associated manpower used in organization that are neither approved not supported by the formal IT organization. Typically this is a reaction on excessive centralization and bureaucratization of IT, endemic for large corporations.  It is also can be used for "double books" kind os schemen like for example in case of Hillary Clinton email scandal. In the latter case the key goal was to avoid accountability and disclosure of her emisl while in the position of the Secterary of State of Obama administration:

 

In the past few years, it's gone from being considered a problem to being consider something more or less tolerated because over-centralized  (and/or outsourced ) IT organizations is essentially unable to solve user problems. Helpdesk tickets are travelling two or more days in a bureaucratic maze before assigning to a specialist who can resolve them, laptops are unable to install patches and take 10 minutes to boot; Bluetooth stop working two years ago and nobody care why. Servers can be down for a week.  Sounds familiar. It is ;-)

At the same time IT management is unwilling to acknowledge that the strategy to save cost via over-centralization is dead-ended and quickly reaches the stage of unintended consequences or as they are often called "centralization blowback". So, as we mentioned above, shadow IT naturally develops and mature as a reaction to excessive bureaucratization of central IT typical for large corporations. As well as loss of flexibility of IT (fossilization) resulting in the inability of IT to serve user needs. When a simple helpdesk ticket travels to central helpdesk and then is lingering somewhere for two days and then is assigned to clueless outsourcer, the user community quickly adapt, creates its own experts (out of the most knowledgeable users who run complex home networks, are involved with home automation or robotics) and knowledge centers and start ignoring official IT functions and services.

The term "blowback" is richer then the term of "unintended consequences" and includes the elements of hidden revolt or at least active counteraction to the policies of central IT. (The Full Wiki) :

Blowback is the espionage term for the violent, unintended consequences of a covert operation that are suffered by the civil population of the aggressor government. To the civilians suffering it, the blowback typically manifests itself as “random” acts of political violence without a discernible, direct cause; because the public—in whose name the intelligence agency acted—are ignorant of the effected secret attacks that provoked revenge (counter-attack) against them. Specifically, blowback denotes the resultant, violent consequences — reported as news fact, by domestic and international mass communications media, when the actor intelligence agency hides its responsibility via media manipulation. Generally, blowback loosely denotes every consequence of every aspect of a secret attack operation, thus, it is synonymous with consequence—the attacked victims’ revenge against the civil populace of the aggressor country, because the responsible politico-military leaders are invulnerable.

Originally, blowback was CIA internal coinage denoting the unintended, harmful consequences—to friendly populations and military forces—when a given weapon is carelessly used. Examples include anti-Western religious fanatics who, in due course, attack foe and sponsor; right-wing counter-revolutionaries who sell drugs to their sponsor’s civil populace; and banana republic juntas who kill American reporters.

This is the situation when, unfortunately,  implicitly sending central IT to hell became politically correct in regional offices. But as everything it is important to remember Talleyrand advice to young diplomats "first and foremost, not too much zeal" ;-). 

Forms of Shadow IT

Shadow IT has several forms:

All-in-all rise of "Shadow IT" signify both loss of control and loss of influence that IT organizations experienced during the last decade. It is the most pronounced when due to over-centralization the quality of service became unacceptably low (despite Potemkin villages of official reporting with their excellent and completely fake "incident resolution time" metrics)

Major symptoms of the loss of flexibility and alienation of users

There are several major symptom of this loss of flexibility and alienation from user needs:

Like with any counterculture there are risks in using shadow IT. It you overstep your boundaries you can lose your job. But if everybody is suffering from the same problem attempt to find a solution outside normal IT channel usually is not punished severely. Typically such cases are just swiped under the rag. Often solution initiated as part of "shadow IT' later find its way into mainstream. In this sense it serves as internal innovation incubator.

Countermeasures to the removal of administrative privileges on laptops

Reagan citing old Russian proverb "Trust but verify" was right not only about international relations, but also about best policy for the user laptops. "Trust but verify" compliance is a better approach then "scan and block".

Removal of administrative privileges is essentially declaration from the central IT that the user lost the trust. And it rises the classic question "Who are the judges ?" Why often incompetent (in comparison with staff of engineering and research departments often having Ph.Ds among members) and detached from reality central IT staff should impose without consultation and consent from business departments measures that undermines productivity in those departments? After all central IT is a parasitic organization that spends money earned by business units. Why business units can't be consulted what that need and want and treated like children, who are just told what to do and what don't?

That's why users without administrator privileges on his/her laptops often rebel. Sometimes there is no direct removal, but severe restrictions are imposed via Active Directory (AD fascism). Restrictions that make doing useful work for certain tasks within the framework imposed by organization next to impossible. Again, this typically is not a problem in accounting department (which actually can squeeze overzealous IT jerks pretty easily ;-) but in research units and labs who have creative people able to smash those restrictions, and who understand some part of IT much better then central IT (especially people involved with such things like genome sequencing, molecular modeling, etc where community is generally extremely computer literate.)

At this point it is the central IT which is a loser as people are much more creative and often invent elegant tricks to bypass restrictions imposed by IT infrastructure and create more usable alternative. In other words shadow IT exists because the business unit(s) perceive that IT is not meeting their needs and using official tools is either unsuitably cumbersome and slow or is detrimental to the success of business.

The key performance indicator for IT is availability. But users satisfaction is equally important and disgruntled users represent much bigger danger to IT infrastructure. The danger that stupid and/or overzealous members of security group that invert those measure fail to understand... In other words instead of improving security such measures are undermining it.

Countermeasures by "deprived" members

Let's discuss countermeasures that "deprived" members of corporate units (and that typically includes some It members, for example Unix administrators) can use to restore status quo. There are several avenue for undermining this decision.

  1. Pressure on "power hungry". Typically such measures are introduced during new hardware deployment. As environment is not perfect especially during new laptop deployment period you can always claim that existing arrangement does not allow you to performs some important part of your job. Logging a couple of tickets and putting a negative evaluation for unresolved ticket can help to speed the sobering of "drunk with power" members of IT team, but this is a razor sharp weapon and should be used with extreme caution and only as a reaction to a real screw-ups. You just no longer need to swipe them under the floor. And you need to find and cultivate allies. There is strength in numbers.
  2. Switch to alternative hardware.
    1. Private tablets, Ultrabooks or Macbooks. They are not the expensive and can be used in additional to company granted laptop or in tandem with company granted laptop. Typically company policy is fuzzy about ultrabooks and, especially, tablets that user owns. Here Microsoft Surface Pro can be very handy in bypassing the "IT standards". You probably need to buy your own 4G internet access card and that can eliminate restrictions imposed by company proxy. Freedom has its price :-).
    2. Using some old laptop or desktop connected along with "standard" laptop via Linksys or similar internet gateway with the address translation and ability to emulate Mac address of your standard laptop. For this solution you should be somewhat knowledge in networking or have a friend who does. Of course nmap and similar tools will discover this substitution but usually this is pretty safe method that gives you both the possibility of using standard laptop and "alternative" laptop. You probably need to use additional non-routable address space for those two connections. For example if organization is using 10 network you can use 192.168 network on the segment that Linksys provides. Used Linksys gateway is approximately $10 on eBay so this is not a big expense.
    3. Some unused server can be used as you "surrogate desktop". If old, decommissioned hardware often is not discarded immediately and you are either in It of have a good contacts that can help you in this area this is a good avoidance maneuver. Windows server is not and as an alternative desktop. Linux is mainly suitable for those who have previous Unix experience. If you in IT but not very close to emperor (for example is in Unix group) and as such was selected for repressions, you have multiple opportunities in this area.
  3. Switch to alternative OSes. Current laptops are so over specified that they can curry multiple OSes.
    1. Dual boot. This is the simplest possibility, if you can do without company specific services (for example use you Blackberry for email). Both Linux and some older version of Windows can be installed. Using virtual machine is another. Guerilla installation of Windows 2003 server are also pretty nice countermeasure. Often you can create some fancy justification for such a "private" server and by definition is not controlled by the same group as desktop. So you get more degrees of freedom.
    2. Use a virtual machine. If company allow using VM players you externally are given a free pass for this solution. Microsoft also provides the ability to install VM with Windows 7. You just need to justify this which is not that difficult as many applications after transition has difficulties.
  4. Using "in the cloud" servers or services. Using alternative email is very common among company employees as using official email for private messages is one of the stupidest thing that you can do in the corporate environment.

Those points are of course raw and incomplete. But stupidity of official policy is the gasoline that fuels "shadow IT renaissance" and inventions of those who are affected. Creatively bypassing of those restrictions is a banner of real IT professional. Pleas note that this often puts company data on far less protected then a regular corporate PC environment. Excessive zeal in security often backfire in a very interesting ways.

In many instances, corporate IT policies and standardization efforts are simply stupid in the very exact meaning of this word. They are often created by a clueless bureaucrat that does not understand (and don't want to) understand the situation "in the trenches". That means that even parts of official IT staff can be engaged in "shadow IT" activities.

Creating shadow Web services

The existence of Shadow IT implies a failure on the part of IT to provide the services to meet the users need. As such this problem is a typical sign of the rotting of IT organizations ("fish rots from the head") -- a widespread phenomenon due to promotion of incompetent manages, outsourcing and other related phenomenon. IT is no longer young and losing IQ this is just one of the ailment of the old age.

Deployment of unreliable, slow, resource hungry systems like Lotus Notes, Lotus Sametime, Documentum and to a certain extent SAP/R3 (which often has very slow response that defeats the purpose and benefits of the centralization) also stimulate search for alternatives.

Like any counterculture creating your own Web services entails certain risks including security risks but it would be simplistic just to condemn it like many writers do. For example

The existence of Shadow IT within an organization is symptomatic of a lack of alignment between business units and IT and, possibly, even senior management and IT. Shadow IT is, at best, a shortsighted strategy that may work well for a given business unit, but be detrimental for the organization overall.

(see The Dangers that Lurk Behind Shadow IT — Datamation.com).  One precondition for creation of shadow Web services is the ability to run virtual mashine on you laptop desktop. Or on remote sites, availability of some local Linux expertise

Often Shadow IT is associated with Unix culture and open source software. Linux essentially started as countercultural phenomenon and only recently got corporate respectability. Firewall on Linux box can easily configured to exclude any outsiders. In with special non-routable network used  the service is not visible outside the particular site and it represents much lesser security risks.

Any modern desktop is extremely capable and powerful server in disguise, often superior to the "real" server from HP or Dell that is five years old.  If ti allow "dual boot" configuration you already has all the necessary infrastructure.

Also on remote sites there is always possibility to get "departmental" desktop and use it as departmental server. In case central IT goes nuts this is one path that might be considered. Using Internet ISPs and places like Amazon cloud is another possibility, but here the problem is that your data migrates outside of It infrastructure. This is a definite security risk and this way you might violate some corporate policy.  

Creation of shadow IT file servers

If using corporate file servers is too painful or the became too slow one extra laptop of desktop in the group can fill the void. A simple linux box with Samba is a decent and quick solution.

Creating of alternative email infrastructure

To a certain extent alternative email infrastructure existed as long as Web connectivity exist. Hotmail, Gmail and other Web-based mail applications automatically mean alternative email infrastructure. That only question if how widely it is used (it definitely should be used for all private emails). The fact that it is impossible to synchronize with corporate Blackberry or other smart phone works against shadow email infrastructure but many people have their own smart phones those days in additional to a corporate one.

Conclusions

Shadow IT is a reaction of users to the problem of fossilization and loss of efficiently and competence of over centralized IT organizations. As such it is just a symptom of the disease. In perverted world of corporate IT it is often serves to increase productivity and as such has the right for existence.

It is naive to think that an official edict can stop shadow IT from emerging in a typical large, bureaucratized IT organization with its multiple sites, multiple datacenters and multiple jerks, authoritarians ("kiss up, kick down" type), and psychopaths (especially dangerous are female psychopaths) at the top and middle levels of IT management.

Budgets cuts also stimulate looking for alternatives for officially supported IT products but not to the extent that bureaucratization and stagnation of "official" IT organizations.


Top updates

Softpanorama Switchboard
Softpanorama Search


NEWS CONTENTS

Old News

[Sep 26, 2016] Clinton Campaign Manager Unable to Answer Questions on Hillary Coverup Operation

It was a cover up operation. No questions about that. Such instruction by a person under any investigation clearly mean tha attempt of cover up...
Notable quotes:
"... There was a document dump on Friday, that we learned from the FBI that an IT contractor managing Hillary Clinton's private email server made reference to the "Hillary coverup operation" in a work ticket. He used those words after a senior Clinton aide asked him to automatically delete emails after 60 days. This IT worker certainly sounded like he was covering something up, no? ..."
"... The FBI dumped another 189 pages of documents pertaining to Clinton's use of an unsecured private server during her time as Secretary of State online Friday, with one note about a "coverup" raising eyebrows: ..."
"... After reviewing an email dated December 11, 2014 with the subject line 'RE: 2 items for IT support,' and a December 12, 2014 work ticket referencing email retention changes and archive/email cleanup, [redacted] stated his reference in the email to '…the Hilary [sic] coverup [sic] operation…' was probably due to the requested change to a 60 day email retention policy and the comment was a joke. ..."
"... "The fact an IT staffer maintaining Clinton's secret server called a new retention policy designed to delete emails after 60 days a 'Hillary coverup operation' suggests there was a concerted effort to systematically destroy potentially incriminating information. It's no wonder that at least five individuals tied to the email scandal, including Clinton's top State Department aide and attorney Cheryl Mills, secured immunity deals from the Obama Justice Department to avoid prosecution," said Trump spokesman Jason Miller in a statement on Friday. ..."
"... Comey told the House Oversight Committee on July 7 that the FBI "did not find evidence sufficient to establish that she knew she was sending classified information beyond a reasonable doubt to meet that - the intent standard" while claiming that prosecuting Clinton for gross negligence would perpetuate a "double standard." ..."
Sep 26, 2016 | Breitbart
CNN anchor Jake Tapper confronted Hillary Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook Sunday over an IT worker handling her private email server joking in a 2014 email about a "Hillary coverup operation," with Mook dodging the question and blaming Republicans for "selectively leaking documents."

TAPPER: There was a document dump on Friday, that we learned from the FBI that an IT contractor managing Hillary Clinton's private email server made reference to the "Hillary coverup operation" in a work ticket. He used those words after a senior Clinton aide asked him to automatically delete emails after 60 days. This IT worker certainly sounded like he was covering something up, no?

MOOK: Look, Jake, I'm - first of all I'm glad you asked that question. A lot of this stuff is swirling around in the ether. It's important to pull back and look at the facts here. The FBI did a comprehensive and deep investigation into this. And at the conclusion of that, FBI Director Comey came out and said to the world that there was no case here, that they have no evidence of wrongdoing on Hillary's part.

TAPPER: So what's the "Hillary coverup operation" that the IT worker was referring to?

MOOK: Well, well, but this is - but this is - this is the perfect example of what's going on here. Republicans on the House side are selectively leaking documents for the purpose of making Hillary look bad. We've asked the FBI to release all information that they've shared with Republicans so they can get the full picture. But again, I would trust the career professionals at the FBI and the Justice Department who looked into this matter, concluded that was no case, than I would Republicans who are selectively leaking information.

The FBI dumped another 189 pages of documents pertaining to Clinton's use of an unsecured private server during her time as Secretary of State online Friday, with one note about a "coverup" raising eyebrows:

After reviewing an email dated December 11, 2014 with the subject line 'RE: 2 items for IT support,' and a December 12, 2014 work ticket referencing email retention changes and archive/email cleanup, [redacted] stated his reference in the email to '…the Hilary [sic] coverup [sic] operation…' was probably due to the requested change to a 60 day email retention policy and the comment was a joke.

The Trump campaign quickly leapt on the FBI's findings.

"The fact an IT staffer maintaining Clinton's secret server called a new retention policy designed to delete emails after 60 days a 'Hillary coverup operation' suggests there was a concerted effort to systematically destroy potentially incriminating information. It's no wonder that at least five individuals tied to the email scandal, including Clinton's top State Department aide and attorney Cheryl Mills, secured immunity deals from the Obama Justice Department to avoid prosecution," said Trump spokesman Jason Miller in a statement on Friday.

Comey told the House Oversight Committee on July 7 that the FBI "did not find evidence sufficient to establish that she knew she was sending classified information beyond a reasonable doubt to meet that - the intent standard" while claiming that prosecuting Clinton for gross negligence would perpetuate a "double standard."

[Sep 24, 2016] Hillary Emailgate How One Twitter User Proved The Intent That The FBI Missed After Months Investigating

Sep 24, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

Zero Hedge

Earlier this week, a twitter user named " Katica " seemingly proved the "intent" of the Hillary campaign to destroy and/or tamper with federal records by revealing the Reddit thread of Paul Combetta (aka the "Oh Shit" guy; aka "stonetear"). But what's most crazy about this story is that "Katica" was able to discover the greatest "bombshell" of the entire Hillary email scandal with just a couple of internet searches while the FBI, with unlimited access to government records, spent months "investigating" this case and missed it all . The only question now is whether the FBI "missed" this evidence because of gross incompetence or because of other motivating factors ?

Now, courtesy of an opinion piece posted on The Daily Caller , we know exactly how "Katica" pieced her "bombshell" discovery together... the folks at the FBI may want to take some notes.

Per the twitter discussion below with @RepStevenSmith , "Katica" discovered Combetta's Reddit thread on September 16th. But while she suspected that Paul Combetta and the Reddit user known as "stonetear" were, in fact, the same person, she had to prove it...

[Sep 24, 2016] The Hillary Coverup Operation - How PRN Described Clinton's 60-Day Email Retention Policy Zero Hedge

Sep 24, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

last night the Federal Bureau of Immunity did it again dropping nearly 200 pages of new, redacted interview notes.

Perhaps one of the most interesting discoveries in the new notes comes from yet another "Undisclosed PRN Staff Member." Apparently, after receiving a request from Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson (both of whom we no know were granted immunity deals by the DOJ) back in December 2014 to change Hillary's email retention policy to 60 days, this "Undisclosed PRN Staff Member" wrote a work ticket that referred to the request as " the Hillary coverup operation ." Per the FBI notes:

But don't worry folks, according to the FBI's notes on the interview conducted on February 18, 2016, this "Undisclosed PRN Staff Member" assured the FBI that the comment was just "a joke." Apparently that explanation was good enough for the FBI so we should probably just take it at face value as well.

Though the Trump campaign doesn't seem to be buying the "it was just a joke" defense as Senior Communications Advisor, Jason Miller, released the following statement last night on the situation:

"The fact an IT staffer maintaining Clinton's secret server called a new retention policy designed to delete emails after 60 days a "Hillary coverup operation" suggests there was a concerted effort to systematically destroy potentially incriminating information. It's no wonder that at least five individuals tied to the email scandal, including Clinton's top State Department aide and attorney Cheryl Mills, secured immunity deals from the Obama Justice Department to avoid prosecution."

Recall that we previously wrote in detail about the events leading up to the point that Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson requested the change to Hillary's "email retention policy."

Now this brings us all the way up to December 2014 when Clinton sent the 55,000 pages to the State Department. Recall, as Politico previously reported, Hillary brought in a former campaign staffer, Heather Samuelson (34 years old), to help determine which emails were "work related" and which "yoga related."

Shortly after providing that data dump to the State Department, in "December 2014 or January 2015," both Heather Samuelson and Cheryl Mills requested that all emails be removed from their computers using "a program called BleachBit to delete the e-mail-related files so they could not be recovered."

For her part, "Clinton stated she never deleted, nor did she instruct anyone to delete, her e-mails to avoid complying with FOIA, State or FBI requests for information."

Of course not. Hillary knew it would be a little too obvious to specifically instruct her staff to permanently delete the emails but she also knew it might be "inconvenient" to have them around. So, she simply "decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days."

See? She never specifically said to delete anything she just made a simple administrative decision on document retention policies.

doctor10 •Sep 24, 2016 3:31 PM

How TF is this NOT impeachable?!!!

This is very clearly a "shadow government" operating beyond legislative and judicial oversight

"The Law" is whatever the Clinton Foundation says it is this week

For anybody paying attention on July 5th, basically the 240th anniversary of the Republic, the Clinton Foundation administered the coup de grace to the American government.

The Clinton Foundation managed to nullify 6 federal laws on behalf of their candidate, and in so doing gut Congress and the FBI-in public.

The Clinton Foundation has totally pwned Fed.gov. In every sense of the meaning.

There's a reason 30,000 emails can never be read by anybody outside the Foundation. They detail the individuals and organizations making it all happen.

Mebbe Chaffetz name isn't part of the spiderweb...mebbe it is and we're being played once again

However, ladies and gentlemen, this is where the rubber meets the road. Either we ARE a nation of laws or not.

If this proves out that we are not, God help us all because Fed.gov bonds will definitely be worthless and whats happening in Charlotte this week will prove to be merely an audition.

knukles DontGive Sep 24, 2016 3:49 PM From the Americna Thinker; "Bardack's 2015 letter mentioned the Fresnel prism glasses Hillary wore to eliminate double vision. The 2016 letter makes no mention of the Zeiss Z1 blue lenses she was wearing on September 11 th . These are used to help prevent seizures, particularly in photosensitive epilepsy, and improve motor control. They are not normally prescribed for patients with pneumonia or seasonal allergies."
Uzda Farce doctor10 Sep 24, 2016 4:02 PM One branch of the "shadow government" is the Rockefeller/CFR. Members include Bill Clinton, Lloyd Blankfein, and George Soros. The banks that paid millions in "speaking fees" to the Clintons (Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, J.P.Morgan, BlackRock, etc) are CFR corporate sponsors. See member lists at cfr dot org.

"It's good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of 'advice' from the Council, so this will mean I won't have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future."

-- Hillary Clinton speech at CFR, 2009-07-15

chunga I M DeMan Sep 24, 2016 3:54 PM BREAKING: Former US Attorney Says FBI Director Comey Should Resign http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/23/breaking-former-us-attorney-says-fbi-d...

"Not only was she given immunity, but she attended Hillary Clinton's interview. It is the first time in history that an immunized witness has attended an interview of the ultimate target of an investigation. This is one of the single most embarrassing moments in the history of the FBI," DiGenova said.

Mena Arkansas Sep 24, 2016 3:39 PM You have to wonder what the Clintons - neither of which holds elected office - have on Comey, Lynch, DoJ or the FBI. What have they threatened to expose if they don't get their way - Sex tapes? 911? Waco? OKC?

What hold do the Clintons have on the DoJ and FBI? Mroex Mena Arkansas Sep 24, 2016 4:37 PM Probably everything you mentioned plus more

We Are The Priests Mena Arkansas Sep 24, 2016 4:30 PM The Clinton's, as do the Bush's, have intimate knowledge and involvement in the operations of the Cocaine Import Agency which is legislatively supported by 80%+ of Congressional office holders and financed by JPM and GS. Any need to wonder further?
chiswickcat Mena Arkansas Sep 24, 2016 4:36 PM The Clinton's defence strategy. "If I go down, you and a whole lot of other people will go down. These other people will not let this happen and will simply snuff you before they ever let you try take me down. Got it?!" BritBob Sep 24, 2016 3:48 PM In 2010, when she was Secretary of State and in Buenos Aires, Hillary Clinton made the mistake of calling for the UK and Argentina talk about the sovereignty of the Falklands.

If she'd been a bit more clued up she wouldn't have fallen for that mythical Malvinas' baloney and realized that Argentina has never legally owned the Falklands:

https://www.academia.edu/17799157/Falklands_-_Some_Relevant_International_Law

shovelhead BritBob Sep 24, 2016 4:33 PM https://i.ytimg.com/vi/hzAAz1YD3Ig/maxresdefault.jpg


Skiprrrdog Sep 24, 2016 4:08 PM secured immunity deals from the Obama Justice Department to avoid prosecution

They might avoid prosecution, but the rope is a whole other story, yet to be written, We Are The Priests Sep 24, 2016 4:16 PM The only reason you seek immunity from prosecution is because you know a crime has been committed--by you and others--and that prosecutions are forthcoming in response to those crimes. The only reason to grant immunity from prosecution is to obtain evidentiary testimony by guilty parties that will lead to the conviction of other, more culpable parties.

Since no prosecutions in this case are being pursued, then these writs of immunity are, in fact, grants of pardon. brada1013567 Sep 24, 2016 4:36 PM Clinton has a new email fraudmail.com Belrev Sep 24, 2016 4:45 PM Meanwhile Hillary Clinton released a new campaign ad " Stronger Together " - https://youtu.be/r4gyG9FALtU

VWAndy Sep 24, 2016 4:57 PM Just the msm making a special batch of koolaid for a special bunch of tools. Thats the scary part. There are some that will believe anything that supports thier pet dogma. They do love thier dogma so. koan Sep 24, 2016 5:26 PM Just to inject a little humor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqYJRc0TJkQ

[Sep 24, 2016] Hillary Clinton in painfully awkward 'Between Two Ferns' interview -- 'I really regret doing this' - Washington Times

www.washingtontimes.com

Mr. Galifianakis then briefly interrupted the interview to play a campaign commercial for Mr. Trump, claiming the billionaire businessman was the show's top sponsor. He then wrapped up the exchange by telling Mrs. Clinton the two should stay in touch.

"What's the best way to reach you? Email?" he said.

[Sep 24, 2016] State Department reveals FBI uncovered 2,800 emails Clinton never turned over - Washington Times

www.washingtontimes.com

The State Department said Friday it likely has more than 2,800 new emails former Secretary Hillary Clinton never turned over but were recovered by the FBI, and will begin releasing them in batches beginning next month.

But only a small percentage will be processed before the election, the department said in court, arguing its resources are stretched too thin to get them done.

All told, the FBI turned over 15,171 emails it recovered that involved Mrs. Clinton, and of those about 60 percent have been deemed purely personal. That leaves some 5,600 that are work-related, but based on a sample of data, nearly half of those are duplicates, leaving the 2,800 or so that are new.

[Sep 24, 2016] Obama used pseudonym in emails with Hillary Clinton FBI

Does that mean that he knewq that he is sending email to an unsecure private server?
Notable quotes:
"... The president's previously unreported use of a pen name is referenced in notes from federal investigators' April 5, 2016 interview with Huma Abedin ..."
www.washingtontimes.com

Washington Times

President Obama emailed Hillary Clinton using a pseudonym while she served as his secretary of state, according to FBI documents released Friday.

The president's previously unreported use of a pen name is referenced in notes from federal investigators' April 5, 2016 interview with Huma Abedin, one of Mrs. Clinton's closest aides, contained within 189 pages of records released late Friday afternoon by the FBI concerning its review of the Democratic presidential nominee's use of a private email server while in office.

During that interview, investigators showed the aide an email exchange dated June 28, 2012 with the subject "Re: Congratulations!"

"Abedin did not recognize the name of the sender. Once informed that the sender's name is believed to be a pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed 'How is this not classified?'" according to the FBI's summary of the interview.

"Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president's use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email."

The FBI's revelation quickly spurred questions about the president's past claims concerning his knowledge of Mrs. Clinton's private email server. Mrs. Clinton's non-governmental email address was first revealed in 2013 when a Romanian computer hacker breached the AOL account of Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton confidant, and subsequently leaked messages to the media that were sent to an account operated by Mrs. Clinton's outside of the .gov realm.

[Sep 22, 2016] The Hidden Smoking Gun the Combetta Cover-Up Clinton Email Investigation Timeline

This is a really outstanding article.
Notable quotes:
"... When Samuelson described the sorting process in her FBI interview , she said that her first step was to find all the emails to or from Clinton and the people she regularly worked with in the State Department, and put all of those emails in the "work-related" category. ..."
"... But from the Abedin emails released so far, about 200 are previously unreleased emails between her and Clinton . Anyone who looks at these can see that the vast majority, if not all, of them are work-related. ..."
"... The Abedin emails released so far are only a small percentage of all her emails that are going to be released on a monthly basis well into 2017 . It is likely that Clinton's supposed 31,000 "personal" emails contain thousands of work-related emails to and from Abedin alone. Consider that only about 15% of the 30,000 Clinton emails released so far were between her and Abedin. ..."
"... It is further worth noting that these emails were not handed over with the rest of Clinton's 30,000 work-related emails, despite clearly being work-related, but were somehow uncovered by the State Department inspector general 's office. Those very emails are good examples of the kind of material Clinton may have tried to keep secret by controlling the sorting process. ..."
"... How many more headlines like that would there be if all 31,000 deleted emails became public before the November 2016 presidential election? It's easy to imagine a political motive for Clinton wanting to keep some work-related emails secret. ..."
"... on or around December 2014 or January 2015 , Mills and Samuelson requested that [Platte River Networks (PRN) employee Paul Combetta] remove from their laptops all of the emails from the July and September 2014 exports. [Combetta] used a program called BleachBit to delete the email-related files so they could not be recovered." ..."
"... With the emails of Mills and Samuelson wiped clean, and the old version of the server wiped clean, that left just two known copies of the emails: one on the new server, and one on the back-up Datto SIRIS device connected to the new server. ..."
"... Mills was interviewed by the FBI in April 2016 . She claimed that in December 2014 , Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her emails older than 60 days . Note that this came not long after the State Department formally asked Clinton for all of her work-related emails, on October 28, 2014 . Mills told the FBI that she instructed Combetta to modify the email retention policy on Clinton's clintonemail.com email account to reflect this change. Emails older than 60 days would then be overwritten several times, wiping them just as effectively as BleachBit. ..."
"... So although the retention policy change sounds like a mere technicality, in fact, Clinton passed the message through Mills that she wanted all her emails from when she was secretary of state to be permanently wiped. ..."
"... Think about Clinton wanting to delete all her old "personal" emails. As a politician with a wide network of contributors and supporters, the information in them could be highly valuable for her. For instance, if a major donor contacted her, she probably would want to review their past correspondence before responding. She'd preserved these emails for nearly two years, but just when investigators started to demand to see them, she decided she didn't want ANY of them, and all traces of them should be permanently wiped. And yet we're supposed to believe the timing is just a coincidence? ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... According to what Combetta later told the FBI, at some point between these two calls, he had an "Oh shit!" moment and remembered that he'd forgotten to make the requested retention policy change back in December . So, even though he told the FBI that he was aware of the emails from Mills mentioning the Congressional request to preserve all of Clinton's emails, he took action. ..."
"... the Datto backups of the server were also manually deleted during this timeframe ." ..."
"... Already, Combetta's behavior is damning. He didn't just change the data retention policy, as Mills had asked him to do, causing them to be permanently deleted 60 days later. He immediately deleted all of Clinton's emails and then wiped them for good measure, and almost certainly deleted them from the Datto back-up device too. ..."
"... To make matters worse for Combetta, on March 20, 2015 , the House Benghazi Committee sent a letter to Clinton's lawyer Kendall , asking Clinton to turn her server over to a neutral third party so it could be examined to see if any work-related emails were still on it. This was reported in the New York Times ..."
"... However, despite all these clear signs that the emails should be preserved, not only did Combetta confess in an FBI interview that "at the time he made the deletions in March 2015 , he was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton's email data on the [server]," he said that " he did not receive guidance from other PRN personnel, PRN's legal counsel or others regarding the meaning of the preservation request." So he confessed to obstruction of justice and other possible crimes, all to the apparent benefit of Clinton instead of himself! ..."
"... The FBI interviewed PRN's staff in September 2015. This almost certainly included Combetta and Bill Thornton, because they were the only two PRN employees actively managing Clinton's server. ..."
"... The fact that the FBI falsely claimed Combetta was only interviewed twice grows in importance given a recent New York Times ..."
"... Then, in May 2016 , he completely changed his story. He said that in fact he did make the deletions in late March 2015 after all, plus he'd wiped her emails with BleachBit, as described earlier. He also confessed to being aware of the Mills email with the preservation request. ..."
"... New York Times ..."
"... For the FBI to give Combetta an immunity deal and then still not learn if he had been told to delete the emails by anyone working for Clinton due to a completely legally indefensible "attorney-client privilege" excuse is beyond belief. It would make sense, however, if the FBI was actually trying to protect Clinton from prosecution instead of trying to find evidence to prosecute her. ..."
"... In one Reddit post , he asked other server managers: "I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a .pst file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out. … Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?" ..."
"... Recall how Clinton allegedly claimed she didn't want to keep any of her deleted emails. It looks like that wasn't true after all. It sounds exactly as if Mills or someone else working for Clinton told him to make it look like all the "personal" emails were permanently deleted due to the 60 day policy change, while actually keeping copies of emails they still wanted. ..."
"... First off, it's interesting that he said he did "a bunch" of "email filters and cleanup," because what has been reported by the FBI is that he only made a copy of all of Clinton's email and sent them off to be sorted in late July 2014 . That fits with his July 2014 Reddit post where he was trying to modify somebody's email address. ..."
"... For now, let us turn back to events in the fall of 2015 . In mid-August 2015 , Senator Ron Johnson (R) asked for and got a staff-level briefing from PRN about the management of Clinton's server, as part of Republican Congressional oversight of the FBI's investigation. It seems very likely that Combetta was a part of that briefing, or at least his knowledge heavily informed the briefing, because again only two PRN employees actively managed her server, and he was one of them. ..."
"... The dishonesty or ignorance of PRN in this time period can be clearly seen due to a September 12, 2015 Washington Post ..."
"... Datto expressed a willingness to cooperate. But because Datto had been subcontracted by PRN to help manage Clinton's server, they needed PRN's permission to share any information relating to that account. When PRN was first asked in early October 2015 , they gave permission. But about a week later, they changed their mind , forcing Datto to stay quiet. ..."
"... But more importantly, consider what was mentioned in an NBC News ..."
"... In an August 18, 2015 email, Combetta expressed concern that CESC, the Clinton family company, had directed PRN to reduce the length of time backups, and PRN wanted proof of this so they wouldn't be blamed. But he said in the email, "this was all phone comms [communications]." ..."
"... On September 2, 2016 , the FBI's final report of their Clinton email investigation was released (along with a summary of Clinton's FBI interview). This report revealed the late March 2015 deletions for the first time. Combetta's name was redacted, but his role, as well as his immunity deal, was revealed in the New York Times ..."
"... Chaffetz also wants an explanation from PRN how Combetta could refuse to talk to the FBI about the conference calls if the only lawyers involved in the call were Clinton's. ..."
"... PRN employees Combetta and Thornton were also given subpoenas on September 8 , ordering them to testify at a Congressional hearing on September 13, 2016 . Both of them showed up with their lawyers, but both of them pled the Fifth , leaving many questions unanswered. ..."
"... In a Senate speech on September 12, 2016 , Senator Charles Grassley (R) accused the FBI of manipulating which information about the Clinton email investigation becomes public . He said that although the FBI has taken the unusual step of releasing the FBI's final report, "its summary is misleading or inaccurate in some key details and leaves out other important facts altogether." He pointed in particular to Combetta's deletions, saying: "[T]here is key information related to that issue that is still being kept secret, even though it is unclassified. If I honor the FBI's 'instruction' not to disclose the unclassified information it provided to Congress, I cannot explain why." ..."
"... Regarding the FBI's failure to inform Congressional oversight committees of Combetta's immunity deal, Representative Trey Gowdy (R) recently commented, "If there is a reason to withhold the immunity agreement from Congress-and by extension, the people we represent-I cannot think of what it would be." ..."
"... The behavior of the FBI is even stranger. Comey was a registered Republican most of his life, and it is well known that most FBI agents are politically conservative. Be that as it may, if Comey made a decision beforehand based on some political calculation to avoid indicting Clinton no matter what the actual evidence was, that the FBI's peculiar behavior specifically relating to the Combetta deletions make much more sense. It would be an unprecedented and bold move to recommend indicting someone with Hillary Clinton's power right in the middle of her presidential election campaign. ..."
"... In this scenario, the FBI having Combetta take the fall for the deletions while making a secret immunity deal with him is a particularly clever move to prevent anyone from being indicted. Note that Combetta's confession about making the deletions came in his May 2016 FBI interview, which came after Mills' April 2016 interview in which she claimed she'd never heard of any deletions. Thus, the only way to have Combetta take the fall for the deletions without Mills getting caught clearly lying to the FBI is by dodging the issue of what was said in the March 31, 2015 conference with a nonsensical claim of "attorney-client privilege." ..."
"... I believe that criminal behavior needs to be properly investigated and prosecuted, regardless of political persuasion and regardless of the election calendar. Combetta clearly committed a crime and he even confessed to do so, given what he admitted in his last FBI interview. If he got a limited immunity deal instead of blanket immunity, which is highly likely, it still would be possible to indict and convict him based on evidence outside of his interviews. That would help explain why he recently pled the Fifth, because he's still in legal danger. ..."
"... But more importantly, who else is guilty with him? Logic and the available evidence strongly suggest that Clinton's lawyer Cheryl Mills at least knew about the deletions at the time they happened. Combetta has already confessed to criminal behavior-and yet somehow hasn't even been fired by PRN. If he didn't at least tell Mills and the others in the conference call about the deletions, there would be no logical reason to assert attorney-client privilege in the first place. Only the nonsensical assertion of this privilege is preventing the evidence coming out that should lead to Mills being charged with lying to the FBI at a minimum. And if Mills knew, can anyone seriously believe that Clinton didn't know too? ..."
Sep 22, 2016 | www.thompsontimeline.com
To understand the 2015 deletions , we have to start further back in time, in June 2013 . Clinton had ended her four-year tenure as secretary of state earlier in 2013 , and she hired the Platte River Networks (PRN) computer company to manage her private email server. This was a puzzling hire, to say the least, because PRN was based in Denver, Colorado, far from Clinton's homes in New York and Washington, DC, and the company was so small that their office was actually an apartment in an ordinary apartment building with no security alarm system. The company wasn't cleared to handle classified information, nobody in it had a security clearance, and it hadn't even handled an important out of state contract before.

PRN assigned two employees to handle the Clinton account: Paul Combetta and Bill Thornton . In late June 2013 , these two employees moved Clinton's server from her house in Chappaqua, New York, to an Equinix data center in Secaucus, New Jersey. They removed all the data from the server, moved it to a new server, and then wiped the old server clean. Both the new and old server were kept running at the data center. At the same time, PRN subcontracted Datto, Inc. , to back up the data on the new server. A Datto SIRIS S2000 was bought and connected to the server , functioning like an external hard drive to make periodic back-ups.

... ... ...

Clinton's emails get sorted

Fast forward to the middle of 2014 . The House Benghazi Committee was formed to investigate the US government's actions surrounding the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya , and soon a handful of emails were discovered relating to this attack involving Clinton's hdr22@clintonemail.com email address. At this point, nobody outside of Clinton's inner circle of associates knew she had exclusively used that private email account for all her email communications while she was secretary of state, or that she'd hosted it on her own private email server.

The Benghazi Committee began pressing the State Department for more relevant emails from Clinton. The State Department in turn began privately pressing Clinton to turn over all her work-related emails.

Cheryl Mills (left) David Kendall (center) and Heather Samuelson (Credit: public domain)

Cheryl Mills (left) David Kendall (center) and Heather Samuelson (Credit: public domain)

Instead of turning over all her emails, Clinton decided to have them sorted into work-related and personal, and then only turn over the work-related ones. She gave this task to three of her lawyers : Cheryl Mills (Clinton's former chief of staff), David Kendall (Clinton's longtime personal lawyer), and Heather Samuelson (a relatively inexperienced State Department staffer during Clinton's tenure). It seems Samuelson did most of the sorting , even though she had no experience for this task nor any security clearance .

It was decided that over 30,000 emails were work-related, and those were turned over to the State Department on December 5, 2014 . These have all since been publicly released, though with redactions. Another over 31,000 emails were deemed personal , and Clinton kept those. They were later deleted in controversial circumstances that this essay explores in detail.

It has become increasingly clear in recent months that this sorting process was highly flawed. Clinton has said any emails that were borderline cases were given to the State Department, just to be on the safe side. But in fact, the FBI later recovered about 17,500 of Clinton's "personal" emails . It is probable no government agency has yet gone through all of these to officially determine which ones were work-related and which ones were not, but FBI Director James Comey has said that " thousands " were work-related.

We can get a glimpse of just how flawed the sorting process was because hundreds of emails from Huma Abedin have been released in recent months, as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit . Abedin was Clinton's deputy chief of staff and still is one of her closest aides.

When Samuelson described the sorting process in her FBI interview , she said that her first step was to find all the emails to or from Clinton and the people she regularly worked with in the State Department, and put all of those emails in the "work-related" category.

But from the Abedin emails released so far, about 200 are previously unreleased emails between her and Clinton . Anyone who looks at these can see that the vast majority, if not all, of them are work-related. Many involve Abedin's state.gov government address, not her clintonemail.com private address, so how on Earth did Samuelson's sorting process miss those? It has even come to light recently that a small number of emails mentioning "Benghazi" have been found in the 17,500 recovered by the FBI, but Samuelson told the FBI she had specifically searched for all emails using that word.

A sample of an email between Clinton and Abedin using her state.gove address. (Credit: public domain)

A sample of an email between Clinton and Abedin using her state.gov address. (Credit: public domain)

The Abedin emails released so far are only a small percentage of all her emails that are going to be released on a monthly basis well into 2017 . It is likely that Clinton's supposed 31,000 "personal" emails contain thousands of work-related emails to and from Abedin alone. Consider that only about 15% of the 30,000 Clinton emails released so far were between her and Abedin. If the rest of her deleted emails follow the same pattern as the Abedin ones, it is highly likely that the majority, and maybe even the vast majority, of Clinton's deleted "personal" emails in fact are work-related.

... ... ...

FBI Director Comey has said he trusts that Clinton had made a sincere sorting effort, but the sheer number of work-related emails that keep getting discovered suggests otherwise. Furthermore, logic and other evidence also suggest otherwise. For instance, in home video footage from a private fundraiser in 2000 , Clinton talked about how she had deliberately avoided using email so she wouldn't leave a paper trail: "As much as I've been investigated and all of that, you know, why would I? I don't even want… Why would I ever want to do email? Can you imagine?"

Practical considerations forced her to start using email a few years later. But what if her exclusive use of a private email address on her own private server was not done out of " convenience " as she claims, but so she could retain control of them, only turning over emails to FOIA requests and later government investigators that she wanted to?

Note also that in a November 2010 email exchange between Clinton and Abedin, Abedin suggested that Clinton might want to use a State Department email account due because the department computer system kept flagging emails from her private email account as spam. Clinton replied that she was open to some kind of change, but " I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible ." It is further worth noting that these emails were not handed over with the rest of Clinton's 30,000 work-related emails, despite clearly being work-related, but were somehow uncovered by the State Department inspector general 's office. Those very emails are good examples of the kind of material Clinton may have tried to keep secret by controlling the sorting process.

Consider that out of the relatively small number of deleted emails that have been made public due to the Abedin monthly releases, a handful of them have created headlines about possible conflicts of interest between Clinton's secretary of state job and the Clinton Foundation . How many more headlines like that would there be if all 31,000 deleted emails became public before the November 2016 presidential election? It's easy to imagine a political motive for Clinton wanting to keep some work-related emails secret.

... ... ...

The deletions begin

Heather Samuelson (Credit: Getty Images)

Heather Samuelson (Credit: Getty Images)

This essay will explore this possibility more later. But if it is the case that she wanted to keep those 31,000 "personal" emails out of the public eye, she had obstacles to overcome. In 2014 , PRN had managerial control of both Clinton's new and old server. Thus, in July 2014 and again in September 2014 , PRN employee Combetta had to send copies of all the emails to the laptop of Clinton lawyer Cheryl Mills, and another copy to the laptop of Clinton lawyer Heather Samuelson, to be used for the sorting process.

With the sorting done, if Clinton didn't want the public to ever see her deleted emails, you would expect all these copies of those emails to be permanently deleted, and that's exactly what happened. According to a later FBI report, " on or around December 2014 or January 2015 , Mills and Samuelson requested that [Platte River Networks (PRN) employee Paul Combetta] remove from their laptops all of the emails from the July and September 2014 exports. [Combetta] used a program called BleachBit to delete the email-related files so they could not be recovered."

The FBI report explained, "BleachBit is open source software that allows users to 'shred' files, clear Internet history, delete system and temporary files, and wipe free space on a hard drive. Free space is the area of the hard drive that can contain data that has been deleted. BleachBit's 'shred files' function claims to securely erase files by overwriting data to make the data unrecoverable." BleachBit advertises that it can "shred" files so they can never be recovered again.

With the emails of Mills and Samuelson wiped clean, and the old version of the server wiped clean, that left just two known copies of the emails: one on the new server, and one on the back-up Datto SIRIS device connected to the new server.

Mills was interviewed by the FBI in April 2016 . She claimed that in December 2014 , Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her emails older than 60 days . Note that this came not long after the State Department formally asked Clinton for all of her work-related emails, on October 28, 2014 . Mills told the FBI that she instructed Combetta to modify the email retention policy on Clinton's clintonemail.com email account to reflect this change. Emails older than 60 days would then be overwritten several times, wiping them just as effectively as BleachBit.

Clinton essentially said the same thing as Mills when she was interviewed by the FBI . Clinton also was interviewed by the FBI. According to the FBI summary of the interview, she claimed that after her staff sent the 30,000 work-related emails to the State Department on December 5, 2014 , "she was asked what she wanted to do with her remaining [31,000] personal emails. Clinton instructed her staff she no longer needed the emails."

So although the retention policy change sounds like a mere technicality, in fact, Clinton passed the message through Mills that she wanted all her emails from when she was secretary of state to be permanently wiped.

Think about Clinton wanting to delete all her old "personal" emails. As a politician with a wide network of contributors and supporters, the information in them could be highly valuable for her. For instance, if a major donor contacted her, she probably would want to review their past correspondence before responding. She'd preserved these emails for nearly two years, but just when investigators started to demand to see them, she decided she didn't want ANY of them, and all traces of them should be permanently wiped. And yet we're supposed to believe the timing is just a coincidence?

But there was a problem with deleting them. Combetta later claimed that he simply forgot to make this change.

More than two months passed, which meant all of Clinton's deleted emails should have been permanently wiped already. Meanwhile, the House Benghazi Committee and others were making more requests to see her emails . In January 2015 , a reporter even filed a FOIA request in court for all of her emails .

Then, on March 2, 2015 , the headline on the front page of the New York Times was a story revealing that while Clinton was secretary of state, she had exclusively used a private email address hosted on her private server, thus keeping all of her email communications secret. This became THE big story of the month, and the start of a high-profile controversy that continues until today.

On December 2, 2014 , the House Benghazi Committee had asked Clinton for all Benghazi-related emails from her personal email address. But one day after the New York Times blockbuster story, the committee sent Clinton a letter asking her to preserve ALL her emails from that address.

Then, a day after that, on March 4, 2015 , the committee issued two subpoenas to her . One subpoena ordered her to turn over all emails relating to the Benghazi attack. The committee had already received about 300 such emails from the State Department in February 2015 , but after the Times story, the committee worried that the department might not have some of her relevant emails. (That would later prove to be the case, given the small number of Benghazi emails eventually recovered by the FBI.) The second subpoena ordered her to turn over documents it requested in November 2014 but still has not received from the State Department, relating to communications between Clinton and ten senior department officials.

Cheryl Mills (Credit: Twitter)

Cheryl Mills (Credit: Twitter)

If Clinton had already deleted her emails to keep them from future investigators, these requests shouldn't have been a problem. On March 9, 2015 , Mills sent an email to PRN employees , including Combetta, to make sure they were aware of the committee's request that all of Clinton's emails be preserved. One can see this as a CYA ("cover your ass") move, since Mills would have believed all copies of Clinton's "personal" emails had been permanently deleted and wiped by this time. The Times story and the requests for copies of Clinton's emails that followed had seemingly come too late.

But that wasn't actually the case, since Combetta had forgotten to make the deletions!


Combetta deletes everything that is left

Sitting behind Combetta is co-founder of Platte River Brent Allshouse (left) and PRN attorney, Ken Eichner. (Credit: CSpan)

Sitting behind Combetta is co-founder of Platte River Brent Allshouse (left) and PRN attorney, Ken Eichner. (Credit: CSpan)

According to a later Combetta FBI interview, he claimed that on March 25, 2015, there was a conference call between PRN employees , including himself, and some members of Bill Clinton's staff. (Hillary Clinton's private server hosted the emails of Bill Clinton's staff too, and one unnamed staffer hired PRN back in 2013 .) There was another conference call between PRN and Clinton staffers on March 31, 2015 , with at least Combetta, Mills, and Clinton lawyer David Kendall taking part in that later call.

According to what Combetta later told the FBI, at some point between these two calls, he had an "Oh shit!" moment and remembered that he'd forgotten to make the requested retention policy change back in December . So, even though he told the FBI that he was aware of the emails from Mills mentioning the Congressional request to preserve all of Clinton's emails, he took action. Instead of simply making the retention policy change, which would have preserved the emails for another two months, he immediately deleted all of Clinton's emails from her server. Then he used BleachBit to permanently wipe them.

The Datto SIRIS S2000 was used for back-up services. (Credit: Datto, Inc.)

The Datto SIRIS S2000 was used for back-up services. (Credit: Datto, Inc.)

However, recall that there was a Datto SIRIS back-up device connected to the server and periodically making copies of all the data on the server. Apparently, Combetta didn't mention this to the FBI, but the FBI found "evidence of these [server] deletions and determined the Datto backups of the server were also manually deleted during this timeframe ." The Datto device sent a records log back to the Datto company whenever any changes were made, and according to a letter from Datto to the FBI that later became public, the deletions on the device were made around noon on March 31, 2015 , the same date as the second conference call. (Although the server and Datto device were in New Jersey and Combetta was working remotely from Rhode Island, he could make changes remotely, as he or other PRN employees did on other occasions.)

A recent Congressional committee letter mentioned that the other deletions were also made on or around March 31, 2015 . So it's probable they were all done at the same time by the same person: Combetta.

Already, Combetta's behavior is damning. He didn't just change the data retention policy, as Mills had asked him to do, causing them to be permanently deleted 60 days later. He immediately deleted all of Clinton's emails and then wiped them for good measure, and almost certainly deleted them from the Datto back-up device too.

The FBI's Clinton email investigation didn't formally begin until July 10, 2015 -more than two months after Combetta took those actions. However, State Department inspector general Steve Linick began investigating Clinton's email usage in April 2015 , and he could have given her an order to preserve all her documents-we don't know. Furthermore, CNN has reported that the FBI investigation actually began informally in late May 2015 , which is less than two months after the deletions. So Combetta could have prevented the State Department and/or the FBI from easily recovering all the emails in time.

To make matters worse for Combetta, on March 20, 2015 , the House Benghazi Committee sent a letter to Clinton's lawyer Kendall , asking Clinton to turn her server over to a neutral third party so it could be examined to see if any work-related emails were still on it. This was reported in the New York Times and other media outlets.

Then, on March 27, 2015 , Kendall replied to the committee in a letter that also was reported on by the Times and others that same day. Kendall wrote, "There is no basis to support the proposed third-party review of the server… To avoid prolonging a discussion that would be academic, I have confirmed with the secretary's IT [information technology] support that no emails… for the time period January 21, 2009 through February 1, 2013 reside on the server or on any back-up systems associated with the server."

David Kendall (Credit: Above the Law)

David Kendall (Credit: Above the Law)

When Kendall mentioned Clinton's IT support, that had to have been a reference to PRN. So what actually happened? Did Kendall or someone else working for Clinton ask Combetta and/or other PRN employees if there were any emails still on the server in the March 25, 2015 conference call, just two days before he sent his letter? Did Combetta lie in that call and say they were already deleted and then rush to delete them afterwards to cover up his mistake? Or did someone working for Clinton tell or hint that he should delete them now if they hadn't been deleted already? We don't know, because the FBI has revealed nothing about what was said in that conference call or the one that took place a week later.

However, despite all these clear signs that the emails should be preserved, not only did Combetta confess in an FBI interview that "at the time he made the deletions in March 2015 , he was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton's email data on the [server]," he said that " he did not receive guidance from other PRN personnel, PRN's legal counsel or others regarding the meaning of the preservation request." So he confessed to obstruction of justice and other possible crimes, all to the apparent benefit of Clinton instead of himself!


Investigations and cover-ups

This is perplexing enough already, but it gets stranger still, if we continue to follow the behavior of Combetta and PRN as a whole.

An inside look at the Equinix facility in Secaucus, NJ. (Credit: Chang W. Lee / New York Time)

An inside look at the Equinix facility in Secaucus, NJ. (Credit: Chang W. Lee / New York Time)

By August 2015 , the FBI's Clinton investigation was in full swing, and they began interviewing witnesses and confiscating equipment for analysis. Because the FBI never empanelled a grand jury, it didn't have subpoena power, so it had to ask Clinton for permission to seize her server. She gave that permission on August 11, 2015 , and the server was picked up from the data center in New Jersey the next day . But remember that there actually were two servers there, an old one and a new one. All the data had been wiped from the old one and moved to the new one, so the new one was the more important one to analyze. But the FBI only picked up the old one.

According to the FBI's final report, "At the time of the FBI's acquisition of the [server], Williams & Connolly [the law firm of Clinton's personal lawyer David Kendall] did not advise the US government of the existence of the additional equipment associated with the [old server], or that Clinton's clintonemail.com emails had been migrated to the successor [server] remaining at [the] Equinix [data center]. The FBI's subsequent investigation identified this additional equipment and revealed the email migration." As a result, the FBI finally picked up the new server on October 3, 2015 .

It was bad enough that Clinton's lawyer wasn't forthcoming about this, especially since Clinton and her staff had switched to using new email accounts located on a different server with a different domain name in late 2014 , so the servers in question weren't urgently needed anymore. But who else could have told the FBI about the data getting transferred to the new server? PRN.

A snippet from the invoice published by Complete Colorado on October 19, 2015. (Credit: Todd Shepherd / Complete Colorado) (Used with express permission from CompleteColorado.com. Do not duplicate or republish.)

The FBI interviewed PRN's staff in September 2015. This almost certainly included Combetta and Bill Thornton, because they were the only two PRN employees actively managing Clinton's server.

It's particularly important to know if Combetta was interviewed at this time. The FBI's final report clearly stated that he was interviewed twice, in February 2016 and May 2016 , and repeatedly referred to what was said in his "first interview" and "second interview." However, we luckily know that he was interviewed in September 2015 as well, because of a PRN invoice billed to Clinton Executive Service Corp. (CESC), a Clinton family company, that was made public later in 2015 . The invoice made clear that Combetta, who was working remotely from Rhode Island, flew to Colorado on September 14, 2015, and then "federal interviews" took place on September 15 . Combetta's rental car, hotel, and return airfare costs were itemized as well. As this essay later makes clear, PRN was refusing to cooperate with anyone else in the US government but the FBI by this time, so "federal interviews" can only mean the FBI.

Bryan Pagliano (Credit: public domain)

Bryan Pagliano (Credit: public domain)

The fact that the FBI falsely claimed Combetta was only interviewed twice grows in importance given a recent New York Times report that the Justice Department gave Combetta some form of legal immunity .

One other person in the investigation, Bryan Pagliano, was given immunity as well. But his immunity deal was leaked to the media and had been widely reported on since March 2016 . By contrast, Combetta's immunity wasn't even mentioned in the FBI's final report, and members of Congress were upset to first read about it in the Times , because they had never been told about it either.

The mystery of this situation deepens when one looks at the FBI report regarding what Combetta said in his February 2016 and May 2016 interviews. In February 2016 , he claimed that he remembered in late March 2015 that he forgot to make the change to the email retention policy on Clinton's server, but that was it. He claimed he never did make any deletions. He also claimed that he was unaware of the March 9, 2015 email from Mills warning of the Congressional request to preserve all of Clinton's emails.

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Then, in May 2016 , he completely changed his story. He said that in fact he did make the deletions in late March 2015 after all, plus he'd wiped her emails with BleachBit, as described earlier. He also confessed to being aware of the Mills email with the preservation request.

It still hasn't been reported when Combetta's immunity deal was made. However, it seems probable that this took place between his February 2016 and May 2016 interviews, causing the drastic change in his account. Yet, it looks that he still hasn't been fully honest or forthcoming. Note that he didn't confess to the deletion of data on the Datto back-up device, even though it took place at the same time as the other deletions. The FBI learned that on their own by analyzing the device.


Attorney-client privilege?!

More crucially, we know that Combetta has not revealed what took place in the second conference call between PRN and Clinton employees. Here is all the FBI's final report has to say about that: "Investigation identified a PRN work ticket, which referenced a conference call among PRN, Kendall, and Mills on March 31, 2015. PRN's attorney advised [Combetta] not to comment on the conversation with Kendall, based upon the assertion of the attorney-client privilege ."

Paul Combetta (left) Ken Eichner (right) (Credit: CSpan)

Sitting behind Paul Combetta at the House Oversight Committee hearing on September 13, 2016, is Platte River Networks attorney Ken Eichner. (Credit: CSpan)

This is extremely bizarre. What "attorney-client privilege"?! That would only apply for communications between Combetta and his lawyer or lawyers. It's clear that Combetta's lawyer isn't Mills or Kendall. The New York Times article about the immunity deal made a passing reference to his lawyer, and, when Combetta showed up for a Congressional hearing on September 12 , he was accompanied by a lawyer who photographs from the hearing make clear is Ken Eichner, who has been the legal counsel for PRN as a whole regarding Clinton's server.

Even if Combetta's lawyer Eichner was participating in the call, there is no way that should protect Combetta from having to tell what he said to Clinton employees like Mills or Kendall. If that's how the law works, criminals could simply always travel with a lawyer and then claim anything they do or say with the lawyer present is inadmissible as evidence due to attorney-client privilege. It's absurd.

For the FBI to give Combetta an immunity deal and then still not learn if he had been told to delete the emails by anyone working for Clinton due to a completely legally indefensible "attorney-client privilege" excuse is beyond belief. It would make sense, however, if the FBI was actually trying to protect Clinton from prosecution instead of trying to find evidence to prosecute her.


Combetta's Reddit posts

A side-by-side shot of Combetta at the House Oversight Committee hearing (left) and a captured shot of Combetta as Stonetear (right). (Credit: CSpan and public domain)

A photo comparison of Combetta at the House Oversight Committee hearing (left) and a captured shot of Combetta as stonetear (right). (Credit: CSpan and public domain)

Furthermore, how much can Combetta be trusted, even in an FBI interview? It has recently come to light that he made Reddit posts under the username "stonetear." There can be no doubt this was him, because the details match perfectly, including him signing a post "Paul," having another social media account for a Paul Combetta with the username "stonetear," having a combetta.com website mentioning his "stonetear" alias, and even posting a photo of "stonetear" that matches other known photos of Combetta.

In one Reddit post , he asked other server managers: "I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a .pst file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out. … Does anyone have experience with something like this, and/or suggestions on how this might be accomplished?"

The date of the post- July 24, 2014 -is very significant, because that was just one day after Combetta sent CESE (the Clinton family company) DVDs containing some of Clinton's emails , so Clinton's lawyers could start the sorting process. Also on July 23, 2014 , an unnamed PRN employee sent Samuelson and Mills the same emails electronically directly to their laptops.

A response captured in the Reddit chat warning Combetta that what he wants to do is illegal. (Credit: Reddit)

A response captured in the Reddit chat warning stonetear aka Combetta that what he wants to do could result in major legal issues. (Credit: Reddit)

Popular software made by companies like Microsoft have tried to make it impossible for people to change email records, so people facing legal trouble can't tamper with emails after they've been sent. Thus, when Combetta posed his problem at Reddit, other Reddit users told him that what he wanted to do "could result in major legal issues." But that didn't deter him, and he kept asking for various ways to get it accomplished anyway.

It isn't clear why Clinton would have wanted her email address removed from all her emails, since her exact address had already been exposed in the media back in March 2013 by the hacker known as Guccifer. One Gawker reporter even used it to email Clinton on March 20, 2013 : "[W] ere your emails to and from the hdr22@clintonemail.com account archived according to the provisions of the President Records Act and Freedom of Information Act?" (Clinton never replied, maybe because it's clear in hindsight that an honest answer would have been "no.") But the fact that Combetta was willing to at least try to do this raises questions, especially his seeming willingness to do something illegal for his "VIP" customer Hillary Clinton.

Combetta made another important Reddit post a few months later:

"Hello- I have a client who wants to push out a 60 day email retention policy for certain users. However, they also want these users to have a 'Save Folder' in their Exchange folder list where the users can drop items that they want to hang onto longer than the 60 day window. All email in any other folder in the mailbox should purge anything older than 60 days (should not apply to calendar or contact items of course). How would I go about this? Some combination of retention and managed folder policy?"

Another sample captured of Combetta as 'stonetear' asking Reddit users for help. (Credit: Reddit)

Another question was captured of 'stonetear' aka Combetta asking Reddit users for technical help. (Credit: Reddit)

Again, the timing is telling, because this post was made on December 10, 2014 . Recall that December 2014 (or January 2015 ) was when he deleted and then wiped Clinton's emails from the laptops of Mills and Samuelson. December also was the month that Mills asked him to change the retention policy on Clinton's server to 60 days , which is precisely the issue he was asking about in his Reddit post.

A captured shot of Combetta's 'stonetear' GMail account with picture included. (Credit: public domain)

A captured shot of Combetta's 'stonetear' Gmail account with picture included. (Credit: public domain)

Recall how Clinton allegedly claimed she didn't want to keep any of her deleted emails. It looks like that wasn't true after all. It sounds exactly as if Mills or someone else working for Clinton told him to make it look like all the "personal" emails were permanently deleted due to the 60 day policy change, while actually keeping copies of emails they still wanted.

Looking at Combetta's two Reddit posts detailed above, there are only two possibilities. One is that Combetta failed to disclose crucial information to the FBI, despite his immunity deal. The second is that he did, but the FBI didn't mention it in its final report. Either way, it's already clear that the FBI has failed to present the full story of Combetta's actions to the public. And how much of what Combetta has said can be trusted, even in his most recent and supposedly most forthcoming FBI interview?

David DeCamillis (Credit: Twitter)

David DeCamillis (Credit: Twitter)

Remarkably, there is a hint that Combetta was being dishonest even before his late March 2015 deletions. On March 3, 2015 , one day after the front-page New York Times story revealing Clinton's use of a private server, PRN's vice president of sales David DeCamillis sent an email to some or all of the other PRN employees. The email has only been paraphrased in news reports so far, but he was already wondering what Clinton emails the company might be asked to turn over .

Combetta replied to the email , "I've done quite a bit already in the last few months related to this. Her [Clinton's] team had me do a bunch of exports and email filters and cleanup to provide a .pst [personal storage file] of all of HRC's [Hillary Rodham Clinton's] emails to/from any .gov addresses. … I billed probably close to 10 hours in on-call tickets with CESC related to it :)."

First off, it's interesting that he said he did "a bunch" of "email filters and cleanup," because what has been reported by the FBI is that he only made a copy of all of Clinton's email and sent them off to be sorted in late July 2014 . That fits with his July 2014 Reddit post where he was trying to modify somebody's email address.

But also, assuming that there aren't important parts to his email that haven't been mentioned by the media, consider what he didn't say. The topic was possibly turning over Clinton's emails, and yet by this time Combetta had already deleted and wiped all of Clinton's emails from the laptops of two Clinton lawyers and been asked to change the email retention policy on Clinton's server so that all her emails would be permanently deleted there too, and yet he didn't bother to mention this to anyone else at PRN. Why?

We can only speculate based on the limited amount of information made public so far. But it seems as if Combetta was covering up for Clinton and/or the people working for her even BEFORE he made his late March 2015 deletions!


Who knows about the deletions, and how?

Senator Ron Johnson (Credit: John Shinkle / Politico)

Senator Ron Johnson (Credit: John Shinkle / Politico)

For now, let us turn back to events in the fall of 2015 . In mid-August 2015 , Senator Ron Johnson (R) asked for and got a staff-level briefing from PRN about the management of Clinton's server, as part of Republican Congressional oversight of the FBI's investigation. It seems very likely that Combetta was a part of that briefing, or at least his knowledge heavily informed the briefing, because again only two PRN employees actively managed her server, and he was one of them.

Regardless of whether he was there or not, it is clear that PRN was not honest in the briefing. Almost nothing is publicly known about the briefing except that it took place. However, from questions Johnson asked PRN in later letters, one can see that he knew nothing about the March 2015 deletions by Combetta. In fact, just like the FBI, there is no indication he knew anything about the transfer of the data from the old server to the new in that time period, which would be a basic fact in any such briefing.

Andy Boian (Credit: public domain)

The dishonesty or ignorance of PRN in this time period can be clearly seen due to a September 12, 2015 Washington Post article. In it, PRN spokesperson Andy Boian said, " Platte River has no knowledge of the server being wiped ." He added, "All the information we have is that the server wasn't wiped." We now know that not only was this untrue, but a PRN employee did the wiping!

This leads to two possibilities. One is that Combetta lied to his PRN bosses, so in September 2015 nobody else in PRN knew about the deletions he'd made. The other is that additional people at PRN knew, but they joined in a cover-up.

At this point, it's impossible to know which of these is true, but one of them must be. PRN employees created work tickets and other documentary evidence of the work they made, so one would think the company leadership would have quickly learned about the deletions if they did any examination of their managerial actions to prepare for investigative briefings and interviews.

But either way, PRN as a whole began acting as if there was something to hide. Although the company agreed to the briefing of Congressional staffers in mid-August 2015 , when Senator Johnson wanted to follow this up with interviews of individual PRN employees in early September, PRN said no . When Congressional committees began asking PRN for documents, they also said no, and kept saying no. Recently, as we shall see later, they've even defied a Congressional subpoena for documents.

Austin McChord, founder and CEO of Datto, Inc. (Credit: Erik Traufmann / Hearst Connecticut Media)

Austin McChord, founder and CEO of Datto, Inc. (Credit: Erik Traufmann / Hearst Connecticut Media)

At the same time Congressional committees began asking PRN for documents and interviews, they made those requests to Datto as well.

Datto expressed a willingness to cooperate. But because Datto had been subcontracted by PRN to help manage Clinton's server, they needed PRN's permission to share any information relating to that account. When PRN was first asked in early October 2015 , they gave permission. But about a week later, they changed their mind , forcing Datto to stay quiet.

To make matters worse, in early November 2015 , PRN spokesperson Andy Boian gave a completely bogus public excuse about this, saying that PRN and Datto had mutually agreed it was more convenient for investigators to deal with just one company. Datto immediately complained in a letter sent to PRN and Senator Johnson that no such discussion or agreement between PRN and Datto had ever taken place.

What is PRN hiding?


The Datto cloud mystery

There is another strange twist to Datto's involvement. Back in June 2013 when Datto was first subcontracted to help with backing up the server data, the Clinton family company CESC made explicit that they didn't want any of the data to be stored remotely . But due to some snafu or miscommunication, it turns out that in addition to local back-ups being stored on the Datto device connected to the server, Datto had been making periodic copies of the server data the whole time in the "cloud!" That means back-up copies of the data were being transferred over the Internet and stored remotely, probably on other servers controlled by Datto.

Co-founders of PRN are Brent Allshouse (left) and Treve Suazo (right) (Credit: PRN)

Co-founders of PRN are Brent Allshouse (left) and Treve Suazo (right) (Credit: PRN)

PRN only discovered this in early August 2015 , around the time the roles of PRN and Datto had with the server began to be made public. PRN contacted Datto, told them to stop doing this, put all the data on a thumb drive, send it to them, and then permanently wipe their remote copies of the server data.

It is unclear what happened after that. The FBI's final report mentions a Datto back-up made on June 29, 2013 , just after all the data had been moved from the old server to the new sever with the back-up, had been useful to investigators and allowed them to find some Clinton emails dating all the way back to the first two months of her secretary of state tenure. However, it isn't clear if this is due to the local Datto SIRIS device or the accidental Datto cloud back-up. Congressional committee letters show that they don't know either and have been trying to find out.

Adding to the mystery, one would think that if Datto was making periodic back-ups either or both ways, the FBI would have been able to recover all of Clinton's over 31,000 deleted emails and not just 17,000 of them. Consider that when PRN employees sent Clinton's lawyers all of Clinton's emails to be sorted in July and September 2014 , they simply copied what was on the server at the time, which presumably was the same amount of emails from years earlier than had been there in June 2013 , and thus backed up by Datto many times.

It's likely there are more twists to the cloud back-up story that have yet to be revealed.


What did Clinton and her aides know about the deletions?

Meanwhile, let's consider what Clinton and her aides may have known and when they knew it. When Mills was interviewed by the FBI in April 2016 , according to the FBI, "Mills stated she was unaware that [Combetta] had conducted these deletions and modifications in March 2015 ." Then, when Clinton was interviewed by the FBI in July 2016 , "Clinton stated she was…unaware of the March 2015 email deletions by PRN."

This is pretty hard to believe. Mills was and still is one of Clinton's lawyers, and even attended Clinton's FBI interview. So why wouldn't she have mentioned the deletions to Clinton between April and July 2016 , after she learned about them from the FBI's questions to her? One would think Clinton would have been extremely curious to know anything about the FBI's possible recovery of her deleted emails.

Clinton making a joking wipe gesture while speaking at a town hall on August 18, 2015, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Credit: John Locher / The Associated Press)

Clinton making a joking wipe gesture while speaking at a town hall on August 18, 2015, in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Credit: John Locher / The Associated Press)

But more importantly, consider what was mentioned in an NBC News report on August 19, 2015 . Clinton's campaign acknowledged "that there was an attempt to wipe [Clinton's] server before it was turned over last week to the FBI. But two sources with direct knowledge of the investigation told NBC News …that the [FBI] may be able to recover at least some data."

Is it plausible that people within Clinton's campaign knew this, and yet neither Mills nor Clinton did? How could that be? Note that just one day before the NBC News report, Clinton had been directly asked if her server had been wiped. She dodged the question by making the joke , " What-like with a cloth, or something?" Then she said she didn't "know how it works digitally at all." Despite the controversy at the time about the cloth joke, her spokesperson claimed one month later, "I don't know what 'wiped' means."

It's highly likely the issue had to have been discussed with Clinton at the time, but there was a conscious effort not to have her admit to knowing anything, due to the on-going FBI investigation.

But more crucially, how could anyone at all working for Clinton know about the deletions as far back as August 2015 ? Recall that this was within days of PRN giving a briefing to Congressional staffers and not telling them, and several weeks prior to a PRN public comment that there was no evidence the server had been wiped.

Moreover, we have no evidence that the FBI knew about the deletions yet. Datto conducted an analysis of its device that had been attached to Clinton's new server, and in an October 23, 2015 email, told the FBI for the first time that deletions had taken place on that device on March 31, 2015 . Keep in mind that even in his February 2016 FBI interview, Combetta claimed that no deletions had taken place in that time frame. Does it make sense that he would have said that if he had reason to believe that PRN had been talking to Clinton's staff about it in the months before? (None of the interviews in the FBI"s investigations were done under oath, but lying to the FBI is a felony with a maximum five-year prison sentence.)

A sample of the letter sent to the FBI by Datto attorney, Steven Cash on October 23, 2015. (Credit: House Science Committee)

A sample of the email sent to the FBI by Datto attorney, Steven Cash on October 23, 2015. (Credit: House Science Committee)

So, again, how could Clinton's campaign know about the wiping in August 2015 ? The logical answer is that it had been discussed in the conference call on March 31, 2015 , that took place within hours of the deletions.

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Paul Combetta (Credit: public domain)

Perhaps Mills, Kendall, or someone else working for Clinton told Combetta to make the deletions, possibly during the first conference call on March 25, 2015 . If that is the case, there should be obstruction of justice charges brought against anyone involved. Or maybe Combetta did that on his own to cover his earlier mistake and then mentioned what he'd done in the second conference call. If either scenario is true, Mills should be charged with lying to the FBI for claiming in her FBI interview that she knew nothing about any of this. Clinton might be charged for the same if it could be proved what she knew and when.


"Shady shit" and "Hillary's cover-up operation"

But there's still more to this strange story. Somehow by October 5, 2015 , Senator Johnson got hold of a curious email exchange between Combetta and Thornton , and he mentioned it in a letter to PRN that got leaked to the public the next day. (Recall that Bill Thornton is the other PRN employee who actively managed Clinton's server.)

Just as the email retention policy on the Clinton server was changed on the orders of people working for Clinton, so was the retention policy on the Datto device connected to the server, in the same time period.

In an August 18, 2015 email, Combetta expressed concern that CESC, the Clinton family company, had directed PRN to reduce the length of time backups, and PRN wanted proof of this so they wouldn't be blamed. But he said in the email, "this was all phone comms [communications]."

Paul Combetta (left) Bill Thornton (right) (Credit: AP)

Paul Combetta (left) Bill Thornton (right) (Credit: The Associated Press)

The next day , there was another email, this one written by Thornton to Combetta and possibly others in PRN . The email has the subject heading "CESC Datto." Thornton wrote: "Any chance you found an old email with their directive to cut the backup back in Oct-Feb. I know they had you cut it once in Oct-Nov, then again to 30 days in Feb-ish." (Presumably this refers to October 2014 through February 2015 .)

Thornton continued: "If we had that email, then we're golden. […] Wondering how we can sneak an email in now after the fact asking them when they told us to cut the backups and have them confirm it for our records. Starting to think this whole thing really is covering up some shady shit. I just think if we have it in writing that they [CESC] told us to cut the backups, and we can go public with our statement saying we have had backups since day one, then we were told to trim to 30 days, it would make us look a WHOLE LOT better."

Combetta replied: "I'll look again, but I'm almost positive we don't have anything about the 60 day cut. […] It's up to lawyer crap now, so just sit back and enjoy the silly headlines."

As an aside, it's curious that Combetta made some unsolicited additional comments in that same email that was supportive of Clinton's position in the email controversy: "It wasn't the law to be required to use government email servers at the State Department, believe it or not. Colin Powell used an AOL address for communicating with his staff, believe it or not."

If we take this email exchange at face value, then it appears that Clinton employees requested an email retention policy change that would result in more deletion of data on the Datto back-up device in the October to November 2014 time range. Keep in mind that the State Department formally asked Clinton for all of her work-related emails , on October 28, 2014 , after informally asking starting in July 2014 . Then, around February 2015 , Clinton employees asked for another change that would have resulted in more deletions. Plus, they did this on the phone, leaving no paper trail. Is it any wonder that Thornton wrote, "Starting to think this whole thing really is covering up some shady shit?"

Details are lacking, but roughly around this time period, one unnamed PRN employee made a joke that they were "Hillary's cover-up operation ." That may have been much more accurate than they realized.


The FBI speaks up, only raising more questions

News about PRN went quiet for the first half of 2016 . Congressional committees kept asking PRN and Datto for more information (including another request for interviews in January 2016 ), and PRN kept saying no as well as not giving Datto permission to respond.

James Comey (Credit: Fox News)

James Comey (Credit: Fox News)

Then, on July 5, 2016 , FBI Director James Comey gave a surprise public speech in which he announced he wouldn't recommend any criminal charges against Clinton or anyone else in the investigation. In the course of his speech, he said it was "likely" that some emails may have disappeared forever because Clinton's lawyers "deleted all emails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery." But he said that after interviews and technical examination, "we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort."

Trey Gowdy (Credit: Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images)

Trey Gowdy (Credit: Brendan Smialowski / Getty Images)

Two days later, on July 7, 2016 , Comey had to explain his decision in front of a Congressional committee. During that hearing, he was asked by Representative Trey Gowdy (R), "Secretary Clinton said neither she nor anyone else deleted work-related emails from her personal account. Was that true?"

Comey replied: "That's a harder one to answer. We found traces of work-related emails in-on devices or in slack space. Whether they were deleted or whether when the server was changed out, something happened to them. There's no doubt that the work-related emails were removed electronically from the email system."

Consider that response. By the time Comey made those comments, the FBI's final report had already been finished, the report that detailed Combetta's confession of deliberately deleting and then wiping all of Clinton's emails from her server. Comey was explicitly asked if "anyone" had made such deletions, and yet he said he wasn't sure. Comey should be investigated for lying to Congress! Had he revealed even the rough outlines of Combetta's late March 2015 deletions in his July 5, 2016 public speech or his Congressional testimony two days later , it would have significantly changed the public perception of the results of the FBI investigation. That also would have allowed Congressional committees to start focusing on this two months earlier than they did, enabling them to uncover more in the limited time before the November presidential election.

The SECNAP Logo (Credit: SECNAP)

Despite the fact that the Combetta deletions were still unknown, Congressional committees began putting increasing pressure on PRN anyway. On July 12, 2016 , two committees jointly wrote a letter to PRN , threatening subpoenas if they still refused to cooperate. The letter listed seven PRN employees they wanted to interview, including Combetta and Thornton. Similar letters went out to Datto and SECNAP. (SECNAP was subcontracted by PRN to carry out threat monitoring of the network connected to Clinton's server.)

On August 22, 2016 , after all three companies still refused to cooperate, Representative Lamar Smith (R), chair of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, issued subpoenas for PRN, Datto, and SECNAP .

On September 2, 2016 , the FBI's final report of their Clinton email investigation was released (along with a summary of Clinton's FBI interview). This report revealed the late March 2015 deletions for the first time. Combetta's name was redacted, but his role, as well as his immunity deal, was revealed in the New York Times article published a few days later.


Congressional investigators fight back

160918ChanningPhillipspublic

Channing Phillips (Credit: public domain)

Since the report has been released, Congressional Republicans have stepped up their efforts to get answers about the Combetta mystery, using the powers of the committees they control. On September 6, 2016 , Representative Jason Chaffetz (R), chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote a letter to Channing Phillips , the US attorney for the District of Columbia. He asked the Justice Department to "investigate and determine whether Secretary Clinton or her employees and contractors violated statutes that prohibit destruction of records, obstruction of congressional inquiries, and concealment or cover up of evidence material to a congressional investigation." Clearly, this relates to the Combetta deletions.

House Oversight Committee Chair Representative Jason Chaffetz. (Credit: Cliff Owen / The Associated Press)

Representative Jason Chaffetz. (Credit: Cliff Owen / The Associated Press)

On the same day , Chaffetz sent a letter to PRN warning that Combetta could face federal charges for deleting and wiping Clinton's emails in late March 2015 , due to the Congressional request to preserve them earlier in the month that he admitted he was aware of. Chaffetz also wants an explanation from PRN how Combetta could refuse to talk to the FBI about the conference calls if the only lawyers involved in the call were Clinton's.

Chaffetz serves the FBI a subpoena during a House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee hearing on September 9, 2016. (Credit: ABC News)

Chaffetz serves the FBI a subpoena during a House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee hearing on September 9, 2016. (Credit: ABC News)

On September 9 , Chaffetz served the FBI a subpoena for all the unredacted interviews from the FBI's Clinton investigation, especially those of Combetta and the other PRN employees. This came after an FBI official testifying at a hearing remarkably suggested that Chaffetz should file a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to get the documents, just like any private citizen can.

On September 8, 2016 , Congressional committees served the subpoenas they'd threatened in August. PRN, Datto, and SECNAP were given until the end of September 12 to finally turn over the documents the committees had been requesting for year. Datto complied and turned over the documents in time. However, PRN and SECNAP did not.

Representative Lamar Smith (Credit: public domain)

Representative Lamar Smith (Credit: public domain)

The next day, September 13 , Representative Lamar Smith (R) said , "just this morning…SECNAP's [legal] counsel confirmed to my staff that the Clinton's private LLC [Clinton Executive Service Corp.] is actively engaged in directing their obstructionist responses to Congressional subpoenas."

PRN employees Combetta and Thornton were also given subpoenas on September 8 , ordering them to testify at a Congressional hearing on September 13, 2016 . Both of them showed up with their lawyers, but both of them pled the Fifth , leaving many questions unanswered.


An FBI cover-up?

In a Senate speech on September 12, 2016 , Senator Charles Grassley (R) accused the FBI of manipulating which information about the Clinton email investigation becomes public . He said that although the FBI has taken the unusual step of releasing the FBI's final report, "its summary is misleading or inaccurate in some key details and leaves out other important facts altogether." He pointed in particular to Combetta's deletions, saying: "[T]here is key information related to that issue that is still being kept secret, even though it is unclassified. If I honor the FBI's 'instruction' not to disclose the unclassified information it provided to Congress, I cannot explain why."

Senator Charles Grassley takes to the Senate floor on September 12, 2016. (Credit: CSpan))

Senator Charles Grassley takes to the Senate floor on September 12, 2016. (Credit: CSpan)

He also said there are dozens of completely unclassified witness reports, but even some of his Congressional staffers can't see them "because the FBI improperly bundled [them] with a small amount of classified information, and told the Senate to treat it all as if it were classified." The normal procedure is for documents to have the classified portions marked. Then the unclassified portions can be released. But in defiance of regulations and a clear executive order on how such material should be handled, "the FBI has 'instructed' the Senate office that handles classified information not to separate the unclassified information." As a result, Grassley claims: "Inaccuracies are spreading because of the FBI's selective release. For example, the FBI's recently released summary memo may be contradicted by other unclassified interview summaries that are being kept locked away from the public."

He said he has been fighting the FBI on this, but without success so far, as the FBI isn't even replying to his letters.

Thus, it seems that Comey failing to mention anything about the Combetta deletions in the July 7, 2016 Congressional hearing, even when directly asked about it, was no accident. Having the FBI report claim that Combetta was only interviewed twice when there is clear evidence of three interviews also fits a pattern of concealment related to the deletions.

James Comey testifies to the House Benghazi Committee on July 7, 2016. (Credit: Jack Gruber / USA Today)

James Comey testifies to the House Benghazi Committee on July 7, 2016. (Credit: Jack Gruber / USA Today)

Regarding the FBI's failure to inform Congressional oversight committees of Combetta's immunity deal, Representative Trey Gowdy (R) recently commented, "If there is a reason to withhold the immunity agreement from Congress-and by extension, the people we represent-I cannot think of what it would be."

Gowdy, who is a former federal prosecutor, also said on September 9 that there are two types of immunity Combetta could have received : use and transactional. "If the FBI and the Department of Justice gave this witness transactional immunity, it is tantamount to giving the triggerman immunity in a robbery case." He added that he is "stunned" because "It looks like they gave immunity to the very person you would most want to prosecute."

This is as much as we know so far, but surely the story won't stop there. PRN has been served a new subpoena. It is likely the requested documents will be seized from them soon if they continue to resist.


Taking the fall and running out the clock

But why does PRN resist so much? Computer companies often resist sharing information with the government so their reputation with their clients won't be harmed. But defying a subpoena when there clearly are legitimate questions to be answered goes way beyond what companies normally do and threatens PRN's reputation in a different way. Could it be that PRN-an inexplicable choice to manage Clinton's server-was chosen precisely because whatever Clinton aide hired them had reason to believe they would be loyal if a problem like this arose?

David DeCamillis (Credit: public domain)

David DeCamillis (Credit: public domain)

There is some anecdotal evidence to support this. It has been reported that PRN has ties to prominent Democrats . For instance, the company's vice president of sales David DeCamillis is said to be a prominent supporter of Democratic politicians, and once offered to let Senator Joe Biden (D) stay in his house in 2008 , not long before Biden became Obama's vice president. The company also has done work for John Hickenlooper, the Democratic governor of Colorado. And recall the email in which Combetta brought up points to defend Clinton in her email controversy, even though the email exchange was on a different topic.

The behavior of the FBI is even stranger. Comey was a registered Republican most of his life, and it is well known that most FBI agents are politically conservative. Be that as it may, if Comey made a decision beforehand based on some political calculation to avoid indicting Clinton no matter what the actual evidence was, that the FBI's peculiar behavior specifically relating to the Combetta deletions make much more sense. It would be an unprecedented and bold move to recommend indicting someone with Hillary Clinton's power right in the middle of her presidential election campaign.

It's naive to think that political factors don't play a role, on both sides. Consider that virtually every Democratic politician has been supportive of Clinton in her email controversy, or at least silent about it, while virtually every Republican has been critical of her about it or silent. Comey was appointed by Obama, and if the odds makers are right and Clinton wins in November , Comey will continue to be the FBI director under President Clinton. (Comey was appointed to a ten-year term, but Congress needs to vote to reappoint him after the election.) How could that not affect his thinking?

Comey could be trying to run out the clock, first delaying the revelations of the Combetta's deletions as much as possible, then releasing only selected facts to diminish the attention on the story.

In this scenario, the FBI having Combetta take the fall for the deletions while making a secret immunity deal with him is a particularly clever move to prevent anyone from being indicted. Note that Combetta's confession about making the deletions came in his May 2016 FBI interview, which came after Mills' April 2016 interview in which she claimed she'd never heard of any deletions. Thus, the only way to have Combetta take the fall for the deletions without Mills getting caught clearly lying to the FBI is by dodging the issue of what was said in the March 31, 2015 conference with a nonsensical claim of "attorney-client privilege."

Unfortunately, if that is Comey's plan, it looks like it's working. Since the FBI's final report came out on September 2, 2016 , the mainstream media has largely failed to grasp the significance of Combetta and his deletions, focusing on far less important matters instead, such as the destruction of a couple of Clinton's BlackBerry devices with hammers-which actually was better than not destroying them and possibly letting them fall into the wrong hands.

The House Benghazi Committee in session in 2015. (Credit: C-SPAN3)

The House Benghazi Committee in session in 2015. (Credit: C-SPAN3)

What happens next appears to largely be in the hands of Congressional Republicans, who no doubt will keep pushing to find out more, if only to politically hurt Clinton before the election. But it's also in the hands of you, the members of the general public. If enough people pay attention, then it will be impossible to sweep this controversy under the rug.

I believe that criminal behavior needs to be properly investigated and prosecuted, regardless of political persuasion and regardless of the election calendar. Combetta clearly committed a crime and he even confessed to do so, given what he admitted in his last FBI interview. If he got a limited immunity deal instead of blanket immunity, which is highly likely, it still would be possible to indict and convict him based on evidence outside of his interviews. That would help explain why he recently pled the Fifth, because he's still in legal danger.

Paul Combetta and Bill Thornton plead the Fifth on September 13, 2016. (Credit: CSpan)

Paul Combetta and Bill Thornton plead the Fifth on September 13, 2016. (Credit: CSpan)

But more importantly, who else is guilty with him? Logic and the available evidence strongly suggest that Clinton's lawyer Cheryl Mills at least knew about the deletions at the time they happened. Combetta has already confessed to criminal behavior-and yet somehow hasn't even been fired by PRN. If he didn't at least tell Mills and the others in the conference call about the deletions, there would be no logical reason to assert attorney-client privilege in the first place. Only the nonsensical assertion of this privilege is preventing the evidence coming out that should lead to Mills being charged with lying to the FBI at a minimum. And if Mills knew, can anyone seriously believe that Clinton didn't know too?

As the saying goes, "it's not the crime, it's the cover up." This is an important story, and not just election season mudslinging. The public needs to know what really happened.

Note to Readers!
If you found this essay informative, check out the Clinton email investigation timeline , as well as the Clinton Foundation timeline , written and updated daily by the same author. Stay up to date with the newest timeline entries by checking out our Recently Added Entries page , and join our Facebook group for intelligent discussions about the latest breaking news throughout the day.

[Sep 20, 2016] Neoliberal media attempt to suppress emailgate failed

Notable quotes:
"... "emails" has been the most frequently recalled word in Americans' reports of news about Mrs. Clinton - the exceptions being the week of the Democratic convention, when emails fell to second place, and this past week when "pneumonia" and "health" eclipsed emails. ..."
"... the research shows that the relevance of Mrs. Clinton's emails is very real in the minds of average Americans. ..."
"... Americans are certainly not ignoring the election and they appear to be closely following what constitutes the campaign as it unfolds. As a result, the public may be learning about the candidates' temperament, character, personality and health issues, but from what they tell us, Americans aren't getting much in the way of real substance. ..."
Sep 19, 2016 | The New York Times

From: What We Are Hearing About Clinton and Trump -

Since July we have asked more than 30,000 Americans to say exactly what it was they read, saw or heard about the two major party candidates over the past several days. The type of information getting through to Americans varies significantly depending on whether the candidate in question is Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton. Americans' daily reports about Mr. Trump are directly tied to what he is doing and saying. If Mr. Trump talks about Muslim parents and their son who was killed in action, that's what the public remembers. If he goes to Mexico or Louisiana, that's what they recall reading or hearing about him. If Mr. Trump calls President Obama the founder of the Islamic State, "ISIS" moves to the top of the list of what Americans tell us they are hearing about the Republican candidate.

What Americans recall hearing about Mrs. Clinton is significantly less varied. Specifically - and to an extraordinary degree - Americans have consistently told us that they are reading and hearing about her handling of emails while she was secretary of state during President Obama's first term. In eight of the past 10 weeks, "emails" has been the most frequently recalled word in Americans' reports of news about Mrs. Clinton - the exceptions being the week of the Democratic convention, when emails fell to second place, and this past week when "pneumonia" and "health" eclipsed emails.

When Matt Lauer of NBC News questioned Clinton about her emails for a third of the allotted time during the commander-in-chief forum on MSNBC earlier this month, he was criticized for focusing on an irrelevant issue. But the research shows that the relevance of Mrs. Clinton's emails is very real in the minds of average Americans.

... ... ...

For as long as I have been involved in election year research, the absence of serious discussion of issues and policies by the candidates has been a source of disgruntlement with the campaign process. So far, it doesn't look like 2016 is providing an exception. Americans are certainly not ignoring the election and they appear to be closely following what constitutes the campaign as it unfolds. As a result, the public may be learning about the candidates' temperament, character, personality and health issues, but from what they tell us, Americans aren't getting much in the way of real substance.

The moderators of the coming series of debates will most likely focus directly on the candidates' positions on issues. This may shift what Americans tell us they are learning about the candidates, and if so, it could signal a significant upgrade in the way the process is working.

But that also means that a lot still depends on the candidates themselves and how they end up shaping the contours of the debates.

[Sep 18, 2016] DNC Emails Possibly Exposed By Hillarys Private Server

Notable quotes:
"... Rooster coming home to roost! I would wager the reason the DNC email server was compromised was due to the lack of security on Clinton's "personal" (read political) email server. HRC left the IT Security door open and that exposed everyone she was in contact with – government, DNC and friends! ..."
Jul 26, 2016 | strata-sphere.com

OK, be patient why I delve into my inner geek.

Everyone is proposing those toxic DNC emails that roiled the Democrat National Convention this weekend were hacked by Russia. Which I actually do not doubt.

But please understand, to hack into a system someone needs to be sloppy and "invite" the hackers in! So how is it that HRC emails and DNC emails were both exposed to the voters during this election year?

Well, … l et's begin with Hillary's "personal" server and known incidents:

Clinton's server was configured to allow users to connect openly from the Internet and control it remotely using Microsoft's Remote Desktop Services. [64] It is known that hackers in Russia were aware of Clinton's non-public email address as early as 2011 . [71] It is also known that Secretary Clinton and her staff were aware of hacking attempts in 2011, and were worried about them. [72]

In 2012, according to server records, a hacker in Serbia scanned Clinton's Chappaqua server at least twice , in August and in December 2012. It was unclear whether the hacker knew the server belonged to Clinton, although it did identify itself as providing email services for clintonemail.com . [64] During 2014, Clinton's server was the target of repeated intrusions originating in Germany, China, and South Korea. Threat monitoring software on the server blocked at least five such attempts. The software was installed in October 2013, and for three months prior to that, no such software had been installed.

Now we know for a fact the "personal" side of Clinton's electronic communication was to pave the way for her second run at the presidential election. In fact, the server originated in 2008 to support her first run. Clinton would not want "Personal Political" emails to become public – for many reasons! (especially to hide any nexus between Bill's speaking fees and State Department Policy decisions ).

Everyone knows Politicians set up one account for "official business" and one for political business – a separation required by federal law. So if HRC was in communication with politicians and the DNC, it was through her personal server!

Then, there is the straight up admission by the FBI Director that Clinton's email server was hacked because people in communication with her were hacked as well:

We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account . We also assess that Secretary Clinton's use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account.

Rooster coming home to roost! I would wager the reason the DNC email server was compromised was due to the lack of security on Clinton's "personal" (read political) email server. HRC left the IT Security door open and that exposed everyone she was in contact with – government, DNC and friends!

Oh the irony – It Berns!!!

[Sep 16, 2016] Whats The FBI Hiding That Triggered A Congressional Subpoena

Sep 16, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com
by Andrew Napolitano

Zero Hedge (reprinted from LewRockwell.com )

It is hard to believe that the FBI was free to do its work, and it is probably true that the FBI was restrained by the White House early on. There were numerous aberrations in the investigation. There was no grand jury; no subpoenas were issued; no search warrants were served. Two people claimed to have received immunity, yet the statutory prerequisite for immunity - giving testimony before a grand or trial jury - was never present.

Because many members of Congress do not believe that the FBI acted free of political interference, they demanded to see the full FBI files in the case, not just the selected portions of the files that the FBI had released. In the case of the House, the FBI declined to surrender its files, and the agent it sent to testify about them declined to reveal their contents. This led to a dramatic service of a subpoena by the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on that FBI agent while he was testifying - all captured on live nationally broadcast television.

Now the FBI, which usually serves subpoenas and executes search warrants, is left with the alternative of complying with this unwanted subpoena by producing its entire file or arguing to a federal judge why it should not be compelled to do so.

On the Senate side, matters are even more out of hand. There, in response to a request from the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI sent both classified and unclassified materials to the Senate safe room. The Senate safe room is a secure location that is available only to senators and their senior staff, all of whom must surrender their mobile devices and writing materials and swear in writing not to reveal whatever they see while in the room before they are permitted to enter.

According to Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI violated federal law by commingling classified and unclassified materials in the safe room, thereby making it unlawful for senators to discuss publicly the unclassified material.

Imposing such a burden of silence on U.S. senators about unclassified materials is unlawful and unconstitutional. What does the FBI have to hide? Whence comes the authority of the FBI to bar senators from commenting on unclassified materials?

Who cares about this? Everyone who believes that the government works for us should care because we have a right to know what the government - here the FBI - has done in our names. Sen. Grassley has opined that if he could reveal what he has seen in the FBI unclassified records, it would be of profound interest to American voters.

What is going on here? The FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton has not served the rule of law. The rule of law - a pillar of American constitutional freedom since the end of the Civil War - mandates that the laws are to be enforced equally. No one is beneath their protection, and no one is above

Short Squeeze •Sep 16, 2016 12:12 PM

My theory is that when Comey stated "no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute", he already knew of her health issues. Would a prosecutor go after someone with 6 months to live?

saloonsf •Sep 16, 2016 12:03 PM

That's not FBI's responsibilities-exposing the elites cupabilities. The FBI primary objective is to protect the elites and the system that benefit them.

Atomizer •Sep 16, 2016 12:10 PM

The wagons are circling around the Clinton Foundation. Chelsea's husband is going to get nicked.

withglee •Sep 16, 2016 12:25 PM

Sen. Grassley has opined that if he could reveal what he has seen in the FBI unclassified records, it would be of profound interest to American voters.

So what's keeping Grassley from asking that those unclassified documents be taken from the room and laid on his desk. He is not allowed to talk about what he saw in the room. But for sure he is allowed to talk about unclassified documents laid upon his desk ... even if they were once in the room. If that wasn't the case, the government would just run every document through the room ... to give it official immunity from inspection and exposure.

[Sep 16, 2016] Clinton's First Email Server Was a Power Mac Tower

Sep 16, 2016 | news.slashdot.org
(arstechnica.com) 223 Posted by BeauHD on Friday September 02, 2016 @08:10PM from the data-capturing-devices dept. An anonymous reader shares with us an excerpt from a report via Ars Technica: As she was being confirmed as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton contacted Colin Powell to ask him about his use of a Blackberry while in the same role. According to a Federal Bureau of Investigations memorandum published today (PDF), Powell warned Clinton that if it became public that she was using a Blackberry to "do business," her e-mails would be treated as "official" record and be subject to the law. "Be very careful," Powell said according to the FBI. "I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data."

Perhaps Clinton's troubles began when she switched from a Blackberry-hosted e-mail account to an account on her Clintonemail.com domain -- a domain hosted on an Apple Power Mac "G4 or G5" tower running in the Clintons' Chappaqua, New York residence. The switch to the Power Mac as a server occurred the same month she exchanged messages with Powell.

The Power Mac, originally purchased in 2007 by former President Clinton's aide Justin Cooper, had acted as the server for presidentclinton.com and wjcoffice.com. Cooper managed most of the technology support for Bill Clinton and took charge of setting up Hillary Clinton's new personal mail system on the Power Mac, which sat alongside a firewall and network switching hardware in the basement of the Clintons' home.

But the Power Mac was having difficulty handling the additional load created by Blackberry usage from Secretary Clinton and her staff, so a decision was made quickly to upgrade the server hardware. Secretary Clinton's deputy chief of staff at the State Department, Huma Abedin, connected Cooper with Brian Pagliano, who had worked in IT for the secretary's 2008 presidential campaign. Cooper inquired with Pagliano about getting some of the campaign's computer hardware as a replacement for the Power Mac, and Pagliano was in the process of selling the equipment off. by quantaman ( 517394 ) writes: on Saturday September 03, 2016 @03:20AM ( #52820193 )

Re: Clinton should be in jail!!! ( Score: 4 , Insightful)

Again, lots of hypothetical examples without any actual incidents.

Your ignorance [navytimes.com]

A sailor going and photographing classified sections of a submarine over a period of months. Basically looking like he was engaged in active espionage.

So no, not a comparable incident.

subject [washingtonpost.com]

Petraeus deliberately shared highly classified materials with his mistress and biographer.

Not a remotely comparable incident.

not [thepoliticalinsider.com] our problem.

Oooh, "10 people were actually punished for similar or lesser offenses than what Mrs. Clinton got away with yesterday".

This should be good for a laugh.

1. "pleaded guilty in 2005 to illegally sneaking classified documents from the National Archives by stuffing papers in his suit. He later destroyed some of them in his office and lied about it."

Nope, he was deliberately removed classified documents and they proved he lied about it.

2. "Peter Van Buren, a foreign service officer for Hillary's State Department, was fired and his security clearance revoked for quoting a Wikileaks document AFTER publishing a book critical of Clinton. In fact, the Washington Post reported that one of his firing infractions was "showing 'bad judgement' by criticizing Clinton and then-Rep. Michele Bachmann on his blog."

Sounds more like someone being punished for writing a book critical of their employer.

3. Was a CIA director storing classified info at home. This is the most comparable though the CIA director was dealing with more sensitive information, should have been more aware than Hillary, and it sounds like he knew he had mishandled classified intel.

So a little worse than Hillary though roughly comparable. He also got pardoned by Bill Clinton before he even finished the plea deal. So that actually kinda sets a no jail-time incident.

4. "A Navy intelligence specialist admitted Thursday that he smuggled classified documents out of Fort Bragg in folders and his pants pockets, then sold them for $11,500 to a man he believed was a Chinese agent."

Wow, #4 and they're already claiming a guy trying to sell classified intelligence to the Chinese was a lesser offence than Hillary?

I seriously checked all of the examples and even read the links on a few that looked promising.

This one was actually hilarious:

Lab Tech Steals Data from Nuclear Facility. Jessica Lynn Quintana, a former worker at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, pleaded guilty in federal court to "knowingly removing classified information from the national security research laboratory, after she took home sensitive documents and data from the lab last year."

Talk about misrepresenting the facts. She was charged because she was running a meth lab!!

Still I learned something, don't believe a damn thing you read on "The Political Insider".

by hsthompson69 ( 1674722 ) writes: on Friday September 02, 2016 @10:51PM ( #52819465 )
Re:It was unequivocally a criminal offense ( Score: 5 , Insightful)

Intent is not necessary to violate 18 U.S. Code 793

https://www.law.cornell.edu/us... [cornell.edu]

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer-
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

tl;dr - she didn't have to know it was wrong, she simply had to be "extremely careless" (aka, "grossly negligent")

by DaHat ( 247651 ) writes: on Saturday September 03, 2016 @03:57AM ( #52820273 ) Homepage
Re:It was unequivocally a criminal offense ( Score: 2 )

tl;dr - she didn't have to know it was wrong, she simply had to be "extremely careless" (aka, "grossly negligent")

And despite the fact the FBI director used the phrase "extreme carelessness" wrt the handling of sensitive info, somehow the defenders of lawlessness still admit to the fact that she very clearly committed multiple crimes.

by DaHat ( 247651 ) writes: on Saturday September 03, 2016 @03:29PM ( #52822043 ) Homepage
Re:It was unequivocally a criminal offense ( Score: 2 )

I know you paid shills like to try to sway people to your side with a good bit of cherry picking, you really should pick your targets better.

And did that "extreme carelessness" result in confidential information being destroyed or delivered to people in violation of trust?

Interesting how you removed half a clause from your copy & paste from above, specifically:

through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody

Was Clinton's email server a proper place of custody? If not, then she violated that statute through gross negligence at minimum.

One, we don't know what/if anything was stolen, we just know that there was at least one successful login to the server via Tor on a user account where the owner claimed no knowledge of the software: http://www.politico.com/story/... [politico.com]

Two, Clinton did not do the reasonable thing in the setting up of the server, nor recognizing classified information, nor allowing her aids to re-handle the information in rather careless ways, so by your very own logic, she should be held criminally responsible for her actions.

[Sep 16, 2016] DaVuVuZeLa

Sep 16, 2016 | arstechnica.com
Ars Scholae  -> Palatinae reply Sep 3, 2016 10:22 AM

Hillary Clinton didn't need to use her own Blackberry. The State Deptartment had been using Blackberries since 2006, and diplomats overseas had been using them for just as long.

Hillary Clinton didn't need to use a fancy NSA-approved smartphone to access classified data. Whenever she went overseas, she had a team of IT specialists who was able to provide her with ClassNet access, and they're able to do so without any technical support from a US Embassy.

 corsairmarks Smack-Fu Master, in training reply Sep 2, 2016 4:27 PM

 Quote: First, the Clintons had requested, according to a PRN employee interviewed by the FBI, that the contents of the server be encrypted so that only mail recipients could read the content. This was not done, largely so that PRN technicians could "troubleshoot problems occurring within user accounts," the FBI memo reports.

Also, while the Clintons had requested only local backups, the Datto appliance initially also used Datto's secure cloud backup service until August of 2015. \

Sounds like some of the problem was the contractor not following the procedures established by the client.

Rommel102 Ars Praefectus et Subscriptor reply Sep 2, 2016 4:27 PM

Popular Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

Sean Gallagher IT Editor reply Sep 2, 2016 4:39 PM

 vcsjones wrote: I wonder what the odds are that all of the OS / Exchange / BES CALs were actually licensed correctly.

The Exchange and BES software were likely purchased by Hillary '08, and properly licensed for that usage. But as far as after that....

diaphanein Smack-Fu Master, in training reply Sep 2, 2016 4:51 PM Uxorious wrote:

Just to clarify, the move to a hosted solution - with requested encryption - was initiated after Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State (January 21, 2009 – February 1, 2013) was completed in February, 2013, and FOIA requests were no longer applicable as she was no longer a government employee.
I think that would depend on the scope of the migration. Did they migrate all of the history over to the hosted solution? i.e. Did they migrate the OS, Exchange and BES servers into PRN's datacenter? Or, did they start from scratch with a clean slate, fresh install and no data migration. If it's the former and not the latter, I'd be pretty damned certain it'd still be subject to FOIA requests.

Rommel102 wrote:

Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times. From your link, an individual email account on the server was breached.

This happens all the time, for varying reasons, mostly due to a phishing compromise of the account, and occasionally due to password re-use and related vectors of compromise. While it's bad for the individual account's contents, it's absolutely irrelevant beyond that.

If that's the worst they can find then personally I'm actually impressed. I was expecting that the server(s) had been root/fully compromised at least once, given how they get perennially described. If that turns out to not be the case, then they've actually been run better and more securely than the State Department's [at least non-classified] servers, from all reports.

Look, getting all up in arms over crap like that link is why people like me are no longer convinced there's anything here worth paying attention to. I'm actually willing to listen if there's some kind of smoking gun, but that's some petty bullshit right there.

taswyn Ars Tribunus Militum reply Sep 2, 2016 5:03 PM

Popular ziegler wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

Not sure why you are being down voted on newly revealed information that seems to confirm that one of the servers email accounts was breached.

If you're down voting him, perhaps an explanation as to why?

Do you say that "google's servers got breached" every time an individual email account on them is compromised?

What he said is factually incorrect. The server was not breached. An individual email account was accessed. They're not the same thing. Not even an OS user level account. An email account.

omniron Ars Praefectus reply Sep 2, 2016 5:13 PM Popular

Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

"multiple times" is 3 times in this case, and it wasn't the server that was breached, it was 1 person's email.

Even if this person was clinton herself, we already know there was not much damaging information stored on this server. And considering this seems more like someone used a weak password or was phished, this is a vulnerability no matter what email provider you're using.

aexcorp Ars Scholae Palatinae reply Sep 2, 2016 5:18 PM

Danrarbc wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Danrarbc wrote: ziegler wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

Not sure why you are being down voted on newly revealed information that seems to confirm that one of the servers email accounts was breached.

If you're down voting him, perhaps an explanation as to why?
Probably because we know DOJ email servers have also been breached. He's implying that her servers were less secure and somehow put information in harms way. History seems to show us that it wasn't at any more risk.

I didn't imply that at all. Here we have fairly solid evidence that a breach of Hillary's server happened. That seems to contradict the FBI's stance, Comey's statement and testimony, and is a first as far as I know.

And in comparison, the DOJs non-classified email systems were hacked. There is no evidence that the classified system ever was.

A 'breach' of an account is not a breach of the server. The account being access via TOR implies the user credentials were acquired through some means. Was this 'breached' account a classified account?

I could be wrong, but I think that all classified emails from DoD and State have to go through SIPRNet.

If this was strictly respected, then Clinton's server should contain no classified information. In real-life, we saw that a few classified things went through her personal email system, so it wasn't fully respected, or some of the info was not yet classified.

Sean Gallagher IT Editor reply Sep 2, 2016 5:21 PM

Story Author Popular omniron wrote: Rommel102 wrote: Most interesting to me was confirmation that the server was breached. Unknown parties accessed it from TOR multiple times.

"multiple times" is 3 times in this case, and it wasn't the server that was breached, it was 1 person's email.

Even if this person was clinton herself, we already know there was not much damaging information stored on this server. And considering this seems more like someone used a weak password or was phished, this is a vulnerability no matter what email provider you're using.

We're going to get into this in a story I'm currently writing (probably for next week, so it's not a Friday newsdumpster move). But it's worth noting THE ENTIRETY OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S UNCLAS EMAIL SYSTEM WAS PWNED FOR OVER A YEAR. I'm sorry, did I type that in all-caps? Also, between Chelsea Manning/ Wikileaks and the repeated hacks of State, the White House, etc between 2009 and 2014, it is highly likely that everything short of the TS/SAP stuff (and even some of that) that Clinton touched was already breached.

This does not excuse Clinton and her staff's-I'm looking at you, Jake Sullivan-for the extreme error of passing Top Secret/ Special Access Program classified data back and forth over Blackberries and a non-governmental e-mail system. I would expect that Sullivan, at a minimum, will have his clearance revoked and he will not be getting a job as a national security adviser if Clinton wins the election. Or at least, I think that's a reasonable expectation.

[Sep 14, 2016] Judge Napolitano FBI Tricked Hillary

Notable quotes:
"... He said they took an innocuous email that she had received from one of her underlings and put the markings on it that indicated it was an email classified as SECRET. They asked Hillary if she had ever seen the email before, she said, "No." ..."
"... The FBI by marking the email with the markings that indicated that it was SECRET was only attempting to get Hillary to indicate that she understood what the markings meant and she did. ..."
The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

The FBI set up a trap for Hillary Clinton during their questioning of her and she fell right into it, according to Judge Andrew Napolitano.

Judge Napolitano appeared yesterday morning on the Don Imus Show on WABC radio and told Imus that at one point early in their questioning of her they lied to her. He said that, under law, they are allowed to do so and did so to set a trap.

He said they took an innocuous email that she had received from one of her underlings and put the markings on it that indicated it was an email classified as SECRET. They asked Hillary if she had ever seen the email before, she said, "No."

But upon reading the email, she went on to say, "I don't know why this is marked secret. There is nothing classified in it." Bam, she fell into the trap.

The FBI by marking the email with the markings that indicated that it was SECRET was only attempting to get Hillary to indicate that she understood what the markings meant and she did.

Judge Napolitano also told Imus that there will be more negative news coming out about the Clintons, especially the Clinton Foundation, He did not provide details.

[Sep 09, 2016] Platte river networks: Clinton e-mail server was never in Denver

Notable quotes:
"... "There never was, at any time, data belonging to the Clintons stored in Denver. Ever," said Dovetail Solutions CEO Andy Boian, who added that Clinton's server was always in a New Jersey data center. "We do not store data in any bathrooms." ..."
"... Private e-mail servers are unusual because they carry greater risks of getting hacked, said Scott W. Burt, president and CEO of Integro, a Denver e-mail management company. ..."
"... Platte River, which submitted a bid for the e-mail job, stepped in four months after Clinton left the secretary job on Feb. 1, 2013, and three months after Sidney Blumenthal , a former Clinton White House staffer, reported that his e-mail account had been hacked, exposing messages sent to Clinton. ..."
"... "We were literally hired in June 2013," Boian said, "and because we use industry best practices, we had (Clinton's) server moved to a data center in New Jersey. It remained in that spot until last week," when the FBI picked it up Aug. 12. ..."
"... "The role of Platte River Networks was to upgrade, secure and manage the e-mail server for both the Clintons and their staff beginning June 2013. Platte River Networks is not under investigation. We were never under investigation. And we will fully comply with the FBI," he said. ..."
"... Platte River Networks opened in September 2002, offering information technology services to small businesses. Services included computer maintenance, virus and malware control, and emergency technical support, according to an archive of its old website. ..."
"... Two years later, the company moved into a condo owned by company co-founder Treve Suazo at Ajax Lofts, 2955 Inca St., a few blocks from the South Platte River. ..."
"... A year later, the company began offering cloud-based services, which makes company data available online so employees can access software and services from any device. ..."
"... Platte River continues to win awards and has grown. Last week, it was named, for the fourth consecutive year, to CRN's Next-Gen 250 . The list highlights companies that are " ahead of the curve " in their IT offerings. ..."
Aug 19, 2015 | denverpost.com

And when Platte River became the latest name to emerge in the Clinton e-mail controversy, the company maintained its silence - until last week, when it hired a crisis-communications expert to defend against political innuendo, death threats and allegations that it stored her e-mail in the bathroom of a downtown Denver loft.

"There never was, at any time, data belonging to the Clintons stored in Denver. Ever," said Dovetail Solutions CEO Andy Boian, who added that Clinton's server was always in a New Jersey data center. "We do not store data in any bathrooms."

Platte River Networks had no prior relationship with Hillary Clinton, said Boian, whose online biography says he served on Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential transition team.

Hillary Clinton's decision to have an employee set up a private e-mail server in her New York home in 2008 has plagued the former secretary of state's presidential campaign.

The FBI is investigating whether any of her private e-mails contained sensitive information and should have been classified - and not stored on a computer inside her house.

Private e-mail servers are unusual because they carry greater risks of getting hacked, said Scott W. Burt, president and CEO of Integro, a Denver e-mail management company.

"There are a lot of people you could hire, and they would set up (an e-mail server) and run it. That's not hard. But there's no real reason to do that," Burt said. "The main motivator is you're nervous about what is in your e-mail. It's a control thing."

Boian said Platte River had nothing to do with Clinton's private home server.

Platte River, which submitted a bid for the e-mail job, stepped in four months after Clinton left the secretary job on Feb. 1, 2013, and three months after Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton White House staffer, reported that his e-mail account had been hacked, exposing messages sent to Clinton.

"We were literally hired in June 2013," Boian said, "and because we use industry best practices, we had (Clinton's) server moved to a data center in New Jersey. It remained in that spot until last week," when the FBI picked it up Aug. 12.

Platte River also is not in possession of any Clinton e-mail backups, he said.

"The role of Platte River Networks was to upgrade, secure and manage the e-mail server for both the Clintons and their staff beginning June 2013. Platte River Networks is not under investigation. We were never under investigation. And we will fully comply with the FBI," he said.

Clinton did not respond to requests for comment, but she has publicly expressed regrets for using a private e-mail server for her work as secretary of state. She has handed a portion of the e-mails to the State Department but deleted others. Asked about it this week by reporters in Las Vegas, Clinton responded, "Nobody talks to me about it other than you guys," she said.

Who are they?

Platte River Networks opened in September 2002, offering information technology services to small businesses. Services included computer maintenance, virus and malware control, and emergency technical support, according to an archive of its old website.

Two years later, the company moved into a condo owned by company co-founder Treve Suazo at Ajax Lofts, 2955 Inca St., a few blocks from the South Platte River.

A year later, the company began offering cloud-based services, which makes company data available online so employees can access software and services from any device.

Today, Platte touts itself as a full-service IT management firm.

It also lists Suazo, its CEO, and Brent Allshouse, its chief financial officer, as co-founders. According to industry publication CRN, Platte River expected to grow to $6 million in sales in 2014, from $4.7 million a year earlier.

But as early as 2006, Tom Welch was listed as a partner, the same title given to Suazo and Allshouse.

Welch, who now runs Colorado Cloud Consulting, declined to comment. But he told the United Kingdom's Daily Mail that Platte River Networks had retrofitted a bathroom in the loft to be the server room.

Fast growth

Before the Clinton scandal blew up, Platte River Networks welcomed attention. David DeCamillis joined the company in 2008 and, as its director of business development, became its public face, using news releases to promote industry awards and appearing on Fox31 Denver's "Good Day Colorado" as a tech expert.

In 2012, Platte River was named Ingram Micro's Rainmaker of the Western Region, an honor that California technology distributor gives its fastest-growing business partners based on revenue, peer-to-peer leadership and use of Ingram Micro's cloud services.

That same year, the company won the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce's Small Business of the Year award. The award is vetted by the chamber and independent judges, said Abram Sloss, executive director of the chamber's small-business development center.

"We really look for companies that have a good chance for a strong uptick and have solid growth," Sloss said. While the chamber can offer advice to members who suddenly are thrown into the media spotlight - for good or bad - Sloss said he has not heard from the company.

"Gosh, if I was the company who the Clintons hired, it'd be hard not to say, 'We are a trusted provider that one of the influential families in the United States hired,' " Sloss said.

Platte River continues to win awards and has grown. Last week, it was named, for the fourth consecutive year, to CRN's Next-Gen 250 . The list highlights companies that are " ahead of the curve" in their IT offerings.

In June, it moved to a 12,000-square-foot building at 5700 Washington St. A photo on Platte River's blog shows 30 people posing in the new building.

Platte River did not make DeCamillis, now its vice president of sales and marketing, available for comment.

But DeCamillis told The Washington Post that no one at the company had expected this kind of attention, which he said included death threats that caused the company to pull employee information from its website.

If they had, he said, "we would never have taken it on."

Platte River Networks timeline

[Sep 09, 2016] Hillary Clinton Used BleachBit To Wipe Emails - Slashdot

Notable quotes:
"... Which means she broke the law. Being "cleared to see it" doesn't mean you can see it anywhere you want, any time you want. There are requirements for handling the information. And a server in her basement that did not use encrypted connections for months, and then had the default VPN keys on the VPN appliance once they started using encryption, and an Internet-connected printer on the same network is nowhere near close to meeting those requirements. ..."
"... His journalist girlfriend had a clearance. According to your gross misunderstanding of our classification system, what crime did Petraeus commit? He had a clearance, and his girlfriend had a clearance. If "had a clearance" is good enough to excuse Clinton, then why was it not good enough to excuse Patraeus? ..."
"... Here's the problem -- Clinton deleted these emails AFTER they were requested from the House as part of an official investigation. She chose to print out everything she claimed was relevant (probably to avoid giving away metadata in headers, etc.) ..."
"... Being that Clinton didn't give a damn about securing the physical server and didn't give a damn about securing the messages sent through the server, it seems strange that she suddenly cares about security practices when deleting e-mail messages about yoga classes. ..."
"... Oh, did I mention that deleting the e-mail messages would be considered an obstruction of justice if it were done by a typical citizen? ..."
Sep 05, 2016 | news.slashdot.org
Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @05:30PM ( #52777655 )
Re:Too secure for insecure? ( Score: 5 , Insightful)

All indications are she wasn't very careful while actively using the server. However, once she started getting requests to produce data from it, then she suddenly got very careful. Even if she did do nothing wrong, that is a very stark change in behavior that just happened to coincide with legal requests to hand over data.

kenai_alpenglow ( 2709587 ) writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @07:33PM ( #52778465 )
Re:Too secure for insecure? ( Score: 5 , Insightful)

The FBI found the "key piece(s)". Comey then said "No prosecutor would pursue this case" and dropped it. He was probably right--but only because of her last name. If I did that, I might get out after 5 years or so. Heck, one of my counterparts got in trouble for a single line in a controlled document which had the same info in the public domain. I'm sick of these "Nothing to see here" claims--just look at any security briefing and it's spelled out. We just had another one, and according to it I would be required to report her if she was in my office.

jeff4747 ( 256583 ) writes: on Saturday August 27, 2016 @02:05PM ( #52781529 )
Re:Too secure for insecure? ( Score: 4 , Insightful)
That whole 'we little people would be in prison if we did this' meme is such bullshit.

You used the wrong tense. It's not "would be". It's "are". There are "little people" currently in prison for negligent handling of classified. Right now. Actually in prison.

She didn't do anything, beyond send and receive stuff she was cleared to see.

Which means she broke the law. Being "cleared to see it" doesn't mean you can see it anywhere you want, any time you want. There are requirements for handling the information. And a server in her basement that did not use encrypted connections for months, and then had the default VPN keys on the VPN appliance once they started using encryption, and an Internet-connected printer on the same network is nowhere near close to meeting those requirements.

Petreus is brought up endlessly. Y'know, the guy who gave classified stuff to his journalist girlfriend

His journalist girlfriend had a clearance. According to your gross misunderstanding of our classification system, what crime did Petraeus commit? He had a clearance, and his girlfriend had a clearance. If "had a clearance" is good enough to excuse Clinton, then why was it not good enough to excuse Patraeus?

but you ought to at least acknowledge that it was a tiny percentage of the traffic

Please cite where the statute states the percentage of allowable leaks.

and that stuff probably would've been sent on the unclassified DOS server had she been using that

First, government servers are regularly scanned for classified, so it would have been caught long before there were thousands of classified in her email. Second, the unclassified DoS server is far, far, far more secure than her basement server. For example, they don't have default VPN keys installed.

What we have here is a witch hunt for something - anything - about Benghazi that could paint Clinton in a politically unfavorable light.

No, this has absolutely nothing to do with Benghazi. But shouting "Benghazi!!!!" does a great job getting people like you to turn off their critical thinking and accept this week's excuse.

Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @06:31PM ( #52778125 )
Lies ( Score: 4 , Insightful)

Yes it does, read the laws. There is a Navy person who facing 20 years to life for disposing of a phone which had his picture while inside the sub. That is one of the more extreme cases, but it's literally a Web Search to prove you are wrong (shill?) Intent comes in to play _only_ for the penalty.

bongey ( 974911 ) writes: on Saturday August 27, 2016 @12:01AM ( #52779455 )
Re:Too secure for insecure? ( Score: 4 , Informative)

Except ALL 22 MILLION Bush administrative emails were recovered from tape backups. Clinton wiped the data AFTER the FOIA request. I don't know of a single person that has decided one day to delete ALL their personal emails, except Clinton. https://www.wired.com/2009/12/... [wired.com] another source http://www.npr.org/templates/s... [npr.org] , another http://www.npr.org/templates/s... [npr.org] . Yep you're idiot.

RoccamOccam ( 953524 ) writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @10:16PM ( #52779171 )
Too secure for insecure? ( Score: 5 , Interesting)
Comey spent hours in front of Congress explaining, very patiently, over and over, that the reason he could not recommend prosecution against Clinton is because all of the suspected crimes required proof of intent, which the FBI did not have.

Transcript of Gowdy questioning Comey. Lots of context, but note the bolded section :

Gowdy : Secretary Clinton said "I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material." That is true?

Comey : There was classified information emailed.

Gowdy : Secretary Clinton used one device, was that true?

Comey : She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.

Gowdy : Secretary Clinton said all work related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?

Comey : No. We found work related email, thousands, that were not returned.

Gowdy : Secretary Clinton said neither she or anyone else deleted work related emails from her personal account.

Comey : That's a harder one to answer. We found traces of work related emails in - on devices or in space. Whether they were deleted or when a server was changed out something happened to them, there's no doubt that the work related emails that were removed electronically from the email system.

Gowdy : Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive. Did her lawyers read the email content individually?

Comey : No.

Gowdy : Well, in the interest of time and because I have a plane to catch tomorrow afternoon, I'm not going to go through any more of the false statements but I am going to ask you to put on your old hat. False exculpatory statements are used for what?

Comey : Well, either for a substantive prosecution or evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.

Gowdy : Exactly. Intent and consciousness of guilt, right?

Comey : That is right?

Gowdy : Consciousness of guilt and intent? In your old job you would prove intent as you referenced by showing the jury evidence of a complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the public record and you would be arguing in addition to concealment the destruction that you and i just talked about or certainly the failure to preserve. You would argue all of that under the heading of content. You would also - intent. You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme when it started, when it ended and the number of emails whether They were originally classified or of classified under the heading of intent. You would also, probably, under common scheme or plan, argue the burn bags of daily calendar entries or the missing daily calendar entries as a common scheme or plan to conceal.
Two days ago, Director, you said a reasonable person in her position should have known a private email was no place to send and receive classified information. You're right. An average person does know not to do that.
This is no average person. This is a former First Lady, a former United States senator, and a former Secretary of State that the president now contends is the most competent, qualified person to be president since Jefferson. He didn't say that in '08 but says it now.
She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, kept the private emails for almost two years and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private email account.
So you have a rogue email system set up before she took the oath of office, thousands of what we now know to be classified emails, some of which were classified at the time. One of her more frequent email comrades was hacked and you don't know whether or not she was.
And this scheme took place over a long period of time and resulted in the destruction of public records and yet you say there is insufficient evidence of intent. You say she was extremely careless, but not intentionally so.
You and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do defendants announce 'On this date I intend to break this criminal code section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this date.' It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial evidence or if you're Congress and you realize how difficult it is prove, specific intent, you will formulate a statute that allows for gross negligence.
My time is out but this is really important. You mentioned there's no precedent for criminal prosecution. My fear is there still isn't. There's nothing to keep a future Secretary of State or President from this exact same email scheme or their staff.
And my real fear is this, what the chairman touched upon, this double track justice system that is rightly or wrongly perceived in this country. That if you are a private in the Army and email yourself classified information you will be kicked out. But if you are Hillary Clinton, and you seek a promotion to Commander in Chief, you will not be. So what I hope you can do today is help the average person, the reasonable person you made reference to, the reasonable person understand why she appears to be treated differently than the rest of us would be. With that I would yield back.

Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @05:50PM ( #52777831 )
Powell is not the prototype ! ( Score: 5 , Informative)

Powell used an aol account. He did NOT put a private server in his house!

Same for Rice. Powell used it for non-state NON-classified business.

Hillary has lied so many times about this server, is is clear to any hones observer that she was hiding activities of corruption with the Clinton foundation and did not want FOIA to discover her activities.

Hillary was supposed to have government archivists sort through the mails, not her personal attorneys. That was a violation of the federal records act.

She had classified information on the server, despite assertions that she did not- caught in another lie. She said all work related mails were turned over. Another lie- the FBI found thousands of work related mails not turned over, including classified.

cahuenga ( 3493791 ) writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @05:51PM ( #52777843 )
Re:Too secure for insecure? ( Score: 5 , Insightful)
Sure, Clinton sucks, but the big knock against her and her email server was that she wasn't secure enough with it.

My quibble was the blatant arrogance of the act. That private server was clearly a move to preserve final editing rights of her tenure at the State Department and evade any future FOIA requests that may crop up during her next run for the presidency; and was there ever any doubt that she would run again? The fact that she thought she could get away with it after experiencing the fallout from the exact same move by members of the Bush administration while she was a sitting Senator in Washington reinforces the feeling that her arrogance knows no bounds. She took a page out of the neocon playbook and figured she would show them how it's done.

Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @08:13PM ( #52778643 )
You're being willfully ignorant ( Score: 5 , Informative)

1. She put classified info on a private unsecured server where it was vulnerable, contrary to the law which she was fully advised of upon taking office.
2. She did all her work through that server, hiding it from all 3 government branches (congressional oversight, executive oversight, and the courts) and public FOIA requests.
3. When the material was sought by the courts and congress, she and the state department people lied under oath claiming the material did not exist (perhaps Nixon cronies should have all lied about tapes existing).
4. After her people knew the material was being sought, the server's files were transferred (by private IT people w/o clearances) to her lawyers (no clearances).
5. She and her lawyers deleted over 30000 e-mails, claiming they were only about yoga and her daughter's wedding dress (Nixon cut a few minutes of tape).
6. They then wiped the files with bit bleach (a step not needed for yoga or wedding dress e-mails). (Nixon did not degauss all his tapes)
7. They handed the wiped server to the FBI, and hillary publicly played ignorant with her "with a CLOTH?" comment (absolute iin-you-face arrogance against the rule of law) (Nixon did not hand tape recorders with erased tapes to the FBI)
Prove you are sincere, and not a total unprincipled partisan hack:
Are you a Nixon supporter?
Would you accept this behavior from Donald Trump or Dick Cheney?

Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @08:24PM ( #52778703 )
Backup appliance and server have all emails ( Score: 4 , Interesting)

Hillary Clinton's IT guy purchased an MS Exchange hosting contract from Platte River. The standard package came with a periodic backup to a Datto appliance, which takes snapshots of the Windows disk image several times a day. The appliance copies the snapshot to Datto's data center in real time. You can erase or even destroy the Windows machine drives and still use the snapshots to restore the disks to the snapshot of the time and date of your chosing.

The FBI confiscated the appliance from Platte River and seized the server from Datto. They have all the emails she sent and received since the start of her State Department tenure.

zerofoo ( 262795 ) writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @05:39PM ( #52777719 )
Not responsible - it's a crime. ( Score: 5 , Insightful)

Hillary Clinton co-mingled personal and official government communications on her private email server. All of those communications are subject to the Federal Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act.

Her personal emails ceased to be personal when she co-mingled them with official government communications. HRC and her lawyers were not authorized to decide what is relevant to FRA and FOIA and what is not.

HRC and her lawyers deleted 30,000 or so emails that are not recoverable - therefore she is in violation of both the FRA and FOIA.

HRC should be, at the very least, in front of a jury to answer for her actions.

AthanasiusKircher ( 1333179 ) writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @11:44PM ( #52779421 )
Re:More political redirection ( Score: 5 , Insightful)
I guess the people that are making accusations over that are either ignorant, or disingenuous.

Here's the problem -- Clinton deleted these emails AFTER they were requested from the House as part of an official investigation. She chose to print out everything she claimed was relevant (probably to avoid giving away metadata in headers, etc.) and then effectively "burned" the server, including (by her lawyer's own admission) tens of thousands of messages.

FBI investigations have now come up with thousands of emails which were NOT turned over in that paper dump. How many could have been part of those that were deleted and then lost when the server was wiped? We'll never know. Many of them were likely deleted in error, with her lawyers not realizing which ones should have been retained as they were going through tens of thousands of documents. But were ALL of these official state department emails recovered by the FBI (now 15,000+) deleted "in error"?

That's what's troubling about all of this. We have no way of knowing whether there may have been significant spoliation of evidence here (that's the legal term for intentionally, recklessly, or negligently destroying evidence). If this were a corporation who had been issued a subpoena and they acted in this manner, and it was later proven that they "lost" over ten thousand relevant documents in the process of their destruction of "irrelevant" documents, they would likely face significant legal sanctions, perhaps even criminal charges.

Legally, the safe course in this instance would have been to put the server in a secure location with legal supervision by Clinton's counsel until the matter could be resolved. Clinton's use of BleachBit is not surprising here -- not because it's proper protocol to delete secure information, but because it's the only reasonable way to delete potentially incriminating evidence of spoliation (even if most of it was accidental or whatever). If they hadn't used a very secure deletion protocol, then Clinton's attorneys would have been doing a VERY poor job at protecting her legally.

Personally, I'm not sure it's likely there was any "evil memo" buried among the State Department correspondence that could prove anything. (And if there were, I'm not convinced Clinton realized it.) On the other hand, I'm sure she had a bunch of private email dealings that she wouldn't want to get out -- if for nothing else then for bad public relations. Hence the destruction of everything on the server -- it's in line with the privacy paranoia that likely caused her to set up the server in the first place. But could there have been worse stuff there too? Maybe. Doesn't seem like we'll ever know, though, does it?

mysidia ( 191772 ) writes: on Saturday August 27, 2016 @09:28AM ( #52780637 )
Re:More political redirection ( Score: 4 , Insightful)

Here's the problem -- Clinton deleted these emails AFTER they were requested from the House as part of an official investigation. She chose to print out everything she claimed was relevant (probably to avoid giving away metadata in headers, etc.)

In other words, she willingly destroyed information she was required to hand over.

The full Headers and all Metadata are part of the Record and part of the E-mail; If you are requested to hand over the e-mails: you have no right to exclude or remove headers, even if your standard e-mail software does not normally display the headers when you are reading the message.

Anonymous Coward writes: on Friday August 26, 2016 @09:10PM ( #52778941 )
Re:More political redirection ( Score: 4 , Insightful)
A: "But anyone could hack in and see her emails, it's totally unsecure!"
B: "She used BleachBit."
A: "That proves she had something to hide!"

Being that Clinton didn't give a damn about securing the physical server and didn't give a damn about securing the messages sent through the server, it seems strange that she suddenly cares about security practices when deleting e-mail messages about yoga classes.

Oh, did I mention that deleting the e-mail messages would be considered an obstruction of justice if it were done by a typical citizen?

[Sep 09, 2016] Quite panic in Hillary camp over transfer of FBI documents to Congress

Congress committees have a couple really tough prosecutors as chairs and that created a ground for Hillary impeachment if she is elected. Also "August break" due to Hillary deteriorating health creates a problem for Hillary campaign as the candidate now is considered by many voters as too frail to hold a POTUS position. This negative impression is supported now by so many facts that it can 't be changed by rabid attacks on Trump. Some Clinton actions in "bathroom server" scandal now can be attributed to her senility.
Notable quotes:
"... Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon is calling the FBI's move to give the notes to Congress "an extraordinarily rare step that was sought solely by Republicans for the purposes of further second-guessing the career professionals at the FBI." ..."
Aug 16, 2016 | www.washingtonpost.com

Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign says it wants FBI documents on the investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server to be shared publicly and not just with members of Congress.

Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon is calling the FBI's move to give the notes to Congress "an extraordinarily rare step that was sought solely by Republicans for the purposes of further second-guessing the career professionals at the FBI."

Fallon says if the material is going to be shared outside the Justice Department, it "should be released widely so that the public can see them for themselves." He says Republicans should not be allowed to "mischaracterize" the information "through selective, partisan leaks."

A Republican-led House oversight panel is reviewing the documents that have been classified as secret.

[Sep 09, 2016] Hillary Clinton lied about not receiving email subpoena, Benghazi chair claims

According to Gowdy, "the committee immediately subpoenaed Clinton personally after learning the full extent of her unusual email arrangement with herself, and would have done so earlier if the State Department or Clinton had been forthcoming that State did not maintain custody of her records and only Secretary Clinton herself had her records when Congress first requested them."
Notable quotes:
"... According to Gowdy, "the committee immediately subpoenaed Clinton personally after learning the full extent of her unusual email arrangement with herself, and would have done so earlier if the State Department or Clinton had been forthcoming that State did not maintain custody of her records and only Secretary Clinton herself had her records when Congress first requested them." ..."
"... Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. The Republicans chant while Rome burns. How about Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq.... ..."
"... Did Clinton say she's never had a subpoena? Yes. Did a subpoena get issued? Yes. Was the whole interview at that point discussing a point in time months before the subpoena got issued? Yes. ..."
"... Karl Rove has so often said that it is who DOES NOT vote that determines the outcome, and now we have the Tea Party. ..."
"... The Clintons ARE very close personal family friends with the entire Bush clan. When the TV cameras are off and the reporters are gone, they are a very tight group who see the world thru like greedy eyes. Check this out. ..."
"... Having someone who is the brother of one former president and the son of another run against the wife of still another former president would be sweetly illustrative of all sorts of degraded and illusory aspects of American life, from meritocracy to class mobility. ..."
"... Wall Street has long been unable to contain its collective glee over a likely Hillary Clinton presidency. ..."
"... the matriarch of the Bush family (former First Lady Barbara) has described the Clinton patriarch (former President Bill) as a virtual family member, noting that her son, George W., affectionately calls his predecessor "my brother by another mother." ..."
"... If this happens, the 2016 election would vividly underscore how the American political class functions: by dynasty, plutocracy, fundamental alignment of interests masquerading as deep ideological divisions, and political power translating into vast private wealth and back again. ..."
"... Most of our presidents were horn dogs. Their wives know about it in many cases, but they knew that it was part of the package. The only difference was that before Clinton, the press would never think of reporting about sexual dalliances. ..."
"... Clinton is not materially different to many GOP candidates outside the loons. ..."
"... She has stiff competition: Madeleine Albright, Samantha Power, Carly Fiorina, etc. She might win the title, though. ..."
"... So after years of trying to turn Benghazi into a scandal, the email thing is mostly meaningless to Democrats. So congratulations Republicans, you blew your chance. ..."
Jul 09, 2015 | The Guardian

In a statement on Wednesday, Republican congressman Trey Gowdy accused the former secretary of state of making an "inaccurate claim" during an interview on Tuesday. Responding to a question about the controversy surrounding her email server while at the US state department, Clinton had told CNN: "I've never had a subpoena."

But Gowdy said: "The committee has issued several subpoenas, but I have not sought to make them public. I would not make this one public now, but after Secretary Clinton falsely claimed the committee did not subpoena her, I have no choice in order to correct the inaccuracy."

Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill told the Guardian that Gowdy's accusation itself was inaccurate, insisting that the congressman had not issued a subpoena until March.

"She was asked about her decision to not to retain her personal emails after providing all those that were work-related, and the suggestion was made that a subpoena was pending at that time. That was not accurate," Merrill wrote in an email.

Gowdy also posted a copy of the subpoena on the Benghazi committee's website.

According to Gowdy, "the committee immediately subpoenaed Clinton personally after learning the full extent of her unusual email arrangement with herself, and would have done so earlier if the State Department or Clinton had been forthcoming that State did not maintain custody of her records and only Secretary Clinton herself had her records when Congress first requested them."


Lester Smithson 9 Jul 2015 16:00

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. The Republicans chant while Rome burns. How about Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq....

kattw 9 Jul 2015 12:41

Gotta love when people say they have no choice but to do something absurd, then choose to do something absurd rather than not.

Did Clinton say she's never had a subpoena? Yes. Did a subpoena get issued? Yes. Was the whole interview at that point discussing a point in time months before the subpoena got issued? Yes.

Yes, Mr. Legislator: you DID subpoena Clinton. Several months AFTER she did the thing in question, which the interviewer wanted to know why she did in light of subpoenas. And really, what was she thinking? After all, a subpoena had already been issued, ummm, 3 months into the future! Why was she not psychic? Why did she not alter her actions based on something that congress would do eventually? How DARE she not know what the fates had decried!

Mr. Legislator, you were given the opportunity to not spin this as a political issue, and to be honest about the committee's actions. You chose to do otherwise. Nobody forced you to do so. You had plenty of choices - you made one. Don't try to shift that onto a lie Clinton never told. She's got plenty of lies in her closet, many stupidly obvious - calling one of her truths a lie just shows how much of an ideological buffoon you really are.

ExcaliburDefender -> Dan Wipper 8 Jul 2015 23:47

Whatever. Dick Cheney should have been tried in the Hague and incarcerated for 50 lifetimes. Most voters have decided to vote party lines, the next 16 months is for the 10% undecided and a few that can be swayed.

Karl Rove has so often said that it is who DOES NOT vote that determines the outcome, and now we have the Tea Party.

Plenty of time for outrage, faux or real. We haven't had a single debate yet. Still get to hear from Chafee on the metric system and whether evolution is real or not from the GOP.

Jill Stein for President <-------|) Paid for by David Koch and Friends


Herr_Settembrini 8 Jul 2015 23:25

Quite frankly, I've long since passed the point of caring about Benghazi, and the reason why is extremely simple: this has been a nakedly partisan investigation, stretching on for years now, that has tried to manufacture a scandal and fake outrage in order to deny Obama re-election in 2012, and now (since that didn't work) to deny Clinton the election in 2016.

The GOP doesn't have one shred of credibility left about this issue-- to the point that if they were able to produce photographs of Obama and Clinton personally storming the embassy, America would collectively shrug (except of course for the AM talk radio crowd, who are perpetually angry anyway, so nobody would notice).


TET68HUE -> StevePrimus 8 Jul 2015 23:08

The Clintons ARE very close personal family friends with the entire Bush clan. When the TV cameras are off and the reporters are gone, they are a very tight group who see the world thru like greedy eyes. Check this out.

JEB BUSH V. HILLARY CLINTON: THE PERFECTLY ILLUSTRATIVE ELECTION
BY GLENN GREENWALD

@ggreenwald
12/17/2014

Jeb Bush yesterday strongly suggested he was running for President in 2016. If he wins the GOP nomination, it is highly likely that his opponent for the presidency would be Hillary Clinton. Having someone who is the brother of one former president and the son of another run against the wife of still another former president would be sweetly illustrative of all sorts of degraded and illusory aspects of American life, from meritocracy to class mobility. That one of those two families exploited its vast wealth to obtain political power, while the other exploited its political power to obtain vast wealth, makes it more illustrative still: of the virtually complete merger between political and economic power, of the fundamentally oligarchical framework that drives American political life.

Then there are their similar constituencies: what Politico termed "money men" instantly celebrated Jeb Bush's likely candidacy, while the same publication noted just last month how Wall Street has long been unable to contain its collective glee over a likely Hillary Clinton presidency. The two ruling families have, unsurprisingly, developed a movingly warm relationship befitting their position: the matriarch of the Bush family (former First Lady Barbara) has described the Clinton patriarch (former President Bill) as a virtual family member, noting that her son, George W., affectionately calls his predecessor "my brother by another mother."

If this happens, the 2016 election would vividly underscore how the American political class functions: by dynasty, plutocracy, fundamental alignment of interests masquerading as deep ideological divisions, and political power translating into vast private wealth and back again. The educative value would be undeniable: somewhat like how the torture report did, it would rub everyone's noses in exactly those truths they are most eager to avoid acknowledge. Email the author: glenn.greenwald@theintercept.com

StevePrimus 8 Jul 2015 22:33

Clinton's nomination as a democratic candidate for president is a fait accompli, as is Bush's nomination on the GOP card. The amusing side show with Rubio, Trump, Sanders, Paul, Walker, Perry, Cruz, et al can be entertaining, but note that Clinton and Bush seem much closer aligned with each other than either sueems to be to Sanders on the left and Graham on the right.


MtnClimber -> CitizenCarrier 8 Jul 2015 20:41

Read some history books and learn.

Most of our presidents were horn dogs. Their wives know about it in many cases, but they knew that it was part of the package. The only difference was that before Clinton, the press would never think of reporting about sexual dalliances.

Among those that cheated are:

Washington
Jefferson
Lincoln
Harding
FDR
Eisenhower
JFK
LBJ
Clinton

Not bad company, but they all cheated. It seems like greater sexual drive is part of the package for people that choose to be president.

RossBest 8 Jul 2015 20:24

There is an obvious possible explanation here. She was talking about things in the past and ineptly shifted in effect into the "historical present" or "dramatic present" and didn't realize she was creating an ambiguity.

That is, she was talking about the times when she set up the email system and used it and later deleted personal emails and she intended to deny having received any relevant subpoenas AT THOSE TIMES.

I'm not a Clinton supporter but this seems plausible. But inept.

zchabj6 8 Jul 2015 20:10

The state of US politics...

Clinton is not materially different to many GOP candidates outside the loons.

CitizenCarrier -> Carambaman 8 Jul 2015 17:54

My personal favorite was when as 1st Lady during a trip to New Zealand she told reporters she'd been named in honor of Sir Edmund Hillary.

She was born before he climbed Everest. He was at that time an obscure chicken farmer.

BorninUkraine -> duncandunnit 8 Jul 2015 17:44

You mean, she lies, like Bill? But as snakes go, she is a lot more dangerous than him.

BorninUkraine -> Barry_Seal 8 Jul 2015 17:40

She has stiff competition: Madeleine Albright, Samantha Power, Carly Fiorina, etc. She might win the title, though.

Dennis Myers 8 Jul 2015 16:30

This sort of thing is exactly why anything they throw at her won't stick. Like the boy who cried wolf, when the wolf actually came, no one was listening anymore. So after years of trying to turn Benghazi into a scandal, the email thing is mostly meaningless to Democrats. So congratulations Republicans, you blew your chance.

[Sep 09, 2016] Hillary Clintons email system was insecure for two months

Notable quotes:
"... Guciffer found top secret E-mail on Blumenthal's (I think that is the guy) account according to the agents who studied Guciffer's computer. ..."
"... The legality of her choice has yet to be determined and will likely hinge on the degree to which classified government documents were exposed or disseminated. It was - and still is - against the rules published by the State Department. ..."
"... It is also an amazingly arrogant act by a politician who often attacked previous administrations for their use of "private emails" and overall lack of transparency. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton has been insecure for years and for many reasons. ..."
"... A person is insecure, a network is unsecured. No? ..."
"... I saw a video where Alabama State troopers are talking about how Hillary and Bill used to swap women. She also apparently has a big affinity for cocaine..though I guess in all fairness that's most of Hollywood and liberal Washington. ..."
Mar 11, 2015 | computerworld.com

JoeDoll4

Guciffer found top secret E-mail on Blumenthal's (I think that is the guy) account according to the agents who studied Guciffer's computer. You can always tell when a politician lies; their lips are moving.

DLivesInTexas

"The arrangement, while it appears unusual, was and is acceptable and legal, according to the State Department."

The legality of her choice has yet to be determined and will likely hinge on the degree to which classified government documents were exposed or disseminated. It was - and still is - against the rules published by the State Department.

It is also an amazingly arrogant act by a politician who often attacked previous administrations for their use of "private emails" and overall lack of transparency.

Genny G

Hillary Clinton has been insecure for years and for many reasons.

StrongHarm

A person is insecure, a network is unsecured. No? Author should correct title.

I saw a video where Alabama State troopers are talking about how Hillary and Bill used to swap women. She also apparently has a big affinity for cocaine..though I guess in all fairness that's most of Hollywood and liberal Washington. As a conservative myself, what I detest about the woman most is not how she affects republicans, but how she affects her own supporters. She claims to be 'looking out for the little guy' and minorities so she can get votes, but when the cameras aren't rolling, she's doing business with corrupt corporations and trying to live like a queen. A lot of politicians are dishonest, but she really takes the cake.

[Sep 06, 2016] After Bush II administration it is generally unclear what should be the level of crime committed to be arrested.

Notable quotes:
"... But potentially opening an important view on the US diplomatic correspondence for four years to any state with the desire to read it is something really special. A unique achievement of Secretary Clinton. ..."
"... for any specialist with even superficial knowledge of computer security the level of incompetence and arrogance demonstrated is simply unreal. Especially after the latest FBI documents. ..."
Sep 05, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com
Drom: Paul Krugman Hillary Clinton Gets Gored

Pres coverage of the campaigns has been "bizarre":

Hillary Clinton Gets Gored, by Paul Krugman, NY Times :

... ... ...

And here's a pro tip: the best ways to judge a candidate's character are to look at what he or she has actually done, and what policies he or she is proposing.

... ... ...

In other words, focus on the facts. America and the world can't afford another election tipped by innuendo.

likbez -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 06:10 PM

You have a valid point.

After Bush II administration it is generally unclear what should be the level of crime committed to be arrested.

But potentially opening an important view on the US diplomatic correspondence for four years to any state with the desire to read it is something really special. A unique achievement of Secretary Clinton.

Now I am not so sure that the level of incompetence of Hillary and her aides in this sordid saga is less it was for the key figures of Bush II administration (who also used a private email server for a while with impunity, although not for State Department activities).

But for any specialist with even superficial knowledge of computer security the level of incompetence and arrogance demonstrated is simply unreal. Especially after the latest FBI documents.

Can you imagine that they have no technical knowledge of how to create the archive of emails in Windows Server directly and used Apple laptop and then Gmail account and then intermediaries to achieve the necessary result. This is something so stupid and reckless that there is no words for it.

Also wiping out this "bathroom" mail server with BleachKit is a very suspicious activity for any person under investigation.

== quote ==
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/08/26/1954241/hillary-clinton-used-bleachbit-to-wipe-emails

All indications are she wasn't very careful while actively using the server. However, once she started getting requests to produce data from it, then she suddenly got very careful. Even if she did do nothing wrong, that is a very stark change in behavior that just happened to coincide with legal requests to hand over data.

...The FBI found the "key piece(s)". Comey then said "No prosecutor would pursue this case" and dropped it. He was probably right--but only because of her last name. If I did that, I might get out after 5 years or so. Heck, one of my counterparts got in trouble for a single line in a controlled document which had the same info in the public domain. I'm sick of these "Nothing to see here" claims--just look at any security briefing and it's spelled out. We just had another one, and according to it I would be required to report her if she was in my office.

...Yes it does, read the laws. There is a Navy person who facing 20 years to life for disposing of a phone which had his picture while inside the sub. That is one of the more extreme cases, but it's literally a Web Search to prove you are wrong (shill?) Intent comes in to play _only_ for the penalty.

...I like how the argument has devolved here to "If Bush did it, then it's ok". PopeRatzo, is Dubya really your moral compass? Your guiding light?

...Except ALL 22 MILLION Bush administrative emails were recovered from tape backups. Clinton wiped the data AFTER the FOIA request. I don't know of a single person that has decided one day to delete ALL their personal emails, except Clinton. https://www.wired.com/2009/12/... [wired.com] another source http://www.npr.org/templates/s... [npr.org] , another http://www.npr.org/templates/s... [npr.org] . Yep you're idiot.

...My quibble was the blatant arrogance of the act. That private server was clearly a move to preserve final editing rights of her tenure at the State Department and evade any future FOIA requests that may crop up during her next run for the presidency; and was there ever any doubt that she would run again? The fact that she thought she could get away with it after experiencing the fallout from the exact same move by members of the Bush administration while she was a sitting Senator in Washington reinforces the feeling that her arrogance knows no bounds. She took a page out of the neocon playbook and figured she would show them how it's done.

...1. She put classified info on a private unsecured server where it was vulnerable, contrary to the law which she was fully advised of upon taking office.

2. She did all her work through that server, hiding it from all 3 government branches (congressional oversight, executive oversight, and the courts) and public FOIA requests.

3. When the material was sought by the courts and congress, she and the state department people lied under oath claiming the material did not exist (perhaps Nixon cronies should have all lied about tapes existing).

4. After her people knew the material was being sought, the server's files were transferred (by private IT people w/o clearances) to her lawyers (no clearances).

5. She and her lawyers deleted over 30000 e-mails, claiming they were only about yoga and her daughter's wedding dress (Nixon cut a few minutes of tape).

6. They then wiped the files with bit bleach (a step not needed for yoga or wedding dress e-mails). (Nixon did not degauss all his tapes)

7. They handed the wiped server to the FBI, and hillary publicly played ignorant with her "with a CLOTH?" comment (absolute iin-you-face arrogance against the rule of law) (Nixon did not hand tape recorders with erased tapes to the FBI)

Prove you are sincere, and not a total unprincipled partisan hack: Are you a Nixon supporter? Would you accept this behavior from Donald Trump or Dick Cheney?

[Sep 06, 2016] Paul Krugman Hillary Clinton Gets Gored

Notable quotes:
"... Clintons crimes with national security leaks and destruction of federal records investigators got no prosecution. The democrat camp has no convictions. The curve Hillary is on is the same one any tin pot dictator enjoys. ..."
"... False equivalence. The world was different in 2008-2012 , Powell had far fewer hackers when he was lying about Iraq. The tech world was much less threatening. Powell learned from his training, knew better than to go past secure networks for sensitive information. He also knew about federal records act and penalties. ..."
"... Clinton crimes are called scandals. She got no convictions. ..."
"... Should Trump take the brass ring, let us hope he isn't really as brash or inept as Bush Jr, but that's asking a LOT ..."
"... And if Hillary does win (as expected), let's look forward to having that charming rogue in the White House at her side. Let's manage to bring the wars to an end & have peace rule the planet, mostly. ..."
"... That last sentence is certainly something we can and should hope for. However, given her somewhat hawkish disposition and likely need to demonstrate that she has the balls to be commander in Chief, I would not preclude the possibility of a little fighting somewhere. However, the consolation is that she did not ask the generals "if we have nukes why don't we use them"? Turns out there are worser things than bad. ..."
"... As someone who has been involved in the national security system for more than four decades, I can't help but nearly vomit when I read Hillary's answers to the FBI's questions. Had I or any other cleared employee of lesser stature given the same answers, we would have been fired if not prosecuted for our behavior. Here irresponsible behavior was dangerous to our security and disgusting. ..."
"... You think Clinton is going to turn out to be bolder and more progressive than her elite and plutocratic backers suspect. Maybe. Time will tell. But I'm just saying that if part of the Democrats' goal was to generate the kind of electoral groundswell that would sweep a whole new progressive House into power, you don't get that kind of result by nominating party royalty and an old guard representative of the national establishment and the administrations of the last century. ..."
"... Not once has an indictment, no arrests, how do people keep holding on to some belief that there must be something to it? I know people will say the euphemism, where there is smoke there is fire, but come on. Mind you the secrecy the Clintons exhibit does their cause no good, but just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you! ..."
"... If any of the scandals went to a jury instead of being swept under the rug, we might have judgements. If I did what Clinton did with information security I would be in jail. If I did that with federal records I would do time as well! ..."
Sep 05, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com
Pres coverage of the campaigns has been "bizarre":
Hillary Clinton Gets Gored, by Paul Krugman, NY Times :

... ... ...

And here's a pro tip: the best ways to judge a candidate's character are to look at what he or she has actually done, and what policies he or she is proposing.

... ... ...

In other words, focus on the facts. America and the world can't afford another election tipped by innuendo.
pgl : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 11:11 AM
"True, there aren't many efforts to pretend that Donald Trump is a paragon of honesty. But it's hard to escape the impression that he's being graded on a curve."

Trump supporters would have you believe his immigration policy is the same as that of Jeb! and little Marco. Never mind what he told that white audience. They would also have you believe he is all for equal rights for black people. Never mind what he told that white audience.

Krugman is saying that Bush was the most dishonest candidate ever in 2000. Well - that was so 16 years ago. Romney 2012 was much worse. And Trump 2016 is reminding me of Romney 2012.

ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:01 PM
A curve! while Clintons crimes with national security leaks and destruction of federal records investigators got no prosecution. The democrat camp has no convictions. The curve Hillary is on is the same one any tin pot dictator enjoys.
sanjait -> ilsm... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:11 PM
It's actually the same one Colin Powell enjoyed, except Hillary's private email system was far more secured and, unlike Powell's janky use of an AOL account that got hacked, there's no evidence HRC's was compromised.
ilsm -> sanjait... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:34 PM
False equivalence. The world was different in 2008-2012 , Powell had far fewer hackers when he was lying about Iraq. The tech world was much less threatening. Powell learned from his training, knew better than to go past secure networks for sensitive information. He also knew about federal records act and penalties.
pgl -> ilsm... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:46 PM
Yes, yes Donald. Now sit down with Ben Carson and pretend you are praying.
ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:35 PM
Retired neuro-surgeons lead prayer?
DeDude : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 11:57 AM
Yes isn't it remarkable how Trump can say opposite things within the same month, week or even in the same speech - and just be considered to have "evolved" rather than being chastised for trying to pander to all sides. Again if he were judged by a standard even half as critical as a Clinton he would have evaporated long time ago.
ilsm -> DeDude... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:01 PM
Clinton crimes are called scandals. She got no convictions.
ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:36 PM
I hope your day job does not challenge you with logic.
ilsm : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:02 PM
poor pk.
RC AKA Darryl, Ron -> ilsm... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:38 PM
Poor us. Poor US. Well in a couple of months it will all be over except for the crying. That never ends.
Fred C. Dobbs : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:14 PM
George Bush Jr (particularly with 9/11, Hurricane Katrina and the financial crash) was a spectacularly inept president and considered one of the worst ever.

His predecessor was a largely successful yet quite 'colorful' president, who had great economic success with the internet boom, which VP Al Gore did have a minor legislative hand in dontchaknow. Barely fought a war. Got impeached.

Both fellows were loved or hated by a lot of people, who don't talk to one another much.

It has now come to pass that a guy who reminds us of the former is running against the spouse of the latter. Complications ensue. Go figure.

Should Trump take the brass ring, let us hope he isn't really as brash or inept as Bush Jr, but that's asking a LOT, so don't chance it, please.

And if Hillary does win (as expected), let's look forward to having that charming rogue in the White House at her side. Let's manage to bring the wars to an end & have peace rule the planet, mostly.

DeDude -> Fred C. Dobbs... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:25 PM
That last sentence is certainly something we can and should hope for. However, given her somewhat hawkish disposition and likely need to demonstrate that she has the balls to be commander in Chief, I would not preclude the possibility of a little fighting somewhere. However, the consolation is that she did not ask the generals "if we have nukes why don't we use them"? Turns out there are worser things than bad.
ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:35 PM
"Barely" is exaggeration, the Kagan advised Nuland Clintons' peace movement is like Obama's and Hillary's.....

pk poor pk says Trump gets away with misstating fallacious facts.

And which Clinton robots are running around like tailgunner Joe screaming that Putin is trying to out do AIPAC?

The democrat peace movement steps aside for spreading organized murder from expensive weapons system to do "civilian protective operations" and the Saudi's bidding against Shiites.

Keep the money flowing and the drones causing justifiable at lest to Lockheed and Boeing shareholders "militarily proportional collateral damage".

"Barely fought a war." Bill's little wars in the Balkans rubber the Tsar's nose in it, broke up a several small countries, bombed the Chinese embassy at great profit from a B-2 (it did not rain that day) and US still pays NATO for a huge military base there.

Fred C. Dobbs -> ilsm... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 12:47 PM
You bring up Clinton's skirmishes as if they bear any kind of comparison to what Bush Jr wrought. Seriously?

Because, after all, to quote George Jr, 'Saddam went after my dad!', he had no choice at all.

ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:44 PM
My nuclear warrior pension is enough for rent, nice car, fishing, hunting, etc. The voices say another ad hominem and not so creative at that!
anne -> Fred C. Dobbs... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:54 PM
"Saddam went after my dad!"

[ There is no such quote on the internet. There can never be a valid reason for inventing a quote, since that distorts history. ]

Alex Tolley -> anne... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 02:17 PM
This is the actual quote according to ABC News: "There's no doubt he can't stand us. After all, this is a guy that tried to kill my dad at one time."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90764&page=1

pgl -> anne... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 02:39 PM
So why did President Bush invade Iraq in 2003? So many excuses, so many lost lives.
ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:45 PM
W listened to Powell like Hillary claims on E Mails.
ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:43 PM
Obama and Hill Clinton are Saudi tools same as W. Keeping AUMF going the past 8 years lets W off a lot of the Iraq/WMD and Afghanistan hooks!

Bill's adventures included firing a general for commenting on the craziness of losing people over Serbia.

Bill's evolutionary adventures in the Balkans are anti Russian neocon trials. Their exceptionalism pushed Russia around and moved NATO eastward reneging on deals Bush Sr. had with the Russians.

Hillary, extending Bill's neocon meme* over Ukraine and Libya are nearing W level insanity.

Nuland (married to the neocon Kagan family) came with Strobe Talbot in 1993.

likbez -> ilsm... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 08:24 PM
Bravo ilsm !!!

We really facing a vote for a person who would probably be convicted by Nuremberg tribunal. All those factors that are often discussed like Supreme court nominations, estate tax, etc, are of secondary importance to the cardinal question -- "war vs peace" question.

A lot of commenters here do not understand the danger of yet another neocon warmonger as POTUS. A person who never have a war she did not like. They never experienced the horrors of wars in their lives. Only highly sanitized coverage from MSM.

Demonizing of Trump went way too far in this forum. And a lot of commenters like most Web hamsters enjoy denigrating him, forgetting the fact that a vote for Hillary is the vote for a war criminal. "Trump this and Trump that" blabbing can't hide this important consideration.

Moreover, lesser evilism considerations are not working for war criminals. They are like absolute zero in Kelvin scale. You just can't go lower.

Moreover, after Bush II there is a consensus that are very few people in the USA who are unqualified to the run the country. From this point of view Trump is extremely qualified (and actually managed to master English language unlike Bush II with his famous Bushisms ).

But again those are secondary considerations. "War vs peace" question in the one that matters most. Another reckless warmonger and all bets might be off for the country (with an unexpected solution for global warming problem)

pgl -> Fred C. Dobbs... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:49 PM
Bush declared he got things done. He did - very bad things.
ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:52 PM
W been out for over 7 years and the body bag strategy is the same. Obama ran on ending Iraq and he did NOT vote for AUMF!

I suggest the collateral damage caused by Obama and Clinton is surging past W, who had only 6 years to do it.

Clinton and Obama will be at it 8 years and for Libya and Syria are [related to percent of population] past Iraq. Syria has military appropriate collateral damage more than Iraq since 1993.

You cannot call someone nut so you can ignore facts.

likbez -> ilsm... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 08:25 PM
That's correct.
Lilguy : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:03 PM
As someone who has been involved in the national security system for more than four decades, I can't help but nearly vomit when I read Hillary's answers to the FBI's questions. Had I or any other cleared employee of lesser stature given the same answers, we would have been fired if not prosecuted for our behavior. Here irresponsible behavior was dangerous to our security and disgusting.

Hillary is every bit as honest as her husband was when he answered "I have not had sex with that woman." The two of them deserve each other. The rest of the country deserves neither of them.

sanjait -> Lilguy... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:14 PM
As someone who also knows a little about network security and the umpteen bazillion ways most people violate stated policies, including Secretaries Rice and Powell who established the precedent at State for Hillary's use of a private email system ...

I think you're overreacting, and myopic, and possibly concern trolling.

ilsm -> sanjait... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:57 PM
The devil made Clinton aggressively inept! Sanjait, come on man!
Watermelonpunch -> sanjait... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 05:16 PM
I agree the 2nd trolly paragraph the commenter paints himself as a kook still luridly fascinated with Bill Clinton's sex life. haha

But I think it's worth pointing out that people who work or have worked for the government in less illustrious (non political) positions are subject to a lot of what seems like nit-picky draconian rules, under threat of having one's work life made miserable, at least for a time, for breaking any little one of them.
It's just the nature of the beast of that type of govt employment. It's a lot of stress. And politically appointed & elected government workers at least seem to get away with a lot comparatively.

So I think it's worth acknowledging, when seen from that position, the attitude, and feelings, are understandable, even if you don't agree with it.

I'd rate that comment just 5% trolly. ;)

Watermelonpunch -> Lilguy... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 05:05 PM
I would drop the 2nd paragraph in future if you want to be heard. Because otherwise people don't think about what you said before it because you've just come across as one of those kind of people who were telling lame old tired monica jokes a decade after the fact. *sigh*
Peter K. : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:16 PM
I think Trump is going to lose badly. Hopefully the Republicans lose the Senate and House as well.

Then the Republicans and alt right cult will have a meltdown.

likbez -> Peter K.... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 08:29 PM
The key question is whether that will be better or worse for the country. I think Hillary is a more dangerous war criminal, then just corrupt businessman like Trump. Trump university is less important then the vote for Iraq war, IMHO.
Dan Kervick -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:21 PM
You think Clinton is going to turn out to be bolder and more progressive than her elite and plutocratic backers suspect. Maybe. Time will tell. But I'm just saying that if part of the Democrats' goal was to generate the kind of electoral groundswell that would sweep a whole new progressive House into power, you don't get that kind of result by nominating party royalty and an old guard representative of the national establishment and the administrations of the last century.
ilsm -> Dan Kervick... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 05:00 PM
While a lot of those new dem senators will be red dogs with the machine. A blue senate might [SOTUS apt] keep gay marriage, not much else.
Fred C. Dobbs -> Dan Kervick... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 08:14 PM
That would be more (arguably) true if Hillary weren't drawing votes from such Republicans. Which naturally concerns progressive Dems. This is perhaps a wave that alters the GOP for a long time.
sanjait : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:20 PM
It's called "the Clinton Rules."

According to the Clinton Rules, the appearance of the possibility of impropriety, no matter how trivial or technical in nature, is to be deemed prima facie as credible evidence of guilt, and any and all innuendo brought forth is to be treated as serious.

Thus, Whitewater. And Vince Foster. And Benghazi. And "Wall Street speeches." And everything related to the word "emails." And State Dept "access". And whatever else is the manufact-roversy of the day.

Meanwhile, the media and the public widely regard both Hillary and Trump as "dishonest", as if there were any semblance of equivalence.


It's clear why this happens ... there is a confluence of interest, among Republicans, Bernie Busters, and the media, in manufacturing controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton. The GOP wants to weaken her. The Busters resent her. And the media desperately wants a horse race and to be able to create "both sides do it" equivalence in order to bolster their own reputations for objectivity. The sad thing is that so many Americans are gullible enough to buy it.

Paine -> sanjait... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 04:59 PM
"the media desperately wants a horse race"

True

".... and ....create "both sides do it" equivalence in order to bolster their own reputations for objectivity."

Nonsense

ilsm -> sanjait... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 05:01 PM
fantastic. controversy? when the DOJ was called off no one in the media blinked?
M. Gamble : , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:31 PM
This whole thing is amazing. For thirty years, the republicans discover a scandal on average about twice a year, starting I think with White Water. Oh sure all official and all, Congressional Hearings, investigators and in the end nada. Not once has an indictment, no arrests, how do people keep holding on to some belief that there must be something to it? I know people will say the euphemism, where there is smoke there is fire, but come on. Mind you the secrecy the Clintons exhibit does their cause no good, but just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you!
pgl -> M. Gamble... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 01:53 PM
"Not once has an indictment, no arrests, how do people keep holding on to some belief that there must be something to it?"

Part of this is due to Faux News. A large part of this is due to the NY Times trying to be Faux News. Competition can be a bad thing at times.

ilsm -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 05:03 PM
Crooked Obama administration.
likbez -> pgl... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 06:10 PM
You have a valid point.

After Bush II administration it is generally unclear what should be the level of crime committed to be arrested.

But potentially opening an important view on the US diplomatic correspondence for four years to any state with the desire to read it is something really special. A unique achievement of Secretary Hillary.

Now I am not so sure that the level of incompetence of Hillary and her aides in this sordid saga is less it was for the key figures of Bush II administration (who also used a private email server for a while with impunity, although not for State Department activities).

But for any specialist with even superficial knowledge of computer security the level of incompetence and arrogance demonstrated is simply unreal. Especially after the latest FBI documents.

Can you imagine that they have no technical knowledge of how to create the archive of emails in Windows Server directly and used Apple laptop and then Gmail account and intermediaries to achieve the necessary result. This is something so stupid and reckless that there is no words for it.

Also wiping out this "bathroom" mail server with BleachKit is a very suspicious activity for any person under investigation.

== quote ==
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/08/26/1954241/hillary-clinton-used-bleachbit-to-wipe-emails

All indications are she wasn't very careful while actively using the server. However, once she started getting requests to produce data from it, then she suddenly got very careful. Even if she did do nothing wrong, that is a very stark change in behavior that just happened to coincide with legal requests to hand over data.

...The FBI found the "key piece(s)". Comey then said "No prosecutor would pursue this case" and dropped it. He was probably right--but only because of her last name. If I did that, I might get out after 5 years or so. Heck, one of my counterparts got in trouble for a single line in a controlled document which had the same info in the public domain. I'm sick of these "Nothing to see here" claims--just look at any security briefing and it's spelled out. We just had another one, and according to it I would be required to report her if she was in my office.

...Yes it does, read the laws. There is a Navy person who facing 20 years to life for disposing of a phone which had his picture while inside the sub. That is one of the more extreme cases, but it's literally a Web Search to prove you are wrong (shill?) Intent comes in to play _only_ for the penalty.

...I like how the argument has devolved here to "If Bush did it, then it's ok". PopeRatzo, is Dubya really your moral compass? Your guiding light?

...Except ALL 22 MILLION Bush administrative emails were recovered from tape backups. Clinton wiped the data AFTER the FOIA request. I don't know of a single person that has decided one day to delete ALL their personal emails, except Clinton. https://www.wired.com/2009/12/... [wired.com] another source http://www.npr.org/templates/s... [npr.org] , another http://www.npr.org/templates/s... [npr.org] . Yep you're idiot.

...My quibble was the blatant arrogance of the act. That private server was clearly a move to preserve final editing rights of her tenure at the State Department and evade any future FOIA requests that may crop up during her next run for the presidency; and was there ever any doubt that she would run again? The fact that she thought she could get away with it after experiencing the fallout from the exact same move by members of the Bush administration while she was a sitting Senator in Washington reinforces the feeling that her arrogance knows no bounds. She took a page out of the neocon playbook and figured she would show them how it's done.

...1. She put classified info on a private unsecured server where it was vulnerable, contrary to the law which she was fully advised of upon taking office.
2. She did all her work through that server, hiding it from all 3 government branches (congressional oversight, executive oversight, and the courts) and public FOIA requests.
3. When the material was sought by the courts and congress, she and the state department people lied under oath claiming the material did not exist (perhaps Nixon cronies should have all lied about tapes existing).
4. After her people knew the material was being sought, the server's files were transferred (by private IT people w/o clearances) to her lawyers (no clearances).
5. She and her lawyers deleted over 30000 e-mails, claiming they were only about yoga and her daughter's wedding dress (Nixon cut a few minutes of tape).
6. They then wiped the files with bit bleach (a step not needed for yoga or wedding dress e-mails). (Nixon did not degauss all his tapes)
7. They handed the wiped server to the FBI, and hillary publicly played ignorant with her "with a CLOTH?" comment (absolute iin-you-face arrogance against the rule of law) (Nixon did not hand tape recorders with erased tapes to the FBI)
Prove you are sincere, and not a total unprincipled partisan hack:
Are you a Nixon supporter?
Would you accept this behavior from Donald Trump or Dick Cheney?

ilsm -> M. Gamble... , Monday, September 05, 2016 at 05:06 PM
One law for the king another for me. If any of the scandals went to a jury instead of being swept under the rug, we might have judgements. If I did what Clinton did with information security I would be in jail. If I did that with federal records I would do time as well!

[Sep 05, 2016] Hillary Clinton email investigation: FBI notes reveal laptop and thumb drive missing

Everything, absolutely everything demonstrates really terrifying level of incompetence: the transfer of emails to Apple laptop, to Gmail account, then transfer back to window system, handing of USB drive. Amazing level of incompetence. This is really devastating level of incompetence for the organization that took over a lot of CIA functions. Essentially Hillary kept the position which is close to the role of the director of CIA. What a tragedy for the country...
Notable quotes:
"... It is painfully clear that she traded access and favors for money and reciprocal favors. It is painfully clear that she made little distinction between working for the State Department, the Clinton foundation and her family and tried to keep the records of what was going on inaccessible. The more honest defense would be, all politicians do it, and you have to suck it up because Trump is worse. Which is true. But trying to downplay this and explain it away is offensive, not all of the public are complete idiots. ..."
"... Her brazen air of arrogance and entitlement is about to fade as she comes to realise, that albeit Comey having been got at, he has still succeeded in striking a severe blow against her, and in addition, at the not-so-tin-hat conspiracy of inappropriate, and increasingly overt, institutional support. ..."
"... All this in the face of documented lies, in your face hypocrisy, and unbridled corruption, oozing from every orifice of a maverick administration. ..."
"... Clinton is the one waging war in the middle east. She is the one being bullish and provocative with Russia. Trump has only been conciliatory with these issues, he has been against the war on Iraq ..."
"... HRC is still likely to be the next President, but this scandal does have legs. She put herself in a corner by claiming lack of recall due to a medical condition (i.e., the concussion). This leaves two possibilities, neither of which is helpful to her cause, to wit: either she was being dishonest or she was (and could still be) cognitively impaired. ..."
"... Reagan was certainly not someone I admired but at least he tried to reduce the chance of nuclear war. Clinton is an out and out Hawke with the blood of many innocent people on her hands in both Syria and Libya. She is hiding her communications because she does not want to be exposed for the role she played in The destruction of Libya and the gun running of weapons to terrorists in Syria. That is to Al Qaeda and ISIS. World War 3 is more likely under Clinton than any other world leader. Even Trump. ..."
"... Not forgetting that she was key in making sure the US didn't side with Assad. Had the US done at the beginning, instead of being at the behest of the Saudis and the petrodollar, then the whole thing would have been over in 6 months and IS would never have got more than a dusty district of northern Iraq. ..."
"... So the applicant to the US presidency does not know what (c) stands for in her emails, archives high security data on a laptop and then losses it for years, uploads same emails on Google's gmail account and then losses devices again. She does not recall many things, not even the training she received on handling the confidential and secure communication. She couldn't recall the procces of drone strikes. (Will she be killing people at a whim, without an accountable protocol?) She is either demented or dangerously reckless or lying. All of these conditions disbar her form her candidacy. ..."
"... If she could only manage a couple of hours a day because of concussion and a blood clot she should have temporarily stood down until she recovered fully, and had a senior official take over her duties until she was well. You can't have a brain-damaged person in charge of the US's affairs - even though there is a long history of nutters the State Dept. ( ie the Military Industrial Complex HQ). ..."
"... the clinton foundation does not pay taxes..and dont forget that slick willie has been on the paedophile plane more times than the pilot ..."
"... She failed to keep up with recordkeeping she agreed to, then when asked to turn over records, somebody destroyed them, but Clinton did not order destruction, or does not remember having done so. Turned over all records-oops I thought WE did! She either lied or has alzheimers ..."
"... Political baggage is a bitch. If this election cycle has demonstrated anything it is that the leadership of both parties is totally out of touch with the voters and really has no interest except supporting the Neoliberal tenet of fiscal nonintervention. This laissez-faire attitude toward corporate interests is paralysing the American government. ..."
"... I cannot believe Clinton has got this far in the election, I believe Obama wants her in to hide many of his embarrassing warmongering mistakes. ..."
"... Today of all days Hillary Clinton puts out a tweet with the following: 'America needs leadership in the White House, not a liability' ! As we have to assume she's not referring to herself it confirms people's suspicion that the person who writes Hillary's tweets is a hostile to her campaign. The tweets are often completely off the mark. ..."
"... Either Comey is on their payroll, or they have threatened his family. Either way it is business as usual. The NWO decided a long time ago that Hillary was their next puppet PONTUS. ..."
"... I was a low-level officer at US Embassies and Consulates in various foreign countries. Clinton's claim that she didn't know what (C) was, or that she "she did not pay attention to the difference between top secret, secret and confidential" and "could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information." Are beyond ridiculous. Any fool knows enough to be aware of different levels of classified info, and the obvious fact that you don't get sloppy with classified info. ..."
"... to paraphrase Leona Helmsley's comment about paying taxes, "security is for little people." So in that respect Hillary is no different from the rest of them. ..."
"... You'd better hope she's lying, because if the incompetence is genuine she shouldn't be allowed near any confidential information ever again. I hate to admit it but Trump is right on this one. Jesus wept. ..."
"... The fact that the Sec State could have an email server built at her home and operate with such laughable gross negligence when it comes to national security is surreal and appalling. ..."
"... If the FBI were not themselves co-conspirators and hopelessly corrupt, they would indict some of the lower level actors and offer them immunity. They could start with the imbecile who put that laptop in the mail and couldn't remember if it was UPS or USPS. ..."
"... Caddell has voiced an interesting concern that others are beginning to share: that the news media has crawled so far in bed with Hillary Clinton they won't be able to get back out. That the news media in America has lost its soul. Even Jake Tapper started asking this question several weeks ago in the middle of his own show. ..."
"... The pyramid scheme of created debt has destroyed capitalism and democracy within 40 years of full operation. Captured Govt has bailed out incompetence and failure at every turn, and in so doing, inverted the yield curve and destroyed the future. It is for this reason alone I cannot respect these financial paedophiles or support anything they do. In this contest for the White House, Clinton is the manifestation of the establishment. ..."
"... "The documents provided a number of new details about Mrs. Clinton's private server, including what appeared to be a frantic effort by a computer specialist to delete an archive of her emails even after a congressional committee had requested they be preserved." -NY Times ..."
"... Hillary's treatment of top-secret US documents was willful and uncorrected. If she had done the same thing with medical records, the individuals whose medical records had been mishandled could have filed charges and Hillary would have been personally liable for up to $50,000 fine per incident. ..."
"... Clinton is an absolute liability. Apart from this scandal she's a status quo candidate for a status quo that no longer exists. She stands for neo-liberalism, US hegemony and capitalist globalization all of which are deader than the dodo. That makes her very dangerous in terms of world peace and of course she will do absolutely nothing for the millions of Americans facing joblessness, hunger, bankruptcy and homelessness except make things worse ..."
"... The entire corrupt establishment want Clinton at all cost, so that they can continue fleecing the future and enslaving the entire world in created debt. All right minded individuals should this as a flashing red light to turn round and vote the other way. ..."
www.theguardian.com

A Clinton Foundation laptop and a thumb drive used to archive Hillary Clinton's emails from her time as secretary of state are missing, according to FBI notes released on Friday.

The phrase "Clinton could not recall" litters the summary of the FBI's investigation, which concluded in July that she should not face charges. Amid fierce Republican criticism of the Democratic presidential candidate, the party's nominee, Donald Trump released a statement which said "Hillary Clinton's answers to the FBI about her private email server defy belief" and added that he did not "understand how she was able to get away from prosecution".

he FBI documents describe how Monica Hanley, a former Clinton aide, received assistance in spring 2013 from Justin Cooper, a former aide to Bill Clinton, in creating an archive of Hillary Clinton's emails. Cooper provided Hanley with an Apple MacBook laptop from the Clinton Foundation – the family organisation currently embroiled in controversy – and talked her through the process of transferring emails from Clinton's private server to the laptop and a thumb drive.

"Hanley completed this task from her personal residence," the notes record. The devices were intended to be stored at Clinton's homes in New York and Washington. However, Hanley "forgot" to provide the archive laptop and thumb drive to Clinton's staff.

In early 2014, Hanley located the laptop at her home and tried to transfer the email archive to an IT company, apparently without success. It appears the emails were then transferred to an unnamed person's personal Gmail account and there were problems around Apple software not being compatible with that of Microsoft.

The unnamed person "told the FBI that, after the transfer was complete, he deleted the emails from the archive laptop but did not wipe the laptop. The laptop was then put in the mail, only to go missing. [Redacted] told the FBI that she never received the laptop from [redacted]; however, she advised that Clinton's staff was moving offices at the time, and it would have been easy for the package to get lost during the transition period.

"Neither Hanley nor [redacted] could identify the current whereabouts of the archive laptop or thumb drive containing the archive, and the FBI does not have either item in its possession."

... ... ...

The FBI identified a total of 13 mobile devices associated with Clinton's two known phone numbers that potentially were used to send emails using clintonemail.com addresses.

The 58 pages of notes released on Friday, several of which were redacted, also related that Hanley often purchased replacement BlackBerry devices for Clinton during Clinton's time at the state department. Hanley recalled buying most of them at AT&T stores in the Washington area. Cooper was usually responsible for setting them up and synching them to the server.

Clinton's closest aide, Huma Abedin, and Hanley "indicated the whereabouts of Clinton's devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device", the documents state. "Cooper did recall two instances where he destroyed Clinton's old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer."

The notes also contain a string of admissions by Clinton about points she did not know or could not recall: "When asked about the email chain containing '(C)' portion markings that state determined to currently contain CONFIDENTIAL information, Clinton stated that she did not know what the '(C)' meant at the beginning of the paragraphs and speculated it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order."

Clinton said she did not pay attention to the difference between top secret, secret and confidential but "took all classified information seriously". She did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not have been on an unclassified system. She also stated she received no particular guidance as to how she should use the president's email address.

In addition, the notes say: "Clinton could not recall when she first received her security clearance and if she carried it with her to state via reciprocity from her time in the Senate. Clinton could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information."

Clinton was aware she was an original classification authority at the state department, but again "could not recall how often she used this authority or any training or guidance provided by state. Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined."

... ... ...

The House speaker, Paul Ryan, said: "These documents demonstrate Hillary Clinton's reckless and downright dangerous handling of classified information during her tenure as secretary of state. They also cast further doubt on the justice department's decision to avoid prosecuting what is a clear violation of the law. This is exactly why I have called for her to be denied access to classified information."

Reince Priebus, chair of the Republican National Committee, said: "The FBI's summary of their interview with Hillary Clinton is a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency. Clinton's answers either show she is completely incompetent or blatantly lied to the FBI or the public.

"Either way it's clear that, through her own actions, she has disqualified herself from the presidency."

The Clinton campaign insisted that it was pleased the notes had been made public. Spokesman Brian Fallon said: "While her use of a single email account was clearly a mistake and she has taken responsibility for it, these materials make clear why the justice department believed there was no basis to move forward with this case."

Terrence James 3h ago

This is the equivalent of the dog ate my homework. This woman could not utter an honest sentence if her life depended on it. She is a corrupt and evil person, I cannot stand Trump but I think I hate her more. Trump is just crazy and cannot help himself but she is calculatingly evil. We are doomed either way, but he would be more darkly entertaining.


Smallworld5 3h ago

Has any of Clinton's state department employees purposely built their own server in their basement on which to conduct official government business, in gross violation of department policy, protocols, and regulations, they would have been summarily fired at a minimum and, yes, quite possibly prosecuted. That's a fact.

The issue at hand is why Clinton sycophants are so agreeable to the Clinton Double Standard.

The presumptive next president of the U.S. being held to a lower standard than the average U.S. civil servant. Sickening.


Laurence Johnson 8h ago

Hillary's use of gender has no place in politics. When it comes to the top job, the people need the best person for the job, not someone who is given a GO because they represent a group that are encouraged to feel discriminated against.


foggy2 9h ago

For the FBI's (or Comey's) this is also a devastating indictment of their or his judgment, honesty and basic competency.

YANKSOPINION 10h ago

Perhaps she has early onset of Alzheimers and should not be considered for the job of POTUS. Or maybe she is just a liar.


AlexLeo 10h ago

It is painfully clear that she traded access and favors for money and reciprocal favors. It is painfully clear that she made little distinction between working for the State Department, the Clinton foundation and her family and tried to keep the records of what was going on inaccessible. The more honest defense would be, all politicians do it, and you have to suck it up because Trump is worse. Which is true. But trying to downplay this and explain it away is offensive, not all of the public are complete idiots.

KaleidoscopeWars

Actually, after you get over all of the baffooning around Trump has done, he actually would make an ideal president. He loves his country, he delegates jobs well to people who show the best results, he's good at building stuff and he wants to do a good job. I'm sure after he purges the terribly corrupted system that he'll be given, he'll have the very best advisors around him to make good decisions for the American people. I'm sure Theresa May and her cabinet will be quick to welcome him and re-solidify the relationship that has affected British politics so much in the past decade. Boris Johnson is perfect for our relations with America under a Trump administration. Shame on you Barack and Hillary. Hopefully Trump will say ''I came, I saw, they died!''

Ullu001 12h ago

Ah, The Clintons. They have done it all: destruction of evidence, witness tampering, fraud, lying under oath, murder, witness disappearance. Did I leave anything? Yet, they go unpunished. Too clever, I guess too clever for their own good!

samwoods77 12h ago

Hillary wants to be the most powerful person on earth yet claims she doesn't understand the classification system that even the most most junior secretary can....deeply troubling.

Mistaron 13h ago

The 'masters' in the shadows are about to throw the harridan under the bus. Her brazen air of arrogance and entitlement is about to fade as she comes to realise, that albeit Comey having been got at, he has still succeeded in striking a severe blow against her, and in addition, at the not-so-tin-hat conspiracy of inappropriate, and increasingly overt, institutional support.

All this in the face of documented lies, in your face hypocrisy, and unbridled corruption, oozing from every orifice of a maverick administration.

The seeds have been planted for a defense of diminished responsibility. Don't fall for it! Hillary, (and her illustrious spouse), deserve not a smidgen of pity.

''We came, we saw, he died'', she enthusiastically and unempathically cackled.

Just about sums her up.


wtfbollos 14h ago

hiliary clinton beheaded libya and created a hell on earth. here is the proof:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/28/hillary-clinton-undercut-on-libya-war-by-pentagon-/?page=all#pagebreak

jean2121 -> ken711 13h ago

Again, total misunderstanding about what is going on. Clinton is the one waging war in the middle east. She is the one being bullish and provocative with Russia. Trump has only been conciliatory with these issues, he has been against the war on Iraq. So far all evidences point to the fact that the Clintons want another big war and all evidence points to the fact that Trump wants co operation. This has totally escape your analysis. It is a choice between the Plague and the Cholera, I agree, but FGS try to be a little less biased.


ungruntled 15h ago

The best case for HC looks pretty grim.
She has no recollection of......??
Laptops and Thumb drives laying about unattended
Total lack of understanding about even the most basic of Data Securit arrangements

All of these things giver her the benefit of the doubt....That she wasnt a liar and a corrupted politician manipulating events and people to suit her own ends.
So, with the benefit of the doubt given, ask yourself if this level of incompetance and unreliabilty makes a suitable candidate for office?
In both cases, with and without BOTD, she shouldnt be allowed anywhere near the corridors of power, let alone the White House.

IAtheist 17h ago

Mrs Clinton is deeply divisive. Bought out since her husbands presidency by vested interests in Wall Street and the HMO's (private healthcare insurance management businesses) and having shown lamentable judgement, Benghazi, private Email server used for classified documents and material.

She has failed to motivate the Democrats white and blue collar working voters male and female. These are the voting demographic who have turned to Trump is significant numbers as he does address their concerns, iniquitous tax rules meaning multi millionaires pay less tax on capital gains and share dividends than employees do on their basic wages, immigration and high levels of drug and gun crime in working class communities Black, White and Hispanic, funding illegal immigrants and failed American youth living on a black economy in the absence of affordable healthcare or a basic welfare system.

Trump may very well win and is likely to be better for the US than Hilary Clinton.

digamey 18h ago

I sympathize with the American electorate - they have to choose between the Devil and the deep blue sea. Given their situation, however, I would definitely choose the Devil I know over the Devil I don't! And that Devil is - - - ?

MoneyCircus -> digamey 10h ago

That willful ignorance is your choice! A public businessman can be examined more closely than most.

Besides, there is a long history of "placemen" presidents whose performance is determined by those they appoint to do the work. Just look in the White House right now.

As for the Clinton record (they come, incontrovertibly, as a package) from Mena, Arkansas, to her husband's deregulation of the banks which heralded the financial crash that devastated millions of lives... the same banks that are currently HRC's most enthusiastic funders... is something that any genuine Democrat should not be able to stomach...

ID9761679 19h ago

My feeling is that she had more to worry about than the location of a thumb drive (I can't recall how many of those I've lost) or even a laptop. When a Secretary of State moves around, I doubt that look after their own appliances. Has anyone asked her where the fan is?

Karega ID9761679 18h ago

Problem is she handled top secret and classified information which would endanger her country's security and strategic interests. She was then US Secretary of State. That is why how she handled her thumb drive, laptop nd desktops matter. And there lies the difference between your numerous lost thumb drives and hers. I thought this was obvious?

EightEyedSpy 23h ago

HRC is still likely to be the next President, but this scandal does have legs. She put herself in a corner by claiming lack of recall due to a medical condition (i.e., the concussion). This leaves two possibilities, neither of which is helpful to her cause, to wit: either she was being dishonest or she was (and could still be) cognitively impaired.

1iJack -> EightEyedSpy 22h ago

either she was being dishonest or she was (and could still be) cognitively impaired.

Its entirely possible its both.

Dick York 24h ago

California survived Arnold Schwarzenegger, the U.S. survived Ronald Reagan, Minnesota survived Jesse "The Body" Ventura and I believe that we will survive Donald Trump. He's only one more celebrity on the road.

providenciales -> Dick York 23h ago

You forgot Al Franken.

antipodes -> Dick York 21h ago

Reagan was certainly not someone I admired but at least he tried to reduce the chance of nuclear war. Clinton is an out and out Hawke with the blood of many innocent people on her hands in both Syria and Libya. She is hiding her communications because she does not want to be exposed for the role she played in The destruction of Libya and the gun running of weapons to terrorists in Syria. That is to Al Qaeda and ISIS. World War 3 is more likely under Clinton than any other world leader. Even Trump. The Democrats must disendorse her because the details of her criminality are now becoming available and unless she can stop it Trump will win. Get rid of her Democrats and bring back Bernie Sanders.

Sam3456 1d ago

We cannot afford a lying, neo-liberal who is more than willing to make her role in government a for profit endeavor.

Four years of anyone else is preferable to someone who is more than willing for the right contribution to her foundation, sell out the American worker and middle class.

MakeBeerNotWar 1d ago

I'm more interested $250k a pop speeches HRC gave to the unindicted Wall St bankster felon scum who nearly took down their country and the global economy yet received a taxpayer bailout and their bonuses paid for being greedy incompetent crooks. How soon we forget....

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/how-wall-streets-bankers-stayed-out-of-jail/399368/

sorrentina -> MakeBeerNotWar 22h ago

even worse is her support for the military coup in Honduras- and her blatant lies in defense of that coup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS-tDVwSHlA

trow 1d ago

Its seems there is just one scandal after another with this women but she seems to be bullet proof mainly because the msm media will not go after her for reasons best known to themselves this is causing them to lose credibility and readers who are deserting them for alternative media .

bashh1 1d ago

Finally today in an article in The NY Times we learn where Clinton has been for a good part of the summer. In the Hamptons and elsewhere at receptions for celebrities and her biggest donors like Calvin Klein and Harvey Weinstein, raking in the millions for her campaign. Trump on the other hand has appeared in towns in Pennsylvania like Scranton, Erie and Altoona where job are disappearing and times can be tough. Coronations cost money I guess.

chiefwiley -> bashh1 1d ago

She is doing what she does best --- raise money.

ksenak 1d ago

Not forgetting that she was key in making sure the US didn't side with Assad. Had the US done at the beginning, instead of being at the behest of the Saudis and the petrodollar, then the whole thing would have been over in 6 months and IS would never have got more than a dusty district of northern Iraq.

ksenak 1d ago

Hillary is humiliated woman. Humiliated to the core by her cheating hubby she would rather kill than let him go. She is paying her evil revenge to the whole world. As a president of USA Hillary Clinton would destabilise the world and lead it to conflicts that threaten to be very heavy.

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was part of the "Arab Spring" (also part of the "Jasmine Revolution), which overthrew leaders such as Gaddafi to Mubarak. Before Gaddafi was overthrown he told the US that without him IS will take over Libya. They did.
-Benghazi Scandal which ended up killing a US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and other Americans.
The Arab Spring destabilized the Middle East, contributed to the Syrian civil war, the rise of ISIS and the exodus of Middle Eastern Muslims.

Sam3456 OXIOXI20 1d ago

Meh. Obama characterized ISIS as the "JV Team" and refused to acknowledge the threat. I assume he was acting on information provided by his Secretary of State, Clinton.

Michael109 1d ago

It's quite possible that Clinton, because she had a fall in 2012 and bonked her head, believes she is telling the truth when she is lying, except that it is not lying when you believe you are telling the truth even though you are lying.

She said she did not recall 30 times in her interviews with the FBI. She could be suffering from some sort of early degeneration disease. Either way, between her health and the lying and corruption she should be withdrawn as the Dem frontrunner.

1iJack -> LakumbaDaGreat 1d ago

She's going to blow it.

I think she already did. Its like all the shit in her life is coming back on her at once.

Early on, when it was announced she would run again, I remember one Democrat pundit in particular that didn't think she could survive the existence of the Internet in the general election (I can't remember who it was, though). But it has turned out to be a pretty astute prediction.

When asked what he meant by that remark, he went on to say "the staying power of the Internet will overwhelm Clinton with her dirty laundry once she gets to the general election. The Clintons were made for the 24 hour news cycles of the past and not the permanent unmanaged exposure of the digital world. Everything is new again on the internet. Its Groundhog Day forever on the Internet."

That's my best paraphrase of his thoughts. He felt Clinton was the last of the "old school" politicians bringing too much baggage to an election. That with digital "bread crumbs" of some kind or another (email, microphones and cameras in phones, etc) the new generation of politicians will be a cleaner lot, not through virtue, but out of necessity.

I've often thought back to his remarks while watching Hillary head into the general.

ImperialAhmed 1d ago

So the applicant to the US presidency does not know what (c) stands for in her emails, archives high security data on a laptop and then losses it for years, uploads same emails on Google's gmail account and then losses devices again.
She does not recall many things, not even the training she received on handling the confidential and secure communication.
She couldn't recall the procces of drone strikes. (Will she be killing people at a whim, without an accountable protocol?)
She is either demented or dangerously reckless or lying. All of these conditions disbar her form her candidacy.


AudieTer
1d ago

If she could only manage a couple of hours a day because of concussion and a blood clot she should have temporarily stood down until she recovered fully, and had a senior official take over her duties until she was well. You can't have a brain-damaged person in charge of the US's affairs - even though there is a long history of nutters the State Dept. ( ie the Military Industrial Complex HQ). And in the White House for that matter ...Nurse ! nurse ! Dubya needs his meds!

thedingo8 -> Lenthelurker 1d ago

the clinton foundation does not pay taxes..and dont forget that slick willie has been on the paedophile plane more times than the pilot

Littlefella 1d ago

She destroyed devices and emails after they were told that all evidence had to be preserved. There are then two issues and the FBI and DOJ have not taken any action on either.

It's no longer just about the emails, it's the corruption.

DaveG123 1d ago

Clinton's closest aide, Huma Abedin, and Hanley "indicated the whereabouts of Clinton's devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device"
-------------
Probably in the hands of a foreign government. Pretty careless behaviour. Incompetent. Part of a pattern of incompetance that includes bad foreign policy decisions (Libya) and disrespect for rules surrounding conflict of interest (Clinton Foundation).

YANKSOPINION -> HansB09 1d ago

She failed to keep up with recordkeeping she agreed to, then when asked to turn over records, somebody destroyed them, but Clinton did not order destruction, or does not remember having done so. Turned over all records-oops I thought WE did! She either lied or has alzheimers

Andy White 1d ago

In addition, the notes say:

"Clinton could not recall when she first received her security clearance and if she carried it with her to state via reciprocity from her time in the Senate. Clinton could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information."

Clinton was aware she was an original classification authority at the state department, but again "could not recall how often she used this authority or any training or guidance provided by state. Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined." ...................secretary of state and could not recall basic security protocols???

....and people complain about trump....this basic security was mentioned in the bloody west wing series for god's sake.....in comparison even trump is a f'ing genius.......love him or hate him trump has to win over clinton,there is something very,very wrong with her....she should NEVER be in charge of a till at asda......and she is a clinton so we all know a very practised liar but this beggers belief,i can see why trump is angry if that was him he would have been publicly burnt at the stake.....this clinton crap just stink's of the political elite....a total joke cover up and a terrible obvious one to....clinton is just a liar and mentally i think she is very unstable....makes the DON look like hawking lol.....

namora 1d ago

Political baggage is a bitch. If this election cycle has demonstrated anything it is that the leadership of both parties is totally out of touch with the voters and really has no interest except supporting the Neoliberal tenet of fiscal nonintervention. This laissez-faire attitude toward corporate interests is paralysing the American government.

duncandunnit 1d ago

I cannot believe Clinton has got this far in the election, I believe Obama wants her in to hide many of his embarrassing warmongering mistakes.

fedback 1d ago

Today of all days Hillary Clinton puts out a tweet with the following: 'America needs leadership in the White House, not a liability' ! As we have to assume she's not referring to herself it confirms people's suspicion that the person who writes Hillary's tweets is a hostile to her campaign. The tweets are often completely off the mark.

Hercolubus 1d ago

Either Comey is on their payroll, or they have threatened his family. Either way it is business as usual. The NWO decided a long time ago that Hillary was their next puppet PONTUS.

BG Davis 2d ago

Clinton has always been a devious weasel, but this reveals a new low. I was a low-level officer at US Embassies and Consulates in various foreign countries. Clinton's claim that she didn't know what (C) was, or that she "she did not pay attention to the difference between top secret, secret and confidential" and "could not recall any briefing or training by state related to the retention of federal records or handling of classified information." Are beyond ridiculous. Any fool knows enough to be aware of different levels of classified info, and the obvious fact that you don't get sloppy with classified info.

That said, over the past few years the entire handling of classified info has become beyond sloppy - laptops left in taxis, General Petraeus was sharing classified info with his mistress, etc. I guess nowadays, to paraphrase Leona Helmsley's comment about paying taxes, "security is for little people." So in that respect Hillary is no different from the rest of them.

Scaff1 2d ago

You'd better hope she's lying, because if the incompetence is genuine she shouldn't be allowed near any confidential information ever again. I hate to admit it but Trump is right on this one. Jesus wept. I said it before: Clinton is the only candidate who could possibly make a tyrant like Trump electable.


charlieblue -> gizadog 2d ago

Where are you getting "looses 13 devices"? (Try loses, nobody is accusing Sec.Clinton of making things loose) I actually read the article, so my information might not be as exciting as yours, but this article states that from the 13 devices that had access to the Clinton server, two (a laptop and a thumb drive) used by one of her aids, are missing. This article doesn't specify whether any "classified" information was on either of them. The FBI doesn't know, because, well... they are missing.

What the fuck is it with you people and your loose relationship with actual facts? Do you realize that just making shit up undermines whatever point you imagine you are trying to make?

gizadog 2d ago

Also: Clinton told FBI she thought classified markings were alphabetical paragraphs

"When asked what the parenthetical 'C' meant before a paragraph ... Clinton stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order," the FBI wrote in notes from its interview with her."

Wow...and there are people that want her to be president.

Casey13 2d ago

In my job as a government contractor we are extremely vigilant about not connecting removable devices to work computers, no work email access outside of work, software algorithms that scan our work mails for any sensitive information, and regular required training on information security. The fact that the Sec State could have an email server built at her home and operate with such laughable gross negligence when it comes to national security is surreal and appalling. I could never vote for her and neither could I vote for Trump.

MonotonousLanguor 2d ago

>>> A Clinton Foundation laptop and a thumb drive used to archive Hillary Clinton's emails from her time as secretary of state are missing, according to FBI notes released on Friday.<<<

Oh golly gee, what a surprise. Should we offer a reward??? Maybe Amelia Earhart has the laptop and thumb drive. Were these missing items taken by the Great Right Wing Conspiracy???

Dani Jenkins 2d ago

Wtf, from the sublime to the ridiculous, springs to mind..

Time to get a grip of the gravity involved, here at the Guardian.. This is a total whitewash of the absurd kind.. That leaves people laughing in pure unadultered astonishment..

SHE lost not just a MacBook & thumb drive with such BS..

So Trump it is then , like many of us have stated ALL ALONG. Sanders was the only serious contender.. A complete mockery of democracy & the so called Democrats have made the way for Trump to cruise all the way to the Whitewash House..

Well done Debbie , did the Don pay you?

chiefwiley -> Lenthelurker 2d ago

Because the revelations are essentially contradicting all of Hillary's defenses regarding her handling of highly classified information. None of the requirements of the State Department mattered to her or her personal staff. It won't go away --- it will get worse as information trickles out.

Casey13 2d ago

Being President of the USA used to be about communicating a vision and inspiring Americans to get behind that dream . Think Lincoln abolishing slavery or JFK setting a goal to put man on the moon. Hillary is boring,has no charisma,and no vision for her Presidency beyond using corruption and intimidation to secure greater power for her and her cronies . Nobody wants to listen to her speeches because she is boring, uninspiring, and has no wit beyond tired cliches. Trump has a vision but that vision is a nightmare for many Americans.

imperfetto 2d ago

Clinton is a dangerous warmonger. She is a danger to us Europeans, as she might drag us into a conflict with Russia. We must get rid of her, politically, and re-educate the Americas to respect other nations, and give up exporting their corrupting values.

Tom Voloshen 2d ago

Liar liar liar....give her a chance, and another and another and another and another...
.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/cnn-stunned-fact-checkers-confirm-clinton-phones-destroyed-hammers/

JCDavis 2d ago

"After reading these documents, I really don't understand how she was able to get away from prosecution."

If the FBI were not themselves co-conspirators and hopelessly corrupt, they would indict some of the lower level actors and offer them immunity. They could start with the imbecile who put that laptop in the mail and couldn't remember if it was UPS or USPS. Or did he actually send it to the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK by accident?

1iJack 2d ago

"The job of the media historically, in terms of the First Amendment – what I call the unspoken compact in the First Amendment – is that the free press, without restraint, without checks and balances, is there in order to protect the people from power. Its job is to be a check on government, and those who rule the country, and not to be their lapdogs, and their support system. That's what we're seeing in this election.

There is an argument to make that the major news media in this country, the mainstream media, is essentially serving against the people's interest. They have made themselves an open ally of protecting a political order that the American people are rejecting, by three quarters or more of the American people. That makes them a legitimate issue, in a sense they never have been before, if Trump takes advantage of it."

Pat Caddell, 2 Sept 2016

Caddell has voiced an interesting concern that others are beginning to share: that the news media has crawled so far in bed with Hillary Clinton they won't be able to get back out. That the news media in America has lost its soul. Even Jake Tapper started asking this question several weeks ago in the middle of his own show.

Will the American press ever have credibility with Americans again? Even Democrats see it and will remember this the next time the press turns against them. There was a new and overt power grab in this election that is still being processed by the American people: the American press "saving" America from Donald Trump. They may never recover from this.

It even scares my Democrat friends.

ConBrio 2d ago

"An unknown individual using the encrypted privacy tool Tor to hide their tracks accessed an email account on a Clinton family server, the FBI revealed Friday.

"The incident appears to be the first confirmed intrusion into a piece of hardware associated with Hillary Clinton's private email system, which originated with a server established for her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

The FBI disclosed the event in its newly released report on the former secretary of state's handling of classified information.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/clinton-email-server-tor-227697

fanUS 2d ago

Clinton is a very dodgy character and cannot be trusted.

Boris Johnson, UK Foreign Secretary on Clinton: "She's got dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital"

CleanPool330 2d ago

The collective mind of the establishment is mentally ill and spinning out of control. In all rites they should be removed but their arrogance, corruption and self-entitlement mean they are incapable of admitting guilt. They have corrupted the weak minds of the majority and will take everybody down with them.

The pyramid scheme of created debt has destroyed capitalism and democracy within 40 years of full operation. Captured Govt has bailed out incompetence and failure at every turn, and in so doing, inverted the yield curve and destroyed the future. It is for this reason alone I cannot respect these financial paedophiles or support anything they do. In this contest for the White House, Clinton is the manifestation of the establishment.

unusedusername 2d ago

If I understand this correctly a laptop and a flashdrive full of classified emails was put in a jiffy bag and stuck in the post and now they're missing and this is, apparently, just one of those things? Amazing!

Blair Hess 2d ago

I'm in the military. Not a high rank mind you. It defies all common logic that HRC has never had a briefing, training, or just side conversation about classified information handling when i have about 50 trainings a year on it and i barely handle it. Sheeple wake up and stop drinking the kool aid…

Ullu001 2d ago

The Clintons have always operated on the edge of the law: extremely clever and dangerous lawyers they are.

USADanny -> Ullu001

Hillary may be criminally clever but legally: not so much. You do know that she failed the Washington DC bar exam and all of her legal "success" after that was a result of being very spouse of a powerful politician.

calderonparalapaz 2d ago

"The documents provided a number of new details about Mrs. Clinton's private server, including what appeared to be a frantic effort by a computer specialist to delete an archive of her emails even after a congressional committee had requested they be preserved." -NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi.html?_r=0

USADanny -> Lee Knutsen 2d ago

Virtually every American healthcare worker has to take annual HIPAA training, pass a multiple-choice test and signed a document attesting that they have taken the training and are fully aware of the serious consequences of inadvertent and willful violations of HIPAA. Oh the irony – HIPAA is a Clinton era law.

Hillary's treatment of top-secret US documents was willful and uncorrected. If she had done the same thing with medical records, the individuals whose medical records had been mishandled could have filed charges and Hillary would have been personally liable for up to $50,000 fine per incident.

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/solutions-managing-your-practice/coding-billing-insurance/hipaahealth-insurance-portability-accountability-act/hipaa-violations-enforcement.page?

Other than Hillary negligently handling top-secret documents, having a head injury that by her own admission has impaired her memory and using her relationship with the Clinton foundation when she was Secretary of State to extort hundreds of millions of dollars, she is an excellent candidate for the president.

oeparty 2d ago

Clinton is an absolute liability. Apart from this scandal she's a status quo candidate for a status quo that no longer exists. She stands for neo-liberalism, US hegemony and capitalist globalization all of which are deader than the dodo. That makes her very dangerous in terms of world peace and of course she will do absolutely nothing for the millions of Americans facing joblessness, hunger, bankruptcy and homelessness except make things worse.

And yet, and yet, we must vote Clinton simply to Stop Trump. He is a proto-fascist determined to smash resistance to the 1% in America and abroad via military means. He is a realist who realises capitalism is over and only the purest and most overwhelming violence can save the super rich and the elites now. Certainly their economy gives them nothing any more. The American Dream is toast. The Green Stein will simply draw a few votes from Clinton and give Trump the victory and it is not like she is a genuinely progressive candidate herself being something of a Putin fan just like Trump. No, vote Clinton to Stop Trump but only so that we can use the next four years to build the revolutionary socialist alternative. To build the future.

dongerdo 2d ago

The Americans are screwed anyways because both easily are the most despicable and awful front runners I can think of in any election of a western democracy in decades (and that is quite an achievement in itself to be honest), the only thing left to hope for is a winner not outright horrible for the rest of the world on which front Clinton loses big time: electing her equals pouring gasoline over half the world, she is up for finishing the disastrous job in the Middle East and North Africa started by her as Secretary of State. Her stance on relations with Russia and China are utterly horrific, listening to her makes even the die-hard GOP neo-cons faction sound like peace corps ambassadors.
If the choice is between that and some isolationist dimwit busy with making America great again I truly hope for the latter.

Who would have thought that one day world peace would depend on the vote of the American redneck.....

Michael109 2d ago

Clinton's "dog ate my server", I can't (30 times) remember, didn't know what C meant on top of emails - why it means Coventry City, M'amm - excuses are the Dems trying to stagger over the line, everyone holding their noses. But even if she is elected, which is doubtful, this is not going away and she could be arrested as USA President.

The FBI will rue the day they did not recommend charges against her when they had the chance. She's make Tony Soprano look like the Dalia Lama.

CleanPool330 2d ago

The entire corrupt establishment want Clinton at all cost, so that they can continue fleecing the future and enslaving the entire world in created debt. All right minded individuals should this as a flashing red light to turn round and vote the other way.

[Sep 04, 2016] The FBIs Fake Investigation of Hillarys Emails

Notable quotes:
"... "the prosecutor has all the power. The Supreme Court's suggestion that a plea bargain is a fair and voluntary contractual arrangement between two relatively equal parties is a total myth… What really puts the prosecutor in the driver's seat is the fact that he - because of mandatory minimums, sentencing guidelines (which, though no longer mandatory in the federal system, are still widely followed by most judges), and simply his ability to shape whatever charges are brought - can effectively dictate the sentence by how he publicly describes the offense". ..."
"... Prosecutorial discretion is now practically unlimited in the United States. This discretion is an essential feature of any dictatorship . It's the essence of any system that separates people into aristocrats, who are above the law, versus the public, upon whom their 'law' is enforced. It's the essence of "a nation of men, not of laws". ..."
"... Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system" ..."
"... Clinton stated she did not remember the email specifically. Clinton stated a 'nonpaper' was a document with no official heading, or identifying marks of any kind, that can not be attributed to the US Government. Clinton thought a 'nonpaper' was a way to convey the unofficial stance of the US Government to a foreign government and believed this practice went back '200 years.' When viewing the displayed email, Clinton believed she was asking Sullivan to remove the State letterhead and provide unclassified talking points. Clinton stated she had no intention to remove classification markings" ..."
"... issues sending secure fax" ..."
"... They say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it" ..."
"... "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure". So: she knew that it was classified information but wanted to receive it so that she would be able to say, "I didn't know that it was classified information". ..."
"... The FBI avoided using the standard means to investigate a suspect higher-up ..."
"... That alone proves the Obama Administration's 'investigation' of Clinton's email system to have been a farce ..."
"... the prosecutor in Hillary's case (the Obama Administration) clearly didn't want her in the big house; they wanted her in the White House. ..."
Sep 03, 2016 | www.strategic-culture.org

1: The FBI chose to 'investigate' the most difficult-to-prove charges, not the easiest-to-prove ones (which are the six laws that she clearly violated , simply by her privatization and destruction of State Department records, and which collectively would entail a maximum prison sentence of 73 years ).

The famous judge Jed Rakoff has accurately and succinctly said that, in the American criminal 'justice' system, since 1980 and especially after 2000, and most especially after 2010, "the prosecutor has all the power. The Supreme Court's suggestion that a plea bargain is a fair and voluntary contractual arrangement between two relatively equal parties is a total myth… What really puts the prosecutor in the driver's seat is the fact that he - because of mandatory minimums, sentencing guidelines (which, though no longer mandatory in the federal system, are still widely followed by most judges), and simply his ability to shape whatever charges are brought - can effectively dictate the sentence by how he publicly describes the offense".

If an Administration wants to be merely pretending an 'investigation', it's easy: identify, as the topic for the alleged 'investigation', not the criminal laws that indisputably describe what the suspect can clearly be proven to have done, but instead criminal laws that don't. Prosecutorial discretion is now practically unlimited in the United States. This discretion is an essential feature of any dictatorship . It's the essence of any system that separates people into aristocrats, who are above the law, versus the public, upon whom their 'law' is enforced. It's the essence of "a nation of men, not of laws".

But, different people focus on different aspects of it. Conservatives notice it in Clinton's case because she was not prosecuted. Progressives notice it in Clinton's case because other people (ones without the clout) who did what she did (but only less of it), have been prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced for it. The result, either way, is dictatorship , regardless of anyone's particular perspective on the matter. Calling a nation like that a 'democracy' is to strip "democracy" of its basic meaning - it is foolishness. Such a nation is an aristocracy, otherwise called an "oligarchy". That's the opposite of a democracy (even if it's set up so as to pretend to be a democracy).

2: The FBI chose to believe her allegations, instead of to investigate or challenge them. For example: On page 4 of the FBI's record of their interview with Hillary dated 2 July 2016 , they noted: " Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system" . But they already had seen this email . So, they asked her about that specific one: " Clinton stated she did not remember the email specifically. Clinton stated a 'nonpaper' was a document with no official heading, or identifying marks of any kind, that can not be attributed to the US Government. Clinton thought a 'nonpaper' was a way to convey the unofficial stance of the US Government to a foreign government and believed this practice went back '200 years.' When viewing the displayed email, Clinton believed she was asking Sullivan to remove the State letterhead and provide unclassified talking points. Clinton stated she had no intention to remove classification markings" .

Look at the email : is her statement about it - that " issues sending secure fax" had nothing to do with the illegality of sending classified U.S. Government information over a non-secured, even privatized, system - even credible? Is the implication by Clinton's remark, that changing the letterhead and removing the document'a classified stamp, would solve the problem that Jake Sullivan - a highly skilled attorney himself - had brought to her attention, even credible? Well, if so, then wouldn't the FBI have asked Sullivan what he was referring to when his email to Clinton said " They say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it" .

The FBI provided no indication that there was any such follow-up, at all. They could have plea-bargained with Sullivan, to get him to testify first, so that his testimony could be used in questioning of her, but they seem not to have been interested in doing any such thing. They believed what she said (even though it made no sense as a response to the problem that Sullivan had just brought to her attention: the problem that emailing to her this information would violate several federal criminal statutes.

Clinton, in other words, didn't really care about the legality. And, apparently, neither did the FBI. Her email in response to Sullivan's said simply: "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure". So: she knew that it was classified information but wanted to receive it so that she would be able to say, "I didn't know that it was classified information". In other words: she was instructing her advisor: hide the fact that it's classified information, so that when I receive it, there will be no indication on it that what was sent to me is classified information.

3: The FBI avoided using the standard means to investigate a suspect higher-up: obtaining plea-deals with subordinates, requiring them to cooperate, answer questions and not to plead the Fifth Amendment (not to refuse to answer) . (In Hillary's case, the Obama Administration actually did plea-deals in which they allowed the person who was supposed to answer all questions, to plea the Fifth Amendment to all questions instead. This is allowed only when the government doesn't want to prosecute the higher-up - which in this case was Clinton. That alone proves the Obama Administration's 'investigation' of Clinton's email system to have been a farce.)

A plea-deal isn't a Constitutional process: Jed Rakoff's article explained why it's not. The process is informal, but nowadays it's used in more than 97% of cases in which charges are brought, and in more than 99% of all cases (including the 92% of cases that are simply dropped without any charges being brought). That's the main reason why nowadays "the prosecutor has all the power". Well, the prosecutor in Hillary's case (the Obama Administration) clearly didn't want her in the big house; they wanted her in the White House.

[Sep 03, 2016] Hillary Clinton Incompetent, Or Criminal

The lost in mail laptop and disappear thumb drive with archived emails story is incredibly fishy. The whole story in incredible. Both Hillary and her close aides (especially Huma ) come out as completely incompetent idiots, who can't be trusted any sensitive information. This level of incompetence combined with recklessness is pretty typical for female sociopath
Notable quotes:
"... The Donald Trump campaign has already called for Clinton to be "locked up" for her carelessness handling sensitive information. The missing laptop and thumb drive raise a new possibility that Clinton's emails could have been obtained by people for whom they weren't intended. ..."
"... The archives on the laptop and thumbdrive were constructed by Clinton aides in 2013, using a convoluted process, before her emails were turned over to State Department officials and later scrubbed to determine which ones had classified information and should either be withheld from public view or could be released with redactions. The archive of messages would contain none of those safeguards, potentially exposing classified information if it were ever opened and its contents read. ..."
"... The archive was created nearly a year before the State Department contacted former secretaries of state and asked them to turn over any emails that they had sent using private accounts that pertained to official business. A senior Clinton aide, Huma Abedin, told the FBI that the archive on the laptop and thumb drive were meant to be "a reference for the future production of a book," according to the FBI report. ..."
"... Whatever the rationale, the transfer of Clinton's emails onto two new storage devices, one of which was shipped twice, created new opportunities for messages to be lost or exposed to people who weren't authorized to see them, according to the FBI report. (The Clinton campaign didn't immediately respond to a request to comment for this story.) ..."
"... The disappearing laptop and thumb drive story is incredibly fishy. Either Team Hillary is lying about it, or they are spectacularly incompetent and reckless with national security information. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton: Incompetent, Or Criminal? Both. ..."
"... Dear God, from the Daily Beast article, apparently they were using one of the laptops as a way to transfer the emails to a contractor they had hired. Since no one knew how to do it, they effected the transfer by sending the entire archive to a personal gmail account, then transfering it again to the contractor. So we have a massive store containing quite classified information going to a major tech company, entirely over the internet with only ssl protection I can only presume, because they could not figure out how to transfer a file system. The incompetence here is astonishing. Even a Google employee who forwards sensitive information to a personal gmail account would risk being fired. ..."
"... Of course the most important detail to come out of this is the use of BleachBit. You don't use that software to delete emails about yoga classes. ..."
"... The employee "transferred all of the Clinton e-mail content to a personal Google e-mail (Gmail) address he created," the FBI found. From that Gmail address, he downloaded the emails into a mailbox named "HRC Archive" on the Platte River server. ..."
"... Honestly, Rod you should highlight this. I can assure you that if something this mindbogglingly reckless were ever done at a major tech company the employee would either be fired or told to find work elsewhere but never enter the office again (because severance is expensive and bad pr). I assume the same is true of the government as well. ..."
The American Conservative

Why, exactly, did the FBI wait until Labor Day Weekend to dump this startling news about Hillary Clinton's e-mail scandal? Hard to believe it was a coincidence that official Washington wanted this story to have the best chance of going away. From the Daily Beast:

A laptop containing a copy, or "archive," of the emails on Hillary Clinton's private server was apparently lost-in the postal mail-according to an FBI report released Friday. Along with it, a thumb drive that also contained an archive of Clinton's emails has been lost and is not in the FBI's possession.

The Donald Trump campaign has already called for Clinton to be "locked up" for her carelessness handling sensitive information. The missing laptop and thumb drive raise a new possibility that Clinton's emails could have been obtained by people for whom they weren't intended. The FBI director has already said it's possible Clinton's email system could have been remotely accessed by foreign hackers.

The revelation of the two archives is contained in a detailed report about the FBI's investigation of Clinton's private email account. The report contained new information about how the archives were handled, as well as how a private company deleted emails in its possession, at the same time that congressional investigators were demanding copies.

More:

The archives on the laptop and thumbdrive were constructed by Clinton aides in 2013, using a convoluted process, before her emails were turned over to State Department officials and later scrubbed to determine which ones had classified information and should either be withheld from public view or could be released with redactions. The archive of messages would contain none of those safeguards, potentially exposing classified information if it were ever opened and its contents read.

The FBI has found that Clinton's emails contained classified information, including information derived from U.S. intelligence. Her campaign has disputed the classification of some of the emails.

The archive was created nearly a year before the State Department contacted former secretaries of state and asked them to turn over any emails that they had sent using private accounts that pertained to official business. A senior Clinton aide, Huma Abedin, told the FBI that the archive on the laptop and thumb drive were meant to be "a reference for the future production of a book," according to the FBI report. Another aide, however, said that the archive was set up after the email account of a Clinton confidante and longtime adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, was compromised by a Romanian hacker.

Whatever the rationale, the transfer of Clinton's emails onto two new storage devices, one of which was shipped twice, created new opportunities for messages to be lost or exposed to people who weren't authorized to see them, according to the FBI report. (The Clinton campaign didn't immediately respond to a request to comment for this story.)

Read it all. The disappearing laptop and thumb drive story is incredibly fishy. Either Team Hillary is lying about it, or they are spectacularly incompetent and reckless with national security information.

Clint says: September 3, 2016 at 12:00 pm
The Clintons have gotten away repeatedly by not playing by the rules that others must play by or get punished for breeching.

It's incrementally being exposed and Americans see that The Clintons act as if they're too big to jail.

Noah172 , says: September 3, 2016 at 12:08 pm
KevinS wrote:

It is like going through a red light because you weren't paying close enough attention as opposed to consciously choosing to run a red light

Lousy analogy. Running a red is a momentary lapse, not a years-long, well-thought-out conspiracy, with considerable effort given to covering tracks (BleachBit).

Sebastien Cole , says: September 3, 2016 at 12:09 pm
No one in the media wants to say it, but this report almost entirely exonerates Clinton. Yes, she's lawyerly and is inclined to walk too close to the line, but no – she didn't do anything immoral or unethical. If at some point it turns out that she's actually done something wrong then we revisit, but the obsession with this 'crimeless coverup' prevents us from stating the obvious – Clinton is a solid candidate for President, intelligent, diligent and serious enough to guide the nation through difficult times. Trump is uncontroversially not.

The moral equivalence games the media plays with the two candidates amounts to a cancer in our civic fiber that allows us not to put away our childish things.

mongoose , says: September 3, 2016 at 12:15 pm
…like choosing a hangover…rather than a heroin overdose
Buckeye reader , says: September 3, 2016 at 12:22 pm
You're insulting Nixon.

We could have had Carly Fiorina dealing with the challenge of cyber warfare in the 21st century. Voters are choosing a woman who put an insecure server containing national security communications in her basement, and sold our intention and opportunities to do good in the world to rich people for her own financial gain.
(I lean toward voting for Trump. My issue is the immense paperwork drag on health care delivery and the increase in cost caused by the "affordable" care act. I expect more of the same with Clinton. )

Abelard Lindsey , says: September 3, 2016 at 12:37 pm
Hillary Clinton: Incompetent, Or Criminal? Both.
Michael Guarino, says: September 3, 2016 at 12:51 pm
Dear God, from the Daily Beast article, apparently they were using one of the laptops as a way to transfer the emails to a contractor they had hired. Since no one knew how to do it, they effected the transfer by sending the entire archive to a personal gmail account, then transfering it again to the contractor. So we have a massive store containing quite classified information going to a major tech company, entirely over the internet with only ssl protection I can only presume, because they could not figure out how to transfer a file system. The incompetence here is astonishing. Even a Google employee who forwards sensitive information to a personal gmail account would risk being fired.

This sort of astonishing incompetence is exactly why I originally thought this was a big deal. The reason you don't want HRC running her own server is because she plainly doesn't know how to manage, or even hire for, all the inane details of information security.

Of course the most important detail to come out of this is the use of BleachBit. You don't use that software to delete emails about yoga classes.

Will Harrington , says: September 3, 2016 at 12:52 pm
Jay, or, and hear me out, like the other Bill, there has to come a point in time where the shear amount of claims of criminal behavior has to be considered. The other Bill got away with rape for years, maybe its time to consider that this Bill and his wife lack credibility in the face of accusers that HRC has denigrated and called Bimbos.

Leftists make me sick in this. They will cry that we should always believe the victim unless one of their political leaders are accused. You want to take out a conservative? Give credible evidence that he is guilty of rape or sexual harassment. We quit voting for them. Your side, deny, deny, deny….and ultimately demand we move on, just like a previous poster's five stages of a Clinton scandal.

The only exception to this I can think of is Weiner, not because he did something that is horrible. No, you guys abandoned him because he was pathetic and embarrassing.

Michael Guarino, says: September 3, 2016 at 1:08 pm
This is the direct quote from the Daily Beast article:

After trying unsuccessfully to remotely transfer the emails to a Platte River server, Hanley shipped the laptop to the employee's home in February 2014. He then "migrated Clinton's emails" from the laptop to a Platte River server.

That task was hardly straightforward, however, and ended up exposing the email archive yet again, this time to another commercial email service.

The employee "transferred all of the Clinton e-mail content to a personal Google e-mail (Gmail) address he created," the FBI found. From that Gmail address, he downloaded the emails into a mailbox named "HRC Archive" on the Platte River server.

Honestly, Rod you should highlight this. I can assure you that if something this mindbogglingly reckless were ever done at a major tech company the employee would either be fired or told to find work elsewhere but never enter the office again (because severance is expensive and bad pr). I assume the same is true of the government as well.

It really makes the Nixon comparisons seem apt, except she has an out for her supporters in simply claiming that she is a bumbling idiot.

Andrew E. , says: September 3, 2016 at 1:23 pm
The good liberals here who are starting the writing on the wall with Crooked Hillary should begin considering the fact that Trump isn't that bad and is actually pretty good in many ways. Come on over, you will be welcomed warmly.

[Sep 03, 2016] Sounds like Hillary used burner phones like a drug dealer

Sep 03, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

dcblogger , September 3, 2016 at 11:46 am

A note sent to all State Department employees on Clinton's behalf warned them against the risks of using personal email addresses for official business.
none , September 3, 2016 at 11:56 am

13 mobile devices? Destroying them with a hammer?

I gotta think there were a lot more than 13. Sounds like she used burner phones like a drug dealer.

Jess , September 3, 2016 at 3:19 pm

Yeah. the first image I got when I read that headline was the scene in Breaking Bad when a phone rings, Walter opens a drawer and has to look through about a dozen phones to find the one that is ringing.

[Sep 03, 2016] Hillary Clintons Team Lost a Laptop Full of Her Emails in the Actual Mail

Notable quotes:
"... lost-in-the-mail ..."
Sep 03, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

JSM , September 3, 2016 at 9:10 am

This story 'Hillary Clinton's Team Lost a Laptop Full of Her Emails in the Actual Mail' ( http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/02/hillary-clinton-s-team-lost-a-laptop-full-of-her-emails-in-the-actual-mail.html ) is an absolutely preposterous concoction. What purpose it's supposed to serve is at the moment unclear. Likely it will become clear when it becomes necessary to hide the truth from Americans, a project that is increasingly, though not always, stillborn.

The most significant thing we learn is that "The employee "transferred all of the Clinton e-mail content to a personal Google e-mail (Gmail) address he created," the FBI found. From that Gmail address, he downloaded the emails into a mailbox named "HRC Archive" on the Platte River server."

Americans must be (or are at least expected to be) the most schizophrenic of all people on the earth. They are not only supposed to believe that the FBI/NSA (the former Marcy Wheeler, I believe, thinks is also spying on Americans' emails) cannot locate a copy of the deleted emails, but that the FBI can't get a warrant to get the 'deleted' emails from Google. Who on earth, on any other day, or in reference to anything else, actually believes that an email deleted from a Gmail account is simultaneously deleted from Google's servers & archives?

Tom , September 3, 2016 at 10:07 am

Even the Hardy Boys would have conducted a harder hitting investigation. What ever happened to the vaunted tough-as-nails FBI? Talk about pulling your punches. Yeesh!

Ivy , September 3, 2016 at 10:58 am

The lost-in-the-mail excuse earned a place in the Lies pantheon.
Another favorite may be "I'm Hillary Clinton and I'm here to help you".

Arizona Slim , September 3, 2016 at 12:39 pm

Wait a minute. I am to believe that this crew sent a laptop through the mail?

And that their boss deserves to be President of the United States?

pretzelattack , September 3, 2016 at 12:43 pm

it was in a big padded envelope, and it was clearly marked "fragile" and "top secret".

[Sep 03, 2016] Gowdy FBI barely probed Clinton about intent on emails

Aug 25, 2016 | TheHill

FBI officials failed to aggressively question Hillary Clinton about her intentions in setting up a private email system, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) claimed this week, exposing a potential key vulnerability in the bureau's investigation.

"I didn't see that many questions on that issue," Gowdy told Fox News's "The Kelly File" on Wednesday evening.

The detail could be crucial for Republican critics of the FBI's decision not to recommend charges be filed against the former secretary of State for mishandling classified information.

... ... ...

"I looked to see what witnesses were questioned on the issue of intent, including her," he said on Fox News. "I didn't see that many questions on that issue."

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz(R-Utah) has called for the FBI to create unclassified versions of the Clinton case file that it gave to Congress, so that the material can be released publicly. Gowdy reiterated the call on Fox News.

"There's no reason in the world you could not and should not be able to look at the same witness interviews that I had to go to Washington and look at in a classified setting," he said.

[Sep 03, 2016] Clinton emails wiped clean after NYT story

Notable quotes:
"... The deletion took place between March 25 and March 31, the FBI learned in a May 3 interview. The name of the person who deleted the emails was redacted from the FBI's notes. ..."
"... The Times story was published on March 2. ..."
"... I am unsympathetic to any person involved in such a discussion that circumvents state secrets protocol because they don't have access to a secure computer. That is an excuse not acceptable. That is saying "I didn't know any better" to folks who are sitting at the highest levels of state secrets! That is plain B.S. in my opinion. ..."
"... A urinating contest between State and CIA operatives who really didn't need State permission to pull the trigger on drone strikes is not an excuse for Hillary to have 22-SAP running loose on her email un-secure un-authorized servers/storage units. I remain unsympathetic to Hillary or anyone else who compromises state secrets at that level because it is inconvenient to find a secure means to communicate. ..."
Sep 02, 2016 | TheHill

The deletion took place between March 25 and March 31, the FBI learned in a May 3 interview. The name of the person who deleted the emails was redacted from the FBI's notes.

"In a follow-up FBI interview on May 3, 2016, ------ Indicated he believed he had an 'oh s--t' moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton;s e-mails," the FBI notes released on Friday stated.

Chris CillizzaVerified account @TheFix 22h22 hours ago

This is crazy. 3 weeks after NYT publish Clinton email server story, there was a big wipe of her emails conducted

BleachBit is a special computer software that is designed to "prevent recovery" of files so that, as House Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said last week, "even God can't read them."

After the conclusion of the investigation in July, the FBI Director James Comey recommended no charges against Clinton but added that the Democratic presidential nominee was "extremely careless" in handling classified material.

The Times story was published on March 2.

Fred_Shrinka Winfield 21 hours ago
"Completely asinine to think a normal rational person would believe that junk."
NEVER FEAR ! We are talking about HiLIARy voters here!

Bill Fred_Shrinka 20 hours ago
The fact that the FBI had this info but excluded it from their deliberations on whether or not to indict, then did a Labor Day weekend dump when most Americans won't be paying attention, is pretty conclusive evidence that the FBI under Comey & Lynch is actively working to shield Clinton.
Paul Bill 20 hours ago
Quick, corporate media, find something Donald Trump said and make it a 5 day story so you don't have to report on HiLlARy's crimes!
Garbage Tears Paul 20 hours ago
The press is a total joke. It is painful to watch,
Teddi Garbage Tears 20 hours ago
They have been exposed by the Trump movement, and yes, its painful to realize...
pablosodahead Teddi 20 hours ago
..painfull to realize we have all be played for years by the democrats and yes republicans and large corporate businesses. Time to take back our control of ourselves and choices, real choices, and not sell our votes for a freaking free cell phone or promises of free this, free that.....
Rick20112 pablosodahead 16 hours ago
Or 13 separate Blackberry cell phones ...
Poor62 Rick20112 29 minutes ago
To go with her THREE servers.
  • Ed pablosodahead 7 hours ago
    Let's stay focused. The DNC and DemocRATs are the ones with the dirty email issues and obvious party wide corruption.

    Sure there are Republicans who have done bad things but it's not the core of the party, like it is with the DNC.

    usaok59 Ed 4 hours ago
    Actually if you dig deeper you will find that both parties are VERY corrupt. The only way to get things done is to make deals and cover for each other. Our political system has totally gone amuck.
    Ed usaok59 3 hours ago
    Again... it's the DNC. The RNC isn't renown for voter fraud and corruption. Because the core of the party doesn't partake. The DNC does...

    http://americanlookout.com/dem...

    Ed usaok59 3 hours ago
    Actually, I have... and the RNC is fairly clean. The party learned a lesson with Nixon. Sure people may not have liked the Bush's, but at least they were fairly honest. And Reagan was an awesome President.

    Also, Trump can't be bought and is a political outsider.

    The DNC and DemocRATs, haven't learned their lesson yet... Slick Willy was almost fully impeached (House not Senate impeached)... but DemocRATs played party politics and let him go. We ALL know he was guilty and repeatedly lied under oath (perjury and obstruction)... something you or I would go to prison for.

    ThatsWhatRosieSays usaok59 3 hours ago
    Well said. And it fact, as someone commented above, this entire political process & "election" is little more than a charade. (A bad one at that.)
    ...Don't be too surprised if/when, sometime in the few weeks, some sort of (manufactured/contrived) 'national emergency' develops, necessitating the 'temporary suspension' of: a) the election process; b) the Bill of Rights; or c) the entire US Constitution -- and imposition of martial law -- 'Just until Order can be Restored.' (Or some such bunch of gibberish.)

    Given what we've seen over the last 7+ years, it's darn near predictable: Americans should anticipate an "October Surprise" the likes of which the world has never seen.

    Even so, come Lord Jesus!

    Ed ThatsWhatRosieSays 3 hours ago
    That's why Trump is perfect right now. He can't be bought and is an outsider. It's actually just what our country needs right now.
    lisamanv . Paul Kersey 18 hours ago
    Lauer is not a moderator.
    nancync lisamanv . 15 hours ago
    Yes, first debate. How nice for Hillary since he was listed as a member of the Clinton Global Initiative at one time. No bias there LOL
    lisamanv . nancync 24 minutes ago
    No, Lester Holt is the first moderator.
    Paul Kersey lisamanv . 17 hours ago
    http://debates.org/index.php?m...
    sickpuppy70454 Thrill22cl 11 hours ago
    I can't speak for anyone else, but I, personally, am in a RAGE over the Lame Stream Media.
    iRon Madden Paul 20 hours ago
    IMPORTANT: when writing "HiLlARy" be sure to use a lowercase L (l), not an uppercase i (I), so it appears as "hillary" to internet search engines and won't be censored. All corporate media, including Google, Facebook, and Twitter are filtering the unique word "hiliary." You must spell "hillary" correctly, so that means using a lowercase L in place of the uppercase i in HiLlARy.
    MuddShark alpha 19 hours ago
    I wonder about who "PRN" is?

    The twitter screen cap clearly shows, "PRN held a conference call with President Clinton's staff"??

    Then, the person who's name is redacted, who was evidently interviewed by the FBI, "deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server...

    ... and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton's e-mails"

    Kind of unclear, since the conference call was with PRESIDENT Clinton's staff, is this PRESIDENT Clinton's archive mailbox, on the PRN server containing PRESIDENT Clinton's emails???

    Tellthewholetruth MuddShark 19 hours ago
    Colorado-based Platte River Networks (PRN), which had managed her primary server since June 2013.
    MuddShark Tellthewholetruth 18 hours ago
    Thanks, so in Dec of 2014, Cheryl Mills told 'him' to make changes to email retention setting for Clinton's emails, and after the PRN conference call, 3/25/15, 'he' realized that 'he' didn't do what Cheryl told 'him' to do in Dec of 2014, so 'he' did what Cheryl told 'him' to do, 3+ months late, and wiped 'his' butt with BleachBit on some exported .PST files 'he' created??

    Somehow it doesn't look very much like the headline of this story makes it out to be??

    Tellthewholetruth MuddShark 16 hours ago
    Oh and there is the small minor point that on Nov. 26, 2014 President Obama signs into law an updated Federal Records Act requiring public officials to forward all work-related email to their government address. Then comes the Cheryl Mills directive to change retention settings. THEN he/she remembers didn't follow orders ("the Oh S***" moment) so deletes all pst files plus back ups. NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!!! /sarcasm
    Clark Kent Tellthewholetruth 16 hours ago
    But Hillary and Cheryl ended their public term in Feb of '13, right? So Obama's signing, Nov of '14, didn't really affect them, did it?
    Paul R. Jones MuddShark 17 hours ago
    A reminder, the data this firm had in its possession had state secrets including 22-Top Secret-Special Access Programs. None of these firms had clearance for such. Wonder if everyone whose fingerprints were on these files got vetted by the FBI and or Intel to determine if they read what they had in their hands if for no other reason than curiosity?
    Clark Kent Paul R. Jones 16 hours ago
    We are assuming that the server in PRN's management had 'all' Hillary's emails on it, but has there been proof shown to the public that the server in New Jersey had 'all' Hillary's emails?

    The 7 email chains, with 22 TS/SAP information containing emails seem to be from 2011 and 2012, with the 2012 very likely being the New Years Holliday.

    Back in June, WSJ reported that the majority seemed to be discussions about a planned CIA drone strike in Pakistan, that did not end up happening, and it started because the CIA let the US diplomat in Islamabad know, a day or so before Christmas, so State could weigh in.

    Paul R. Jones Clark Kent 16 hours ago
    Well said. We, the People, may very well never know the details on this batch of state secrets...nothing new about the Intel folks being tight-lipped. Nothing I've read on-line has given any info on what the SAP email contained...but, T.S./SAP is the most rigidly controlled/guarded state secret and I doubt any will become public knowledge. Any way this Hillary state secrets compromise is sliced, it is a violation of state secrets protocol in my opinion. From the gist of the FBI notes provided so far, there was little or no effort by the FBI personnel to 'dig' into 'intent,' thus glossing over a specific state secret statutes. Nor did the FBI team devote much time to 'chasing' the means by which these 22-T.S./SAP jumped the gap from State's closed-loop secure email system to Hillary's rogue system...why not?

    Lastly, I wonder if anyone from the Intel folks sat-in and or participated in Hillary's 'walk-in-the-park soft-ball' not under oath chat with the FBI...the Intel folks got 'hurt' badly with Hillary's compromise of the 22 SAP in my opinion.

    MuddShark Paul R. Jones 15 hours ago
    Many of today's cable news talking heads are mentioning the planned Pakistan drone strike discussions as if it is now a forgone conclusion. Those of us who don't pay WSJ can read the story from other sources...

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic...

    "Some of those emails were then sent by Clinton's aides to her personal email account, officials told the Journal.

    The vaguely worded messages didn't mention the "CIA," "drones" or details about the targets, the Journal reported.

    The emails were written within the often-narrow time frame in which State Department officials had to decide whether or not to object to drone strikes before the CIA pulled the trigger, officials told the newspaper. The still-secret emails are still a part of the ongoing FBI investigation.

    One exchange reported by the Journal came before Christmas in 2011 when the U.S. ambassador sent a note about a planned strike that sparked an email chain between Clinton's senior advisers. Officials said the exchange was clear those involved in the email were having discussions because they were away from their offices and didn't have access to a classified computer."

    Paul R. Jones MuddShark 15 hours ago
    I am unsympathetic to any person involved in such a discussion that circumvents state secrets protocol because they don't have access to a secure computer. That is an excuse not acceptable. That is saying "I didn't know any better" to folks who are sitting at the highest levels of state secrets! That is plain B.S. in my opinion.

    And, yet, Hillary's fawning faithful followers are buying the ruse. Such rationalization of compromising state secrets infuriates men and women in the field who can die (Amb. Stevens and the men who rushed to their own deaths to help protect Stevens) because of such bureaucratic idiocy in my opinion beginning with Hillary and her immediate minions merits the wrath of We, the People not admiration...some of whom questioned Hillary's email mess early-on such as Amadin who believed Hillary's email stuff was 'outrageous!"

    "Outrageous" is an understatement on steroids in my opinion that would get anyone else prison time.

    Paul R. Jones megajess 4 hours ago
    Thanks
    Clark Kent Paul R. Jones 14 hours ago
    Our Amb. to Pakistan initiated these 'chains', because CIA 'requested input'; those requests seems to have been off the secure system. The drone operators were not in danger.

    If the CIA had pulled the trigger, it would have before State gave the input CIA asked for, if they traveled to secure lines.

    This is one of the reasons the CIA is dropping out of drone strikes; moving forwards the Defense Dept. will pull the trigger.

    The argument between State and CIA over these discussions does not seem to have started because of Hillary, and it doesn't seem to have ended because of Hillary. It is only because of the FOIA disclosures that we know they seem to have agreed to disagree on this subject.

    Paul R. Jones Clark Kent 13 hours ago
    A urinating contest between State and CIA operatives who really didn't need State permission to pull the trigger on drone strikes is not an excuse for Hillary to have 22-SAP running loose on her email un-secure un-authorized servers/storage units. I remain unsympathetic to Hillary or anyone else who compromises state secrets at that level because it is inconvenient to find a secure means to communicate.
    Clark Kent Paul R. Jones 11 hours ago
    Did you read the ViceNews article about the Vaughn Index they received on the 7 'chains' that contain the 22 emails? You do realize that in at least one chain, a news agency article link, and possible quote, is being forwarded, and the article is likely the source of the TS/SAP information, don't you? Even after it is leaked to someone like the NYT or Guardian, a TS/SAP document is still considered TS/SAP by the NSA, right? Even after everyone on the planet who is interested has read the information, discussing it on the non-secure system is considered against procedures, right?

    https://news.vice.com/article/...

    "A large number of emails at the center of the Clinton FBI probe appear to have been between U.S. diplomats in Pakistan and the State Department in Washington D.C. discussing planned drone strikes." http://www.inquisitr.com/31881... ... "The emails were sent in 2011 and 2012 through a private server and contained information that allowed the State Department input into a potential drone strike, where they had the opportunity to voice either opposition or support for the planned strike."

    Based on the The Inquisitor article, and the ViceNews article, 8 emails seem to be regarding the CIA drone strike, and one of the remaining 3 chains was about the news article.

    Paul R. Jones Clark Kent 3 hours ago
    I still remain unsympathetic to anyone caught-up in this compromise of state secrets. Too many lessor mortals have been severely punished for a lot less and the powerful escape any consequences for Hillary's mess. The RULE OF LAW is being 'shaded' if not outright lost in this mess!

    William Card > iRon Madden

    Hillary is a walking psyop. NOTHING about her is real.

    Chez Kiva > Chez Kiva • 20 hours ago

    A memory lapse? I don't think so. Careless? Yes, careless to a fault. People died. Agents were outed.

    And, the entire thing is a ruse to keep we the Americans from discussing the real infraction, which is that these CIA players were involved in destroying Libya and simultaneously causing the Syrian civil war. It wasn't an 'embassy' it was a safe house for all the lettered covert operatives and arms dealers. That's why she believes here role as 'guardian of State secrets' is safe.

    Mark this "Classified:" We are deliberately involved in destroying 7 countries mid-east in a row. Iran (read nuclear) comes next!- General Wesley Clark.

    CheeseEatingSurrenderMonkey > Fred_Shrinka

    "Accidently" used BLEACHBIT "guaranteed unrecoverable" Secure Data Erase program?

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahah.

    [Sep 03, 2016] Were headers of Hillary emails from her private server manipulated to hide her address?

    Hillary lied again claiming that the existence of her bathroom mail server was a common knoleadge. Some of Mrs. Clinton's closest aides were unaware of the server
    Notable quotes:
    "... some State Department employees interviewed by the F.B.I. explained that emails by Clinton only contained the letter 'H' in the sender field and did not display her email address ..."
    "... The F.B.I. said that some of Mrs. Clinton's closest aides were aware she used a private email address but did not know she had set up a private server. The aides said they were "unaware of the existence of the private server until after Clinton's tenure at State or when it became public knowledge." ..."
    nytimes.com

    From: 6 Things We Learned in the F.B.I. Clinton Email Investigation

    Mrs. Clinton said in her interview it was "common knowledge" that she had a private email address because it was "displayed to anyone with whom she exchanged emails." But the F.B.I. said in a summary of its findings that "some State Department employees interviewed by the F.B.I. explained that emails by Clinton only contained the letter 'H' in the sender field and did not display her email address."

    The F.B.I. said that some of Mrs. Clinton's closest aides were aware she used a private email address but did not know she had set up a private server. The aides said they were "unaware of the existence of the private server until after Clinton's tenure at State or when it became public knowledge."

    From: Links-9-3-2016 naked capitalism
    temporal

    re: 6 Things We Learned

    “some State Department employees interviewed by the F.B.I. explained that emails by Clinton only contained the letter ‘H’ in the sender field and did not display her email address.” I have no idea what kind of email client would hide the contents of the from/reply-to field. How does their spam filter work if it doesn’t reveal who sent it? Why do they read stuff when they don’t have any idea who sent it? Did the F.B.I. really simply accept these statements as facts? Maybe they all just use cell phones and could care less who else is in the loop.

    “Three weeks later, a Platte River employee realized he had not deleted the emails as instructed. The employee said he then used a special program called BleachBit to delete the files.” He was told to delete files that any nitwit knows shouldn’t be deleted and delete only means delete if they can’t be found again but now it turns out he was supposed to shred them after removing the staples.

    The clear signal is that if you are going to break laws, hide information from future legal discovery and generally stonewall investigators with easily disproven statements be very certain that it at the behest of your liege lord. Laws are for the peasants. Justice is blind for the elite because no one dares look.

    fresno dan

    Now we find out a laptop was “lost” in the mail.
    Damn, this is gonna be really bad….for the post office.
    Of course, it will be hard to spin when it turns out it was addressed to Putin in Hillary’s handwriting…

    Bunk McNulty, September 3, 2016 at 9:57 am
    “The sh!t has hit the fan.”
    Higgs Boson

    What sh!t? What fan? Remember, the FBI gave HRC a pass. Nothing to see. It was all a big “nothingburger”. The only people that keep harping on this are right-wing rubes who get their marching orders from Putin’s army of hackers. It’s been assimilated into the Clinton Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy mythos.

    Now go vote for Her, because “love [of what, they don’t specify] Trumps hate.”

    That is all.

    winstonsmith

    Here are the FBI summary file and interview notes in a single searchable PDF and some highlights from a reddit thread:

    Handling of Confidential Information

    “During [Sysadmin’s] December 22, 2015 FBI interview, Pagliano recalled a conversation with [Redacted] at the beginning of Clinton’s tenure, in which [Redacted] advised he would not be surprised if classified information was being transmitted to Clinton’s personal server.” (Page 28)

    Clinton could not give an example of how the classification of a document was determined; rather she stated there was a process in place at State before her tenure, and she relied on career foreign service professionals to appropriately mark and handle classified information. Clinton believed information should be classified when it relates to [Redacted] the use of sensitive sources, or sensitive deliberations.” (Page 26)

    She relied on State officials to use their judgment when e-mailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her e-mail address. The FBI provided Clinton with copies of her classified e-mails ranging from CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET/SAP and Clinton said she did not believe the e-mails contained classified information.” (Page 26)

    “State employees interviewed by the FBI explained that emails from Clinton only contained the letter “H” in the sender field and did not display their e-mail address. The majority of the State employees interviewed by the FBI who were in e-mail contact with Clinton indicated they had no knowledge of the private server in her Chappaqua residence. Clinton’s immediate aides, to include Mills, Abedin, Jacob Sullivan, and [Redacted] told the FBI they were unaware of the existence of the private server until after Clinton’s tenure at the State or when it became public knowledge.

    Possible Censorship

    There were no e-mails provided by Williams & Connolly to State or the FBI dated from January 21, 2009 to March 18, 2009. FBI investigation identified an additional 18 days where Clinton did not provide State any responsive e-mail. FBI investigation determined 14 of the 18 days where Clinton did not provide State any responsive e-mail correspond with e-mail outages affecting Clinton’s personal server systems as a result of both Hurricane Irene and Hurricane Sandy. FBI investigation indicated other explanations for gaps in Clinton’s e-mail production could include user deletion prior to PRN’s transfer of Clinton’s e-mails for review…” (Page 27)

    Security Threats

    “Forensic analysis noted that on January 5, 2013, three IP addresses matching known Tor exit nodes were observed accessing a user e-mail account on the Pagliano Server believe to belong to President Clinton staffer [Redacted] FBI investigation indicated the Tor user logged in to [Redacted] email account and browsed e-mail folders and attachments. When asked during her interview, [Redacted] stated to the FBI she is not familiar with nor has she ever used Tor Software” (Page 29)

    “The FBI does not have in its possession any of Clinton’s 13 mobile devices which potentially were used to send e-mails using Clinton’s clintonemail.com e-mail addresses. As a result, the FBI could not make a determination as to whether any of the devices were subject to compromise. Similarly, the FBI does not have in its possession two of the five iPad devices which potentially were used by Clinton to send and receive e-mails during her tenure… (Page 30)

    “Investigation identified multiple occurrences of phishing and/or spear-phishing e-mails sent to Clinton’s account during her tenure as Secretary of State. [Paragraph Redacted]…

    Clinton received another phishing e-mail, purportedly sent from the personal e-mail account of State official [Redacted]. The email contained a potentially malicious link. Clinton replied to the email [Redacted] stating, “Is this really from you? I was worried about opening it!” … Open source information indicated, if opened the targeted user’s device may have been infected, and information would have been sent to at least three computers overseas, including one in Russia.” (page 31)

    Pages 33 – 47 are redacted. About one third of the entire review is redacted.

    Lambert Strether

    Thanks very much for this handy compendium!

    Roger Smith

    However email tag data works, her name appears as “H” because she isn’t using her typical address. The address I have seen H appear in is HDR22@clintononemail.com. Something about the contact data shows her as H.

    There is an exchange between her and mega donor Ms. Rothschild that I saw this in. In the email Clinton apologizes for inconveniencing her and literally says, “Let me know what penance I owe you.”

    https://twitter.com/d_seaman/status/771569083695239168

    hunkerdown, September 3, 2016 at 1:54 pm
    I have no idea what kind of email client would hide the contents of the from/reply-to field.
    “Friendly” ones, like, say, Outlook. Some people just don’t care for all that gobbledygook, and Microsoft aims to please. Of course, the sender can put whatever they want in the comment field.
    From: “H”
    is a perfectly valid email From: line.
    >

    [Sep 03, 2016] In December 2014, while Hillary was under investigation, a top aide to Mrs. Clinton told the company that housed her server to delete an archive of emails from her account

    If this is not obstruction of justice then what is: " ...Representative Jason Chaffetz, Republican of Utah and the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said that the deletion of the emails violated an order his committee issued to Mrs. Clinton in 2012 and a subpoena issued by the Benghazi committee in 2015."
    Notable quotes:
    "... These were not Hillary Clinton's emails - they were government records, and this was potentially one of the largest security breaches at the State Department because they had all these years of security records that just went out the door, ..."
    "... Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, called the F.B.I. documents "a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency."\ ..."
    Sep 02, 2016 |

    From: 6 Things We Learned in the F.B.I. Clinton Email Investigation - The New York Times

    According to the F.B.I., in December 2014 a top aide to Mrs. Clinton told the company that housed her server to delete an archive of emails from her account. The company, Platte River Networks, apparently never followed those instructions. On March 2, 2015, The New York Times reported that Mrs. Clinton had exclusively used a personal email account when she was secretary of state. Two days later, the congressional committee investigating the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, and Mrs. Clinton's response to them, told the technology firms associated with the email account that they had to retain "all relevant documents" related to its inquiry.

    Three weeks later, a Platte River employee realized he had not deleted the emails as instructed. The employee said he then used a special program called BleachBit to delete the files. The F.B.I. said Mrs. Clinton was unaware of the deletions.

    The F.B.I. said it was later able to find some of the emails, but did not say how many emails were deleted, or whether they were included in the 60,000 emails that Mrs. Clinton said she sent and received while secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

    From: F.B.I. Papers Offer Closer Look at Hillary Clinton Email Inquiry - The New York Times

    But Representative Jason Chaffetz, Republican of Utah and the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said that the deletion of the emails violated an order his committee issued to Mrs. Clinton in 2012 and a subpoena issued by the Benghazi committee in 2015.

    He said he planned to seek answers from Mrs. Clinton about the deletions. "These were not Hillary Clinton's emails - they were government records, and this was potentially one of the largest security breaches at the State Department because they had all these years of security records that just went out the door," Mr. Chaffetz said. "It's a very black-and-white order. There's no wiggle room."

    Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, called the F.B.I. documents "a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency."\

    The F.B.I. released only small portions of its thick files on the Clinton investigation, and Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who leads the Senate Judiciary Committee, accused the F.B.I. of withholding key documents - including many unclassified ones - from public view.

    The selective release, he said, produced "an incomplete and possibly misleading picture of the facts without the other unclassified information that is still locked away from the public and even most congressional staff."

    [Sep 02, 2016] Longtime Bill Clinton aide Justin Cooper, who was not Department of State employee, managed Hillary Blackberries, synching them to the server

    That means that Justin Cooper has full access to all Hillary email information, which is illegal.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Longtime Bill Clinton aide Justin Cooper, who helped set up the private email account that Hillary Clinton used as secretary of state, was the person "usually responsible" for setting up her new devices and syncing them to the server. ..."
    "... another person whose name is redacted, also helped Clinton set up her BlackBerry. ..."
    Sep 02, 2016 | www.politico.com
    3. Breaking and smashing

    Longtime Bill Clinton aide Justin Cooper, who helped set up the private email account that Hillary Clinton used as secretary of state, was the person "usually responsible" for setting up her new devices and syncing them to the server. Top aides Huma Abedin and Monica Hanley, as well as another person whose name is redacted, also helped Clinton set up her BlackBerry.

    According to Abedin and Hanley, Clinton's old devices would often disappear to parts "unknown once she transitioned to a new device."

    Cooper, according to the report, "did recall two instances where he destroyed Clinton's old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer."

    [Sep 02, 2016] Looks like Pagiano was an amateur: low quality or no spam filter on "bathroom" server

    www.politico.com
    The suspicious porn email

    The FBI said it uncovered multiple instances of phishing or spear-phishing emails sent to Clinton's account, including one that appeared to be sent from another State official's account. Clinton responded to the email by trying to confirm that the person actually sent it, adding, "I was worried about opening it!"

    But in another incident, the FBI noted that Abedin emailed someone (whose name is redacted) conveying Clinton's concern that "someone [was] hacking into her email" after receiving an email from a "known [redacted] associate containing a link to a website with pornographic material."

    "There is no additional information as to why Clinton was concerned about someone hacking into her e-mail account, or if the specific link referenced by Abedin was used as a vector to infect Clinton's device," the FBI's report states, and after roughly two lines of redacted text goes on to note that "open source information indicated, if opened, the targeted user's device may have been infected, and information would have been sent to at least three computers overseas, including one in Russia."

    [Sep 02, 2016] Bathroom email server was actually a series of three servers but the main Windows server administered by Pagiano was in use from 2009 till 2013

    Notable quotes:
    "... That server was replaced in 2009 with a server installed by a former IT specialist for Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign ..."
    www.politico.com

    The former secretary of state's email server was in fact a series of three servers used over a period of time from approximately 2007 to 2015, beginning with an Apple server installed by a former aide to her husband.

    That server was replaced in 2009 with a server installed by a former IT specialist for Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, which was then supplanted in 2013 by a server installed by a vendor, Denver-based Platte River Networks.

    That server, housed in a data center in New Jersey, was voluntarily handed over to the FBI in 2015.

    [Sep 02, 2016] 13 Blackberries and 5 iPads

    www.politico.com
    The report said there was "no additional information" about the email or more about why Clinton was concerned about the hack, or whether the link Abedin referred to in her email was "used as a vector to infect Clinton's device."

    Following roughly two lines of redacted text, the report states, "Open source information indicated, if opened, the targeted user's device may have been infected, and information would have been sent to at least three computers overseas, including one in Russia."

    In its investigation, the FBI turned up 13 total mobile devices connected to two different phone numbers that had potentially been used to send emails from Clinton's personal account, including eight email-capable BlackBerrys that she used during her tenure as secretary of state. Lawyers for Clinton said in late February of 2016 that they were unable to find any of the 13 devices identified by the bureau.

    The FBI also identified five iPads "associated with Clinton" that were potentially used to send emails from Clinton's private system. The bureau managed to obtain three of those iPads, none of which contained any potentially classified information.

    As she transitioned between mobile devices, two people interviewed by the FBI said the whereabouts of Clinton's previous devices would "frequently become unknown." One aide to former President Bill Clinton who also helped the family set up the initial personal email server in their Chappaqua, New York, home said that on two occasions he "destroyed Clinton's old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer."

    [Sep 02, 2016] The art of bleaching the bathroom email server to delete traces of potencially compromizing Hillary Clinton emails

    Notable quotes:
    "... The unnamed staffer deleted the files after remembering an earlier request from longtime Clinton aide Cheryl Mills that changed "email retention policies" for Clinton's server. ..."
    www.politico.com

    But weeks after the Times published its story, the FBI's investigation found that an individual, whose name was redacted, used an online program called BleachBit to delete a file on the server containing Clinton's emails.

    The unnamed staffer deleted the files after remembering an earlier request from longtime Clinton aide Cheryl Mills that changed "email retention policies" for Clinton's server.

    [Sep 02, 2016] Emails destruction and bleaching the server were a deliberate act of sabotage of FOIA

    Using BleachBit clearly shows the criminal intent, which FBI did not found in the whole Clinton emailgate saga...
    Notable quotes:
    "... used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton's e-mails." ..."
    www.politico.com

    Speaking to the FBI on May 3, 2016, "[redacted] indicated he believed he had an 'oh shit' moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton's e-mails."

    [Sep 02, 2016] FBI Hillary Clinton Lost Cell Phones with Classified Emails

    Notable quotes:
    "... Hillary Clinton lost several mobile telephones carrying e-mails from her private server during her time in office ..."
    "... "[Huma] Abedin and [former Clinton aide Monica] Hanley indicated the whereabouts of Clinton's [mobile] devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device," one report indicates. ..."
    Sep 02, 2016 | www.breitbart.com
    Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lost several mobile telephones carrying e-mails from her private server during her time in office, according to newly-released FBI documents on the investigation into her mishandling of classified information.

    "[Huma] Abedin and [former Clinton aide Monica] Hanley indicated the whereabouts of Clinton's [mobile] devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device," one report indicates.

    On other occasions, a staffer would destroy Clinton's old mobile phones "by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer," the FBI documents reveal.

    [Sep 02, 2016] Clinton allowed handling of her classified emails by a loyalist without any security clearance

    www.politico.com
    When reviewing an email from October of 2012, for example, Clinton said that while she did not recall the message specifically, she described an individual involved with the communication as "someone who was well acquainted with handling classified information" and "described him as someone she held in high regard."

    She said she "relied on" the individual, whose name is redacted in the FBI notes, and she had "no concern over his judgement and ability to handle classified information."

    [Sep 02, 2016] So what I said, not what I do

    Notable quotes:
    "... In addition, Clinton said she did not remember a State email going out in late June 2011 informing employees of the importance of securing their personal email accounts in correlation with the upgrading of her clintonemail.com server. ..."
    www.politico.com
    Clinton "did recall the frustration over State's information technology systems," the FBI said in its notes from the interview.

    In addition, Clinton said she did not remember a State email going out in late June 2011 informing employees of the importance of securing their personal email accounts in correlation with the upgrading of her clintonemail.com server.

    Clinton said she did not consider switching over to a State.gov account, as she, according to the report, "understood the email system used by her husband's personal staff had an excellent track record with respect to security and had never been breached."

    [Sep 02, 2016] Pathological liar Hillary Clinton pretended to be ignorant with FBI investigators; that was a silly defense strategy, but it worked probably beacuse of Obama meddling in the investigation

    Any reasonable investigator would instantly understand that she is trying to sell him the Brooklyn bridge. In no way with her career she can be unaware of such things.
    www.politico.com
    The meaning of (C)

    Clinton told the FBI that she did not know what the "(C)" portion markings on an email chain signified, explaining that she thought it meant the paragraphs were marked in alphabetical order.

    As far as her knowledge of the various classification levels of U.S. government information, Clinton responded that she took all classified material seriously regardless of the "level," be it "TOP SECRET," "SECRET" or "CONFIDENTIAL."

    [Sep 02, 2016] Clinton was not part of the decision to move from the Apple server managed by Cooper to a [windows] server built by Bryan Pagliano

    Notable quotes:
    "... Clinton "had no knowledge of the reasons for selecting it to install it in the basement" of her Chappaqua, New York, home. ..."
    "... Clinton also denied using the server to avoid the Federal Records Act, and did not have any conversations about using the server to avoid the Freedom of Information Act, according to the FBI's investigation notes. ..."
    www.politico.com

    Clinton was not part of the decision to move from the Apple server managed by Cooper to a [windows] server built by Bryan Pagliano, according to the report, which stated that Clinton "had no knowledge of the reasons for selecting it to install it in the basement" of her Chappaqua, New York, home.

    Clinton also denied using the server to avoid the Federal Records Act, and did not have any conversations about using the server to avoid the Freedom of Information Act, according to the FBI's investigation notes.

    [Sep 02, 2016] F.B.I. Papers Offer Closer Look at Hillary Clinton Email Inquiry

    NYT comments are just overflowing from neoliberal supported of this neocon warmonger Hillary. Amazing !!!
    Notable quotes:
    "... The fact that Hillary or any senior elected official can operate outside of a secure system without automated detection/correction is the real issue here. I expect many more govt' officials are doing the same, but in a less politically charged atmosphere. No investigations in their cases as there is no trophy at the end. ..."
    "... So who is minding the computer farm? Government computer systems/policies need to be reviewed, training reinforced, and automatic incident tracking of activity to and from undocumented server IP addresses. Automated systems should prevent government officials through their lack of knowledge from using systems that do not comply. ..."
    "... There is something fishy about her desire to maintain a private email server at her home at the same time she is working as a public official in the role of secretary of state. There is also the perceived conflict of interest between this role as the nation's top diplomat and her connection with the Clinton foundation. ..."
    "... If she exchanged favors for contributions to the foundation, which many suspect she did, the smoking guns have probably been deleted by now. She was given plenty of time to sort through her emails to cover her tracks before turning them over to investigators. ..."
    "... Her evasiveness and attempt to avoid FOIA requests have certainly earned her the nickname crooked Hillary. ..."
    "... The fact that so many people support Clinton, in the face of her egregious and arguably criminal behavior, speaks to the fact that a large number of people vote strictly party line. ..."
    "... The bottom line is that we are a very partisan nation whose voters support their candidate no matter how flawed is that person. ..."
    "... IF HRC played by the rules like everyone must, and simply used the State Department email, all of this could have been avoided. Yet she refused to use her State email even though it was offered to her. ..."
    "... ultimately, this shows the incompetence of the IT people in the government agencies handling her communications. ..."
    "... Hillary Clinton is ultimately responsible for making sure her classified communications are secure, and she should have been asking people questions to make sure this was the case. I am a Democrat but I have grave misgivings regarding her judgement and handling of this matter. ..."
    "... The most important finding is that the federal government is woefully incompetent in designing, implementing, and maintaining large information systems. ..."
    "... These are plainly false statements to the FBI, and so crimes. She did not do it "out of convenience" but to avoid public records act, and to get more privacy. Huma admitted that much, as have others. She got repeated warnings. We've heard that from those who warned her, who were told not to say it again. "I don't recall" any of them is just not credible. She is supposed to recall being warned. ..."
    "... She did not think those things were classified? She's Sec of State. She knows which subjects are classified, and many of those were. She knew that. She got the most classified stuff there is, because she was Sec of State. ..."
    "... The biggest concern of all is that she did this in deliberate defiance of the requirements of law, the public records requirements, for the express purpose of violating that law. The FBI just decided that it was not investigating THAT law, and so ignored it. Yet those are felonies, not just little things. ..."
    "... I am not concerned by Hillary's emails. I am very upset by the refusal of the media and politicians to address the real issues of our classification system. We have known since at least the Pentagon Papers, and probably earlier, that the purpose of classifying information is to keep it from the American people more than from our adversaries. ..."
    "... "But Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, which has used the email issue as one of its main weapons against Mrs. Clinton, called the documents "a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency." ..."
    "... Clinton apparently didn't know an email server from a jar of mayonnaise. I can understand that -- not sure I would either. ..."
    "... But if I were starting out on a 4-year stint as US Secretary of State, it would occur to me that I'd probably send or receive a sensitive email or two somewhere along the way, and I'd wonder whether sending and receiving those emails over a private server located in my home might be a good idea. ..."
    "... Lame very lame Hillary excuses . But the problem comes from both sides Democrat or Republican and there lame excuses . From the deficit from the Trickle down economy , deregulation to Trade-deal and the lost of jobs . Tax cut to tax inversion .. If we want change , Then why are voter still voting in Incumbents . The ones that made the problems we have . Shame us who do.. Vote the incumbents out of office .. ..."
    "... With over 75% of the country stating Hillary cannot be trusted, it's important to also consider the severe lack of accountability and level of arrogance displayed. If she's willing to take the lowest road possible, voting her into office will be a huge mistake. ..."
    "... You gotta be kidding me. All we get each day, all day is more breathless Trump 'News'. On the front page no less. Each smirk and foible is covered ad nauseum as if it were actually new worthy. You rarely hear about the other candidate. No policy comparisons for pete's sake. Until today. ..."
    Sep 02, 2016 | The New York Times

    Among the other key findings in the F.B.I. documents:

    ■ Mrs. Clinton regarded emails containing classified discussions about planned drone strikes as "routine."

    ■ She said she was either unaware of or misunderstood some classification procedures.

    ■ Colin L. Powell, a former secretary of state, had advised her to "be very careful" in how she used email.

    Scot, Seattle 7 hours ago

    Until I hear crowds chanting "lock him up" in relation to George Bush or Dick Cheney and the Iraq war, I'm going to have a hard time taking this gross witch hunt seriously. The contrast between Clinton's email administration screw-up and the unbroken daisy-chain of once-in-a-century global catastrophes committed by the Bush administration is so huge as to be hard to grasp.

    Paul, Canada 6 hours ago

    Sorry folks, but time to point out what has been missed by everyone as they attempt to make this a political election issue.

    There is no way Hillary or any elected official should be given the opportunity to use a private email server. Any technology org worth its salt will have its systems and computer usage policies locked down tight.

    Any action by a user that falls outside these policies must be automatically detected and investigated by the systems teams. Wrongs identified, computer users advised on proper usage, and corrective action taken to prevent reoccurrence.

    The fact that Hillary or any senior elected official can operate outside of a secure system without automated detection/correction is the real issue here. I expect many more govt' officials are doing the same, but in a less politically charged atmosphere. No investigations in their cases as there is no trophy at the end.

    So who is minding the computer farm? Government computer systems/policies need to be reviewed, training reinforced, and automatic incident tracking of activity to and from undocumented server IP addresses. Automated systems should prevent government officials through their lack of knowledge from using systems that do not comply.

    Hillary nor other officials are computer experts. They should not be expected to be responsible for this. I would say there is a greater risk in how these systems are being currently managed.

    Peter, New York 6 hours ago

    Sadly this supports the Donald's charge about Hillary's questionable judgment. There is something fishy about her desire to maintain a private email server at her home at the same time she is working as a public official in the role of secretary of state. There is also the perceived conflict of interest between this role as the nation's top diplomat and her connection with the Clinton foundation.

    If she exchanged favors for contributions to the foundation, which many suspect she did, the smoking guns have probably been deleted by now. She was given plenty of time to sort through her emails to cover her tracks before turning them over to investigators.

    Her evasiveness and attempt to avoid FOIA requests have certainly earned her the nickname crooked Hillary. Even if you don't like Trump, it is very difficult to make the case that Clinton is a better alternative.

    Lois Brenneman, New Milford, PA 3 hours ago

    The fact that so many people support Clinton, in the face of her egregious and arguably criminal behavior, speaks to the fact that a large number of people vote strictly party line. In their view, no matter what Clinton has done, she is still better than having a Republican in the White House and, most esp, better than Donald Trump. I am hardly one who can complain, however, as I basically do the same thing. I'd probably vote for my dog before I would a Democrat even if it means voting for a flawed candidate. I find Clinton to be the very pits of all possible candidates, much like the Dems view of Trump.

    The bottom line is that we are a very partisan nation whose voters support their candidate no matter how flawed is that person. If anyone else was heading the Dem ticket, I suspect that person would win by a landslide in 2016. With Clinton heading up the party, Trump just may win. Choosing her as the candidate was arguably the stupidest thing the Dems could have possibly done

    Wally Wolf, Texas 6 hours ago

    ENOUGH!! Compared to what G.W. Bush did (the facts are known to all) while president and what Donald Trump did as a business man (Trump University, numerous bankruptcies, tax evasion and/or avoidance, questionable modeling agency practices, and on and on), Hillary Clinton's emails are small potatoes. If people allow this ridiculous email situation to cripple Hillary and allow Trump to become president then they will have to live with the fallout and, believe me, it will be disastrous.

    Joseph, NYC 4 hours ago

    IF HRC played by the rules like everyone must, and simply used the State Department email, all of this could have been avoided. Yet she refused to use her State email even though it was offered to her.

    If she did not do this to cover up her activities then she really bad judgement, and if she did it to cover up her activities, why did she do so? Either way, she is not a person to be entrusted with the Presidency. This is what is causing the nightmare Trump to still be competitive and to be catching up with her in the polls. If he wins HRC and the DNC have noone to blame but themselves.

    gary, Washington state 6 hours ago

    Congress asked Bush-Cheney in 2007 for emails surrounding the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. AG Gonzales could not produce the email because it was sent on a non-government email server, gwb43.com, which was run by the RNC. No smoking gun--sorry about that.

    Over time it was revealed that 22 White House officials including Karl Rove used private RNC email accounts for government business. In April 2007, Dana Perino admitted that approximately 5 million messages may have been deleted from that server. In 2009, watchdog groups announced that technicians had recovered 22 million emails that were deleted somehow from gwb43.com. Many of these messages were recovered from other government email servers.

    Clearly gwb43.com was under the legal obligations of the Presidential Records Act, which each of these 22 million deletions violated. Republican leaders (like Chris Christie, Karl Rove, etc.) who are now enraged by Hillary Clinton's email server were then uncritical of the Bush administration and its behavior.

    Is this American exceptionalism--hypocrisy, political pretense, and selective enforcement of laws?

    Sam Crow, SF Bay Area 3 hours ago

    ultimately, this shows the incompetence of the IT people in the government agencies handling her communications. As the Secretary of State, how can they not have procedures in place which would prevent this from happening? Hillary Clinton is ultimately responsible for making sure her classified communications are secure, and she should have been asking people questions to make sure this was the case. I am a Democrat but I have grave misgivings regarding her judgement and handling of this matter.

    Thomas MacLachlan, Highland Moors, Scotland 5 hours ago

    Having read through these 58 pages, it's clear that all they say is that Hillary is not a savvy technologist. She made her decision to use a private email system without understanding the implications of it regarding security, access control, data integrity, or retention. Also, none of her staff was competent in the technology involved, either. At a low level, perhaps. But not at a high level, where the architecture defines how all these pieces of the system work together. It was that area that fell apart and has caused her the myriad of political problems she now faces with this.

    The most important finding is that the federal government is woefully incompetent in designing, implementing, and maintaining large information systems. At State back then, the system was full of holes and was very hackable. By comparison, Hillary's system was more secure, though unauthorized. But you can't have a parade of different administrators or consultants go stomping through the implementation and expect it to hold together, either.

    The government needs to get their act together to provide systems which are actually secure and globally available. This isn't just a technology statement. The workflows involved and usage processes need to be well defined, and users need to be trained on them. And the technical staff needs to show some leadership so that they can help guide senior staff to the right solutions.

    The buck stops with Hillary, but she is certainly not the guilty party in this.

    Mark Thomason, is a trusted commenter Clawson, Mich 8 hours ago

    These are plainly false statements to the FBI, and so crimes. She did not do it "out of convenience" but to avoid public records act, and to get more privacy. Huma admitted that much, as have others. She got repeated warnings. We've heard that from those who warned her, who were told not to say it again. "I don't recall" any of them is just not credible. She is supposed to recall being warned.

    She did not think those things were classified? She's Sec of State. She knows which subjects are classified, and many of those were. She knew that. She got the most classified stuff there is, because she was Sec of State.

    The biggest concern of all is that she did this in deliberate defiance of the requirements of law, the public records requirements, for the express purpose of violating that law. The FBI just decided that it was not investigating THAT law, and so ignored it. Yet those are felonies, not just little things.

    This is an outrage. It has grown far beyond just a few emails.

    EdBx, Bronx, NY 7 hours ago

    I am not concerned by Hillary's emails. I am very upset by the refusal of the media and politicians to address the real issues of our classification system. We have known since at least the Pentagon Papers, and probably earlier, that the purpose of classifying information is to keep it from the American people more than from our adversaries.

    There is no conclusive evidence that our nation has been harmed by the classified information released by Daniel Ellsburg, Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden. On the other hand it is certainly known that great harm was done by the misuse and abuse of classified information by duly authorized government officials in getting us into the war in Iraq. The lesson is that it is more important who we choose as president than how they maintained their email accounts several years ago.

    Also, while we may not have known it in 2008, we should know now that government officials should operate under the assumption that anything on a computer is subject to hacking, no matter how secure we think the system is.

    chichimax, albany, ny 7 hours ago

    It is amazing how much scrutiny this and the Clinton Foundation have gotten and how little George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo and the "torture memos" got. Not to mention the whole sum of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo episodes. Scrutiny of Hillary Clinton, thy name is petty. Lack of scrutiny of the entire Bush Administration's misdeeds, thy name is HUGE.

    DCC, NYC 4 hours ago

    "But Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, which has used the email issue as one of its main weapons against Mrs. Clinton, called the documents "a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency."

    Wow, the head of the RNC finds that Hillary has a lack of judgment and honesty and is incompetent. And we value his assessment because he..........helped.............nominate......... Trump. Yep, his opinion really matters!

    MyThreeCents, San Francisco 4 hours ago

    Clinton apparently didn't know an email server from a jar of mayonnaise. I can understand that -- not sure I would either.

    But if I were starting out on a 4-year stint as US Secretary of State, it would occur to me that I'd probably send or receive a sensitive email or two somewhere along the way, and I'd wonder whether sending and receiving those emails over a private server located in my home might be a good idea.

    I'd probably conclude that it was advisable to get myself a State Department email address, and use it every now and then. True, US enemies reportedly hacked the State Department server, along with the personal emails of several top Clinton aides, which may make one think it's pointless even to try to keep one's emails secure. But it's much easier to hack a private server located in someone's home than it is to hack a State Department email server.

    A bored 14-year old kid probably could have hacked Clinton's private server in 15 minutes.

    Kathryn Horvat, Salt Lake City 57 minutes ago

    More and more I find myself upset with the poor judgment of the leaders of the Democratic Party, who allowed and encouraged her to run for president. She already was encumbered by a lot of baggage, not to mention her loss to Obama in 2008. I also wonder about the judgment of the New York Times , which engaged in the most openly biased reporting and opinion pieces I have ever seen.

    How could so many seasoned politicians have been so blind?

    David Howell, 33541 57 minutes ago

    Lame very lame Hillary excuses . But the problem comes from both sides Democrat or Republican and there lame excuses . From the deficit from the Trickle down economy , deregulation to Trade-deal and the lost of jobs . Tax cut to tax inversion .. If we want change , Then why are voter still voting in Incumbents . The ones that made the problems we have . Shame us who do.. Vote the incumbents out of office ..

    fmofcali, orange county 1 hour ago

    With over 75% of the country stating Hillary cannot be trusted, it's important to also consider the severe lack of accountability and level of arrogance displayed. If she's willing to take the lowest road possible, voting her into office will be a huge mistake. How can you have a commander in chief that refuses to simply take accountability and always blames her staff for the issues she clearly creates?!

    moviebuff, Los Angeles 1 hour ago

    If this were Nixon - a man I detested, mind you - we'd have empowered Senate and House committees to look into disqualifying him as a candidate. Did those who still support Hillary Milhous Clinton even read the article on which they're commenting? Sending the emails privately, the order to delete, the use of Bleach bit after she was ordered to preserve the emails, throwing her aides under the bus… her behavior makes RMN look like Abe Lincoln.

    J.D., USA 1 hour ago

    I've worked as a tech consultant for years and I've seen this same ignorance from so many people, that it's not surprising. E-mail is something most people use, but it's not something most people understand, so they don't really get how unsecured it is. Was it a potentially dangerous mistake to make? Yes. Was it surprising? Absolutely not. But, more because most people don't understand e-mail, than because of any lapse in reasoning or malicious intent on her part.

    ... ... ..

    Malebranchem, Ontario, NY 1 hour ago

    You gotta be kidding me. All we get each day, all day is more breathless Trump 'News'. On the front page no less. Each smirk and foible is covered ad nauseum as if it were actually new worthy. You rarely hear about the other candidate. No policy comparisons for pete's sake. Until today.

    "The newly disclosed documents, while largely reinforcing what had already been known about the F.B.I. investigation, provided a number of new details about Mrs. Clinton's use of a private email system, which has shadowed her presidential campaign for more than a year."

    As another commenter said, "There's no there there." It is the NYT that is casting a shadow over Secretary Clinton's campaign. Wake me when you actually start covering this Presidential race.

    [Sep 02, 2016] FBI Releases Documents Related To Its Clinton Email Investigation

    Notable quotes:
    "... The FBI that conducted a criminal investigation into Clinton's email server is serving under a Democratic administration. The director, appointed by Barack Obama, said Clinton was "Extremely careless" in handling classified material. The State Dept's Inspector General found that Clinton lied when she said she had permission to use a private server. ..."
    "... she definitely had poor email practice. but so did 3 of her four immediate predecessors at state, who used private email; at least 2 of their inboxes also contained material later classified. so did Karl Rove, who used private servers while running two wars as presidential chief of staff. 3 million of the last administration's emails are missing, rather tnan 30,000. so yes, she continued past poor email practices, but nothing that was illegal or even unusual. So why is only her email under investigation. ..."
    "... Anybody remember Valerie Plame? You want to talk about compromising national security? How about the Bush Administration revealing the secret identity of a covert CIA operative working on Iran's Nuclear Program capabilities?? ..."
    "... After she gets elected they will start the impeachment process along with a complete cold shoulder to all her attempts at getting anything accomplished. We could have had Bernie. ..."
    "... So, she's in great health for opening pickle jars, but not so great when it comes to her memory. And on top of her failing memory, Colin Powell essentially went public to say her camp is lying and using him as a defense for using a private server. ..."
    "... She didn't recall "all the briefings she received on handling gov documents"? Well maybe she wasn't fit for the job of handling gov documents then. ..."
    "... It's called mishandling classified documents, and it is a crime. She's not facing consequences because of who she is and the influence she has. Had it been random Jane Doe however, there'd be serious repercussions. ..."
    "... I am stunned by reading the responses to this article. It doesn't matter what Hillary does, most of you will simply defend her or ignore her issues ..."
    "... Hillary could drive through a soccer field in a drunken stupor, killing dozens of kids and you sheep would blame the car or the booze! ..."
    "... The fact that not a single person who originated any of these emails, nor anyone else who were on the email distribution lists, have ever received so much as an administrative rebuke about any of these, and Comey testified that there were no plans at all to investigate ANYONE who were responsible for actually writing and sending these emails. ..."
    "... James Constantino What do you not comprehend about "classified at the time" you just proved Tom Johnson correct when he stated " It doesn't matter what Hillary does, most of you will simply defend her or ignore her issues" ..."
    "... She set up a private server in her house, used that server to exchange classified materials and then claims a loss of memory of briefings to safeguard those materials after her term was over at State to explain the erasure of thousands of emails. I'm no Trump fan but this is just as bad as Nixon's white house tapes. This is why I voted for Bernie. ..."
    "... So Hillary couldn't remember security briefings she received in 2009 because of a concussion she received in 2012? This doesn't pass the laugh test. Nothing is every her responsibility and she has never ever done anything wrong. Is the concussion still impacting her memory? ..."
    "... If the globalist media wasn't bought, they would have such information in a few days from deciding to find such information which should be available. I have worked for government departments before not only are policies and procedures issued to you and/or read out to you, you are also required to sign on the dotted line that you have understood them. Whats happening around HRC is just a shameful cover-up and surely the people know it by now? ..."
    "... Yes, this is someone we want to be President. Someone who can't rememeber security breifings. "The extraordinary disclosure was made as the FBI published details of its agents' interview with the former secretary of state which was conducted days before the agency's director ruled out any charges against her. ..."
    "... Queue health rumors again(Re: concussion). Also, I like how the I don't recall defense worked just fine for regean and Iran contra, but republicans don't apply the same standard when concerning Clinton ..."
    "... Awww. I see.. She's in perfect health but when it is convenient she will use her illnesses to her advantage. Got it. ..."
    "... Our records show that Clinton sent & received thousands of cables with "(C)" paragraph classification markings. The FBI report, although not fatal for Democratic loyalists but I think it is devastating to average Americans. ..."
    "... So, what about the bit where she claimed she turned over ALL work-related e-mails, yet we keep finding ones that weren't turned over, and even more that were deleted with specialty wiping software? ..."
    "... Wow! this is so damaging! cant' remember anything , lost so many phones and didn't know how to read a classified documents! She is unfit to run a lemonde stand! With all her handlers and executive assistance and Huma for 24/7, you would think she will know more! ..."
    "... You can all sleep good tonight. Once all your children die in the wars she wants to continue she will say, "in hindsight, I regretted using bombs on all those innocent kids while president." Kudos DNC. ..."
    "... Hillary's new defense: If you've had a FALL you can't RECALL ..."
    "... Holy crap, - Clinton was also asked about the (C) markings within several documents that FBI Director James Comey testified before Congress represented classified information. Clinton told the FBI she was unaware of what the marking meant. "Clinton stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order," the interview notes stated. Hillary Clinton told the FBI she did not recall all of the briefings she received due to a concussion she suffered in 2012. This woman is unfit period. http://www.cnn.com/.../hillary-clinton-fbi-interview-notes/ ..."
    "... Kat Hathaway - Clinton repeatedly told the FBI she lacked recollection of key events. She said she "could not recall any briefing or training by State related to the retention of federal records or handling classified information," according to the FBI's notes of their July 2 interview with Clinton. The notes revealed that Clinton relied heavily on her staff and aides determining what was classified information and how it should be handled. ..."
    "... So bringing up her health issues us an "unfounded attack" but then she uses those very same health issues to cover her ass? ..."
    "... We invaded Iraq in 2003 GWB was reelected in 2004, this peanuts compared to that. ..."
    www.huffingtonpost.com
    Clinton told investigators she could not recall getting any briefings on how to handle classified information or comply with laws governing the preservation of federal records, the summary of her interview shows.

    "However, in December of 2012, Clinton suffered a concussion and then around the New Year had a blood clot," the FBI's summary said. "Based on her doctor's advice, she could only work at State for a few hours a day and could not recall every briefing she received."

    A Clinton campaign aide said Clinton only referenced her concussion to explain she was not at work but for a few hours a day at that time, not that she did not remember things from that period.

    The concussion was widely reported then, and Republicans have since used it to attack the 68-year-old candidate's health in a way her staff have said is unfounded.

    The FBI report, which does not quote Clinton directly, is ambiguous about whether it was her concussion that affected her ability to recall briefings.

    - SEPTEMBER 02 2016 -

    DONALD J. TRUMP
    STATEMENT ON FBI
    RELEASING CLINTON
    INTERVIEW NOTES

    ★ ★ ★

    "Hillary Clinton's answers to the FBI about
    her private email server defy belief. I was
    absolutely shocked to see that her answers
    to the FBI stood in direct contradiction to
    what she told the American people. After
    reading these documents, I really don't
    understand how she was able to get away
    from prosecution." - Donald J. Trump

    Anthony Zenkus, TED talker at TED
    The FBI that conducted a criminal investigation into Clinton's email server is serving under a Democratic administration. The director, appointed by Barack Obama, said Clinton was "Extremely careless" in handling classified material. The State Dept's Inspector General found that Clinton lied when she said she had permission to use a private server.

    These are departments in a Democratic administration, not a vast right wing conspiracy. The fact that Republicans try to make hay out of the facts in this case do not change the fact that Clinton, according to a Democrat's STate Dept and FBI, acted carelessly and was less than truthful.

    Ron Prichard, Seattle, Washington

    Anthony Zenkus she definitely had poor email practice. but so did 3 of her four immediate predecessors at state, who used private email; at least 2 of their inboxes also contained material later classified. so did Karl Rove, who used private servers while running two wars as presidential chief of staff. 3 million of the last administration's emails are missing, rather tnan 30,000. so yes, she continued past poor email practices, but nothing that was illegal or even unusual. So why is only her email under investigation.

    Bruce Hunter, Capitola, California

    Anybody remember Valerie Plame? You want to talk about compromising national security? How about the Bush Administration revealing the secret identity of a covert CIA operative working on Iran's Nuclear Program capabilities??

    How about Bush commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby who obstructed and derailed the investigation??

    How about the way Republicans attacked Plame who was a loyal employee of the CIA for over 20 years??

    Republicans are the true threats to our national security,not Hillary Clinton.

    Chris Caldwell, Owner at Master Vision

    The attacks on Hillary will only get worse over the next month, then they break out the big one, the October surprise. Everyone that chose her over Bernie should have seen this. After she gets elected they will start the impeachment process along with a complete cold shoulder to all her attempts at getting anything accomplished. We could have had Bernie.
    Michelle Becker, Newfield High School
    He lost by 3,000,000 + votes. There was no choice.

    James Simon, Emerson College

    Michelle Becker Wrong. The Stamford Study shows without question that the states without paper trails had her way outperforming the exit polls where it wasn't statistically possible without some kind of tampering. Add to that the placebo ballots in California, the voter purge in AZ, IL, NY, and it would have been a much different result. Could she have won legitimately? We'll never know thanks to the DNC leaks of collusion with the HRC camp, the media, and others. But hey, enjoy the status quo, your fracking, your endless wars, your corporate influence in Congress. This is what you wanted. Knock yourself out. USA. USA.
    JL Torres, DeWitt Clinton High School
    So, she's in great health for opening pickle jars, but not so great when it comes to her memory. And on top of her failing memory, Colin Powell essentially went public to say her camp is lying and using him as a defense for using a private server. I simply don't know how establishment Dems keep trying to cover this obviously nagging problem they have with their candidate. What a horrible choice between these two awful major party nominees.

    Anthony Zenkus, TED talker at TED

    She didn't recall "all the briefings she received on handling gov documents"? Well maybe she wasn't fit for the job of handling gov documents then.

    Edward Schillenger

    It's called mishandling classified documents, and it is a crime. She's not facing consequences because of who she is and the influence she has. Had it been random Jane Doe however, there'd be serious repercussions.
    Gary Stern, University of Baltimore
    Here is a question for all the angry white male Trump supporters.

    Republicans control the Senate and the House. Republicans control 31 states as governors including the rust belt states. So if republicans are in control why haven't they created high wage jobs that you whine about? Why has the economy slowed with republicans running government? Why haven't they fixed the immigration problem? The republican congress can pass a bill tomorrow to build Trump's wall and hire a deportation force. The republican congress can pass a balanced budget anytime the want? Taxes too high? Republicans can cut the tax rate to zero if they want. My point is why do republicans want to blame the president and Hillary for every problem known to man while their republican leaders sit on their butts doing nothing to solve a single problem. Maybe you need to tell congress to stop investigating and pass a Jobs Bill.

    Tom Johnson, Executive Chef at Breezy Point Resort

    I am stunned by reading the responses to this article. It doesn't matter what Hillary does, most of you will simply defend her or ignore her issues. The article clearly states:

    The FBI has concluded Clinton was wrong: At least 81 email threads contained information that was classified at the time, although the final number may be more than 2,000, the report says. Some of the emails appear to include discussion of planned future attacks by unmanned US Military drones, the FBI report says.

    Hillary could drive through a soccer field in a drunken stupor, killing dozens of kids and you sheep would blame the car or the booze!

    James Constantino, Plasma Etch Engineer at Northrup Grumman

    Here's the thing... all 81 email chains that the FBI claims were "classified" didn't originate with Clinton. All were sent to her... none were marked as classified... and no one who actually composed and sent these emails thought that they should have been classified at the time.

    The fact that not a single person who originated any of these emails, nor anyone else who were on the email distribution lists, have ever received so much as an administrative rebuke about any of these, and Comey testified that there were no plans at all to investigate ANYONE who were responsible for actually writing and sending these emails.

    If you really expect me to take this seriously as anything other than a republican fever dream, please show me ANY wrongdoing on Clinton's part that involves more than being copied on someone else's email chain... because as evil master plans go, that's kind of reaching.

    Chuck Drake, University of Toledo

    James Constantino What do you not comprehend about "classified at the time" you just proved Tom Johnson correct when he stated " It doesn't matter what Hillary does, most of you will simply defend her or ignore her issues"

    Meesta Naturale, Resident Mystic Guru at Tranquille Sanatorium

    She set up a private server in her house, used that server to exchange classified materials and then claims a loss of memory of briefings to safeguard those materials after her term was over at State to explain the erasure of thousands of emails. I'm no Trump fan but this is just as bad as Nixon's white house tapes. This is why I voted for Bernie.

    Karin Eckvall, UC Davis

    So Hillary couldn't remember security briefings she received in 2009 because of a concussion she received in 2012? This doesn't pass the laugh test. Nothing is every her responsibility and she has never ever done anything wrong. Is the concussion still impacting her memory?

    Time for Democrats to write in Joe Biden.

    Zelda Rosenberg

    Since I'm sure you won't believe me from over in your fact free world, here is the exact quote from the Reuter's article: "Clinton said she received no instructions or direction regarding the preservation or production of records from (the) State (Department) during the transition out of her role as Secretary of State in 2013.

    "However, in December of 2012, Clinton suffered a concussion and then around the New Year had a blood clot (in her head). Based on her doctor's advice, she could only work at State for a few hours a day and could not recall every briefing she received," the report said.

    Karin Eckvall, UC Davis

    Zelda Rosenberg Coming or going, it still doesn't pass the laugh test.

    Jess Manuel

    Okay. Obviously the media is painting these two candidates as deeply flawed. Here's a solution. Obama, 4 more years !!!!! :)

    Living Wild Photography

    That's about as much a solution as Titanic backing up and them ramming the iceberg again would be a solution to its problem from the first impact.

    John McCormack, Cairo University

    Whether she intended to use a private server and/or was briefed about the Department's policies and procedures is one thing. Surely the State Department has records of whether HRC was briefed or not and the main question is whether she then decided not to comply.

    If the globalist media wasn't bought, they would have such information in a few days from deciding to find such information which should be available. I have worked for government departments before not only are policies and procedures issued to you and/or read out to you, you are also required to sign on the dotted line that you have understood them. Whats happening around HRC is just a shameful cover-up and surely the people know it by now?

    Chuck Drake, University of Toledo

    Actually she should have been briefed when she was the FIrst Lady..and then again when she was a senator..and then again when she was secretary of state.
    Sam Thornton, Fort Worth, Texas
    Yes, this is someone we want to be President. Someone who can't rememeber security breifings. "The extraordinary disclosure was made as the FBI published details of its agents' interview with the former secretary of state which was conducted days before the agency's director ruled out any charges against her.

    Agents noted that Clinton could not recall being trained to handle classified materials as secretary of state, and had no memory of anyone raising concerns about the sensitive information she received at her private address.

    The Democratic presidential nominee also 'did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system,' the FBI's report declared.

    She did not recall all of the briefings she received on handling sensitive information as she made the transition from her post as secretary of state, due to a concussion she suffered in 2012."

    Nodens Caedmon

    "Couldn't recall all briefings on preserving documents."

    Who needs to remember security briefings definitely not someone running for president.

    David Hennessey, University of Minnesota Duluth

    Why even mention the concussion? She can't remember more than 10% of her briefings even if she is far above average, she would have to review the notes to jog her memory for even partial recall as everyone must do when asked to testify about events like this.

    With the number of briefings and variety of subjects, her memory is the least useful way to recreate those meetings, with or without a concussion, if ten people at the meetings recounted their memories, it would sound like ten different meetings, the notes and minutes are the only reliable sources.

    For some important decisions, she might remember quite a bit but there are natural limits to memory that are quite severe unless you have unique innate skills.

    Alan Davidson, IT Technician at Geeks on Site
    Queue health rumors again(Re: concussion). Also, I like how the I don't recall defense worked just fine for regean and Iran contra, but republicans don't apply the same standard when concerning Clinton

    Nancy Gilbert

    Awww. I see.. She's in perfect health but when it is convenient she will use her illnesses to her advantage. Got it.

    Obviously the powers that be want Hillary. That's why we've got a choice between her and trump. As bad as she is, she looks like a saint next that madman. Ha! For now on I will be sitting next to the overweight peeps. That way I will look slim.

    Charlotte Scot, Victoria College of Art - University Canada West

    From Wikileaks: Note on Clinton FBI report: Our records show that Clinton sent & received thousands of cables with "(C)" paragraph classification markings.
    The FBI report, although not fatal for Democratic loyalists but I think it is devastating to average Americans.

    Living Wild Photography

    So, what about the bit where she claimed she turned over ALL work-related e-mails, yet we keep finding ones that weren't turned over, and even more that were deleted with specialty wiping software?

    Mani Rand

    Wow! this is so damaging! cant' remember anything , lost so many phones and didn't know how to read a classified documents! She is unfit to run a lemonde stand! With all her handlers and executive assistance and Huma for 24/7, you would think she will know more!
    Wenai Prantamporn, Las Vegas, Nevada
    Below is the list of things Clinton could not recall in the FBI interview:
    1. When she received security clearance
    2. Being briefed on how to handle classified material
    3. How many times she used her authority to designate items classified
    4. Any briefing on how to handle very top-secret "Special Access Program" material
    5. How to select a target for a drone strike
    6. How the data from her mobile devices was destroyed when she switched devices
    7. The number of times her staff was given a secure phone
    8. Why she didn't get a secure Blackberry
    9. Receiving any emails she thought should not be on the private system
    10. Did not remember giving staff direction to create private email account
    11. Getting guidance from state on email policy
    12. Who had access to her Blackberry account
    13. The process for deleting her emails
    14. Ever getting a message that her storage was almost full
    15. Anyone besides Huma Abedin being offered an account on the private server
    16. Being sent information on state government private emails being hacked
    17. Receiving cable on State Dept personnel securing personal email accounts
    18. Receiving cable on Bryan Pagliano upgrading her server
    19. Using an iPad mini
    20. An Oct. 13, 2012, email on Egypt with Clinton pal Sidney Blumenthal
    21. Jacob Sullivan using personal email
    22. State Department protocol for confirming classified information in media reports
    23. Every briefing she received after suffering concussions
    24. Being notified of a FOIA request on Dec. 11, 2012
    25. Being read out of her clearance
    26. Any further access to her private email account from her State Department tenure after switching to her HRCoffice.com account
    Kevin Potts
    Now let's watch all the Libs quantify all of this LOL. She could run naked through Times Square and the Huffpos would somehow justify her actions as bold and showing off her leadership capabilities
    Dean Smith, Inventory Consultant at Paramount Coffee Company
    You can all sleep good tonight. Once all your children die in the wars she wants to continue she will say, "in hindsight, I regretted using bombs on all those innocent kids while president." Kudos DNC.

    Jessica Mantoani, School of Bob Dylan

    Hillary's new defense: If you've had a FALL you can't RECALL. Where is Johnny Cohran when you need him? LOL-
    Jan Kaczmarczyk, University of Maryland
    Holy crap, - Clinton was also asked about the (C) markings within several documents that FBI Director James Comey testified before Congress represented classified information. Clinton told the FBI she was unaware of what the marking meant. "Clinton stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order," the interview notes stated. Hillary Clinton told the FBI she did not recall all of the briefings she received due to a concussion she suffered in 2012. This woman is unfit period. http://www.cnn.com/.../hillary-clinton-fbi-interview-notes/
    Jan Kaczmarczyk, University of Maryland
    Kat Hathaway - Clinton repeatedly told the FBI she lacked recollection of key events. She said she "could not recall any briefing or training by State related to the retention of federal records or handling classified information," according to the FBI's notes of their July 2 interview with Clinton. The notes revealed that Clinton relied heavily on her staff and aides determining what was classified information and how it should be handled.

    http://www.cnn.com/.../hillary-clinton-fbi-interview-notes/

    What was your question?

    Robert Thompson

    So bringing up her health issues us an "unfounded attack" but then she uses those very same health issues to cover her ass?

    Felix Diaz, The City College of New York

    We invaded Iraq in 2003 GWB was reelected in 2004, this peanuts compared to that.

    [Sep 02, 2016] Clinton Email Hairball

    Notable quotes:
    "... National Review ..."
    Sep 02, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    "We are also reminded that Clinton repeatedly vowed she'd surrendered every single government business-related email upon the State Department's request" [ New York Post ].

    This was an extraordinary lie: She hoarded and attempted to destroy thousands of emails which, like the one The Post describes, involved government business - some of it highly sensitive and significant (such as the 30 emails related to the Benghazi massacre that the FBI recovered but the State Department has yet to disclose). Converting government records to one's own use and destroying them are serious crimes, even if no classified information is involved.

    I rarely find myself agreeing with a National Review columnist writing in the New York Post, but "converting government records to one's own use and destroying them": Yes, exactly .

    [Sep 02, 2016] Looks like Clinton did nt recall some really important things. So this detail-oriented policy wonk think that it is somebody else's fault if classified information was handled improperly.

    Sep 02, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    voteforno6 , September 2, 2016 at 2:35 pm

    FBI Releases Documents Related To Its Clinton Email Investigation

    Just scanned through the report – there's a whole lot that Clinton didn't recall. She also said that she relied on the judgment of the people that sent her emails, when it came to the proper handling of classified material. So, in other words, this detail-oriented policy wonk couldn't remember anything about this and besides, it's somebody else's fault if classified information was handled improperly.

    I still have a hard time understanding why people find her dishonest.

    Jim Haygood , September 2, 2016 at 2:55 pm

    Excerpt [page 5 of 11]:

    CLINTON was not involved in the decision to move from the Apple server managed by JUSTIN COOPER to a server built by BRYAN PAGLIANO. Therefore, CLINTON had no knowledge of the reasons for selecting to install it in the basement of CLINTON's New York residence.

    When Clinton had technical issues with her email account, she contacted COOPER to resolve the issues. She could not recall ever contacting PAGLIANO for technical support.

    Brazen, brazen lies. Compare:

    Bryan Pagliano, the former State Department IT specialist who managed Hillary Clinton's private email server, was hired by the State Department as a political appointee. Pagliano had previously worked as an IT director for Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.

    [Pagliano] was ultimately involved in setting up Clinton's email server at her home in Chappaqua, New York, and maintained it while working at the State Department. The Clinton campaign says he was paid separately by the Clintons for all work on the server during that time.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/10/politics/bryan-pagliano-hillary-clinton-server-state-department/

    Pagliano was a former Clinton campaign staffer, shoehorned into State as a Clinton political appointee, separately paid by the Clintons to set up a server in their house … but Hillary never even talked to him , so she claims. Here is a photo of Pagliano posing with Hillary, as she remained mute:

    https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/capture2.jpg

    Needless to say, given Pagliano's immunized testimony to the FBI, plenty of evidence is available to indict Hillary for lying to the FBI, totally aside from her premeditated federal records crimes.

    Tom_Doak , September 2, 2016 at 5:21 pm

    There is a perfectly reasonable explanation for the picture of Pagliano and Clinton. He must have attended one of those $5,000 a plate dinners which entitles you to a quick photo in the reception line. You can't possibly expect her to remember all of the people who have anted up for one of those!

    fresno dan , September 2, 2016 at 6:26 pm

    voteforno6
    September 2, 2016 at 2:35 pm

    I just want to point out that the release of this on a Friday before a 3 day weekend is simply a coincidence and has absolutely nothing to do with trying to "throw shade" or diminish the impact of the release. I mean there are people who posit that things are released on Friday for news management purposes. Poppycock says I – PURE COINCIDENCE. When have the Clintoons ever done something like that????

    I just do this because there are a lot of cynical people at NC who might ponder if the FBI is in cahoots with Hillary and does this to in some way to try and lessen the newsworthiness of this release, or simply out of a bureaucratic self protection instinct because it might show the investigation of the FBI was less than stellar…
    I am so glad I'm not cynical…

    [Sep 02, 2016] FBI Releases Full Report Into Hillary Clinton Email Probe Zero Hedge

    Sep 02, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

    FBI Releases Full Report Into Hillary Clinton Email Probe

    by Tyler Durden Sep 2, 2016 1:18 PM 0 SHARES Just as we predicted on a sleepy Friday afternoon ahead of a long weekend, The FBI has released a detailed report on its investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, as well as a summary of her interview with agents, providing, what The Washington Post says is the most thorough look yet at the probe that has dogged the campaign of the Democratic presidential nominee.

    Official FBI Statement:

    Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure .

    We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter. We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

    Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI's electronic FOIA library.

    As The Washington Post adds, the documents released total 58 pages, though large portions and sometimes entire pages are redacted.

    FBI Director James B. Comey announced in July that his agency would not recommend criminal charges against Clinton for her use of a private email server. Comey said that Clinton and her staffers were "extremely careless" in how they treated classified information, but investigators did not find they intended to mishandle such material. Nor did investigators uncover exacerbating factors - like efforts to obstruct justice - that often lead to charges in similar cases, Comey said.

    The FBI turned over to several Congressional committees documents related to the probe and required they only be viewed by those with appropriate security clearances, even though not all of the material was classified, legislators and their staffers have said.

    Those documents included an investigative report and summaries of interviews with more than a dozen senior Clinton staffers, other State Department officials, former secretary of state Colin Powell and at least one other person. The documents released Friday appear to be but a fraction of those.

    ...

    Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon has said turning over the documents was "an extraordinarily rare step that was sought solely by Republicans for the purposes of further second-guessing the career professionals at the FBI."

    But he has said if the material were going to be shared outside the Justice Department, "they should be released widely so that the public can see them for themselves, rather than allow Republicans to mischaracterize them through selective, partisan leaks."

    Though Fallon seems to have gotten his wish, the public release of the documents will undoubtedly draw more attention to a topic that seems to have fueled negative perceptions of Clinton . A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll found 41 percent of Americans had a favorable impression of Clinton, while 56 percent had an unfavorable one.

    Key Excerpts...

  • *CLINTON DENIED USING PRIVATE EMAIL TO AVOID FEDERAL RECORDS ACT
  • *CLINTON KNEW SHE HAD DUTY TO PRESERVE FEDERAL RECORDS: FBI
  • *COLIN POWELL WARNED CLINTON PRIVATE E-MAILS COULD BE PUBLIC:FBI
  • *FBI SAYS CLINTON LAWYERS UNABLE TO LOCATE ANY OF 13 DEVICES
  • *AT LEAST 100 STATE DEPT. WORKERS HAD CLINTON'S E-MAIL ADDRESS
  • CLINTON SAID SHE NEVER DELETED, NOR INSTRUCTED ANYONE TO DELETE, HER EMAIL TO AVOID COMPLYING WITH FEDERAL RECORDS LAWS OR FBI OR STATE REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
  • CLINTON AIDES SAID SHE FREQUENTLY REPLACED HER BLACKBERRY PHONE AND THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE OLD DEVICE WOULD "FREQUENTLY BECOME UNKOWN"
  • CLINTON CONTACTED POWELL IN JANUARY 2009 TO INQUIRE ABOUT HIS USE OF A BLACKBERRY WHILE IN OFFICE; POWELL ADVISED CLINTON TO 'BE VERY CAREFUL
  • Hillary Clinton used 13 mobile devices and 5 iPads to access clintonemail.com. The FBI only had access to 2 of the iPads and The FBI found no evidence of hacking on those 2...

    And here is the email from Colin Powell telling her that emails would need to be part of the "government records" ...

    And here is Clinton denying that she used a private server to "avoid [the] Federal Records Act" as she just assumed that "based on her practice of emailing staff on their state.gov accounts, [that] communications were captured by State systems." Yes, well what about the "official" communications had with people outside of the State Department? Did retention of those emails ever cross Hillary's mind? * * * Full Report below...

    Hillary Clinton FBI Part 1 of 2

    [Sep 02, 2016] Someone using Tor breached email account on Clinton server

    Notable quotes:
    "... According to the bureau's review of server logs, someone accessed an email account on Jan. 5, 2013, using three IP addresses known to serve as Tor "exit nodes" - jumping-off points from the anonymity network to the public internet. ..."
    www.politico.com
    An unknown individual using the encrypted privacy tool Tor to hide their tracks accessed an email account on a Clinton family server, the FBI revealed Friday.

    The incident appears to be the first confirmed intrusion into a piece of hardware associated with Hillary Clinton's private email system, which originated with a server established for her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

    The FBI disclosed the event in its newly released report on the former secretary of state's handling of classified information.

    According to the bureau's review of server logs, someone accessed an email account on Jan. 5, 2013, using three IP addresses known to serve as Tor "exit nodes" - jumping-off points from the anonymity network to the public internet.

    The owner of the account, whose name is redacted in the report, said she was "not familiar with nor [had] she ever used Tor software."

    [Aug 30, 2016] Mark Cuban Its Not Hillarys Fault Her Email Server Wasnt Set Up Right

    Notable quotes:
    "... the person who set up her email should have set up "filters and alerts that said any email that came with a classified header." ..."
    "... You know, create an alert that says this shouldn't be on this system and deal with it so that you don't, you know, consume it in this way. But the administrator didn't do it and she didn't know to do it because the whole time she had a very specific process in place. If it is classified, print it out and let me deal with it in hard copy, which is why she had complete confidence to say, 'I never dealt with anything marked classified.'" ..."
    Breitbart

    Monday night on "CNN Tonight," supporter of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, billionaire Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, said Clinton did nothing wrong because the person who set up her email should have set up "filters and alerts that said any email that came with a classified header."

    ...

    And so you go - look, I was in this business. My first career, my first company, all I did was install local area networks and messaging and email systems and I had my own personal server in my office until about 2010, and so I've been through this whole process. And so she talks to the admin who is responsible, she doesn't know any better, and takes his or her advice."

    "I think it was a he," he continued. "And it just so happens that he was given immunity by the Justice Department so we haven't had a chance to hear any of this. But for that personal server, if that admin had done his job like I had done my job doing the same thing, I would have set up filters and alerts that said any email that came with a classified header or any of the determined classified markings like the little 'c' Director Comey mentioned, pop it out, right?

    You know, create an alert that says this shouldn't be on this system and deal with it so that you don't, you know, consume it in this way. But the administrator didn't do it and she didn't know to do it because the whole time she had a very specific process in place. If it is classified, print it out and let me deal with it in hard copy, which is why she had complete confidence to say, 'I never dealt with anything marked classified.'"

    [Aug 29, 2016] Is Huma still under the gun for emailgate scandal?

    Notable quotes:
    "... With Huma becoming a lightening rod of the whole access issue, the cynical part of me figures this is not an ill timed, but well timed family tragedy with a sympathetic hard working mistreated wife… ..."
    "... It isn't that it happened. It is the timing. ..."
    "... Oh for heaven's sake! Clearly the man is compulsive, he will never stop. And he is willing to risk job, career and family for his addiction. Kudos to Huma for putting the well-being of her child first and leaving him sort out his addiction by himself .! ..."
    "... "I think it's a little – it's often a little more challenging when you're in politics because your private life, and I think everybody craves their own privacy, and so I think your private life is displayed to the world in a way that you otherwise wouldn't have to deal with if one spouse is a private person and the other person's in politics as was the case certainly in my marriage," Abedin said. ..."
    "... "But I think it works if you fully support each other." During the podcast, she mentioned she is on out on the campaign trail a lot of the time and her husband helps to care for her son. " I have a four-year-old son and I don't think I could do this if I didn't have the support of a spouse who is willing to basically be a stay-at- home dad as much as he possibly can so I'm able to be on the road," Abedin said. ..."
    "... "I miss my son but I don't worry about him because I know between this little village we've created between Anthony and my in-laws and my mom and our families and this wonderful woman who we have helping us I can go out and be the best professional woman that I can be because I have that support." ..."
    Aug 29, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
    Pat , August 29, 2016 at 2:48 pm

    With Huma becoming a lightening rod of the whole access issue, the cynical part of me figures this is not an ill timed, but well timed family tragedy with a sympathetic hard working mistreated wife…

    I mean if the mayoral campaign blowup of his career comeback for the same issues… (done on camera no less).

    Pat , August 29, 2016 at 6:29 pm

    No, it isn't beyond credulity. I never said he didn't do it. But apparently this has been going on since last year with a woman he has never met. And unless I missed something, she leaked this. Why out this now? Other times he goofed and it was public, OR was done to upset his comeback weak though it might have been. But why now? At some point in the next few days some advantage for the woman may change my mind, but otherwise it is very convenient.

    It isn't that it happened. It is the timing.

    JTMcPhee , August 29, 2016 at 4:34 pm

    Read the comments on the little Abedin story, and one has to conclude that our species is mostly Fokked. I particularly like this one:

    Oh for heaven's sake! Clearly the man is compulsive, he will never stop. And he is willing to risk job, career and family for his addiction. Kudos to Huma for putting the well-being of her child first and leaving him sort out his addiction by himself .!

    Which follows this text from the article:

    "I think it's a little – it's often a little more challenging when you're in politics because your private life, and I think everybody craves their own privacy, and so I think your private life is displayed to the world in a way that you otherwise wouldn't have to deal with if one spouse is a private person and the other person's in politics as was the case certainly in my marriage," Abedin said.

    "But I think it works if you fully support each other."

    During the podcast, she mentioned she is on out on the campaign trail a lot of the time and her husband helps to care for her son.

    " I have a four-year-old son and I don't think I could do this if I didn't have the support of a spouse who is willing to basically be a stay-at- home dad as much as he possibly can so I'm able to be on the road," Abedin said.

    "I miss my son but I don't worry about him because I know between this little village we've created between Anthony and my in-laws and my mom and our families and this wonderful woman who we have helping us I can go out and be the best professional woman that I can be because I have that support."

    Big Jim Thompson, former US Attorney in Chicago and former Governor of Illinois, got married to a former assistant US attorney and a child was somehow produced. Little Samantha was, like the marriage from the gossip I heard and pontificating in the papers, just popped out to scotch rumors about Thompson's polarity.

    The salient part of the tale is that while Thompson was out campaigning with his spouse, with Baby Samantha in tow, neither parent noticed that the kid was, like, seriously sick, fever as I recall of over 104 degrees, and some brave campaign worker had to do the parenting thing and see the kid got medical attention.

    Reported that Thompson et ux were irked that this threw the campaign schedule off. Did not keep him from getting elected… This guy was also on the "9/11 Commission," and has lots of other notable corruption connection credentials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R._Thompson

    One claim to fame was obtaining conviction of former Governor Otto Kerner for public corruption, taking race track stock for helping the track owners get more racing dates. Chief witness was Marge Everett, attorney for the racetrack corporation. She got disbarred in IL, so Thompson flew her personally to CA and testified on her behalf before the "fitness committee" of the CA bar, that she was an upright moral person fit to be admitted to the CA bar. Shortly after, as I recall, ol' Marge got in trouble for peddling stock and other valuables to the CA officials who oversaw the doling out of racing dates (ka-ching!) to her new client, a CA racetrack corporation…

    It never ends. Impossible to even try to keep up…

    MyLessThanPrimeBeef , August 29, 2016 at 5:14 pm

    "I have a four-year-old son and I don't think I could do this if I didn't have the support of a spouse who is willing to basically be a stay-at- home dad as much as he possibly can so I'm able to be on the road," Abedin said.

    With Basic Income, maybe she can stay home as well…

    [Aug 29, 2016] The emails – a self-inflicted tragedy of almost Shakespearean proportions – won't go away, and now they suggest a pattern of appointments with supporters of the Clinton Foundation while Secretary of State that was, at best, inappropriate, at worst, illegal

    Notable quotes:
    "... Hillary Clinton, a neoliberal, neocon, corporatist PACster politician, is unlikely to inspire millennials or progressives ..."
    "... Hillary Clinton is a sitting duck. And her vulnerability has nothing to do with the manufactured hype ..."
    "... This on top of charges by the FBI that she was reckless, make her uniquely vulnerable ..."
    "... Then there's her numerous "sniper fire in Bosnia" type gaffs, and a record of flip-flops on the issues that is virtually unprecedented in modern politics. And if the flip-flops in the primary weren't enough, her personnel appointments so far show she's going to try to go from corporate centrist to progressive to corporate centrist in the space of a year. You'd almost have to be an idiot to lose to her. ..."
    www.commondreams.org

    From: Clinton Wins in A Cakewalk Don't Bet the Ranch on It by John Atcheson

    Hillary Clinton, a neoliberal, neocon, corporatist PACster politician, is unlikely to inspire millennials or progressives, and some version of 2014 could easily play out again. As I've said all along, Hillary Clinton is a sitting duck. And her vulnerability has nothing to do with the manufactured hype or the …er… trumped up charges Republicans have been ginning up for years now. In fact, in some strange way, they may help Clinton, by discrediting some of the legitimate issues that could yet dog her.

    The emails – a self-inflicted tragedy of almost Shakespearean proportions – won't go away, and now they suggest a pattern of appointments with supporters of the Clinton Foundation while Secretary of State that was, at best, inappropriate, at worst, illegal. This on top of charges by the FBI that she was reckless, make her uniquely vulnerable to attack ads.

    Then there's her numerous "sniper fire in Bosnia" type gaffs, and a record of flip-flops on the issues that is virtually unprecedented in modern politics. And if the flip-flops in the primary weren't enough, her personnel appointments so far show she's going to try to go from corporate centrist to progressive to corporate centrist in the space of a year. You'd almost have to be an idiot to lose to her.

    ... ... ...

    But if Trumps' new team manages to reel him in, and formulate a coherent attack on Clinton, all bets are off.

    [Aug 28, 2016] Gowdy Says FBI Failed To Ask Clinton Right Questions About Email Server

    Notable quotes:
    "... America's Newsroom ..."
    Aug 28, 2016 | www.westernjournalism.com
    Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., argued on Thursday that the FBI failed to asked Hillary Clinton the right questions during its interview last month, if it was truly trying to decide her intent in using a private, unsecured, unauthorized email server.

    Appearing on Fox's America's Newsroom , Gowdy said he thoroughly reviewed the FBI's notes from the interview and was surprised there were no questions addressing the former secretary of state's intent.

    "Remember [FBI director] James Comey said she was not indicted because he didn't have sufficient evidence on the issue of intent? I didn't see any questions on the issue of intent," the congressman said.

    [Aug 27, 2016] Hillary Clinton Had Private Server To Hide Clinton Foundation Dealings

    Notable quotes:
    "... The issue we've always asked ourselves here is, why was she hiding this in the first place? Why did she have a private server? Obviously it was concealing, what was she concealing? And the most obvious possible answer was the [Clinton] Foundation. ..."
    Aug 27, 2016 | www.westernjournalism.com

    CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Look, we've been speculating for a year about what the email scandal was all about and I think we were diverted for a year about the classification. It's a real issue, serious issue, but that was never the issue.

    The issue we've always asked ourselves here is, why was she hiding this in the first place? Why did she have a private server? Obviously it was concealing, what was she concealing? And the most obvious possible answer was the [Clinton] Foundation.

    [Aug 27, 2016] Gowdy: Clintons Method Of Deletion Proves Nature Of Her Emails

    Notable quotes:
    "... The clearest evidence that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had something to hide in her emails is the way she made sure their contents stayed hidden, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. said Thursday. ..."
    "... Clinton famously laughed off a question about whether she had wiped her private email server. ..."
    Aug 27, 2016 | www.westernjournalism.com

    The clearest evidence that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had something to hide in her emails is the way she made sure their contents stayed hidden, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. said Thursday.

    Clinton famously laughed off a question about whether she had wiped her private email server.

    "What? Like with a cloth or something?" she asked. "I don't know how it works digitally at all."

    [Aug 27, 2016] Clinton calendars wont be released until after election

    Notable quotes:
    "... The department has so far released about half of the schedules. Its lawyers said in a phone conference with the AP's lawyers that the department now expects to release the last of the detailed schedules around Dec. 30, weeks before the next president is inaugurated. ..."
    Aug 27, 2016 | www.wnd.com
    (Associated Press) Seven months after a federal judge ordered the State Department to begin releasing monthly batches of the detailed daily schedules showing meetings by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, the government told The Associated Press it won't finish the job before Election Day.

    The department has so far released about half of the schedules. Its lawyers said in a phone conference with the AP's lawyers that the department now expects to release the last of the detailed schedules around Dec. 30, weeks before the next president is inaugurated.

    The AP's lawyers late Friday formally asked the State Department to hasten that effort so that the department could provide all Clinton's minute-by-minute schedules by Oct. 15. The agency did not immediately respond.

    [Aug 27, 2016] Clinton Emails On Film - Huma Abedin's Deposition

    Aug 27, 2016 | www.youtube.com

    YouTube

    Published on Jul 6, 2016

    Verbatim reenactment of highlights of the deposition transcript. For more information and to support this project, please go to www.ClintonEmailsOnFilm.com

    [Aug 26, 2016] Rep. Gowdy Hillary Clinton is a 'habitual, serial liar'

    Fox News Video

    - 2:08 - Republican lawmaker questions absence of emails sent by secretary of state on foundation

    [Aug 26, 2016] Clinton emails - Proof that the West had lost control of the situation in Libya already since 2011

    Aug 26, 2016 | www.moonofalabama.org
    nmb | Aug 25, 2016 3:35:05 PM | 2
    Clinton emails - Proof that the West had lost control of the situation in Libya already since 2011
    james | Aug 25, 2016 4:10:01 PM | 3
    @ 1 rr.. i thought paveway described it best (his post below).. this is the little game that has been going on for some time and includes all the designations - moderates, isis, white helmets - you name it... this is the line of bs the usa is hoping dupes believe... ps, i also thought curtis comment from george carlin on the previous thread was great and what has come to typify usa foreign policy - " "Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity."

    paveways comment :

    "A NATO country has just rolled tanks into Syria and sent in head-chopper ground forces - the same ones Syria, Russia and Iran have been trying to kill for months on end in Aleppo and Idlib. ISIS isn't putting up much resistance in Jarabulus because they're too busy trading their ISIS ID cards/flags for al Nusra or al Zenki ID cards/flags. Head-choppers need paychecks to feed their families, too:

    Headchopper #1: "Snackbar - somebody is shooting at us! What flag are we suppose to be flying today, brother?"

    Headchopper #2: "Look on your paycheck, brother..."

    Headchopper #1: "No good, brother - it's from ISIS. That was last week!"

    Headchopper #2: "I'll get on the radio - our leaders should know, God willing..."

    (a few minutes later...)

    Headchopper #2: "Nobody knows for sure, but put on this white helmet for now, brother. Soros' checks are clearing."

    Headchopper #1: "Does that mean I have to shave? Snackbar... can't we just be al Nusra this week?"

    Headchopper #2: "No flags yet.. But you have to shave anyway, brother. The CIA won't pay you for FSA Nusra if you look too Wahhabi head-chopperish. Have a Captagon and calm down. Our Turkish brothers will be here soon."

    Posted by: PavewayIV | Aug 24, 2016 11:41:49 AM | 78"

    okie farmer | Aug 25, 2016 4:21:11 PM | 5
    In this episode of Truth in Media, Ben Swann explores the origin of Daesh (ISIS) that has already been long forgotten by American media.

    Swann takes on the central issue of whether or not ISIS was created by "inaction" by the United States government or by "direct" action.

    https://youtu.be/o6kdi1UXxhY

    [Aug 26, 2016] State Department "intent" to release the withheld emails only after the election met with a federal court order

    Notable quotes:
    "... FBI Admits Clinton Used Software Designed To "Prevent Recovery" And "Hide Traces Of" Deleted Emails ..."
    "... Assange: Clinton's Campaign is Full of 'Disturbing' Anti-Russia 'Hysteria' http://sputniknews.com/us/20160826/1044654512/assange-clinton-russia-hysteria.html ..."
    Aug 25, 2016 | www.moonofalabama.org
    likklemore | Aug 25, 2016 6:46:22 PM | 18

    @ nmb 2

    Huge blow to the Clinton Campaign.

    State Department "intent" to release the withheld emails only after the election met with a federal court order:

    Court Orders New Clinton Email Production by September 13
    http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/court-orders-new-clinton-email-production-september-13/

    AUGUST 25, 2016
    State Admits Benghazi Material in New Cache of Emails Clinton Failed to Produce

    (Washington DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a federal court has ordered the State Department to review newly found Clinton emails and turn over responsive records by September 13. And, in two other Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits, the State Department is scheduled to release additional emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's non-state.gov email system beginning September 30. In a court filing this week, the State Department admitted it had found Benghazi-related documents among the 14,900 Clinton emails and attachments uncovered by the FBI that Mrs. Clinton deleted and withheld from the State Department.

    ~ ~ ~ ~
    Why don't they just ask NSA?

    FBI Admits Clinton Used Software Designed To "Prevent Recovery" And "Hide Traces Of" Deleted Emails
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-25/fbi-admits-clinton-used-software-designed-prevent-recovery-and-hide-traces-deleted-e

    ~ ~ ~ ~
    Is this not a reminder of the missing 18 minutes in the Nixon tapes that helped to put him down? 74 days ahead; so breathe normally. They could use the same route as those FBI Vince Foster investigation docs – vanished, disappeared from the National Archives.

    Robz | Aug 26, 2016 4:36:42 AM | 45
    China will provide Syrian military with 'medical training' http://presstv.com/Detail/2016/08/25/481632/China-military-support-Syria

    Assange: Clinton's Campaign is Full of 'Disturbing' Anti-Russia 'Hysteria' http://sputniknews.com/us/20160826/1044654512/assange-clinton-russia-hysteria.html

    metamars | Aug 26, 2016 8:54:56 AM | 51
    Jill Stein's criticism of Hillary and TPP is censored on PBS
    ProPeace | Aug 26, 2016 9:22:03 AM | 53
    Wow, what an interesting coincidence! Just days after Dr. Drew Pinsky aired his concerns about Hillary's health and the health care she's receiving his show which was running for 5 years was just canceled!

    [Aug 25, 2016] Judge orders State to begin releasing Clinton emails next month

    Hillary Clinton has hit a rough patch at a critical time in the race for the White House.
    Notable quotes:
    "... As she faces increasing scrutiny, allies acknowledge it highlights the larger problem that looms over her campaign: Trust. ..."
    Aug 25, 2016 | thehill.com

    The State Department must start releasing the additional 15,000 emails uncovered during the FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton 's private server starting on Sept. 13.

    ...

    As she faces increasing scrutiny, allies acknowledge it highlights the larger problem that looms over her campaign: Trust.

    ...the foundation and email controversies are both problems for Clinton.

    [Aug 25, 2016] FBI Admits Clinton Used Software Designed To Prevent Recovery And Hide Traces Of Deleted Emails Zero Hedge

    Aug 25, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

    Pomkiwi GreatUncle Aug 25, 2016 7:02 PM As a matter of habit I run CC Cleaner after I close my browser. Imagine my surprise when I get a message 'Firefox is still running - needs to be closed to continue cleaning'. I click ok close it then get a message ' not closing would you like to force it to close?' That works - perhaps I should disconnect my router to be sure lol.
    GreatUncle css1971 Aug 25, 2016 6:21 PM Got to admit I use CC cleaner and leave it to always destructively clean. Then by the time more data is overewritten hundreds of times you exceed the 20 layer or so limit of being able to peal bakc the layer.

    Microsoft is lazy or more to the point it intentionally leaves you exposed for failing to do this as standard.

    Makes the spooks job alot harder.

    Dre4dwolf Aug 25, 2016 5:53 PM All the emails are out there on the internet, the server had no encryption, out there somewhere is some nerd with all of Hillary Clintons Emails hanging on his wall as a testament to his great conquest over " the server ".

    Hillary Clintons emails are like pokemon, they are all over the place, you just gota "catch um all " by finding people willing to "trade".

    Also, there are always two copies on an email chain

    1 copy on Hillary Clintons Server

    and

    1 copy on the recipient/sending server, you need two servers to have a " back and forth" conversation on the internet between two different email domains.

    So one way to get all the emails would be:

    1) Compile a list of known email contacts from the pool of emails you already have

    2) Get a judge to sign a warrant to force the domains / hosting companies of those email contacts to turn over their data

    3) ? Profit as 90% of the missing emails are recovered?

    There is a very small chance that the 30,000 emails missing were each from 30,000 unique people.

    Most likeley its less than 1000 contacts and most of them will have benign emails associated with them that were not deleted (so they are in the contact list pool).

    The NSA has all this data, everyone knows the NSA has all this data, thus far most of the leaked emails PROBABLY COME FROM NSA AGENTS who are concerned about the future of the country.

    asierguti Aug 25, 2016 5:48 PM I worked for a big data recovery company, and there is more effective and easier way to destoy de data. Just take out the hard drive, open it and scratch every platter. That's it, the data is now gone forever, unless you (insert the NSA here) have a copy.

    I rembeber we had a law enforcement agency coming with a hard drive from a guy they wanted to prosecute. That bastard opened the hard drive, scratched every platter, even bent them, and smashed every single chip.

    Rubicon727 Aug 25, 2016 5:57 PM Here's what one website questioning WHO can call for and "Independent Counsels, Special Prosecutors, Special Counsels, and the Role of Congress
    | By Jack Maskell | Legislative Attorney | June 20, 2013 |

    .. Congress may also have a legislative role in designing a statutory mechanism for the appointment of "independent counsels" or "special prosecutors," as it did in title VI of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. Under the provisions of that law relating to the appointment of "independent counsels" (called "special prosecutors" until 1983), the Attorney General was directed to petition a special three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals to name an independent counsel upon the receipt of credible allegations of criminal misconduct by certain high-level personnel in the executive branch of the federal government whose prosecution by the Administration might give rise to an appearance of a conflict of interest. In 1999, Congress allowed the "independent counsel" provisions of law to expire. Upon the expiration of the law in June of 1999, no new "independent counsels" or "special prosecutors" may be appointed by a three-judge panel upon the application of the Attorney General.

    The Attorney General retains the general authority to designate or name individuals as "special counsels" to conduct investigations or prosecutions of particular matters or individuals on behalf of the United States. Under regulations issued by the Attorney General in 1999, the Attorney General may appoint a "special counsel" from outside of the Department of Justice who acts as a special employee of the Department of Justice under the direction of the Attorney General.

    https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43112.pdf"

    Kirk2NCC1701 Aug 25, 2016 6:02 PM I see what should be at least one obvious case of OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

    If Comey has any brains, balls or ethics left.

    And this is from a guy who had Religious Studies at college.

    Or do we need to wait for another tarmac encounter between Bill and Lowrenta? Dre4dwolf Aug 25, 2016 6:03 PM https://media.makeameme.org/created/i-cant-see-ftp6fy.jpg Neochrome Aug 25, 2016 6:06 PM no "intent" to hide or obfuscate any of the deleted emails

    To be honest, her intent was to "suicide" that server, not just obfuscate the E-mails...

    DuneCreature Aug 25, 2016 6:11 PM

    The NSA has all of Killary's Emails in triplicate. .. If they were encrypted in transit they can have them cracked and broken in about 10 minutes apiece.

    They can search them and have them and all metadata that goes with them in a few clicks of a mouse. .. They know what routers the Emails went through on their way to China and Soros.

    Hackers, my ass, that's what the NSA does and it has a budget of billions and billions. ... What do people not understand about spying on the web?

    Live Hard, If The FBI Wants Emails They Dial NSA-2001 And Ask For Alex, Die Free

    ~ DC v2.0

    smacker Aug 25, 2016 6:20 PM I've had BleachBit running on my system for a fair while and never been that impressed with it, although all of these programs delete some stuff.

    A far better one that actually works well to clean stuff up is:

    " Nirsoft Clean After Me " 100% free, portable/non-install and small.

    (Nirsoft have a huge range of small free progs for doing all sorts of things)

    Still, if the Clintonista had BleachBit running, she had intent .

    LN Aug 25, 2016 6:22 PM " FBI Admits Clinton Used Software Designed To "Prevent Recovery" "

    How does one spell CO-CONSPIRATORS ?

    LN

    Stan522 Aug 25, 2016 7:27 PM I looked up BleachBit and here's part of the description....

    "Beyond simply deleting files, BleachBit includes advanced features such as shredding files to prevent recovery , wiping free disk space to hide traces of files deleted by other applications, and vacuuming Firefox to make it faster. Better than free, BleachBit is open source."

    Besides for nefarious reasons, why else would someone use this type of software? And to top it off, this software is open source shareware... in her world that means free.....

    [Aug 25, 2016] Clinton Criminal Emails Scandal will not go away anytime soon

    It' sad that Trump campaign does not exploit this weakness of Hillary to the fullest extent... Actually the author is wrong about "Clinton, a verb, emails." more correct is "Clinton, a verb, to jail"
    www.huffingtonpost.com

    That headline is Hillary Clinton's biggest current problem. At this point, it has become akin to how Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign used to be described: "a noun, a verb, 9/11."

    Clinton has entered similar linguistic territory, because any headline using the word "Clinton" and the word "emails" now triggers a consistent reaction from the public. Details, even fresh new ones, don't even really matter all that much at this point - all people are really hearing now is: "Clinton, a verb, emails."

    [Aug 24, 2016] That is why she went to the extraordinary step of deleting everything the high-ranking source told The ENQUIRER

    That's a wild rumor from yellow rag, but it tends to explain the extreme stupidity of Hillary behaviour with "bathroom" server... See also http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/hillary-clinton-lesbian/
    Notable quotes:
    "... Hillary made the huge mistake of mixing public and private messages while using her personalized email server – before risking a massive scandal by refusing to make the documents public. ..."
    "... Hillary is particularly concerned about intimate emails to longtime aide Huma Abedin – who married U.S. Representative Anthony Weiner in a ceremony that many ridiculed as a political arrangement. ..."
    Apr 15, 2015 | blindgossip.com

    From [ National Enquirer ]

    Hillary Clinton isn't just caught in a political scandal over her missing emails from her stint as secretary of state – she's also terrified of personal revelations about a secret lesbian lifestyle!

    Now a world-exclusive investigation by The National ENQUIRER reveals that some of the presidential candidate's famously "deleted" emails are packed full of lesbian references and her lovers' names.

    "I don't think she's so concerned about emails referring to her as secretly gay," said a Clinton insider. "That's been out for years – her real fear is that the names of some of her lovers would be made public!"

    The ENQUIRER learned the list of Hillary's lesbian lovers includes a beauty in her early 30s who has often traveled with Hillary; a popular TV and movie star; the daughter of a top government official; and a stunning model who got a career boost after allegedly sleeping with Hillary. Hillary made the huge mistake of mixing public and private messages while using her personalized email server – before risking a massive scandal by refusing to make the documents public.

    "That's clearly why she went to the extraordinary step of deleting everything," the high-ranking source told The ENQUIRER .

    Hillary is particularly concerned about intimate emails to longtime aide Huma Abedin – who married U.S. Representative Anthony Weiner in a ceremony that many ridiculed as a political arrangement.

    [Aug 23, 2016] Congress subpoenaed three technology companies involved in Clinton bathroom server setup and maintenance

    Notable quotes:
    "... congressional Republicans subpoenaed three technology companies involved in her unusual home server setup. ..."
    "... The subpoenas were issued after the companies did not cooperate with a House committee's investigation into the issue, said House Science panel Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas. ..."
    www.cnn.com

    Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill Monday, congressional Republicans subpoenaed three technology companies involved in her unusual home server setup.

    The subpoenas were issued after the companies did not cooperate with a House committee's investigation into the issue, said House Science panel Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas.

    [Aug 23, 2016] The FBI Is Hiding Something About Their Investigation Into Hillary Clinton

    Notable quotes:
    "... A congressional source confirmed to Fox News Tuesday that the House Government Oversight Committee had received a heavily redacted FBI summary of Hillary Clinton's session last month with FBI agents who interviewed her about her use of a private server for government business. The agents' notes were provided as well. ..."
    "... Separately, the Republican chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee confirmed that even he does not have a high enough security clearance to read the documents in full. ..."
    "... "As the chairman of the chief investigative body in the House, it is significant I can't even read these documents in their entirety," Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah told Fox News."This shows how dangerous it was to have this intelligence, highly classified to this day, on the former Secretary's unsecured personal server where it was vulnerable." ..."
    "... The fact that portions of the FBI investigative file are heavily redacted and must be held and read by lawmakers in a secure facility on Capitol Hill shows how classified the material remains, despite claims made by the Clinton campaign. ..."
    "... The campaign's call to release the FBI agents' notes appears suspect because the material is too highly classified to make public.The FBI told the committee that the documents cannot be released in part or in full without prior agency approval. ..."
    "... "This information being highly classified according to the FBI is in direct conflict with what the State Department and Ms. Clinton have said is on the server. You could not have it both ways," former military intelligence officer Tony Shaffer said. "You cannot say one day this is unclassified 'nothing to see here' and the next day, only certain people can see this and you must not be able to take it outside of a secure facility." ..."
    conservativerevival.com

    Conservative Revival

    Republicans in Congress demanded the FBI turn over their notes from the agency's interview with Hillary regarding her private email server.

    The agency dragged their feet.

    But when the documents were turned over, most of the information was hidden.

    Hillary's emails contained so much classified information that the notes were heavily redacted.

    Not even members of Congress possessed the appropriate security clearance to view the notes.

    Fox News reports:

    A congressional source confirmed to Fox News Tuesday that the House Government Oversight Committee had received a heavily redacted FBI summary of Hillary Clinton's session last month with FBI agents who interviewed her about her use of a private server for government business. The agents' notes were provided as well.

    Separately, the Republican chairman of the House Government Oversight Committee confirmed that even he does not have a high enough security clearance to read the documents in full.

    "As the chairman of the chief investigative body in the House, it is significant I can't even read these documents in their entirety," Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah told Fox News."This shows how dangerous it was to have this intelligence, highly classified to this day, on the former Secretary's unsecured personal server where it was vulnerable."

    The fact that portions of the FBI investigative file are heavily redacted and must be held and read by lawmakers in a secure facility on Capitol Hill shows how classified the material remains, despite claims made by the Clinton campaign.

    The campaign's call to release the FBI agents' notes appears suspect because the material is too highly classified to make public.The FBI told the committee that the documents cannot be released in part or in full without prior agency approval.

    "This information being highly classified according to the FBI is in direct conflict with what the State Department and Ms. Clinton have said is on the server. You could not have it both ways," former military intelligence officer Tony Shaffer said. "You cannot say one day this is unclassified 'nothing to see here' and the next day, only certain people can see this and you must not be able to take it outside of a secure facility."

    This just proves Hillary Clinton is a liar.

    She claimed she never sent or received any information that was marked classified.

    But the redacted notes - clearly hiding information that was so classified not even a committee chair could read it - indicate Hillary should have known classified intelligence was on her server.

    The redacted notes also call into question FBI Director Comey's decision not to recommend criminal charges be brought against Hillary.

    As more details emerge, critics are convinced Director Comey failed to recommend charges because Obama endorsed Hillary for President.

    Announcing Hillary should be charged just weeks before she was to accept the Democrat Party's nomination for president would have thrown the race into chaos.

    It also may have handed the nomination to Bernie Sanders, a candidate many believe because of his socialist views was too extreme to win a presidential election.

    If Hillary was indicted and lost to Trump, Republicans could dismantle Obama's entire agenda.

    Protecting his achievements - namely ObamaCare - is a central reason Obama endorsed Hillary and has fiercely attacked Donald Trump.

    And many believe the FBI took a dive on the investigation because the Director got cold feet about involving the Bureau during a presidential election.

    [Aug 22, 2016] Hillary Clinton is Blaming Colin Powell for her Private Email Problem - The Atlantic

    Notable quotes:
    "... "The truth is, she was using it for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did." (Powell added, "It doesn't bother me. But it's okay; I'm free.") ..."
    "... The Clintons' blatantly dishonest attempts to cover-up and deny their scandals are almost always worse than the scandals themselves. They are shameless and believe they are above reproach ..."
    "... Ha. You realize that the first time that Hillary Clinton used the term "vast right wing conspiracy" was regarding the Monica Lewinsky scandal? How did the GOP force Bill to take advantage of a subordinate? ..."
    www.theatlantic.com

    When People spoke with Powell Sunday night in the Hamptons, he was blunter. "Her people have been trying to pin it on me," he said. "The truth is, she was using it for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did." (Powell added, "It doesn't bother me. But it's okay; I'm free.")

    JerseyCowboy > xplosneer

    The Clintons' blatantly dishonest attempts to cover-up and deny their scandals are almost always worse than the scandals themselves. They are shameless and believe they are above reproach.

    spudwhisperer > JerseyCowboy

    I disagree - I think the scandals would be disqualifying and liable for prosecution even if there were no cover-up.

    mtbr1975 > xplosneer

    I think a lot of that developed because of all the attempts to pin scandals on her... Can you really blame her? Look at all the garbage she's been accused of... Everything from murder to enabling Bill Clinton to cheat on her.

    Uncle Luie > mtbr1975

    100% true! From her lawyer billings in the early 80s, to Whitewater to Vince Foster, Travel-gate and on and on. The most accurate thing she ever said was about the "vast right wing conspiracy", also 100% true, just like Mconnell's plan to oppose and obstruct everything Obama tries to accomplish. These people are dirt

    oracle > Uncle Luie

    "The most accurate thing she ever said was about the "vast right wing conspiracy", also 100% true"

    Ha. You realize that the first time that Hillary Clinton used the term "vast right wing conspiracy" was regarding the Monica Lewinsky scandal? How did the GOP force Bill to take advantage of a subordinate?

    Disqus 30 > qaz zaq

    Don't forget she's the devil and founded ISIS. Those are the best ones.

    Lexi > Disqus

    It's true trolly. Proof is all over the place. Wow- you are defending her like she's a saint. Nobody is doing that. You seem full of morality (Not) to defend a serial liar who corrupted our country in the worst possible ways. Sad you.

    bookish1 > mtbr1975

    Sorry, but it was Hillary who decided to set up her own email server, send classified material, refuse to authorize a Benghazi rescue mission, make millions off the Russian uranium deal, and "mistakenly" delete 30,000 emails. If she wasn't so inept and corrupt, she wouldn't be hit with all these "scandals."
    See how that works?

    jar > xplosneer

    This one is particularly mendacious as she has previously publicly stated that she chose the private server so she would only have to carry one device. Of what relevance is Powell's prior practice if this was her motivation? The fact is that she will throw up as many excuses and deflections as she can, without any regard for the consistency of her arguments. This is why over 60% of the American people find her dishonest and untrustworthy (or, as a recent poll indicated, only 11% of the public finds her honest and trustworthy).

    Yoch Man > Lew

    The world has NOT changed much in 25 years and being young has nothing to do with it. I have worked in IT for 26 years at a state level. If I had done what Clinton did back in 1989 I would have been fired and gone to jail for several reasons. aside from top secret or classified information. FERPA and the Federal records act are just two reasons. The Federal records act is as old as 1950. Every single document that is compiled on work computers OR work hours belongs to the state or Federal government. I also have an obligation to protect emails addresses, employees that I work with. I must keep their personal information confidential. Add on top of that a nations secrets.

    In 1995 Bill Clinton passed legislation and clarified the Federal records act and classified information. See state department manual "5 FAM". It has been there for 21 years. Hillary Clinton is lying to you.

    DB > Lew • 7 hours ago

    Clinton hired her own IT boy. He was not in his 60s. You can make excuses for her age all you like..... but it doesn't work. Btw, I have friends in their 60s who run major IT depts. Being old yourself, you should know people can stay sharp barring some physical/cognitive issues.

    Lew > bookish1

    How would you grant control of 1/5 of Americas Uranium? You believe if you owned 20% of Berkshire Hathaway you'd start pushing Buffets buttons?
    You think you'd be telling the board; I'll be taking home six tractor trailer loads of wrigley gum for my son's birthday party?
    You think you'd be telling "fruit of the loom" how to put a better cheaper elastic on their underwear?...
    This company will share in Corp. profit, little more...

    Tyfereth > Admiral Nelson

    Loathing Donald Trump and finding Hillary Clinton's serial mendaciousness and corruption upsetting are not mutually exclusive propositions. There is literally no one who Hillary Clinton won't blame to avoid personal responsibility for her actions, and while it may not matter to her supporters that she's throwing General Powell under the bus, its a sign that we are in for 8 years of Hillary Clinton making poor decisions, and deflecting blame onto others.

    Raubüberfall

    Hillary's reason for using a private email server was so she could control that source of information, which the public and other State Dept. officials would now have access to only through her. A shadow Secretary of State, that is, unaccountable to president, public, and law enforcement alike.

    [Aug 22, 2016] Thousands of Missing Hillary Emails Could Go Public Just In Time for Election Day

    Aug 22, 2016 | www.thedailybeast.com

    The State Department has announced that all work-related emails recovered from Hillary Clinton's private servers will be released. In response to a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch, State said it will disclose the FBI-recovered messages. Thousands will be released to the conservative watchdog group, which has routinely released documents obtained through open-records lawsuits. The department stated that it had "voluntarily agreed to produce non-exempt agency records responsive to plaintiff's [Freedom of Information Act] request."

    The State Department has not set a timeline for releasing the emails, although Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, has implored the department to release the emails prior to the election in November. A court conference to discuss the case is scheduled for Aug. 22.

    ... the revelation that investigators found a cache of information perhaps half the size of what Clinton initially disclosed raised questions about how she and her lawyers determined which emails they wanted to disclose or keep private, and how extensive a search they mounted.

    ... ... ...

    David Kendall, Clinton's attorney, didn't respond to a request for comment on the methodology, search terms, or other techniques that he and his colleagues used.

    But in July, Comey gave some insight into the process, noting that unlike FBI investigators, Clinton's attorneys didn't actually read all her emails.

    ..."Is it possible because of what her lawyers did that they were erasing things that were incriminating, maybe involving items that you were not particularly investigating but these have now been destroyed forever?" Rep. Glenn Grothman asked the FBI director.

    ...In another matter related to Clinton's email server, Judicial Watch released a series of emails to and from top Clinton aide Huma Abedin that the group said showed Clinton had offered special favors and access to top donors to the Clinton Foundation.

    The emails show that Abedin fielded requests for meetings with Clinton, which came from big donors via other intermediaries, including a top foundation official.

    [Aug 22, 2016] The Missing Man at the Center of Hillary Clinton's Email Scandal

    This article raises two interesting questions: "Did Pagliano committed a tax fraud by not reporting his income from Clinton foundation?" and "What information his yet unreleased emails to Clinton and her Huma Abedin contain? Also the article does not mention that there was a second sysadmin, which was not granted immunity from prosecution by FBI and who probably know even more the Pagliano about the setup of the server.
    Notable quotes:
    "... Pagliano also had an unusual employment arrangement. He was pulling down a six-figure salary at the State Department, which put him at the high-end of the pay scale for what appeared to be an ordinary tech support job. ..."
    "... Paliano was also being paid on the side in cash by the Clinton family, something his immediate supervisors didn't know ..."
    "... they were never clear on precisely what his job was and didn't know that during office hours, Pagliano was working for Clinton personally to maintain her private email system ..."
    "... The only statement he has given on the record was to the FBI, which has never released a transcript of the interview. ..."
    "... What started out as a dream job more than a decade ago has landed Pagliano a most unenviable role-a key witness in an election year scandal. ..."
    "... Pagliano first came to work for Clinton in 2006, as part of her first presidential campaign, having worked as a systems engineer for a company that provides technical support and advice to nonprofits. ..."
    "... Pagliano was responsible for the campaign headquarters' data center, oversight of other technology staff in the field, and working with contractors. ..."
    "... Pagliano was paid, among other sources, by Clinton's Senate leadership PAC, according to campaign finance records. A leadership PAC is used for expenses that can't be paid out of campaign or committee funds. Clinton's was set up in part to help fund other Democratic races. But an investigation by The Intercept found that money from the PAC was used more to benefit Clinton's own campaign and her staff than other candidates. ..."
    "... In the first four months of 2009-just before Pagliano took a job at the State Department working for the newly installed secretary-he was paid a total of $27,850 from the leadership PAC and two other campaign funds. ..."
    "... In May 2009, Pagliano was hired at the State Department, as a "Schedule C" employee, a political appointee. ..."
    "... Pagliano's job came with a handsome salary-around $140,000 per year, according to personnel information compiled by FedSmith, an analysis company. That put him on the very high end of State Department earners. For example, Pagliano was making about $13,000 more than the highest base salary allowed for Foreign Service employees, which includes career diplomats who serve in overseas posts, sometimes dangerous ones ..."
    "... Hiring Pagliano, a technology specialist, was itself unusual since the department is filled with similarly skilled personnel. ..."
    "... Pagliano was also hired at the highest "grade," 15, on the government pay scale. Career employees spend years climbing the pay ladder. ..."
    "... What exactly Pagliano did at the department, however, wasn't clear to his bosses. And later, they would question whether his employment arrangement was above board. ..."
    "... That's because while earning that hefty salary as a State Department employee, Pagliano was also being paid to perform "technology services for the Clinton family," ..."
    "... Between 2009 and 2013, Pagliano was paid "by check or wire transfer in varying amounts and various times," the State IG found. He worked out of State Department headquarters but also made trips to New York to check on the server and maintain it. ..."
    "... he top technology officials who oversaw Pagliano and wrote his performance evaluations-told investigators that during the four years Pagliano worked there, they didn't even know he was working on Clinton's email system ..."
    "... What's more, Pagliano failed to list his outside income on a required personal financial disclosure that he filed each year, The Washington Post reported. ..."
    "... The government gave Pagliano what's known as "use" immunity, which means that anything he told the FBI in the course of its investigation of Clinton's email system cannot be used to bring charges against him. (If evidence of a crime emerges from other sources, the government could still prosecute Pagliano.) ..."
    "... "It's hard to believe that an IT staffer who set up Hillary Clinton's reckless email server never sent or received a single work-related email in the four years he worked at the State Department," Raj Shah, the deputy communications director for the RNC, told The Daily Beast at the time. ..."
    "... For him, the biggest question of all may be, "How long can you stay quiet?" ..."
    Jul 24, 2016 | The Daily Beast

    ...Of all the characters in the political drama of Hillary Clinton's private email server, none has been more mysterious-and potentially more important-than a 40-year-old technology specialist named Bryan Pagliano.

    ... ... ...

    But Pagliano also had an unusual employment arrangement. He was pulling down a six-figure salary at the State Department, which put him at the high-end of the pay scale for what appeared to be an ordinary tech support job. But Paliano was also being paid on the side in cash by the Clinton family, something his immediate supervisors didn't know. In fact, they were never clear on precisely what his job was and didn't know that during office hours, Pagliano was working for Clinton personally to maintain her private email system.

    ...Congressional Republicans have seized on the FBI's findings of multiple devices as evidence that Clinton is lying, and they have now asked the bureau to investigate whether she perjured herself in testimony last year that touched on the email system.

    ... ... ...

    ... a federal judge in Washington is weighing whether Clinton should be deposed under oath by a conservative watchdog group that has been one of the Clinton family's tireless political foes.

    ... ... ...

    ...Pagliano has remained almost entirely silent in the face of his inquisitors. He has rebuffed congressional requests. When he was ordered to give a deposition to the conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch, he declined to answer every question posed to him, invoking his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself 125 times. The only statement he has given on the record was to the FBI, which has never released a transcript of the interview.

    For Pagliano, working for Clinton was a major career booster, and personally enriching. But it has come at a cost. What started out as a dream job more than a decade ago has landed Pagliano a most unenviable role-a key witness in an election year scandal.

    ... ... ...

    Pagliano first came to work for Clinton in 2006, as part of her first presidential campaign, having worked as a systems engineer for a company that provides technical support and advice to nonprofits. With Clinton, he started out as a kind of assistant, "providing technical engineering and support," but worked his way up to leading the campaign's information technology operations, according to his LinkedIn profile. The two were friendly. On his Facebook page, Pagliano posted photos of him posing with the secretary, as well as her husband. They have since been removed.

    Pagliano was responsible for the campaign headquarters' data center, oversight of other technology staff in the field, and working with contractors. When Clinton accepted Barack Obama's nomination to become secretary of state, Pagliano set up the server in the Clintons' home in Chappaqua, New York. Bill Clinton had already been using a server for his emails, but it was deemed too small for the workload of a cabinet secretary.

    Pagliano was paid, among other sources, by Clinton's Senate leadership PAC, according to campaign finance records. A leadership PAC is used for expenses that can't be paid out of campaign or committee funds. Clinton's was set up in part to help fund other Democratic races. But an investigation by The Intercept found that money from the PAC was used more to benefit Clinton's own campaign and her staff than other candidates.

    Pagliano was well compensated. In the first four months of 2009-just before Pagliano took a job at the State Department working for the newly installed secretary-he was paid a total of $27,850 from the leadership PAC and two other campaign funds.

    In May 2009, Pagliano was hired at the State Department, as a "Schedule C" employee, a political appointee. It's easier to hire and fire such employees than it is career government workers, but they're also subject to strict ethics rules. Pagliano's job came with a handsome salary-around $140,000 per year, according to personnel information compiled by FedSmith, an analysis company. That put him on the very high end of State Department earners. For example, Pagliano was making about $13,000 more than the highest base salary allowed for Foreign Service employees, which includes career diplomats who serve in overseas posts, sometimes dangerous ones.

    Hiring Pagliano, a technology specialist, was itself unusual since the department is filled with similarly skilled personnel. But Schedule C employees also have a "confidential or policy-determining relationship to their supervisor and agency head," according to the Office of Personnel Management. The agency head in this case was Clinton. Schedule C authorities let a cabinet official hire whomever she thinks is best suited for the job, even if that person doesn't meet the on-paper requirements or is creating a redundant position.

    Pagliano was also hired at the highest "grade," 15, on the government pay scale. Career employees spend years climbing the pay ladder. Pagliano had no prior government service. And while Schedule C employees may earn higher salaries than their career counterparts-indeed, the authorities are sometimes used to attract highly paid, skilled workers from the private sector-Pagliano appears to have been exceptionally well compensated for someone with his background, which aside from working for the non-profit was limited to being Clinton's technology director.

    What exactly Pagliano did at the department, however, wasn't clear to his bosses. And later, they would question whether his employment arrangement was above board.

    That's because while earning that hefty salary as a State Department employee, Pagliano was also being paid to perform "technology services for the Clinton family," Hillary Clinton's lawyer told the State Department inspector general (PDF), which issued a blistering report in May on Clinton's unorthodox use of a private email server-the one Pagliano installed and maintained for her while she was the secretary.

    Between 2009 and 2013, Pagliano was paid "by check or wire transfer in varying amounts and various times," the State IG found. He worked out of State Department headquarters but also made trips to New York to check on the server and maintain it.

    Pagliano's arrangement raised many questions for his direct supervisors at the department when it was revealed by the IG investigation. The State Department's chief information officer and the deputy chief information officer-the top technology officials who oversaw Pagliano and wrote his performance evaluations-told investigators that during the four years Pagliano worked there, they didn't even know he was working on Clinton's email system. The impression at Foggy Bottom was that Pagliano had been brought on to support "mobile computing issues across the entire department." His bosses thought he was at State to work for everyone, not exclusively for Clinton.

    The officials told the IG that they "questioned whether [Pagliano] could support a private client during work hours, given his capacity as a full-time employee."

    ***

    What's more, Pagliano failed to list his outside income on a required personal financial disclosure that he filed each year, The Washington Post reported. Government personnel rules don't prohibit a political appointee like Pagliano also earning a side income, but there are limits on how much he could earn, and the amounts must be disclosed. He would also have to report the income on his tax returns.

    How much the Clintons paid Pagliano while he worked at the State Department is unclear. He declined to grant an interview to the State Department inspector general, as did Clinton and five of her top aides.

    Neither his lawyer nor the FBI have said whether Pagliano's immunity agreement covers his employment arrangement and any violations that could have occurred as a result of his collecting outside income or failing to report it. But immunity agreements can be fashioned to cover any manner of subjects.

    The government gave Pagliano what's known as "use" immunity, which means that anything he told the FBI in the course of its investigation of Clinton's email system cannot be used to bring charges against him. (If evidence of a crime emerges from other sources, the government could still prosecute Pagliano.)

    The full details of the immunity deal haven't been revealed publicly. But some key aspects were revealed in a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch, which is seeking information on another unusual employment arrangement-that of Huma Abedin, Clinton's senior aide. She was allowed to hold multiple outside jobs, including for the Clinton Foundation, while also serving as Clinton's deputy chief of staff at the State Department.

    "The mere fact that the government was willing to offer Pagliano 'use' immunity here in exchange for his testimony indicates that his fear of prosecution is more than fanciful or speculative," Pagliano's lawyer, Mark MacDougall, wrote in a legal filing with the court hearing Judicial Watch's case. The watchdog group also wanted to depose Pagliano. But his lawyer argued that would put him at risk.

    "Mr. Pagliano's prospective deposition will inevitably cover matters that might 'furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute,'" MacDougall wrote. "The Court has authorized Judicial Watch to obtain discovery relating to 'the creation and operation of clintonemail.com for State Department business."

    That subject was also the focus of the FBI investigation. So, Pagliano had reason to believe that what he might say to Judicial Watch could put him at risk for prosecution, MacDougall argued. As a result, Pagliano intended to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege and not answer any of Judicial Watch's questions. The group didn't try to force him. But they wanted to videotape the deposition. Pagliano would be captured on film, declining to answer dozens of questions about his old boss and her complicated, careless email system. The judge ultimately ruled the deposition would be recorded. He also required Pagliano to hand over a copy of his immunity agreement, which was placed under seal. Judicial Watch isn't the only Clinton adversary that has locked on Pagliano and what he knows.

    Earlier this month, members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform questioned FBI Director James Comey about the findings of the bureau's investigation. Comey, who had by then already said that Clinton was "extremely careless," left little doubt that Pagliano was a key witness.

    "What about Bryan Pagliano?… Do you know if he knew that she [Clinton] was not following proper protocol here?" asked Rep. Buddy Carter, a Republican from Georgia, in regards to using a private email system, which the inspector general had determined was at odds with department rules.

    "He helped set it up," Comey replied.

    "He helped set it up? So obviously he knew," Carter said.

    "Yeah. Obviously he knew that," Comey said.

    ... Comey said that the FBI had spent "thousands of hours" figuring out the architecture of Clinton's email system, which was far more complex than the public had realized.

    "Piecing all of that back together-to gain as full an understanding as possible of the ways in which personal email was used for government work-has been a painstaking undertaking," Comey said, made harder by the complex way in which the system was maintained.

    "For example, when one of Secretary Clinton's original personal servers was decommissioned in 2013, the email software was removed," Comey said. "Doing that didn't remove the email content, but it was like removing the frame from a huge finished jigsaw puzzle and dumping the pieces on the floor. The effect was that millions of email fragments end up unsorted in the server's unused-or 'slack'-space. We searched through all of it to see what was there, and what parts of the puzzle could be put back together."

    Clinton's emails weren't the only ones that have been hard to piece back together. Pagliano's have also been difficult to find.

    ***

    In the many lawsuits brought under the Freedom of Information Act to force the release of Clinton's emails and those of her aides-including one filed by The Daily Beast-Pagliano's emails have been the hardest for State Department officials to locate. Initially, the State Department claimed that there were no Pagliano emails-at least none that its investigators could discover. A State Department official explained to The Daily Beast in May that the department had searched for copies of Pagliano's emails in a backup known as a .pst file, but that officials couldn't locate one for the period of time that covers Clinton's tenure as secretary. The Republican National Committee, which had filed a lawsuit seeking copies of Pagliano's emails, was incredulous. "It's hard to believe that an IT staffer who set up Hillary Clinton's reckless email server never sent or received a single work-related email in the four years he worked at the State Department," Raj Shah, the deputy communications director for the RNC, told The Daily Beast at the time.

    Also curious was that while the department found no .pst file for Pagliano's work during Clinton's tenure, officials did find one for his work as a contractor-after Clinton had left office. In order to reconstruct Pagliano's email record, the State Department looked for emails of people who were likely to have corresponded with him or about him. (One such message actually turned up in a batch of Clinton's own emails, which have been released for months now on a rolling basis. Pagliano wrote to his boss to wish her a happy birthday. "To many more!" he wrote. Clinton forwarded the message to an aide with a request to "Pls respond.")

    ...just this month, State came back with new information. Somehow, it had managed to narrow down that giant universe of emails to just 1,300 that were either to or from Pagliano or "cc'd" to him. The department was now confident that it could locate Pagliano's emails and turn them over to the RNC. What may appear to some to be a willful effort to keep Pagliano's emails from the public could also be sheer incompetence in record keeping. The inspector general criticized the department's archiving system, and department officials have acknowledged that they need to do a better job keeping track of officials' emails. But Republicans have seized on the missing emails as an indication of a possible coverup, meant to protect the Democratic nominee. "Such records might shed light on [Pagliano's] role in setting up Clinton's server, and why he was granted immunity by the FBI," Shah told The Daily Beast. "But it seems that his emails were either destroyed or never turned over, adding yet another layer to the secrecy surrounding his role."

    ... Two technology employees told the inspector general that in late 2010 they "discussed their concerns about Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email account" with John Bentel, who was then the director of Information Resource Management in the office of the Executive Secretariat, where Pagliano worked.

    "In one meeting, one staff member raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton's account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements," the IG found. "According to the staff member, the Director [Bentel] stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further."

    But that review didn't happen. Judicial Watch now wants to depose Bentel under oath, too. The judge hearing the case, Emmet Sullivan, said this month that he thought the deposition should proceed... ...Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, respectively the powerful chairmen of the committees on the Judiciary and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, have been after Pagliano since last year to testify about the email system. Given that he has a immunity protection, the senators have questioned why he won't speak.

    ... Refusing to answer questions doesn't constitute any admission of guilt on Pagliano's part. But his silence has only fanned the flames of intrigue surrounding his role in the email scandal and what more he may know about it.

    ...For him, the biggest question of all may be, "How long can you stay quiet?"

    [Aug 21, 2016] The NSA Leak Is Real, Snowden Documents Confirm

    Notable quotes:
    "... The evidence that ties the ShadowBrokers dump to the NSA comes in an agency manual for implanting malware, classified top secret, provided by Snowden, and not previously available to the public. The draft manual instructs NSA operators to track their use of one malware program using a specific 16-character string, "ace02468bdf13579." That exact same string appears throughout the ShadowBrokers leak in code associated with the same program, SECONDDATE. ..."
    Aug 19, 2016 | theintercept.com
    On Monday, a hacking group calling itself the "ShadowBrokers" announced an auction for what it claimed were "cyber weapons" made by the NSA. Based on never-before-published documents provided by the whistleblower Edward Snowden, The Intercept can confirm that the arsenal contains authentic NSA software, part of a powerful constellation of tools used to covertly infect computers worldwide.

    The provenance of the code has been a matter of heated debate this week among cybersecurity experts, and while it remains unclear how the software leaked, one thing is now beyond speculation: The malware is covered with the NSA's virtual fingerprints and clearly originates from the agency.

    The evidence that ties the ShadowBrokers dump to the NSA comes in an agency manual for implanting malware, classified top secret, provided by Snowden, and not previously available to the public. The draft manual instructs NSA operators to track their use of one malware program using a specific 16-character string, "ace02468bdf13579." That exact same string appears throughout the ShadowBrokers leak in code associated with the same program, SECONDDATE.

    SECONDDATE plays a specialized role inside a complex global system built by the U.S. government to infect and monitor what one document estimated to be millions of computers around the world. Its release by ShadowBrokers, alongside dozens of other malicious tools, marks the first time any full copies of the NSA's offensive software have been available to the public, providing a glimpse at how an elaborate system outlined in the Snowden documents looks when deployed in the real world, as well as concrete evidence that NSA hackers don't always have the last word when it comes to computer exploitation.

    But malicious software of this sophistication doesn't just pose a threat to foreign governments, Johns Hopkins University cryptographer Matthew Green told The Intercept:

    The danger of these exploits is that they can be used to target anyone who is using a vulnerable router. This is the equivalent of leaving lockpicking tools lying around a high school cafeteria. It's worse, in fact, because many of these exploits are not available through any other means, so they're just now coming to the attention of the firewall and router manufacturers that need to fix them, as well as the customers that are vulnerable.

    So the risk is twofold: first, that the person or persons who stole this information might have used them against us. If this is indeed Russia, then one assumes that they probably have their own exploits, but there's no need to give them any more. And now that the exploits have been released, we run the risk that ordinary criminals will use them against corporate targets.

    The NSA did not respond to questions concerning ShadowBrokers, the Snowden documents, or its malware.

    A Memorable SECONDDATE

    The offensive tools released by ShadowBrokers are organized under a litany of code names such as POLARSNEEZE and ELIGIBLE BOMBSHELL, and their exact purpose is still being assessed. But we do know more about one of the weapons: SECONDDATE.

    SECONDDATE is a tool designed to intercept web requests and redirect browsers on target computers to an NSA web server. That server, in turn, is designed to infect them with malware. SECONDDATE's existence was first reported by The Intercept in 2014, as part of a look at a global computer exploitation effort code-named TURBINE. The malware server, known as FOXACID, has also been described in previously released Snowden documents.

    Other documents released by The Intercept today not only tie SECONDDATE to the ShadowBrokers leak but also provide new detail on how it fits into the NSA's broader surveillance and infection network. They also show how SECONDDATE has been used, including to spy on Pakistan and a computer system in Lebanon.

    The top-secret manual that authenticates the SECONDDATE found in the wild as the same one used within the NSA is a 31-page document titled "FOXACID SOP for Operational Management" and marked as a draft. It dates to no earlier than 2010. A section within the manual describes administrative tools for tracking how victims are funneled into FOXACID, including a set of tags used to catalogue servers. When such a tag is created in relation to a SECONDDATE-related infection, the document says, a certain distinctive identifier must be used:

    The same SECONDDATE MSGID string appears in 14 different files throughout the ShadowBrokers leak, including in a file titled SecondDate-3021.exe. Viewed through a code-editing program (screenshot below), the NSA's secret number can be found hiding in plain sight:

    All told, throughout many of the folders contained in the ShadowBrokers' package (screenshot below), there are 47 files with SECONDDATE-related names, including different versions of the raw code required to execute a SECONDDATE attack, instructions for how to use it, and other related files.

    .

    After viewing the code, Green told The Intercept the MSGID string's occurrence in both an NSA training document and this week's leak is "unlikely to be a coincidence." Computer security researcher Matt Suiche, founder of UAE-based cybersecurity startup Comae Technologies, who has been particularly vocal in his analysis of the ShadowBrokers this week, told The Intercept "there is no way" the MSGID string's appearance in both places is a coincidence.

    Where SECONDDATE Fits In

    This overview jibes with previously unpublished classified files provided by Snowden that illustrate how SECONDDATE is a component of BADDECISION, a broader NSA infiltration tool. SECONDDATE helps the NSA pull off a "man in the middle" attack against users on a wireless network, tricking them into thinking they're talking to a safe website when in reality they've been sent a malicious payload from an NSA server.

    According to one December 2010 PowerPoint presentation titled "Introduction to BADDECISION," that tool is also designed to send users of a wireless network, sometimes referred to as an 802.11 network, to FOXACID malware servers. Or, as the presentation puts it, BADDECISION is an "802.11 CNE [computer network exploitation] tool that uses a true man-in-the-middle attack and a frame injection technique to redirect a target client to a FOXACID server." As another top-secret slide puts it, the attack homes in on "the greatest vulnerability to your computer: your web browser."

    One slide points out that the attack works on users with an encrypted wireless connection to the internet.

    That trick, it seems, often involves BADDECISION and SECONDDATE, with the latter described as a "component" for the former. A series of diagrams in the "Introduction to BADDECISION" presentation show how an NSA operator "uses SECONDDATE to inject a redirection payload at [a] Target Client," invisibly hijacking a user's web browser as the user attempts to visit a benign website (in the example given, it's CNN.com). Executed correctly, the file explains, a "Target Client continues normal webpage browsing, completely unaware," lands on a malware-filled NSA server, and becomes infected with as much of that malware as possible - or as the presentation puts it, the user will be left "WHACKED!" In the other top-secret presentations, it's put plainly: "How do we redirect the target to the FOXACID server without being noticed"? Simple: "Use NIGHTSTAND or BADDECISION."

    The sheer number of interlocking tools available to crack a computer is dizzying. In the FOXACID manual, government hackers are told an NSA hacker ought to be familiar with using SECONDDATE along with similar man-in-the-middle wi-fi attacks code-named MAGIC SQUIRREL and MAGICBEAN. A top-secret presentation on FOXACID lists further ways to redirect targets to the malware server system.

    To position themselves within range of a vulnerable wireless network, NSA operators can use a mobile antenna system running software code-named BLINDDATE, depicted in the field in what appears to be Kabul. The software can even be attached to a drone. BLINDDATE in turn can run BADDECISION, which allows for a SECONDDATE attack:

    Elsewhere in these files, there are at least two documented cases of SECONDDATE being used to successfully infect computers overseas: An April 2013 presentation boasts of successful attacks against computer systems in both Pakistan and Lebanon. In the first, NSA hackers used SECONDDATE to breach "targets in Pakistan's National Telecommunications Corporation's (NTC) VIP Division," which contained documents pertaining to "the backbone of Pakistan's Green Line communications network" used by "civilian and military leadership."

    In the latter, the NSA used SECONDDATE to pull off a man-in-the-middle attack in Lebanon "for the first time ever," infecting a Lebanese ISP to extract "100+ MB of Hizballah Unit 1800 data," a special subset of the terrorist group dedicated to aiding Palestinian militants.

    SECONDDATE is just one method that the NSA uses to get its target's browser pointed at a FOXACID server. Other methods include sending spam that attempts to exploit bugs in popular web-based email providers or entices targets to click on malicious links that lead to a FOXACID server. One document, a newsletter for the NSA's Special Source Operations division, describes how NSA software other than SECONDDATE was used to repeatedly direct targets in Pakistan to FOXACID malware web servers, eventually infecting the targets' computers.

    A Potentially Mundane Hack

    Snowden, who worked for NSA contractors Dell and Booz Allen Hamilton, has offered some context and a relatively mundane possible explanation for the leak: that the NSA headquarters was not hacked, but rather one of the computers the agency uses to plan and execute attacks was compromised. In a series of tweets, he pointed out that the NSA often lurks on systems that are supposed to be controlled by others, and it's possible someone at the agency took control of a server and failed to clean up after themselves. A regime, hacker group, or intelligence agency could have seized the files and the opportunity to embarrass the agency.

    Documents

    Documents published with this story:

    [Aug 21, 2016] Hillary blames Colin Powell for email scandal

    Notable quotes:
    "... Pressed by the F.B.I. about her email practices at the State Department, Hillary Clinton told investigators that former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had advised her to use a personal email account. ..."
    "... Separately, in a 2009 email exchange that also emerged during the F.B.I. questioning, Mrs. Clinton, who had already decided to use private email, asked Mr. Powell about his email practices when he was the nation's top diplomat under George W. Bush, according to a person with direct knowledge of Mr. Powell's appearance in the documents, who would not speak for attribution. ..."
    August 19, 2016 | AllenBWest.com

    After months of "short circuiting" on her excuses for and defense of her use of a private email server, Hillary Clinton has finally "revealed" why she used one in the first place. ... ... ...
    Now, it turns out Hillary's trying to push blame for the whole fiasco on someone else entirely: Colin Powell. As the New York Times writes:

    Pressed by the F.B.I. about her email practices at the State Department, Hillary Clinton told investigators that former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had advised her to use a personal email account.

    The account is included in the notes the Federal Bureau of Investigation handed over to Congress on Tuesday, relaying in detail the three-and-a-half-hour interview with Mrs. Clinton in early July that led to the decision by James B. Comey, the bureau's director, not to pursue criminal charges against her.

    Separately, in a 2009 email exchange that also emerged during the F.B.I. questioning, Mrs. Clinton, who had already decided to use private email, asked Mr. Powell about his email practices when he was the nation's top diplomat under George W. Bush, according to a person with direct knowledge of Mr. Powell's appearance in the documents, who would not speak for attribution.

    The journalist Joe Conason first reported the conversation between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Powell in his coming book about Bill Clinton's postpresidency, "Man of the World: The Further Endeavors of Bill Clinton," which The Times received an advanced copy of.

    ... Powell's office released a statement Friday saying the former secretary "has no recollection of the dinner conversation." The statement did admit, however, that Powell "did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use of a personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it vastly improved communications within the State Department."

    The statement emphasized, however, that "at the time, there was no equivalent system within the department." Also, Powell "used a secure state computer on his desk to manage classified information."

    As Townhall's Guy Benson explained in February, there are two key distinctions: Powell did not set up a "recklessly unsecure private emails server" and conduct all official business on it, and Powell only received two emails which were retroactively classified (at the lowest level of classification!).

    Clinton's email was not through a company like AOL, but on her own private server, which was likely hacked by foreign powers like the Russians and the Chinese, according to former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Even the Times admitted that "Powell did not have a server at his house or rely on outside contractors, as Mrs. Clinton did at her home in Chappaqua, N.Y."

    [Aug 21, 2016] Clinton Finds New People To Blame For Email Scandal

    Notable quotes:
    "... Now the former first lady is refusing to even take blame for the use of the server, saying that the practice has been around for decades and that another former secretary of state. ..."
    "... Hillary Clinton has been an expert at bobbing and weaving around controversy during this election cycle, but the sheer magnitude of her recent scandals may end up blindsiding her with excuses this sloppy. ..."
    The Unofficial Megyn Kelly

    Hillary Clinton has insisted from day one that her illegal use of a private email server was no big deal at all, even if it put many Americans' lives at risk.

    Now the former first lady is refusing to even take blame for the use of the server, saying that the practice has been around for decades and that another former secretary of state.

    "Now, it turns out Hillary's trying to push blame for the whole fiasco on someone else entirely: Colin Powell. As the New York Times writes: Pressed by the F.B.I.about her email practices at the State Department, Hillary Clinton told investigators that former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had advised her to use a personal email account."

    Colin Powell has denied using a private email account for anything other than non-classified material.

    "And as we know, Hillary did use that email server for sending and receiving classified information, while Powell did not. This is yet another case of Hillary trying to push her poor judgement onto someone else. Unfortunately for her, Colin Powell isn't willing to quietly take the fall for her."

    Hillary Clinton has been an expert at bobbing and weaving around controversy during this election cycle, but the sheer magnitude of her recent scandals may end up blindsiding her with excuses this sloppy.

    [Aug 20, 2016] Ouch Congressman Cries Hillary is Honest, She Only Perjured Herself Three Times

    Notable quotes:
    "... The host also criticized attempts by Hillary's campaign to downplay the damage wrought by FBI Director James Comey's detailed examination of Clinton's "homebrew" server that many intelligence professionals worry compromised US state secrets. "It's not like he gave her a stellar review and an A+" said Ruhle. ..."
    "... only three of them had any markings whatsoever suggesting a possible classification, and I – there's a clip from that I wish you guys would run -." Ruhle jumped in and hammered the Congressman saying, "But only three is not zero… You either did it or you didn't do it. No?" ..."
    sputniknews.com

    Speaking on "MSNBC Live" Congressman Matt Cartwright (D-PA) was grilled by host Stephanie Ruhle who demanded the Clinton surrogate who was appealing to Hillary's trustworthiness explain how the former Secretary of State did not commit perjury.

    ... ... ...

    Laying out a montage of Hillary Clinton's statements before the Benghazi Select Committee, host Stephanie Ruhle couldn't help but ask her guest, Clinton surrogate and Pennsylvania Congressman Matt Cartwright, "How is that not perjury?"

    The host also criticized attempts by Hillary's campaign to downplay the damage wrought by FBI Director James Comey's detailed examination of Clinton's "homebrew" server that many intelligence professionals worry compromised US state secrets. "It's not like he gave her a stellar review and an A+" said Ruhle.

    The Congressman responded, "Here's what we established, when I questioned Director Comey. The Question was, well, were there things marked classified that she sent or received? And out of tens of thousands of emails that they were reviewing, only three of them had any markings whatsoever suggesting a possible classification, and I – there's a clip from that I wish you guys would run -."

    Ruhle jumped in and hammered the Congressman saying, "But only three is not zero… You either did it or you didn't do it. No?"

    ... ... ...

    [Aug 17, 2016] FBI hands over Clinton email interview summary to Congress  by and

    This is a huge danger for Hillary... Now all those materials got into the hand of hostile and very competent prosecutors.
    Notable quotes:
    "... "The FBI has turned over a 'number of documents' related to their investigation of former Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email server. Committee staff is currently reviewing the information that is classified SECRET. There are no further details at this time," a spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee said on Tuesday afternoon. ..."
    "... The handover of the records all but guarantees the email issue will continue to dog Clinton this election cycle, although it is unclear what Republicans can do with them, given that they are classified materials. Still, her decision to set up a private server at the State Department, and the subsequent fallout, remains a sizable self-inflicted wound for Clinton, even as Donald Trump's various missteps have found him lagging behind the Democrat in national and battleground state polls. ..."
    Aug 15, 2016 | POLITICO
    The FBI on Tuesday handed over to Congress classified records from its investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, the latest development in the scandal that the Democratic nominee just can't shake.

    Among the materials turned over to Capitol Hill was an FBI summary of the 3½-hour interview Clinton submitted to at FBI headquarters early last month, according to the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff of California.

    The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee also confirmed receiving a package of records from the FBI about the Clinton email probe.

    "The FBI has turned over a 'number of documents' related to their investigation of former Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email server. Committee staff is currently reviewing the information that is classified SECRET. There are no further details at this time," a spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee said on Tuesday afternoon.

    The handover of the records all but guarantees the email issue will continue to dog Clinton this election cycle, although it is unclear what Republicans can do with them, given that they are classified materials. Still, her decision to set up a private server at the State Department, and the subsequent fallout, remains a sizable self-inflicted wound for Clinton, even as Donald Trump's various missteps have found him lagging behind the Democrat in national and battleground state polls.

    As it sent the materials up on Tuesday, the FBI warned publicly against leaking the documents.

    "The material contains classified and other sensitive information and is being provided with the expectation it will not be disseminated or disclosed without FBI concurrence," an FBI spokesperson said in a statement.

    But top Republicans are already pushing back, urging the FBI to publicly release of some of the information.

    "On initial review, it seems that much of the material given to the Senate today, other than copies of the large number of emails on Secretary Clinton's server containing classified information, is marked 'unclassified/for official use.' The FBI should make as much of the material available as possible," said Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) in a statement. "The public's business ought to be public, with few exceptions. The people's interest would be served in seeing the documents that are unclassified. The FBI has made public statements in describing its handling of the case, so sharing documents in support of those statements wherever appropriate would make sense."

    [Aug 15, 2016] Hillary Clinton Short-Circuited

    Notable quotes:
    "... After Clinton recognized that even her strongest supporters doubted her statement, she attempted to walk it back. In doing so, she repeatedly lied again, but offered as an excuse a bizarre claim that she had "short-circuited" her answer. ..."
    "... Who knows what that means? She claimed that she and Wallace were talking over each other and her answer had been misunderstood and misconstrued. Yet, Clinton said that Comey exonerated her as being "truthful" to the public when in fact he stated that she had been truthful during her three-hour, closed-door, unrecorded interview with the FBI. ..."
    "... Could Clinton have legally received, opened, stored or sent a secret or top secret email without knowing it, as she has claimed? In a word: NO. ..."
    "... That's because, on her first day in office, Clinton swore under oath that she recognized her legal obligation to recognize state secrets and treat them according to law - that is, to keep them in a secure government venue - whether they are marked as secrets or not. ..."
    "... Last Sunday, Iran executed a scientist who sold Iranian nuclear secrets to the U.S. The secrets were eventually passed on to Secretary of State John Kerry for his use during the negotiations that led to the recent U.S.-Iran nuclear accord. But the sale of the secrets and the U.S.'s payments for them (several million dollars) were consummated under then-Secretary Clinton's watch. The scientist was lured back to Iran, fearing harm to his family. Upon his return, he was arrested, tried and convicted of treason. ..."
    August 11, 2016 | The Unz Review
    When former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked last week if she has misled the American people on the issue of her failure to safeguard state secrets contained in her emails, she told my Fox News colleague, Chris Wallace, that the

    FBI had exonerated her. When pressed by Wallace, she argued that FBI Director James Comey said that her answers to the American people were truthful.

    After Clinton recognized that even her strongest supporters doubted her statement, she attempted to walk it back. In doing so, she repeatedly lied again, but offered as an excuse a bizarre claim that she had "short-circuited" her answer.

    Who knows what that means? She claimed that she and Wallace were talking over each other and her answer had been misunderstood and misconstrued. Yet, Clinton said that Comey exonerated her as being "truthful" to the public when in fact he stated that she had been truthful during her three-hour, closed-door, unrecorded interview with the FBI.

    Clinton told a group of largely pro-Clinton journalists that she had short-circuited her remarks. Then, she acknowledged that Comey had only referred to whatever she told the FBI as being truthful. Then, she lied again, by insisting that she told the FBI the same things she has told the press and the public since this scandal erupted in March 2015.

    But that cannot be so, because she has issued a litany of lies to the press and to the public, which the FBI would have caught. In her so-called clarifying remarks, she again told journalists her oft-stated lie about returning all work-related emails to the State Department. She could not have told that to the FBI because Director Comey revealed in July that the FBI found "thousands" of unreturned work-related emails on her servers, some of which she attempted to destroy.

    On the state secrets issue, she has told the public countless times that she never sent or received anything marked classified. She could not have said that to the FBI, because even a novice FBI agent would have recognized such a statement as a trick answer. Nothing is marked "classified." The markings used by the federal government are "confidential" or "secret" or "top secret." When Director Comey announced last month that the FBI was recommending against indictment, he revealed nevertheless that his agents found 110 emails in 52 email threads containing materials that were confidential, secret or top secret.

    The agents also found seven email chains on her servers that were select access privilege, or SAP. SAP emails cannot be received, opened or sent without knowing what they are, as a special alphanumeric code, one that changes continually, must be requested and employed in order to do so. SAP is so secret that the FBI agents investigating Clinton lacked access to the code.

    Could Clinton have legally received, opened, stored or sent a secret or top secret email without knowing it, as she has claimed? In a word: NO.

    That's because, on her first day in office, Clinton swore under oath that she recognized her legal obligation to recognize state secrets and treat them according to law - that is, to keep them in a secure government venue - whether they are marked as secrets or not.

    This past weekend, we learned how deadly the consequences of Clinton's failure to secure secrets can be.

    Last Sunday, Iran executed a scientist who sold Iranian nuclear secrets to the U.S. The secrets were eventually passed on to Secretary of State John Kerry for his use during the negotiations that led to the recent U.S.-Iran nuclear accord. But the sale of the secrets and the U.S.'s payments for them (several million dollars) were consummated under then-Secretary Clinton's watch. The scientist was lured back to Iran, fearing harm to his family. Upon his return, he was arrested, tried and convicted of treason.

    One email sent to Clinton, from Richard Morningstar, a former State Department special envoy for Eurasian energy, referred to this scientist as "our friend." The fact that Clinton's aides referenced this spying scientist as "our friend" shows a conscious awareness of their duty to hide and secure state secrets - his name and what he had done for the U.S. Yet, at the same time, Clinton put these state secrets at risk by having them sent to her via her nonsecure home servers. This "our friend" email was a top-secret email, which Clinton failed to keep secure. It was either one of the 110 that the FBI found on her servers or one of the work-related emails she did surrender.
    Could this email have been used as evidence in the treason trial of the now-executed scientist?

    That is not an academic question. Most of the intelligence community seriously mistrusts Clinton, as her recklessness has jeopardized their work. Some feared that many of their undercover colleagues were compromised or even killed due to Clinton's emails.

    Hillary Rodham Clinton has established a clear and unambiguous record of deception. Her deceptions are not about the time of day or the day of the week; they are about matters material to her former job as Secretary of State and material to national security.

    Do you know any rational person who continues to trust her?

    Copyright 2016 Andrew P. Napolitano. Distributed by Creators.com.

    1. exiled off mainstreet says: Show CommentNext New Comment August 11, 2016 at 4:51 am GMT • 300 Words

      If the lamestream media were not fully in the bag for the harpy, questions would be being asked about the mysterious death of the man whom Assange says was the leaker to wikileaks of the Democratic National Committee emails. Others have noted that several other people have died mysteriously during the last few weeks including a UN figure who died from a suspicous home weightlifting accident and an anti-Clinton researcher who unexpectedly committed "suicide."

      The Libya thing is still on record as a war crime and the fact is indisputable that Clinton was the spearhead who convinced Obama, who has indicated it was against his better judgment, to carry through on the overthrow. Meanwhile, we have on record Clinton's barbaric gloat, "we came, we saw, he died" with a horror movie type cackle. Also on record is the fact that the jihadi element Clinton sponsored in the overthrow effort committed a crime against humanity, a mass liquidation of Sub-saharan Africans Khaddafi had settled in the city of Sirte in the wake of their seizure of that city. It has been documented again in an article in this week's blackagendareport by their regular reporter, Danny Haiphong.

      Of course Trump is accused based on an ambiguous off-the-cuff comment he made about 2nd amendment rights that he suggested violence against the harpy. The media's cashing in on this issues makes relevant the harpy's own statement in July, 2008 when she had been beaten by Obama but before the convention which would confirm that defeat, that she was staying in the race in case a "Robert Kennedy" incident occurs. This is a much more unambiguous statement which could be construed as hoping for something favorable. Her status as a major party candidate is a disgrace, particularly now that the wikileaks disclosures have revealed the fraud engaged in to secure it. Sanders, meanwhile, appears craven in light of these new disclosures. If she triumphs, the last shreds of legitimacy will be gone from the yankee imperium.

    1. Lawrence Fitton says: Show CommentNext New Comment August 11, 2016 at 4:20 pm GMT • 100 Words

      state secrets – just the words give me the creeps. reminds of police states. state secrets keep the people, the employers of the united states government, in the dark. criminal regimes everywhere flourish without sunlight. states secrets are used as a cya tactic, as well. if the citizens don't know what their government does, they can't object. we, the people, are kept ignorant, which allows corruption to proliferate and produce people like bill & hillary clinton.
      hillary lied to congress, didn't she? why isn't she prosecuted?
      donald trump is a braggart who lies so often and so much, the mind reels. hillary clinton is a serial prevaricator, part-time criminal, thoroughly corrupt, massively entitled, political hack who should have been yesterday's news 25 years ago.
      trump or clinton.
      try not to cry.

    [Aug 08, 2016] The subtext is that it was Clinton's carelessness with classified material which got him killed

    marknesop.wordpress.com
    Cortes , August 7, 2016 at 6:06 pm
    The narrative for the opening chapter of WWIII beginneth like this:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/07/iran-executes-nuclear-scientist-shahram-amiri-returned-country-from-us

    Persian nukes? Check

    R2P? Check.

    Crazy mullahs? Check.

    Et cetera

    marknesop , August 7, 2016 at 8:50 pm
    The subtext is that it was Clinton's carelessness with classified material which got him killed. And the probability that the reason for his return to Tehran was that his minders had assessed it was now safe for him to go back and be Washington's ear in Tehran.

    [Aug 02, 2016] NSA Architect: Agency Has ALL of Clinton's Deleted Emails

    A very important, informative interview. Outlines complexity of challenges of modern society and the real power of "alphabet agencies" in the modern societies (not only in the USA) pretty vividly. You need to listen to it several times to understand better the current environment.
    Very sloppy security was the immanent feature both of Hillary "bathroom" server and DNC emails hacks. So there probably were multiple parties that has access to those data not a single one (anti Russian hysteria presumes that the only party are Russian and that's silly; what about China, Iran and Israel?). Russian government would not use a "known attack" as they would immediately be traced back.
    Anything, any communications that goes over the network are totally. 100% exposed to NSA data collection infrastructure. Clinton email messages are not exception. NSA does have information on them, including all envelopes (the body of the message might be encrypted and that's slightly complicate the matter, but there is no signs that Clinton of DNC used encryption of them)
    NSA has the technical capabilities to trace the data back and they most probably have most if not all of deleted mail. The "total surveillance", the total data mailing used by NSA definitely includes the mail envelopes which makes possible to enumerate all the missing mails.
    Notable quotes:
    "... The National Security Agency (NSA) has "all" of Hillary Clinton's deleted emails and the FBI could gain access to them if they so desired, William Binney, a former highly placed NSA official, declared in a radio interview broadcast on Sunday. ..."
    "... Binney referenced testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2011 by then-FBI Director Robert S. Mueller in which Meuller spoke of the FBI's ability to access various secretive databases "to track down known and suspected terrorists." ..."
    "... "Now what he (Mueller) is talking about is going into the NSA database, which is shown of course in the (Edward) Snowden material released, which shows a direct access into the NSA database by the FBI and the CIA. Which there is no oversight of by the way. So that means that NSA and a number of agencies in the U.S. government also have those emails." ..."
    "... Listen to the full interview here: ... ..."
    "... And the other point is that Hillary, according to an article published by the Observer ..."
    www.breitbart.com
    The National Security Agency (NSA) has "all" of Hillary Clinton's deleted emails and the FBI could gain access to them if they so desired, William Binney, a former highly placed NSA official, declared in a radio interview broadcast on Sunday.

    Speaking as an analyst, Binney raised the possibility that the hack of the Democratic National Committee's server was done not by Russia but by a disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker concerned about Clinton's compromise of national security secrets via her personal email use.

    Binney was an architect of the NSA's surveillance program. He became a famed whistleblower when he resigned on October 31, 2001, after spending more than 30 years with the agency.

    He was speaking on this reporter's Sunday radio program, "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio," broadcast on New York's AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia's NewsTalk 990 AM.

    Binney referenced testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2011 by then-FBI Director Robert S. Mueller in which Meuller spoke of the FBI's ability to access various secretive databases "to track down known and suspected terrorists."

    Stated Binney:

    "Now what he (Mueller) is talking about is going into the NSA database, which is shown of course in the (Edward) Snowden material released, which shows a direct access into the NSA database by the FBI and the CIA. Which there is no oversight of by the way. So that means that NSA and a number of agencies in the U.S. government also have those emails."

    "So if the FBI really wanted them they can go into that database and get them right now," he stated of Clinton's emails as well as DNC emails.

    Asked point blank if he believed the NSA has copies of "all" of Clinton's emails, including the deleted correspondence, Binney replied in the affirmative.

    "Yes," he responded. "That would be my point. They have them all and the FBI can get them right there."

    Listen to the full interview here: ...

    Binney surmised that the hack of the DNC could have been coordinated by someone inside the U.S. intelligence community angry over Clinton's compromise of national security data with her email use.

    And the other point is that Hillary, according to an article published by the Observer in March of this year, has a problem with NSA because she compromised Gamma material. Now that is the most sensitive material at NSA. And so there were a number of NSA officials complaining to the press or to the people who wrote the article that she did that. She lifted the material that was in her emails directly out of Gamma reporting. That is a direct compromise of the most sensitive material at the NSA. So she's got a real problem there. So there are many people who have problems with what she has done in the past. So I don't necessarily look at the Russians as the only one(s) who got into those emails.

    The Observer defined the GAMMA classification:

    GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was).

    Aaron Klein is Breitbart's Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio." Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

    [Jul 23, 2016] Hillary Clinton: Electing a Foreign Spy for President?

    petras.lahaine.org
    Many of Clinton's leading critics, among them two dozen former CIA agents, have presented a myth that Hillary's main offence is her 'carelessness in handling official documents and her deliberate deceptions and lies to the government.

    These critics have trivialized, personalized and moralized what is really deliberate, highly politicized state behavior. Mme. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not 'careless in managing an insecure mail server'. If Clinton was engaged in political liaison with foreign officials she deliberately used a private email server to avoid political detection by security elements within the US government. She lied to the US government on the use and destruction of official state documents because the documents were political exchanges between a traitor and its host

    The 22 top secret reports on 'Special Access Programs' which Clinton handled via her private computer provided foreign governments with the names and dates of US operatives and proxies; allowed for counterresponses inflicting losses of billions of dollars in program damages and possibly lost lives.

    The Inspector General Report (IGP) deals only with the surface misdeeds. The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) has gone a step further in identifying the political linkages, but faces enormous obstacles from Hilary's domestic allies in pursuing a criminal investigation. The FBI, whose director is a political appointee, has suffered a series of defeats in its attempts to investigate and prosecute spying to Israel, including the AIPAC espionage case of Rosen and Weismann and in their long held opposition to the release of the notorious US-Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard. The power of the Zionists within the government halted their investigation of a dozen Israeli spies captured in the US right after the attacks of September 11,
    2001.

    Clinton's choice of conducting secret private communications, despite several years of State Department warnings to abide by their strict security regulations, is an indication of her Zionist power base, and not a mere reflection of her personal hubris or individual arrogance.

    Clinton has circulated more vital top-secret documents and classified material than Jonathan Pollard.

    [Jul 20, 2016] FBI Agents Silenced on Hillary Probe

    Notable quotes:
    "... FBI agents who worked on the investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server reportedly had to sign an unusual non-disclosure form banning them from talking about the case unless they were called to testify. ..."
    Jul 13, 2016 | www.newsmax.com

    FBI agents who worked on the investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server reportedly had to sign an unusual non-disclosure form banning them from talking about the case unless they were called to testify.

    Unnamed sources tell the New York Post they'd never heard of the special form - known as a "case briefing acknowledgment" - being used before, though all agents initially have to sign nondisclosure agreements to obtain security clearance.

    "This is very, very unusual. I've never signed one, never circulated one to others," one unnamed retired FBI chief tells the Post. "I have never heard of such a form. Sounds strange," an anonymous FBI agent said.

    The Post additionally reports some FBI agents are disappointed that Director James Comey decided against recommending that charges be brought against Clinton for her mishandling of classified information.

    "FBI agents believe there was an inside deal put in place after the [Attorney General] Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton tarmac meeting" just hours before the release of a House report on the Benghazi, Libya terror attack in 2012, one unnamed source tells the Post.

    Another Justice Department source tells the newspaper he was "furious" with Comey, deriding him for having "managed to piss off right and left."

    [Jul 19, 2016] Hillary Clinton had right to delete personal emails, says US justice department

    Guardian presstitutes are ready to defend even indefensible Hillary Clinton behaviour.
    Notable quotes:
    "... I think that the moment she mixed personal and work related or classified information, she loses the right to claim that any of the emails were personal. Hence, all emails become connected to her work as SOS, and none of the emails can be deleted. None of her emails can be treated as personal anymore, they have now become government property. She had no right to delete anything. ..."
    "... In Hillary's case, I suspect "personal emails" is a euphemism for ANY correspondence she does not want exposed in official governmental records, including that which could be used against her politically in the future, i.e. backroom deals, dubious policies, nefarious schemes, etc. ..."
    www.theguardian.com
    makaio , 2015-09-12 04:26:16
    This is disheartening and outrageous, with State and Justice skirting around the issues, and as one commenter said, covering for Hillary in a partisan way.

    The departments have been largely silent on rules and legalities, and now they've evolved to tiptoeing. Pathetic.

    The comparison of government server deletions versus private server deletions and wipes is inapt. Government employees and service members -- the millions who aren't as special as Hillary with private off-site servers for their work -- surely can delete any emails they choose, work or personal. But backup records are controlled by government IT departments, who ideally are following records-keeping regulations.

    Not so with the queen's server and email setup. She's deplorable, as is this State and Justice mockery.

    If the President continues to stand for this, I have no interest in voting. I haven't pulled him into my disgust with this topic until now ... Justice is full of crap.

    Berkeley2013 , 2015-09-12 04:37:05
    Many things are intriguing about this scandal.

    1. The media covers it but not in a comprehensive or responsible way. The NY Times barely touches it. Same with The Economist. The Post pushes it to those vacuous bloggers, DM and CC. The New Yorker is hiding under a rock.

    2. You would expect all to write "Calls to Action" of some kind.

    3. Some kind of legal clarifications is order--several, actually. All the Title 18 items need to be clarified for the public. Do they apply?

    4. Damage analysis. What possible damage could have been done?

    5. Role of the administration? How did this situation last for four years?

    6. Are the deleted e-mails going to surface?

    7. Cost. Why should public pay for the legal and administrative chaos of a rogue SoS?

    Berkeley2013 flatulenceodor67 , 2015-09-12 04:52:35
    All these issues lead to more questions. In this case, who authorized the use? Who knew? Who responded to the existence of this rogue communications network? Who maintained? Which if any clearances did they have? Did they share any of what they knew with others? And this is just the most basic of this whole tsunami of needless problems. Just this avenue leads to millions of dollars of investigative hours. Many millions...
    flatulenceodor67 ShinjiNoShinji , 2015-09-12 05:04:29
    Well one federal Judge thinks so...
    http://jonathanturley.org/2015/08/21/federal-judge-says-hillary-clinton-violated-government-policy-in-using-personal-server-while-secretary-of-state /
    Berkeley2013 , 2015-09-12 05:03:58
    The Guardian is being quite irresponsible here. You need to quote/date your sources and supply links to the full documents. Which case? When? Who? It looks to me as though you are just grabbing an article by a disreputable Metro DC publication that I am not going to dignify by naming.

    Also, assuming that something like this story is accurate, why would DOJ do this?

    Am not sure why you add a click-bait article to this complex topic--you should just stick with the tabloid, sports, Hollywood junk articles that fill your virtual space these days.

    tropic2 makaio , 2015-09-12 07:11:52
    She simply used a classified government email system, or more likely, approved hardcopy classified draft messages for a member of her staff to send with her approval.

    No, she didn't use a government email system (classified or not). She used a private email system, completely outside the government.

    And no, she didn't set up her own server for the purpose of having hard copies of message drafts. So far, she has suggested a range of different reasons:

    - To have just one device for both her official and personal communications....which is a lie: she had two devices.

    - She was "not thinking very much about it"... which is a lie: she had a private server installed in her house, a domain registered under a former aide's name, and key staffers conducting official government business on that server. And she paid $5000 to a former IT aide to set up the system. Report

    makaio tropic2 , 2015-09-12 16:17:10
    This conversation is pretty muddled.

    In short, she wrongly used a private server and personal email address for the majority of her official work, which of course is not permissible for classified information, and questionable at best for unclassified content. And she has wrongly lied to the American public in response to related questions.

    But just because she used her private account does not mean she did not have a largely inactive .gov address. And she also likely had a government address on a classified government system, which she or her staff likely used when receiving or sending marked classified information.

    ga gamba , 2015-09-12 06:55:31
    Of course she had the right to delete to personal emails - keep in mind that had she used a gov't-provided account like almost all other State Department employees she would have had to follow the rules governing personal use of tax payer-provided equipment and services.

    Ms Clinton certainly did not have the right to process classified information on a personal computer system. That's illegal. You'd think the top executive would know such things.

    zbrowne , 2015-09-12 07:34:35
    I think that the moment she mixed personal and work related or classified information, she loses the right to claim that any of the emails were personal. Hence, all emails become connected to her work as SOS, and none of the emails can be deleted. None of her emails can be treated as personal anymore, they have now become government property. She had no right to delete anything.
    Socraticus , 2015-09-12 07:39:55
    In Hillary's case, I suspect "personal emails" is a euphemism for ANY correspondence she does not want exposed in official governmental records, including that which could be used against her politically in the future, i.e. backroom deals, dubious policies, nefarious schemes, etc.
    Thirdparty Socraticus , 2015-09-12 07:59:31
    How very cynical of you! If ever there was an opening for a 'Mr. Clean' named Joe Biden, this is it. Hillary is plummeting in the polls. Biden is not in the race, yet he polls 20%. After his appearance on Colbert on Thursday evening, I think that if he were to declare, his support would double, at least. At 40%, he would be ahead of Hillary. In addition to being thoroughly unethical, Hillary is not liked even by those who work with her.
    ID9630461 , 2015-09-12 09:20:58
    For many, Hillary's very existence is a crime, so no amount of exoneration by the Justice Dept... or indeed anyone else.... will change anything. The relentless attacks will continue, and many of us will continue to see them as a clear indication of how vulnerable the Republicans feel about their own Presidential prospects, with a campaign that's in complete disarray, and a front runner who seems determined to systematically alienate every single one of the demographic groups that the GOP had hoped to court this time around. Frankly, I'd be worried too if I were a Republican! Report
    Tom Voloshen ID9630461 , 2015-09-12 10:04:36
    The Justice Department run by a political democratic appointee says Hillary has "rights" I wonder.....Fast and Furious, NSA spying, Waco, refusal to disseminate information after numerous court orders as directed under freedom of information act etc etc.. So you say we we should stand behind whatever the justice department says....LOL. Seems they are even more guilt of lying and cover ups then she is.
    Tom Voloshen , 2015-09-12 09:43:42
    For almost all of us when using the company's equipment our emails become the property of the company. All mail on a company server is backed up for a period of time and it is the responsibility of the user to insure critical Emails are saved or archived properly to prevent them from being deleted thru periodic routine house keeping by the IT department. Being that all emails become company property and subject to review at any time by the company it seems quite obvious this was unacceptable to the Clinton's and could lead to problems similar to the Nixon fiasco on which Hillary cut her teeth just out of school. She as arrogant as she is decided she could ignore the the rules and keep all her communications to herself. She thinks if she says she did no wrong long enough people will give up. They usually do. While that still won't make her right it certainly makes her someone not to be trusted.
    wavigaru , 2015-09-12 13:35:57
    Here is the deal folks.... This person wants to be president and have the responsibilities that go along with the office. If she can't even be competent with the little data she was entrusted why should she be given more responsibility? Because she is a woman?

    Why are we rewarding incompetence? Obama was re-elected despite the incredibly low labor usage, declining wage growth, and skyrocketing health care costs. He made it his mission to provide "affordable" care with the ACA, yet my rates doubled up to $500/month (compare this with my ever decreasing car insurance rates… only $25/month from Insurance Panda now). Yet we voted him in for 8 years? And we want to elect Hillary?

    I am sorry but when you do a poor job at any job they don't promote you unless they just want to go out of business. Also what this woman did was a crime. Nixon was impeached for less, Edward Snowden did the same thing and is in hiding in Russia and the Government won't let him come home, and General Petraeus was forced to resign from his position in the CIA yet this woman is not facing any charges so far and is running for the highest office in the land. What is wrong with this picture?

    chiefwiley andthensome , 2015-09-12 15:35:38
    Read the entire section under 5 FAM 443.5. Nothing in the system is considered "personal" and there is no expectation of privacy expected or granted. Cherry picking or rephrasing a rule that anybody can read in two minutes is also no way to go about your day.
    Every email has a sender and a receiver. Usually multiple servers are involved. Every email in the system is recorded at numerous points, even if deleted at the source or destination. A day or two with a talented engineer and a high speed search engine would recover just about all of it. No warrant would be required for anything with a government connection. -- only the will to do it or an order from the appropriate judge.
    DracoFerret , 2015-09-12 14:53:31
    a corrupt woman with such poor judgment and a Tory attitude toward the working class should not be president. No wonder Sanders is rising in the polls.

    Let her go back to Arkansas

    makaio Thebirdsareback , 2015-09-12 16:41:21
    To Clinton's supporters ... here's a nice summary of everything she's done wrong on this subject, most of it intentional with no respect for most anyone.

    http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2937114-155/lowry-how-hillary-can-really-come

    makaio nolashea , 2015-09-12 21:16:25
    She has purposely circumvented maintaining public records, dragged her feet in providing records as required, and botched public attempts to claim her actions have been aboveboard ... because they haven't been.

    However legal or illegal, unbelievable gullibility is needed to assert she's done nothing wrong.

    She's trying to play us, people of all political beliefs. And despite notable executive and media support, she's largely failing, as both public responses and her reactions have demonstrated.

    Woodenarrow123 , 2015-09-12 17:46:59
    Another biased article that fails to include the context of the allegations (that Clinton had the right to delete emails) and consequently it provides a misleading impression.

    This is NO vindication for Hillary Clinton - it is a defence filing in a case where the Judge Emmet Sullivan has already decided at an earlier hearing that Clinton has violated Government Policy with regard to the handling of emails.

    As a result of his decision he ordered the State Department to tell the FBI to go through all the emails (that are recovered - assuming they can be recovered), both business and personal, on her home brew server to see if Hillary deleted any emails she should have handed over to him as part of the FOI case.

    Now Clinton's people are up in arms - Why? Is it because she deleted embarrassing emails regarding Benghazi? Is it because the FBI (having been instructed by a Federal Judge) might end up reading emails relating to dodgy dealings at the Clinton Foundation?

    In the deeply Politicised US Civil Service both the State Department and the Justice Department are objecting to the Judge's decision and are attempting to limit the inquiry.

    For those that naively (or perhaps because they support Hillary) believe this is simply a political attack by GOP opponents - It is worth remembering the FBI investigation was launch by the Inspector General and decision to have ALL emails examined was made by a member of the Judiciary (appointed ironically by Bill Clinton).

    Both parties cited above are independent of the GOP.

    Also for the record Hillary did NOT delete the emails at the time - She deleted them some 18 months after leaving office (according to her lawyer some time after October last year) and AFTER several investigations had been launched.

    If Hillary Clinton deleted info relating to matters under investigation after an investigation was launched (destroying evidence) then that is a felony offence.

    Hillary understood the seriousness of the question when asked did she wipe the server - That is why she replied along these lines: With a cloth or something.

    Again this is no vindication of Clinton - Instead it is a lame defence to a serious charge to a Federal Judge who has already decided in the matter.

    pattbaa , 2015-09-12 20:10:23
    What do you Brits know about the "Fast and Furious" scandal in the Dept. of Justice ? ; to have a perspective of how outrageous this was , consider this hypothetical situation.

    In Manhattan , a narcotics squad interdicts a gang of drug dealers , a "shoot-out" erupts, and one of the squad members is murdered. The firearm that was used to commit the murder is seized , and an investigation reveals the "Source" of the murder weapon was-- the Office of the District Attorney on New York County!! ( Manhattan)

    The D- A's Office was supplying drug criminals with firearms?; would never happen you might say. But that's EXACTLY what happened in the "Fast and Furious" scandal when Eric Holder was Attorney-General; the ATF division of the U. S. Dept. of Justice was selling firearms to members of Mexican drug cartels , and a Border Agent was murdered by a weapon supplied by the ATF division of the Justice Dept.

    So much for the Dept. of Justice under the current President. The present A-G , Loretta Lynch , is loyal to the President and the Democratic Party , but not loyal to "Justice". Report

    sour_mash pattbaa , 2015-09-12 22:03:02
    What do you know about Fast and Furious? Here is a good read for anyone that cares about facts or details:

    http://fortune.com/2012/06/27/the-truth-about-the-fast-and-furious-scandal /

    Ladislav Din , 2015-09-12 22:06:29
    Hillary in her own words:

    "I believe in an open, transparent government that is accountable to the people. Excessive government secrecy harms democratic governance and can weaken our system of checks and balances by shielding officials from oversight and inviting misconduct or error. ... To me, openness and accountability are not platitudes _ they are essential elements of our democracy."

    -- Hillary Clinton, May 2008 in response to Sunshine Week survey of presidential candidates.

    http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/clinton-tells-sunshine-week-shes-committed-to-restoring-open-government-56932142.html

    John Bluebeard , 2015-09-13 02:11:34
    When are these extreme right wing terrorists like NPR going to stop saying that Clinton IS NOT exactly telling the truth? http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/09/11/439456567/fact-check-hillary-clintons-email-defense-is-a-mixed-bag

    Perhaps it is time to cut off all gov't funding of NPR. We all know the obvious truth-- Clinton has told the truth. Report

    Carl Stewart John Bluebeard , 2015-09-13 15:51:45
    Well, it is refreshing to see someone with a sense of humor about this. Thanks, Mr Bluebeard
    A_Cappella , 2015-09-13 14:44:10
    Hillary just needs to lie the U.S. into a very costly war in terms of American and indigenous deaths, trillions of dollars and significant more destabilization in the Mideast.

    That will mollify the Republicans.

    CitizenCarrier , 2015-09-15 00:22:50
    The State Department guidelines for emails had prohibited use of a private server since 2005.

    Yet she still keeps saying that what she did was allowed.

    Hillary's State Department fired U.S. Ambassador Scott Gration (Kenya) in part for using private emails to evade agency rules.

    Hillary said the emails she deleted included private ones between her and her husband. Her husband's spokesman, within days, announced surprise at that, since Bill Clinton has only sent two emails in his entire life...and not to Hillary.

    She is a liar. And a felon in violation of the Espionage Act.

    [Jul 14, 2016] Gaius Publius: Picking Up James Comeys Pieces - What He Did, What He Should Have Done Why

    Notable quotes:
    "... Wheeler thinks Comey is covering for Attorney General Loretta Lynch, his boss, whose reputation for impartiality was damaged by her recent tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton. Wheeler writes, "By overstepping the proper role of the FBI here, Comey surely gave Lynch cover - now she can back his decision without looking like Bill Clinton convinced her to do so on the tarmac." ..."
    "... That's the money line right there. Just as back in the 50's, all of this is based on simplistic moralistic arguments concerning intent to harm the state. HRC virtually embodies the modern state, and thus, her intent cannot and will not ever ..."
    "... I agree absolutely. And I would add that the "state" now a days is far more of an ideological monolith than 60 or even 40 years ago. Any "serious" person in the upper echelons of the US governing class believes in the all security state, and whatever is necessary to maintain it. ..."
    "... If Daniel Ellsberg had done today what he did in the '70's, he would be in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison, and there would be NONE in the high reaches of the US governing class opposed to this outcome. ..."
    "... Or by Exxon and JP Morgan so they could get even more details on how to make a fortune off our tragic foreign policy. http://www.ibtimes.com/campaign-2016-hillary-clinton-pitched-iraq-business-opportunity-us-corporations-2121999 ..."
    "... The government tries to stuff this hero/traitor dichotomy up our butts but Manning, Sterling, and Drake are human rights defenders. Manning defended our right to information freedom. Sterling defended our human right to peace by denouncing illegal war propaganda. Drake defended our human right to privacy from illegal NSA surveillance. ..."
    "... Chelsea Manning's trial was a classic case for Francis Boyle's civil resistance framework. The issue was not only information freedom but denunciation of war crimes. Under federal law and the Army Field Manual, disobedience was Manning's legal duty. But we heard this drumbeat of he wouldn't dare, he wouldn't dare… The implication was, he'd be punished more harshly for explicitly complying with the federal law of war crimes. ..."
    "... Human rights defenders like Sakharov, Sharansky, and Slepak helped reform the USSR out of existence. Manning, Sterling, Drake, and the ones who come after them will do the same for all of us Americans trapped in the USA. ..."
    "... I like the way you think. Those who defend human rights by pointing fingers at the state for its transgressions are considered traitors, while those who embody the state, yet violate its laws are exonerated. Isn't that pretty close to placing the state above the law – a police state? ..."
    "... Yeah depending on to whom she was trading our government secrets for, it doesn't really matter that it was (for example) through intermediaries like Blumenthal in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and not out of loyalty to a foreign country. There is still the potential that she did things that constituted espionage. ..."
    "... Hillary's email debacle and subsequent lack of prosecution is an important milestone on the road to widespread recognition that America has become a third world banana republic. This has undermined belief in the system, credibility of government, and ultimately the global empire. ..."
    "... Four months after Clinton left the State Dept, she was still keeping her emails at home, in violation of a requirement to turn them over for official archiving. Had it not been for Guccifer, she would never have turned them over. ..."
    "... The commenter is looking at Comey's unusual public statement through the lens of DOJ group-think makes it seem driven by "the need for absolute transparency." This is how they pass the buck in that organization. Comey's statement makes perfect sense inside the DOJ - his assertion that "no reasonable prosecutor" would file charges only makes sense to a careerist to whom pleasing their superiors is the only "sensible" and "reasonable" behavior, and to whom actual justice is a mere abstraction. ..."
    "... Apparently at the DOJ, as with Antonin Scalia*, the law is not about right and wrong, innocence or guilt. Its about CYA and protecting the prerogatives of the state. ..."
    "... Read Bill Moushey's 10-part "Win at All Costs" series on the federal conviction mill, and you would not even want an "AUSA" living in your neighborhood, for fear of being swept up in their mindless criminal dragnet. ..."
    "... As a prosecutor of 32 years successful legal practice, let me just say: "You're wrong." The only mens rea ..."
    "... This sort of violation is the easiest thing in the world to prove to a judge or jury, and I've personally taken scores of unanimous jury verdicts involving General Intent crimes. Petraeus was easily convicted of this violation, and many men and women have been cashiered and/or imprisoned for it, especially by the Obama Justice Department. No Ken Starr crusade required - the evidence is beyond dispute ..."
    "... My brother is in the service with a security clearance and they are all furious. They said what she did is illegal and if anyone else did it they would be prosecuted . ..."
    "... The Clintons are grifters and it would not surprise me if most of those deleted emails involved starting wars in other countries, TPP and scamming for the foundation. The claim she was too stupid to know what she was doing was wrong is ludicrous. If she wins the presidency we need a congress full of tea partiers so she cannot enact anything. ..."
    "... The retired LTG who was vetted by Trump for veep also said if it was him, he would be doing jail time for what Hill did. I'm sure that's why Trump would love to have this guy as an attack dog on the campaign trail. ..."
    "... I have a cousin who is a commander in the Navy with Southern Command who nearly never talks publicly about "politics" or much that is in the media. He speaks with his near family and very close friends, but widely or on any sort of social media, no way. He is irate about Clinton not being prosecuted. He sees this as an issue of justice and national security and is very public about his views. I asked him why he was willing to be so public with his views in this instance and he explained it is based on the seriousness of the crimes and the undermining of all he believes he is serving for. ..."
    "... I used to be a USAFA nuclear launch officer. One of my fellow officers (unthinkingly) brought a crew bag into the classified vault where we were processing a rev change (a periodic change to procedures, methods and/or targets). One of the sheets from the old rev slipped into his crew bag. He took the crew bag into the (occupi