What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

For the love of God, do not elect Hilary Clinton next election. (2 Viewers)

Are we still pretending having a lack lusterly (yeah, I made that up) secured server to do top secret work is still no big deal?? :oldunsure:
Commish, you called it on the security issue.

There will be another news drop after this once they dig into the data and the details.
It wasn't exactly a Nostradamus moment....I've had better predictions in my past ;) I know a thing or two about this sort of stuff. Again, making this a Hillary issue minimizes the overall problem that there aren't explicit laws against this sort of behavior. It's mind boggling really. As to Hillary, I'd be shocked if things weren't completely destroyed. She's had plenty of time to take care of it......we'll see.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OH F!!@ YEAH.

Jeff Zeleny ‏@jeffzeleny 8m8 minutes ago

.@HillaryClinton will turn over her private email server and thumb driver to Justice Department, spokesman Nick Merrill tells @CNN.
You mean the drives she's probably already had scraped cleaned and written over (DoD style) at least 7 times? THOSE drives?

How convenient now that there is most likely nothing on them.
A BCWipe a day will make your problems go away.
Even this is recoverable. Once inspected they will be able to tell if things were removed with the intent on never getting them back or if it were a simple "purge" as a normal person would know how to do.

 
The Countless Crimes of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now Hillary finally hands over her server—after it's been professionally wiped clean

After years of holding herself above the law, telling lie after lie, and months of flat-out obstruction, HIllary Clinton has finally produced to the FBI her server and three thumb drives. Apparently, the server has been professionally wiped clean of any useable information, and the thumb drives contain only what she selectively culled. Myriad criminal offenses apply to this conduct. Anyone with knowledge of government workings has known from inception that Hillary’s communications necessarily would contain classified and national security related information. Thanks to the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community, it is now beyond dispute that she had ultra-Top Secret information and more that should never have left the State Department. Equal to Ms. Clinton’s outrageous misconduct is that of the entire federal law enforcement community. It has long chosen to be deliberately blind to these flagrant infractions of laws designed to protect national security—laws for which other people, even reporters, have endured atrocious investigations, prosecutions, and some served years in prison for comparatively minor infractions.

During the same years that Hillary was communicating about national security and world affairs off the grid, the Department of Justice has had no qualms threatening news reporters and prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act. It’s high time for a special prosecutor to be named to conduct a full investigation into Ms. Clinton’s likely commission of multiple felonies, including a conspiracy with Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and possibly others, to violate multiple laws.

It’s high time for a special prosecutor to be named to conduct a full investigation into Ms. Clinton’s likely commission of multiple felonies, including a conspiracy with Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and possibly others, to violate multiple laws. While the FBI and Department of Justice have willfully ignored Hillary Clinton’s outrageous conduct, they didn’t hesitate a minute to investigate and prosecute former CIA Director and national hero, General Petraeus. He was just tarred, feathered and ridden out of the CIA on a rail for sharing some information (his own notebook) with his biographer who was both in the military and had a top secret clearance. Yet, Petraeus did not have a secret server set up to house his classified and top secret information or digital satellite imagery; he destroyed nothing; and, there was no “leak.” But that’s not all.

During the same years that Hillary was communicating about national security and world affairs off the grid, the Department of Justice has had no qualms threatening news reporters and prosecuting whistleblowers under the Espionage Act.

To hell with the First Amendment and Supreme Court precedent, even the New York Times reported that this administration prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers for “espionage” than all prior administrations put together.

Remember Fox news reporter James Rosen? The Holder Justice Department not only seized his emails immediately and without his knowledge, they suggested he was a criminal “co-conspirator” in a leak case—under the Espionage Act—which carries a ten-year term of imprisonment. And they quickly indicted former House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senator Menendez on extremely stretched or tortured views of vague criminal statutes and factual allegations of conduct that may well not be criminal. Senator Menendez can’t vacation with his best friend but Hillary Clinton and her “Foundation” can accept millions of dollars from foreign governments seeking to curry her favor. Yet there’s been no criminal investigation of Ms. Clinton and her cabal? They couldn’t seize her server months ago while it contained all the emails? They couldn’t put a stop to it from the beginning?

Oh right, I forgot. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Ms. Clinton had declined to allow an Inspector General at the State Department during her entire tenure—so there was no internal oversight. And oh yes, her name is Clinton, and she has long deemed herself above the law. The rules only apply to everyone else. But wait, there’s still more. The current Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, Leslie Caldwell, and her Chief of the Corporate Fraud Section, Andrew Weissmann, destroyed Arthur Andersen and its 85,000 jobs on unfounded charges of obstruction of justice for destroying documents the Supreme Court said it had no legal obligation to keep. The laws governing Ms. Clinton’s obligations are clear. Nonetheless, they haven’t even convened a grand jury to look into Ms. Clinton’s longstanding assertion that she wiped her server clean—of documents she was legally required to keep?

On top of that, there can be little doubt that Eric Holder and other high-ranking FBI and DOJ officials themselves wrote Ms. Clinton at Clintonemail.com—not to mention countless communications with the President and “All His Muses”—Counter-terrrorism advisor Lisa Monaco, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and then White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler (not to mention Valerie Jarrett)—about Benghazi and all other top secret and classified issues. The DOJ hasn’t subpoenaed the emails from any of the recipients—or the internet service providers? Or looked for them on the backup government servers of the accounts of all the recipients? And the State Department still today is making statements defending her? Not only did Ms. Clinton deliberately demonstrate disdain for the Federal Records Act and nullify the protections of the Freedom of Information Act, she violated the Espionage Act by having information relating to the national defense on her server at all. And her deliberate disregard for national security made the job of all hackers that much easier.

As Andy McCarthy explained it in the National Review: In fact, the espionage act—which regulates the handling of intelligence by government officials — does not refer to classified information; it refers to information relating to the national defense. Moreover, it does not prohibit solely the transmission of such information; it criminalizes the communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; causing communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; permitting the removal of that information from its proper place of custody through gross negligence; permitting that information to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed through gross negligence; or, failing to make a prompt report to superiors in the government when an official knows that the information has been removed from its proper place of custody, communicated to someone not authorized to have it, lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed. See also Title 18 United States Code Section 2071 (prohibiting destruction of records).

The Inspector General for the Intelligence Community has advised Congress that even in the few emails he has reviewed, there was top secret information—in the form of digital satellite imagery and signals intelligence. Regardless of how it was marked, and no doubt Ms. Clinton will blame others, even a neophyte would have known that such information was of the highest secrecy. Not surprisingly, the first seeds of Ms. Clinton’s deflecting the blame to underlings were sown by her protectors in the State Department itself last night.

Aside from that, her knowledge and intent do not matter under some of these statutes and are indefensible under others. General Petraeus certainly had no criminal intent, and neither did any of the reporters.

There’s still more. The countless false statements are crimes under 18 United States Code Section 1001—both by Ms. Clinton to Congress (“no classified information”) and in writing by Cheryl Mills to the State Department and just filed with Judge Sullivan—in which she states: “On matters pertaining to the conduct of government business, it was her practice to use the officials’ government email accounts.” We already know that Ms. Clinton used her personal server exclusively. Title 18 United States Code Section 1001 makes it a crime for anyone to “knowingly and willfully” falsify, conceal, or cover up “a material fact,” or make “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or misrepresentation,” etc. Countless people are convicted felons under this statute—some for offenses that would never occur to anyone even to be a crime. And these are just a few of the possible statutes that it would appear to any federal prosecutor that she and her corrupt cabal violated. As Lt. Col. Ralph Peters had the guts to say last night on FoxNews, “Hillary Clinton is a criminal.” Military heroes who have risked their lives for this country have gone to prison for less. The Department of Justice’s selective prosecutions have been well-document. Its favoritism and targeting practices must end.

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

- As this revelation became an issue became a controversy it has now become a political issue.

- I think where this issue goes next is: 1. demands for a special prosecutor, 2. the search for the actual server or drives holding the data where Hillary actually pulled her emails for responding to the request from State in October 2014, and 3. the investigation into the handling of classified data on an unauthorized server or locations extending to past aides and associates of Hillary Clinton.

- And now also 4. Investigation into violations of Espionage Act, because Hillary & Co. transferred data relating to national defense (Top Secret).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is from March:

How Hillary Clinton Could Be Targeted Under The Espionage Act...

It remains to be seen whether Clinton could be found to have violated the Espionage Act, a law that the Obama administration has used repeatedly against whistleblowers. The relevant section of the law says that it is a crime to retain classified material. Clinton, for her part, said Tuesday that she did not send classified information from the personal address, and that the server she used was protected by the secret service and suffered no security breaches.

The Justice Department leveled just that charge against NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake and James Hitselberger, a former Navy linguist who sent classified documents to an archive at the Hoover Institution. Former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee also was infamously charged with 10 counts of retaining classified data for storing information on tapes.

There are two big hurdles to making such a determination in Clinton's case, said Steven Aftergood, who heads the Federation of Americans Scientists' Project on Government Secrecy. Officials have said it does not appear as if Clinton discussed classified matters over email, and the secretary of state has broad latitude to decide what is classified.

"Any email that the secretary of state sends is at least sensitive, and would be of interest to many foreign intelligence agencies, but that's not the same as it's classified or that mishandling is punishable under the Espionage Act," Aftergood said.

That would make Clinton's case different from that of former Gen. David Petraeus, who handed obviously secret material to his biographer, and recently pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of mishandling classified information.

Aftergood thought there was "zero chance" that Clinton would face a prosecutor based on what is currently known, but he allowed that it was possible if the material is later determined to be classified.

"I think there's a question about how the selection of emails was made for transferring to the State Department, and what might not have been transferred," he said. "I think we shouldn't be asked to trust Secretary Clinton when the whole arrangement is so irregular."

...Since Clinton never did turn over all of her communications, and only her staffers were involved in deciding what material to give to the government, it may be impossible to ever tell if she broke the law.

"We ought to know, and as long as we don't know either way, then there's going to be some lingering doubt," Aftergood said.

Indeed, Gowdy insisted that a third party should be involved to try and erase any lingering doubt.

"I see no choice but for Secretary Clinton to turn her server over to a neutral, detached third-party arbiter who can determine which documents should be public and which should remain private," Gowdy said. "Secretary Clinton alone created this predicament, but she alone does not get to determine its outcome."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/10/hillary-clinton-email_n_6841218.html

Again that was from 5 months ago and the conditions mentioned have come to fruition.

- Although the FBI could have more than we know, according to WaPo Hillary has still not turned over the server which she actually pulled data from for the request from State.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Puzzle Time. - Open question:

- WHY would Hillary hold on to a totally blank server for 9 months?

The State Dept asked for the data in October 2014

Hillary (or her campaign) claims she deleted the data in December 2014.

March 2015 it was revealed she had stashed away all her public records onto an unauthorized server.

Right at that time she said she wanted the people to see all her email, but she stated, "The server shall remain private."

August 2015: Faced with the threat of subpoena or warrant she turns over a server that has been blank apparently since 2013.

- Why hold on to that blank server and refuse to turn it over when she said she had already deleted everything?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Puzzle Time. - Open question:

- WHY would Hillary hold on to a totally blank server for 9 months?

The State Dept asked for the data in October 2014

Hillary (or her campaign) claims she deleted the data in December 2014.

March 2015 it was revealed she had stashed away all her public records onto an unauthorized server.

Right at that time she said she wanted the people to see all her email, but she stated, "The server shall remain private."

August 2015: Faced with the threat of subpoena or warrant she turns over a server that has been blank apparently since 2013.

- Why hold on to that blank server and refuse to turn it over when she said she had already deleted everything?
I'll take "Things that are still being professionally wiped" for $1000, Alex.

 
- As this revelation became an issue became a controversy it has now become a political issue.

- I think where this issue goes next is: 1. demands for a special prosecutor, 2. the search for the actual server or drives holding the data where Hillary actually pulled her emails for responding to the request from State in October 2014, and 3. the investigation into the handling of classified data on an unauthorized server or locations extending to past aides and associates of Hillary Clinton.

- And now also 4. Investigation into violations of Espionage Act, because Hillary & Co. transferred data relating to national defense (Top Secret).
:lmao:

Stop it. You're killing me here.

:lmao:

 
Thankfully, Diane Feinstein has finished her investigation:

“There has been a lot of press coverage recently of allegations regarding Secretary Clinton’s email. Unfortunately, much of the coverage has missed key points.

“First, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information were written by Secretary Clinton.

“The questions are whether she received emails with classified information in them, and if so, whether information in those emails should have been classified in the first place. Those questions have yet to be answered. However, it is clear that Secretary Clinton did not write emails containing classified information.

“Second, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information include any markings that indicate classified content.

“As someone who regularly reviews classified material, I can say that those documents are always clearly marked as containing classified information. Every official who writes classified material, whether in email or on paper, must mark the information as classified. They would also be required to use a separate classified email system to transmit the information. The emails identified did not contain these markings.

 
McClatchy has had the best reporting on this issue:

Classified data found on emails in May; Clinton camp slow to protect secretsState Department officials delivered safe to her attorney’s office in July

Was data inadequately secured for weeks? Months? Years?

Denver firm delivers empty server to Justice Department

WASHINGTON

U.S. officials first found classified information among Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails last May, far earlier than known publicly, and it’s not clear what she and her lawyer did over the following weeks to fully secure the sensitive data, people familiar with federal inquiries into the matter said Thursday.

The inspectors general for the U.S. Intelligence Community and the State Department have disclosed over the last week that at least five emails, routed through a private server that Clinton used throughout her tenure as secretary of state, contained classified information, including two emails whose content is now deemed to be “Top Secret.”

Now newly emerging details about Clinton’s handling of the more than 30,000 official emails stored on the server could underscore concerns about whether she adequately guarded state secrets over a six-year period.

The recent situation provoked enough concern that in early July, State Department officials finally delivered a safe to the Washington law office of Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, to secure a thumb drive he held containing all of the emails, according to the individuals with knowledge of the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to its sensitivity.

6 weeks Time span from first discovery of classified data on Clinton's email to when it was put in a government safe

In an attempt to quell the controversy that has weakened her leading bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, Clinton announced Tuesday she would turn over to the Justice Department the thumb drive and a server that has stored her email traffic since she left her cabinet post in early 2013. On Wednesday, a Colorado technology company that operated the server transferred it from a site in New Jersey to Justice Department custody, the officials said.

As federal investigators have been told previously, the server is no longer active and had been erased of all data, the officials said. Clinton turned over all of her official emails to the State Department on Dec. 5, 2012. She said at a news conference in March that she simultaneously deleted more than 31,000 of personal emails. Clinton did not receive a federal directive to retain the emails until early March, the officials said.

In a sworn affidavit signed last Saturday in response to a public records lawsuit, Clinton disclosed that a key State Department confidante, Huma Abedin, also sent emails over an account on her private server.

It’s not been disclosed whether the Denver firm that managed the server, Platte River Networks, operated a backup server that also stored the files, and if so, whether it too was wiped clean. Company officials have declined to comment.

On Aug. 6, the thumb drive was transferred a few blocks from Kendall’s office at the prestigious Washington law firm of Williams & Connolly, to a secure facility in the Justice Department, the officials said.

Left unclear was what, if any, special precautions were taken since May 22, when intelligence officials first declared one or more of Clinton’s emails to be classified, to ensure the data was secure. It also appeared likely that Kendall first took possession of the thumb drive in December of last year.

"None of the emails alleged to contain classified information include any markings that indicate classified content. As someone who regularly reviews classified material, I can say that those documents are always clearly marked." Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California

Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, wrote Kendall in late July to inquire about what precautions were taken to secure the thumb drive. A committee spokeswoman declined to comment on whether Kendall had responded to the inquiry.

Clinton campaign officials also declined comment.

State Department officials have released three batches of Clinton emails since late May, including nearly 300 messages relating to a Sept. 11, 2012 attack on U.S. diplomatic and CIA compounds in Benghazi, Libya, that cost the lives of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others. Prior to the release of each batch, each email went through a classification review.

But it was apparently not until late June or early July that Clinton’s team consulted with the State Department about whether greater security was needed to safeguard any classified information on the emails.

With revelations about the emails continuing to flow, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee arose to Clinton’s defense on Thursday.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California issued a statement emphasizing that none of the emails was marked as classified at the time Clinton received them and that “it is clear that Secretary Clinton did not write emails containing classified information.”

Yet to be determined, she said, is “whether information in those emails should have been classified in the first place.”
A few things here:

- One of the issues that has arisen is that the reason so much classified material does not have markings is that by using this system Hillary circumvented the entire classification system. Typically persons who handle this kind of material are trained to recognize sensitive material and they then route it for marking before it can ever leave an authorized server. Hillary apparently avoided this crucial step in every instance.

- Feinstein is working with paper, she has not seen the original electronic copy of any of these emails as they were just obtained on Kendall's thumb drive (supposedly). It's possible these TS materials were indeed marked initially but that the markings were later removed which would be a crime in itself.

- If the blank server was wiped and repurposed in 2013 and the data migrated as reported by WaPo that latter act would be a crime in itself as well.

- If unauthorized persons continued to hold the classified material, we're talking the entire cache of a SOS's data here, say by the Denver vendor or Teneo employees, that would be a crime.

- The special safe described about Kendall is a separate issue, apparently State and the intel agencies will let authorized persons hold classified data at home if they are set up with a specially designed safe, apparently Kendall had this thumb drive a long time outside normal protocols.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So it seems from Feinstein's statement that Hillary's team is fully moving forward with throwing those around her to the wolves and perhaps to jail.
Maybe, it does seem like some kind of trial balloon. It also seems to put Abedin and maybe some random IT guy squarely in the middle between Hillary and trouble. Remains to be seen if they go along with that.

 
...What, then, does all this mean for Hillary Clinton? There is no doubt that she, or someone on her State Department staff, violated federal law by putting TOP SECRET//SI information on an unclassified system. That it was Hillary’s private, offsite server makes the case even worse from a security viewpoint. Claims that they “didn’t know” such information was highly classified do not hold water and are irrelevant. It strains belief that anybody with clearances didn’t recognize that NSA information, which is loaded with classification markings, was signals intelligence, or SIGINT. It’s possible that the classified information found in Clinton’s email trove wasn’t marked as such. But if that classification notice was omitted, it wasn’t the U.S. intelligence community that took such markings away. Moreover, anybody holding security clearances has already assumed the responsibility for handling it properly.

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton had no authority to disseminate intelligence-community information on her own, neither could she make it less highly classified (a process termed “downgrading” in the spy trade) without asking permission first.

It is a very big deal and less-connected people who do this sort of thing ruin their lives, as any IC counterintelligence official can attest. During my NSA time, I saw junior personnel terminated for relatively minor infractions of security regulations.

...Underlying all this is the question of why Hillary Clinton decided to employ her own private email and server to handle so much of her official State Department business. This is, to say the least, highly irregular—not to mention a violation of numerous U.S. government rules and regulations—so there had to be a compelling reason to do this. What was it?

... The FBI is now on the case and one hopes they will exercise due diligence in their investigation of what may be a serious leak of classified information, made worse by the fact that Clinton’s personal server was wholly unencrypted for three months, leaving it wide open to exploitation by foreign intelligence services. ...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/12/the-spy-satellite-secrets-in-hillary-s-emails.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Next up:

FredZeppelin ‏@FredZeppelin12 5h5 hours ago

If Hillary didn't use her server for classified State Department emails, then what server DID she use for classified emails?
This very simple question kinda gets to the heart of Hillary's recklessness. She's the secretary of state and her only email address is private and unsecure. Email seems like a pretty vital form of communication these days. She had over 55K emails that she turned in (no telling how many more she deleted) related to her job. I'd imagine that the SOS would be getting emailed details all the time that aren't for everyone's eyes. They didn't have to be labeled TOP SECRET for her to know somethings are classified. She just didn't give a ####.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Next up:

FredZeppelin ‏@FredZeppelin12 5h5 hours ago

If Hillary didn't use her server for classified State Department emails, then what server DID she use for classified emails?
This very simple question kinda gets to the heart of Hillary's recklessness. She's the secretary of state and her only email address is private and unsecure. Email seems like a pretty vital form of communication these days. She had over 55K emails that she turned (no telling how many more she deleted) related to her job. I'd imagine that the SOS would be getting emailed details all the time that aren't for everyone's eyes. They didn't have to be labeled TOP SECRET for her to know somethings are classified. She just didn't give a ####.
It's reckless but also deceitful.

it's been a bit of a shell game, watch the server.... the server doesn't matter, the question is where is the data. Now it turns out the data was migrated in June 2013. Where is it now? It could have been with the vendor and maybe the FBI has it now. Or maybe it's on drives that the vendor did not receive and it's somewhere else.

It was also at the time that Blumenthal got hacked, which caused all this moving of data around in the first place out of concern it was not secure back then. Hillary was doing this all on her own, never brought in State or the intel agencies. She did not even have a professional team on it until June 2013. The first three months of her tenure at SOS the data was entirely unencrypted.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thankfully, Diane Feinstein has finished her investigation:

“There has been a lot of press coverage recently of allegations regarding Secretary Clinton’s email. Unfortunately, much of the coverage has missed key points.

“First, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information were written by Secretary Clinton.

“The questions are whether she received emails with classified information in them, and if so, whether information in those emails should have been classified in the first place. Those questions have yet to be answered. However, it is clear that Secretary Clinton did not write emails containing classified information.

“Second, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information include any markings that indicate classified content.

“As someone who regularly reviews classified material, I can say that those documents are always clearly marked as containing classified information. Every official who writes classified material, whether in email or on paper, must mark the information as classified. They would also be required to use a separate classified email system to transmit the information. The emails identified did not contain these markings.
She forgot a few things here. Even if classified info wasn't marked it is every person's responsibility (of those who handle classified information) to classify information and treat it appropriately. And, in the case of the satellite data, which was obviously sensitive information, why wasn't this reported and the unsecure container (Hillary's responsibility, BTW) turned over to be properly secured?

As they say ignorance is no excuse. She set it up knowing that this was a very likely outcome. She gets the consequences.

 
Thankfully, Diane Feinstein has finished her investigation:

“There has been a lot of press coverage recently of allegations regarding Secretary Clinton’s email. Unfortunately, much of the coverage has missed key points.

“First, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information were written by Secretary Clinton.

“The questions are whether she received emails with classified information in them, and if so, whether information in those emails should have been classified in the first place. Those questions have yet to be answered. However, it is clear that Secretary Clinton did not write emails containing classified information.

“Second, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information include any markings that indicate classified content.

“As someone who regularly reviews classified material, I can say that those documents are always clearly marked as containing classified information. Every official who writes classified material, whether in email or on paper, must mark the information as classified. They would also be required to use a separate classified email system to transmit the information. The emails identified did not contain these markings.
She forgot a few things here. Even if classified info wasn't marked it is every person's responsibility (of those who handle classified information) to classify information and treat it appropriately. And, in the case of the satellite data, which was obviously sensitive information, why wasn't this reported and the unsecure container (Hillary's responsibility, BTW) turned over to be properly secured?

As they say ignorance is no excuse. She set it up knowing that this was a very likely outcome. She gets the consequences.
When you don't feel the rules apply to you why would you worry about consequesnces?

 
otello said:
Thankfully, Diane Feinstein has finished her investigation:

“There has been a lot of press coverage recently of allegations regarding Secretary Clinton’s email. Unfortunately, much of the coverage has missed key points.

“First, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information were written by Secretary Clinton.

“The questions are whether she received emails with classified information in them, and if so, whether information in those emails should have been classified in the first place. Those questions have yet to be answered. However, it is clear that Secretary Clinton did not write emails containing classified information.

“Second, none of the emails alleged to contain classified information include any markings that indicate classified content.

“As someone who regularly reviews classified material, I can say that those documents are always clearly marked as containing classified information. Every official who writes classified material, whether in email or on paper, must mark the information as classified. They would also be required to use a separate classified email system to transmit the information. The emails identified did not contain these markings.

The same Dianne who went on TV in CA & told the world they had a shoe print from the Night Stalker. He promptly threw his shoes off the Golden Gate bridge. Yes, she is an elected official.
 
FBI Said to Examine Whether Hillary Clinton E-Mail Was Backed UpAn official says it's one of the next logical steps in the agency's investigation into whether the former secretary of state's private e-mail account handled classified information.

The FBI is seeking to determine whether data from Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's private e-mail server may still exist elsewhere, a U.S. official said.

After acquiring the server on Wednesday, agents are attempting to determine whether e-mails may have been backed up on another machine, said the official, who asked for anonymity. The official said it's one of the next logical steps in the agency's investigation into whether the former secretary of state's private e-mail account handled classified information.

Barbara Wells, an attorney for Platte River Networks, a Denver-based company that has managed Clinton's private e-mail since 2013, said in a phone interview Thursday that the server turned over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation “is blank and does not contain any useful data.” But Wells added that the data on Clinton's server was migrated to another server that still exists. She ended the interview when questioned further, declining to say whether the data still exists on that other server and who has possession of it.

Subsequent calls and e-mails to Wells and the Clinton campaign went unanswered.

Justice Department spokesman Patrick Rodenbush declined in an e-mail to comment on whether it is aware of the other server and is trying to access it.

“The data on the old server is not now available on any server or device that is under Platte River’s control,” Wells said during the interview.

The suggestion that some of the data Clinton said she erased from her private e-mail server might still exist came as the Democrat turned over her server to government officials, who are investigating whether classified material might have been improperly exposed. Clinton and some of her closest aides used private e-mail accounts while she was the nation's top diplomat.

Clinton’s server was held in a secure data center operated by “a third-party” in New Jersey when it was handed over to the FBI on Wednesday, said Wells. She declined to identify the third party.

What the Server Might RevealThe FBI’s examination of the private e-mail server used by Clinton could yield useful information, such as private communications thought to be deleted and evidence as to whether the device was hacked.

Or it could turn up nothing.

Michael Kortan, a spokesman for the FBI, declined to comment.

The outcome of the FBI’s forensic analysis of the server will depend on what steps were taken to delete and overwrite data on it, according to former law enforcement investigators and cybersecurity specialists.

“Most people don’t understand really what it takes to actually delete things from a computer permanently,” said Peter Toren, a former computer crimes prosecutor for the Justice Department. “The FBI has had a great deal of training and they’re very good about recovering data from computers that people think have been erased or deleted.”

The FBI took possession of the server on Wednesday after the intelligence community’s inspector general determined that the personal e-mail account used by Clinton when she was secretary of state contained some information that should have been classified and secured.

Clinton is not accused of any wrongdoing and has said she’s confident that material in her e-mails wasn't marked as being classified at the time it was sent and received through her server. Republican lawmakers have questioned why she used a private e-mail system and whether it jeopardized the security of sensitive data.

What the FBI GotAn e-mail server is a computer used to send, store, and manage electronic communications. Clinton, who was secretary of state from 2009 until February 2013, kept the server in her home in Chappaqua, New York.

Clinton said she turned over paper copies of 30,490 e-mails relating to government business from her tenure. She said another 31,830 personal messages—including yoga routines and condolence messages—were deleted. Clinton's critics have questioned whether she should have been the one to make the call about what to turn over to the government and what to hold back.

FBI investigators likely will first look to see if the deleted e-mails can be recovered, said Toren, a partner with the law firm Weisbrod Matteis & Copley Pllc.

However, the e-mails and any other data on the server could have been permanently deleted if the operating disk was overwritten—a process known as wiping, said Philip Lieberman, president of Lieberman Software Corp., a cybersecurity company based in Los Angeles.

“If the disk itself at the lowest level was wiped, it’s probably not recoverable,” Lieberman said.

“If only files were wiped, it’s probably recoverable.”

Not Just About E-mailsInvestigators also will look at how often files were erased or the disk was wiped. If Clinton regularly had the system wiped, that indicates a common security practice. If the system was only wiped once, it could indicate an effort to hide evidence, Lieberman said.

If the server is barren, investigators could pursue other avenues to try to recover data, Lieberman said. For example, they could check if e-mails were sent to people using a service that keeps logs, such as Google Inc.’s Gmail. They could also ask if the Internet service provider used by Clinton kept logs.

It’s also not clear if Clinton’s data still exists on a backup server.

The FBI’s inspection of Clinton’s server could also yield valuable information into how secure the server was and whether it was ever hacked, said Elad Yoran, executive chairman of Koolspan Inc., a communications security company based in Bethesda, Maryland.

“They may be able to tell whether it was hacked and thatopens up a whole other set of questions,” Yoran said.

Toren, Lieberman, and Yoran all said they considered Clinton’s use of a private e-mail system and server to be extraordinary and weren’t aware of any other government officials doing the same.

“This wasn’t done because it was convenient for her,” Yoran said. “There’s a ton of email services that are available that are actually quite secure, easy to use, and you can use them on every device.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-08-14/fbi-said-to-examine-whether-clinton-e-mail-was-backed-up

 
I just have a feeling this is going to Teneo. The guy, Justin Cooper, who registered the original server setup was a 2008 campaign aide who now works for Teneo, Abedin worked and still works for Teneo and now she is in the mix as illegally accessing information which was on an unauthorized server to begin with. The server is meaningless, the question is where is the data, where has it been and who has and had access to it.

 
Hero Marine Nailed for Secret Email: What Did He Do That Hillary Didn’t?Clinton could still become president after her email scandal, but a decorated Marine is being forced out over one classified report he sent to avert a disaster.
No matter how much classified material is found in her personal email server, Hillary Clinton will no doubt continue campaigning to become our next president.

Meanwhile, a decorated Marine officer who has deployed four times faces being discharged from the corps he loves because he used his personal email to send a single classified report as an urgent warning when lives were at stake.

...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/14/hero-marine-nailed-for-sending-classified-report-from-personal-email.html

 
Long read but a good one.

How Clinton’s team went from nonchalant to nervous over e-mail controversyLate last month, Hillary Rodham Clinton stood before a line of television cameras at a rural Iowa campaign stop to deny reports that she had sent sensitive information over her private e-mail system.

“I’m confident that I never sent or received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received,” Clinton said, dismissing claims to the contrary by federal intelligence officials as a bureaucratic dispute over what qualifies as classified.

The view from inside Clinton’s presidential campaign team was much the same: Clinton had done what she needed to do, there was nothing of real concern regarding the e-mails and, mostly, the whole matter was an annoyance in her efforts to win the White House.

The next week, however, law enforcement officials became interested, and the campaign’s apparent lack of concern began to turn into a sense of anxiety.

“They’re worried about it,” said a longtime Clinton adviser and confidant who agreed to discuss the mood of the campaign team only on the condition of anonymity. “They don’t know where it goes. That’s the problem.”

Clinton has come under fire for using a private e-mail during her time as secretary of state. The e-mails are being screened and released in batches. Here are some things we’ve learned from them.

The controversy over her private e-mail setup has moved into a new and, potentially, more serious phase. What had begun five months ago as a relatively narrow question about proper archiving of public records has become a bigger, more politically dangerous one: Whether the then-secretary of state and her close aides, in choosing to use a private e-mail system, disregarded common sense and may have put sensitive information at risk of falling into the wrong hands.

The first warning came July 31 when a Justice Department prosecutor called Clinton’s longtime lawyer, David Kendall, seeking a thumb drive that contained a copy of the 30,000 e-mails that Clinton had turned over earlier to the State Department, according to a person briefed about the conversation. Six days later, Kendall turned over to the FBI his thumb drive — and two copies — which had been stored in a safe in his office provided by the State Department. Next, the FBI wanted Clinton’s private server. That too, has been handed over, arriving in government hands Wednesday afternoon from the New Jersey data center where it was being kept.

The FBI’s interest in Clinton’s e-mail system arose after the intelligence community’s inspector general referred the issue to the Justice Department on July 6. Intelligence officials have expressed concern that some sensitive information was not in the government’s possession and that Clinton’s unusual e-mail system could have “compromised” secrets.

That investigation, still preliminary, is focusing on how to contain any damage from classified information that might have been put at risk. Officials have said that Clinton is not a target. But, according to legal experts, this type of security review can turn into a criminal investigation if there is evidence that someone intentionally mishandled government secrets.

Clinton’s Democratic backers in Congress, including some who have had access to the e-mails in question, have in recent days waved away the suggestion that Clinton bears particular responsibility for improper handling of sensitive information. Rep. Adam B. Schiff and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, two California Democrats who are ranking intelligence committee members, said none of the e-mails alleged to contain classified information were written by Clinton.

“I think the fact that some staff of the Department of State may have sent the secretary some e-mails not marked as classified is going to prove to be of very minor significance,” Schiff said.

The issues around Clinton’s e-mails have also intensified as it has become clear that a number of her statements defending her actions now appear to be false.

As she did that Sunday in Iowa, Clinton has said multiple times that she never sent or received any e-mails containing information that was classified at the time.

But the intelligence community’s inspector general, reviewing a small sample of Clinton’s private e-mails, has contradicted that claim. While the e-mails may not have been marked that way, they contained classified information. The IG said this week that he had discovered information in two e-mails that intelligence agencies considered to be top secret, the highest category of classification.

In recent weeks, Clinton, her campaign and the State Department have shifted their language, offering less definitive denials regarding classified information.

When her use of a private e-mail account first came to light in March, Clinton said that, “I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

But then last week, as The Washington Post reported that the FBI had begun its inquiries, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said that she had not sent or received any e-mails that were “marked classified at the time.”

This week, when the inspector general said some e-mails should have been designated top secret, the State Department said it was reviewing the content but acknowledged that some had been sent over “unclassified systems” in 2009 and 2011 and “ultimately some were forwarded to Secretary Clinton.”

Like Merrill, the agency spokesman also said that the e-mails had not been marked as classified. According to federal rules, it is the responsibility of the sender of an e-mail to ensure it contains the proper classification designations.

The controversy highlights one of the problems with Clinton’s decision to use her own e-mail system during her four years running the State Department.

At many agencies that handle sensitive information, discussions of classified material and sharing of classified documents must take place on specially secure classified computers. The government protections don’t extend to private accounts.

Other Cabinet secretaries have been known to use private accounts, including one of Clinton’s predecessors, Colin Powell.

State Department rules require employees to “use, hold, process, or store classified material in data and word processing systems . . . only under conditions that will prevent unauthorized persons from gaining access,” according to the agency’s Foreign Affairs Manual. A 2009 executive order also specifies that classified information “may not be removed from official premises without proper authorization.”

In several of the e-mails that intelligence officials now say are classified, Clinton’s closest aides were writing to her to alert her to specific information and sometimes citing what the CIA was reporting, according to two government officials who have reviewed them.

Clinton was on the thread of the e-mails as other aides shared new information or joined in the discussion, and often did not reply, the officials said.

John Fitzpatrick, head of the Information Security Oversight Office within the National Archives, said agencies train officials with security clearances to spot sensitive material and then to look up the proper classifications — such as “confidential,” “secret” or “top secret.”

“If you write an e-mail , you are expected to distinguish the classified from the unclassified,” Fitzpatrick said. “If you say ‘the CIA reports’ something — writing that sentence should set off alarm bells.”

Fitzpatrick said the dispute is somewhat academic given Clinton’s unique system. Officials shouldn’t rely on private systems for work e-mails, he said, and they should never talk about classified matters on a private system.

“The rules require conducting any official business on an official system. There are many reasons for that — including assuring the security of the information, regardless of its classification. There is no argument to have those conversations in a private e-mail.

One open question is whether 31,000 e-mails that Clinton deemed to be personal and which were not handed over to the government remain in some way on her server.

Both Clinton and a lawyer for the company that has been handling the server since 2013 have said there is no trace of any files on the drive.

But technology experts say that there can be ways to revive deleted e-mails.

Joseph Lorenzo Hall, the chief technologist for the Center for Democracy and Technology, said some ways of deleting information from a server are more thorough than others. A quick deletion may erase data from the table of contents in a server, but the data itself could remain deep in the system.

Experts typically use a more thorough but time-consuming way to erase the data, using software to write over the files with gibberish. The Department of Defense and the NSA recommend writing over data multiple times to ensure it is fully obscured.

Whether any files remain on Clinton’s server “depends on the level of technical competence of the people doing the damage control,” Hall said. In this case, he added, “I would expect this to have been wiped. Not just wiped but, since they had some time, thoroughly wiped.”

Much of what the public now knows about Clinton’s e-mails comes as a result of a Republican-led House oversight investigation into the State Department’s handling of the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.

In August 2014, the committee’s discovery in records of a private e-mail domain, “clintonemail.com,” prompted the State Department to ask Clinton for copies of all of her work-related e-mails.

In December, Clinton turned over to the State Department printed paper copies of 30,000 e-mails that she said were work-related. Because of a long-standing public records request seeking Clinton’s records as secretary, a court ordered the State Department to review and make public large portions of all of the e-mails that Clinton turned over by specific deadlines, starting in May. The State Department’s Freedom of Information Act office then became intensely busy, trying to figure out what needed to be redacted for privacy or sensitivity reasons.

In April, following a New York Times report in March that first noted Clinton’s exclusive use of a private e-mail address during her time as secretary, State Department inspector general Steve Linick began an inquiry to look more deeply at the use of personal devices by Clinton and other previous secretaries. In early June, he expanded the inquiry to have his team read through hundreds of Clinton’s e-mails to check on the State process for releasing them. Linick asked the inspector general for the intelligence community, I. Charles “Chuck” McCullough III, to help because of his office’s expertise in classified records.

In mid-June, McCullough and Linick became concerned that State might be handling potentially classified information in a sloppy way. They discovered that classified information mentioned in one of Clinton’s e-mails had been released by the State Department to the public in May.

But the inspectors tussled with a top State Department official, Patrick Kennedy, who said the proper protocols were being followed to protect classified information.

State officials believed that McCullough’s office was over-classifying by deeming information sensitive even if it had been published in news articles or other public documents, according to two government officials. An agency spokesman, Alec Gerlach, said it was common for staffers around the world to learn information from open sources “that may also be independently learned through entirely separate means within the intelligence community.” He said State officials were working with intelligence agencies to review Clinton’s e-mails and to “clarify their findings and resolve whether, in fact, this material is classified.”

On June 24, McCullough learned in a letter sent by Kendall to the State Department that copies of these classified e-mails were on a thumb drive in Kendall’s Williams & Connolly office in downtown Washington.

On June 25, McCullough called an FBI official running the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, a little-known agency responsible for securing the federal computer and cyber systems, to alert him that classified information was outside of the government’s control, according to two government officials. McCullough was told to refer the matter to the FBI’s national security branch, the officials said.

State officials were dissatisfied with the security of Kendall’s thumb drive, which he was storing in his office safe, according to a person with knowledge of internal discussions. Kendall argued that he had to preserve it as evidence in the Benghazi investigation. The State Department then arranged for a government-issued safe to be installed in the office of Kendall’s partner, Katherine Turner, another Clinton attorney.

However, Clinton’s team was not aware of the Justice Department’s involvement until it was reported late the evening of July 23 by the New York Times.

Kendall called the Justice Department on July 24 seeking information — the first contact between the Clinton team and law enforcement with regard to the sensitive material, according to a person with knowledge of the interaction.

The FBI launched its inquiry, looking into the security of the e-mail setup and the thumb drive.

The investigation is being overseen by two veteran prosecutors in the Justice Department’s National Security Division. One of them helped manage the prosecution of David H. Petraeus, the retired general and former CIA director who was sentenced to probation earlier this year after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified materials. He was also fined $100,000.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-clintons-team-went-from-nonchalant-to-nervous-over-e-mail-controversy/2015/08/14/347f1066-405e-11e5-9561-4b3dc93e3b9a_story.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just have a feeling this is going to Teneo. The guy, Justin Cooper, who registered the original server setup was a 2008 campaign aide who now works for Teneo, Abedin worked and still works for Teneo and now she is in the mix as illegally accessing information which was on an unauthorized server to begin with. The server is meaningless, the question is where is the data, where has it been and who has and had access to it.
Follow the money.

 
It's getting worse and even more serious.

The FBI is now investigating whoever at State or presumably in the government who would have emailed Hillary classified info because by doing so they were improperly transmitting naturally classified data. Which is punishable and against the regs and maybe even the law.

And oh yeah they're checking into whether foreign governments may have accessed some of this data.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=1&referrer=&referrer=

If true this would have made Hillary a sort of Venus Flytrap during her time as SOS.

 
Yaknow Squizz while I assiduously avoid saying such things and let the facts speak for themselves you assiduously say such things and avoid the facts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's getting worse and even more serious.

The FBI is now investigating whoever at State or presumably in the government who would have emailed Hillary classified info because by doing so they were improperly transmitting naturally classified data. Which is punishable and against the regs and maybe even the law.

And oh yeah they're checking into whether foreign governments may have accessed some of this data.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=1&referrer=&referrer=

If true this would have made Hillary a sort of Venus Flytrap during her time as SOS.
So since Hillary is NOT the subject of any investigation, her email account is, if they find laws were broken does her email account go to jail? Or is it the server, which they already have in custody?

 
It's getting worse and even more serious.

The FBI is now investigating whoever at State or presumably in the government who would have emailed Hillary classified info because by doing so they were improperly transmitting naturally classified data. Which is punishable and against the regs and maybe even the law.

And oh yeah they're checking into whether foreign governments may have accessed some of this data.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=1&referrer=&referrer=

If true this would have made Hillary a sort of Venus Flytrap during her time as SOS.
So since Hillary is NOT the subject of any investigation, her email account is, if they find laws were broken does her email account go to jail? Or is it the server, which they already have in custody?
Hillary is running short of wriggle room, isn't she? I realize of course the difference between whether Hillary committed a crime vs whether the DOJ will prosecute her for that crime, but just so people know:

- She is being investigated. You have to track the language. They have said she is not a "target."

Mrs. Clinton herself is not a target of the investigation.

F.B.I. agents investigating Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email server..

Law enforcement officials have said that Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, is not a target of the investigation, and she has said there is no evidence that her account was hacked.

In an unusual move, the F.B.I.’s inquiry is being led out of its headquarters in Washington, blocks from the White House. Nearly all investigations are assigned to one of the bureau’s 56 field offices. But given this inquiry’s importance, senior F.B.I. officials have opted to keep it closely held in Washington in the agency’s counterintelligence section, which investigates how national security secrets are handled. The investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails has its roots in her decision to use only a private email account for her official business when she was secretary of state, an unorthodox decision that gave her some control over what was made public.

she is fully cooperating with the investigation

In addition, specially trained cybersecurity investigators will seek to determine whether Russian, Chinese or other hackers breached the account or tried to transfer any of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, including those containing the classified information, several officials said.

...
There is a difference between being a target and being investigated. Right now everyone and everything is being investigated. No one is a target. People may or may not realize this but a person does not become a "target" until they receive a "target letter" which happens once an investigation has formally reached some conclusions about possible wrongdoing. That has not happened to anyone yet.

Basically State is and has been pushing back in a number of ways probably because there are people who are complicit in what was going on there and also because they know Hillary could be president and they fear for their political futures and careers. - There is also information being leaked out from State about what is going on and has been since the beginning and the reason is because there are career foreign service, State personnel who take their jobs very seriously and they follow these rules on classification and protection of data every day at the risk of their lives and the cost to their country and my guess is the idea of Hillary being their commander in chief makes them sick.

The DOJ demanded her server and the extra drive and they moved with lightning speed after the IGs made their referral - Hillary, along with others, is being investigated, period. I think the original NYT report was correct and is pretty close even right now to being fully vindicated.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's getting worse and even more serious.

The FBI is now investigating whoever at State or presumably in the government who would have emailed Hillary classified info because by doing so they were improperly transmitting naturally classified data. Which is punishable and against the regs and maybe even the law.

And oh yeah they're checking into whether foreign governments may have accessed some of this data.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=1&referrer=&referrer=

If true this would have made Hillary a sort of Venus Flytrap during her time as SOS.
So since Hillary is NOT the subject of any investigation, her email account is, if they find laws were broken does her email account go to jail? Or is it the server, which they already have in custody?
Hillary is running short of wriggle room, isn't she? I realize of course the difference between whether Hillary committed a crime vs whether the DOJ will prosecute her for that crime, but just so people know:

- She is being investigated. You have to track the language. They have said she is not a "target."

Mrs. Clinton herself is not a target of the investigation.

F.B.I. agents investigating Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email server..

Law enforcement officials have said that Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, is not a target of the investigation, and she has said there is no evidence that her account was hacked.

In an unusual move, the F.B.I.’s inquiry is being led out of its headquarters in Washington, blocks from the White House. Nearly all investigations are assigned to one of the bureau’s 56 field offices. But given this inquiry’s importance, senior F.B.I. officials have opted to keep it closely held in Washington in the agency’s counterintelligence section, which investigates how national security secrets are handled. The investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails has its roots in her decision to use only a private email account for her official business when she was secretary of state, an unorthodox decision that gave her some control over what was made public.

she is fully cooperating with the investigation

In addition, specially trained cybersecurity investigators will seek to determine whether Russian, Chinese or other hackers breached the account or tried to transfer any of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, including those containing the classified information, several officials said.

...
There is a difference between being a target and being investigated. Right now everyone and everything is being investigated. No one is a target. People may or may not realize this but a person does not become a "target" until they receive a "target letter" which happens once an investigation has formally reached some conclusions about possible wrongdoing. That has not happened to anyone yet.

Basically State is and has been pushing back in a number of ways probably because there are people who are complicit in what was going on there and also because they know Hillary could be president and they fear for their political futures and careers. - There is also information being leaked out from State about what is going on and has been since the beginning and the reason is because there are career foreign service, State personnel who take their jobs very seriously and they follow these rules on classification and protection of data every day at the risk of their lives and the cost to their country and my guess is the idea of Hillary being their commander in chief makes them sick.

The DOJ demanded her server and the extra drive and they moved with lightning speed after the IGs made their referral - Hillary, along with others, is being investigated, period. I think the original NYT report was correct and is pretty close even right now to being fully vindicated.
It certainly is an investigation of her. Go to the end of this piece which I had posted in the other Hillary thread.

http://nypost.com/2015/08/14/hillarys-lame-e-mail-excuse-the-server-did-it/

 
People still think she won't be President?
Personally I don't know anymore, I used to be very confident she would be. The Trump thing has really made things sketchy pushing it back to the Demos in addition to the EV advantages, and I am very wary of not succumbing to the magic bullet theory. But obviously people up top in the DNC and WH are concerned. I think if Joltin' Joe jumps in it gets back to being very 50/50 for Hillary. The DOJ can be reluctant to indict someone when they're running for mayor or governor, much less president, and then there's always the issue of politics entering the final call. But then maybe they let it roll. Weird thing is Obama would be a hero to conservatives, independents, even a lot of progressives, if he just let the FBI and DOJ takes its natural course. I mean seriously, conservatives, just bow down if Obama let's this happen. And it would be a great victory for public accountability.

A lot of moving, unpredictable parts and I think Hillary's team is likely scared even if she is not because it's out of their control, entirely. But if she is not indicted do I think it possible that the country could elect someone they genuinely, generally dislike, distrust and don't even believe cares about ordinary folks? Yeah, this country's in a weird place right now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The DOJ demanded her server and the extra drive and they moved with lightning speed after the IGs made their referral - Hillary, along with others, is being investigated, period. I think the original NYT report was correct and is pretty close even right now to being fully vindicated.
So is it one server or two? I'm somewhat confused on this point.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top