Hillary can wipe the server clean of everything except for her perfidy- UPDATED

By 27 Comments 2,502 views

hillary-clinton-liar

 

I thought this would be a good time to review Hillary Clinton’s email perfidy.

Huma Abedin still hasn’t sworn under oath that she has turned over all her State Department emails

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton declared Monday under penalty of perjury that she has given the State Department all of her work-related emails from her four years as secretary of state, but her trusted aide Huma Abedin has not yet taken that step – despite a request from a federal judge.

Abedin’s lawyer Karen Dunn told Politico on Thursday that the longtime Clinton insider, who served as deputy chief of staff at State, plans to turn over her work-related emails and other messages from her tenure there by August 28.

But Dunn declined to say whether or not Abedin will ink the same statment Clinton has signed.

Abedin enjoyed a rare but legal status as a ‘Special Government Employee’ during part of her time in government, allowing her to double-dip with a second paycheck in the private sector.

That may not be enough. Abedin and Mills also used their personal accounts to send emails to Clinton.

But they did show that Mrs. Clinton’s top aides at times corresponded with her about State Department matters from their personal email accounts, raising questions about her recent assertions that she made it her practice to email aides at their government addresses so the messages would be preserved, in compliance with federal record-keeping regulations.

Clinton clearly lied about this as well. Her communications show that her biggest concern over Benghazi was her image. And you can’t help but wonder how much of Clinton’s information Abedin shared with Carlos Danger.

This all began in 2013 when Sid Blumenthal’s AOL account was hacked by “Guccifer” and it exposed the existence of Clinton’s personal email account. Four emails sent to Clinton’s personal account were made public. All were labeled “Confidential.”

The most recent memo included in the trove is dated February 16, 2013, and includes intelligence that comes “from extremely sensitive sources and should be handled with care.”

Then we had this nugget:

Speaking on condition of absolute secrecy,” an individual with sensitive access status spoke out on the attacks in a memo that was given to Blumenthal, sent to Clinton and eventually intercepted by Guccifer. According to that source’s claims, Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika “instructed commanders of the Algerian external intelligence service (Direction Generale de la Sécurité Extérieure – DGSE) to provide Libyan intelligence chief, General Salim Hassi, with selected portions of the information obtained in the investigation of the terrorist attack on the facility at In Amenas.”

Subsequently, Clinton decided she better destroy the evidence. She then handed the server over to PRN for safekeeping. The Washington Post laughingly asserts that Clinton was “upgrading” her system. PRN itself has been accused of irregularities.

It’s is now reported that Clinton’s emails contain information about drone operations:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The two emails on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private server that an auditor deemed “top secret” include a discussion of a news article detailing a U.S. drone operation and a separate conversation that could point back to highly classified material in an improper manner or merely reflect information collected independently, U.S. officials who have reviewed the correspondence told The Associated Press.

The sourcing of the information could have significant political implications as the 2016 presidential campaign heats up. Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, agreed this week to turn over to the FBI the private server she used as secretary of state, and Republicans in Congress have seized on the involvement of federal law enforcement as a sign that she was either negligent with the nation’s secrets or worse.

If she failed to realize the secret nature of this information she is a bimbo and a felon. If she did, she’s only a felon and a liar.

One of those who still professes to respect Clinton is more concerned about Bill Clinton and the Lolita Express than he is about national security:

But what concerns me far more is a specific story — one about Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire investor with a taste for sex with underage prostitutes. Lots of them. Perhaps as many as “34 confirmed minors.” (Epstein pled guilty to state charges in 2008. He was sentenced to 18 months and released after serving 13.)

Flight logs from Epstein’s private jet — nicknamed the “Lolita Express” — show at least 10 trips by Bill Clinton, including several on which he flew (according to Gawker) with “a woman who federal prosecutors believe procured underage girls to sexually service Epstein and his friends and acted as a ‘potential co-conspirator’ in his crimes.”

Something Hillary said in March as part of the obfuscation is entertaining:

The server contains personal communications from my husband and me, and I believe I have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private …

But Bill Clinton says he’s sent two emails in his life, both as President. It was March of this year and she said “contains”- not “contained.”

About that server- there are a number of unanswered questions. When was it erased? The Daily Mail reports this:

June 2013 – Hillary’s team shifts control of the email domain to an outside IT contractor in Denver called Platte River Networks, and sends the original server hardware to a data center facility in New Jersey, where it is erased.

There is other speculation:

“We do have a little, tiny bit of an idea of when it occurred, according to Clinton’s lawyer and some things that have come up through various House investigations. We have an idea that it happened between December 5th, 2014 and March 27th, 2015.

If that it true, then Clinton is guilty of the destruction of records. Congress first demanded those records in September of 2012.

Here is a timeline of the Clinton obstruction.

From Politifact:

The Clinton campaign told us the work-related emails were deleted off the server shortly after they were turned over to the State Department on Dec. 5. They referred us to a letter Clinton’s lawyer David Kendall wrote to Gowdy. The Benghazi committee subpoenaed Clinton’s emails on March 4, 2015, and Gowdy asked for the physical server about two weeks later on March 19.

According to Kendall’s letter, dated March 27, the emails relevant to Benghazi were in the State Department’s possession and the committee had no legal right to the server. What’s more, what Gowdy wanted no longer existed.

There’s a problem with that, as noted by Bill Jacobson. Clinton said the server was transferred to the custody of PRN in 2013.

But as the Professor notes, she transferred it to PRN in 2013:

How could the server be reviewed if Clinton no longer had possession of it? How was the server wiped if Clinton no longer had possession of it? Why would Hillary seek special security for a clean server only after she’d been exposed?

The intelligence community wants Clinton’s security clearance stripped.

Earlier this week a former chairman of the House intelligence committee, former Rep. Pete Hoekstra, charged that Mrs. Clinton had to have known that the information she was emailing was classified, even if it wasn’t so marked at the time.

Bart Bechtel, a former CIA clandestine service officer, said he considers Mrs. Clinton’s security breach greater than that of retired Gen. David Petraeus. The former CIA director pled guilty to mishandling classified material.

“In my opinion, not only should she have any clearances rescinded, she should be prosecuted to a greater extent than Petraeus,” Mr. Bechtel said. “This blatant disregard for regulations and security is egregious. If she does not suffer severe consequences, it will demonstrate how corrupt the entire Obama administration is.”

The DOJ and FBI recommended felony charges against David Petraeus for leaking “confidential” information. None of it was top secret.

I always wondered how the Islamic Jihadists who attacked the compound in Benghazi knew he was there. I believe the massacre of 30 Americans, including 22 SEALs, in 2011 was an ambush. Now I can’t help but wonder whether the then-Secretary of State unwittingly aided those efforts.

Is there anyone stupid enough to think that over four years Clinton neither received nor sent any classified information over her personal email system? If so, what exactly did she do other than plan yoga routines and weddings?

 

UPDATE

There is a second server.

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.

Stay tuned.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

27 Responses to “Hillary can wipe the server clean of everything except for her perfidy- UPDATED”

  1. 1

    JSW

    As recently as yesterday, Hilleroids were saying “no crime, nothing proven,” and mocking the idea this will hurt her.

    I don’t know about anyone else, but looking around online, reading the papers, etc., it sure seems like this time, it’s different. Maybe it’s just that this isn’t about something so casually-dismissed as “only about sex,” or, “embassies were attacked under Bush.”

    I think HRC is banking on her loyalists to take the fall again, but either they’d do it for Bill but not for Hill, or people just don’t think it’s worth it to hang for these two. Because this time, it just seems different–the dems are panicking, which they never did before, and her coronation doesn’t seem like the only possible outcome to the election anymore.

  2. 2

    mathman

    Huma can swear as much as she wants.
    Lying to kaffirs is perfectly acceptable to Muslims. Mohammed said so.
    So she can swear that the sky is red, the sun comes up in the west, the moon is made of green cheese…whatever she wants.
    It will all be a lie.
    It is in the interest of Muslims, after all.

  3. 3

    Bill

    I just think it’s a crying damned shame that all the evidence needed to verify that Hillary has been telling the truth all along….. was eradicated by Hillary. How sad.

    Right, Greg?

  4. 4

    JSW

    @Bill: It’s Hillary’s own fault for being so busy saving the world that she just couldn’t take the time to look after her OWN needs. She only got that email server to protect US, because she’s just so golly-darn tech-unsavvy she couldn’t handle two devices (and couldn’t understand that cutting-edge ‘fax’ technology). If only she were as self-centered as other politicians, she would have saved all those yoga emails, and the communications with Bill (who has said he’s only sent one email in his life, but whatever), and could exonerate herself. Now, we’ll never know. But like Bill, she puts country ahead of self. We’re so unworthy, she should quit the race and say “To heck with you ingrates!” and retreat to one of her multi-million-dollar estates, or to the condo of her daughter who doesn’t care about money. That’s what the American people truly deserve, to be deprived of the Clintons.

  5. 5

    Greg

    @Bill, #3:

    I just think it’s a crying damned shame that all the evidence needed to verify that Hillary has been telling the truth all along….. was eradicated by Hillary. How sad.

    There’s a big flaw in the logic propping up your story, I’m afraid: Clinton CAN’T eradicate all of the messages, because the messages in her inbox originated somewhere other than on her end. Every message she received will also be retained on the system of the person or the governmental component that sent it. Similarly, every message she sent landed on some other system. She can’t magically reach out and erase copies of everything she sent from other servers.

    This is all suddenly getting very interesting: It was discovered late yesterday that two of the now-classified messages reportedly containing Top Secret information came from someone inside the CIA, apparently without the required Top Secret security markings. She didn’t send them, she received them, and could have had no way of knowing references were being made to information the CIA considered Top Secret.

    The whole thing might be a setup. I can even see the vague outlines of a possible motive. Benghazi might actually figure in.

  6. 6

    JSW

    @Greg: I love that “She couldn’t eliminate messages, they are in the Sent boxes of everyone who ever sent her anything!” line gets rolled out (as it has since day one of this whole thing), as if that somehow closes the book on this case.

    “Every message she received will also be retained on the system of the person or the governmental component that sent it” All that means is she was in communication with government offices–was there a question about that? I can’t recall a single person saying she needs to come clean because we have to know who sent her official government emails.

    This is an attempt at obfuscation typical of the Clintons. (We couldn’t have done anything illegal with Whitewater because we took a loss, as if one can’t sustain a loss on a shady investment.)

    “– Similarly, every message she sent landed on some other system. She can’t magically reach out and erase copies of everything she sent from other servers.” Again, who said she could? Again, you’re answering a question no one has asked.

    According to what you’ve written, all the FBI (those damned Republicans!) and Justice (ditto!) have to do is check everyone who may have sent Hillary an email, and everyone she sent emails to, and they know everything that was on that email server. Are you going to admit to the Clinton-ego-sized flaw in your ‘defense,’ or does it have to be pointed out to you?

    (Hint: What you’ve described only helps her cause if people are demanding to know “Did A, B and C send her emails?” and “Did she send emails to D, E, and F?” And no one’s asking those questions, because they are immaterial to the question of whether or not she broke the law. You REALLY think if the Obama justice dept. wanted the answers your ‘solutions’ provide, they wouldn’t just do as you say?)

    If this is what the Clintonians are going to use as a defense, she’s sunk.

  7. 7

    Greg

    @JSW, #6:

    “Every message she received will also be retained on the system of the person or the governmental component that sent it” All that means is she was in communication with government offices–was there a question about that?

    You seem to be missing what I’m suggesting here.

    According to Fox News CIA sources, the two messages on Clinton’s server referencing Top Secret information came from somebody inside the CIA without the required Top Secret security warnings. Clinton didn’t send them, she received them, and she wouldn’t necessarily have known that the references made had Top Secret document or program associations.

    This happened not just once, but twice.

    What I’m suggesting is a possibility that Clinton is being set up by some faction inside the CIA that has absolutely no desire to see her become president, and that the backstory may relate to a serious behind-the-scenes State Department /CIA conflict over the CIA’s covert operation in Benghazi, which the State Department’s diplomatic mission was little more than cover for.

    You people have been claiming for a couple of years now that something has been covered up in Benghazi. Well, OK, maybe so. And it probably has a lot more to do with the CIA operation than with the diplomatic mission compound.

    Of course you really aren’t interested in a possibility like that. All you’re interested in is the success of the Hillary Clinton take-down, by whatever means become available.

    Well, the deeper the investigation goes into this now, the better. A Hillary Clinton presidency may be a lost cause. No problem. I can always go with Joe Biden. And I suddenly want to know what’s really at the bottom of the email scandal. Let’s not stop with Hillary Clinton had classified information on her server that wasn’t marked as classified. Why not follow it all the way down and see what’s really lurking at the very bottom?

  8. 8

    Me

    Greg, your retardation is truly startling. The only way to set her up, by the CIA or anyone else would be if she maintained an illegal personal email server with which she did the people’s (that’s us numbnuts) national security business! Guess what you moron, that’s exactly what she did! Your ridiculous attempt to find another conspiracy actually defeats your own argument. SHEESH! What flavor was the Kool-Aid in which you bathed today?

  9. 9

    Greg

    @Me, #8:

    I’ll repeat this yet again, for the benefit of anyone for whom it still hasn’t registered: There was no legal prohibition against using a private, non-governmental server as Hillary Clinton did until the law was amended in 2014, after she had left office.

    Her personal email server was not illegal. That’s a simple straightforward fact, not speculation or a matter of personal opinion.

  10. 10

    Me

    Even if not 100% illegal, clearly vulnerable as a point at which our extremely delicate national security information was easily attainable. To repeat, for those who can’t count above ten with their shoes on, no one could have “set her up” unless she had an insufficiently secured server. An incontrovertible fact, not idle speculation or matter of opinion.

  11. 14

    Greg

    @Me, #10:

    Even if not 100% illegal…

    It was entirely legal. Things are not a little bit legal or a little bit illegal. They’re either one or the other.

    To repeat, for those who can’t count above ten with their shoes on, no one could have “set her up” unless she had an insufficiently secured server.

    I’m not saying that she was set up, only that that it’s a scenario that should be considered. For someone inside the CIA to have sent the Secretary of State email containing Top Secret information without adding Top Secret warning markings, not once but twice, would be a highly irregular and suspicious occurrence. It could be either gross incompetence or a deliberate act on the part of the CIA message originator. If a deliberate act, planting evidence to be discovered at a later date would be a very real possibility. Whatever the case was, sending such a message would most definitely be illegal. The relative security of Clinton’s server wouldn’t even be a factor.

    All of this is hypothetical, since it’s now an open question whether any of the four messages the Inspector General mentioned actually contain any classified references to begin with. It turns out that at least one he cited refers to information that had previously been declassified and released for public inspection. Oops.

  12. 15

    drjohn

    @Greg:

    So you’re position is that as long as someone strips off the “Classified” label anyone can store that information anywhere they desire. Clinton could even trade it for a cash donation, right?

  13. 16

    Greg

    @drjohn:

    ‘Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic-mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record-keeping system.’ The responsibility for making and preserving the records is assigned to ‘the head of each federal agency.’”

    Hillary Clinton was the head of the federal agency in question. She established official the email policy for all those under her jurisdiction. She also had the authority to set a different policy for herself, within the boundaries established by federal law.

    The rules that a General sets forth to be followed by those under his command do not necessarily apply equally to both the General and the Corporal. This is a perfectly normal state of affairs. The General sets his own guidelines as he sees fit.

  14. 18

    Greg

    @drjohn, #15:

    No sir, I’m not saying that. Stripping off a Top Secret marking is most definitely not OK. I just don’t believe it’s clear where this was done, or even if it was done at all.

    It sounds as if messages may have arrived at the State Department from the CIA already lacking classified markings. Possibly the information had already been declassified. Possibly not. I’m waiting for the next revelation. It seems like we’ve been getting regular loads of accusations, denials, and rumors, with only an occasional bit of credible information like the prize in a box of Cracker Jacks. When you tear open the wrapper, the prize isn’t all that much.

    @drjohn, #17:

    Nope. The General is still bound by law and regulation. He can set more specific and more controlling policies for those under his command within those wider boundaries, but he’s got to stay within those wider boundaries himself.

  15. 19

    james raider

    I find that the brawl being staged in the media for the dumbing down of even more Americans over this Clinton “e-mail” insanity is stunningly idiotic.

    IMHO, this is really, really bloody simple, . . . .

    When you step into the second most powerful Administrative position America has to offer, everything you write, say, plan and do, has to be cloaked with as much protection and in as much secrecy as the government can provide. Whether you are orchestrating movement of arms out of Libya, through Turkey and to rebels in wherever, or you are asking Slick about that mess you found in the master bedroom when you came home from Latvia — it’s confidential to the Nation’s protection apparatus.

    She accumulated more frequent miles than any other Secretary of State and Slick thought he’d won another lottery. ALL her communications were classified until proven otherwise. She knew that. We know that. Jarrett knew that. Only apologists want us to think otherwise.

  16. 21

    Bill

    @Greg:

    It was entirely legal. Things are not a little bit legal or a little bit illegal. They’re either one or the other.

    But Hillary said it was extra-Constitutional…. and bad. Remember?

    For someone inside the CIA to have sent the Secretary of State email containing Top Secret information without adding Top Secret warning markings, not once but twice, would be a highly irregular and suspicious occurrence.

    And then the CIA hijacked her email account and send/received other classified information to/from Sidney Bloomenthal? Thos BASTARDS!!

    The rules that a General sets forth to be followed by those under his command do not necessarily apply equally to both the General and the Corporal.

    Hillary (and Obama, for that matter. And Holder) certainly seem to see it that way. In fact, the rules don’t apply to them at ALL.

  17. 22

    Greg

    @Bill, #21:

    It hasn’t yet been established that any law was broken, that any information in any of Clinton’s emails was classified when the emails were sent or received, nor has it been established that her server was ever hacked or even particularly vulnerable to hacking—which is unfortunately more than can be said for a lot of government computer systems.

    Of the emails the intelligence community’s IG claimed to contain Top Secret references, one has been discovered to actually refer to information that had already been declassified and released to the general public.

    Two of the emails on her server alleged to have referred to classified information were actually sent to her from someone inside the CIA, apparently without appropriate classification markings—assuming these aren’t also cases of information that wasn’t really classified either.

    So, what serious crime is Hillary Clinton being accused of at this point?

    What you pretty much have is a pile-on of unsubstantiated allegations, all feeding on the fact that the right just doesn’t like Hillary Clinton.

  18. 24

    Bill

    @Greg:

    It hasn’t yet been established that any law was broken, that any information in any of Clinton’s emails was classified when the emails were sent or received, nor has it been established that her server was ever hacked or even particularly vulnerable to hacking—which is unfortunately more than can be said for a lot of government computer systems.

    Well, I’m sort of confused. What happens to that information when it gets onto Hillary’s server… it suddenly BECOMES classified on its own? Did it gain consciousness and become classified by itself?

    One thing we know for certain; Hillary lied. She lied about having the classified information on her server, she lied about turning over all the pertinent emails and she lied about only erasing personal emails.

    And then there were 60…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3200316/Investigators-60-emails-sent-Hillary-s-private-server-classified-information-meaning-final-total-reach-hundred.html

    Mishandling classified information is illegal, Greg. Illegal.

    Hillary wanted to play like she was Secretary of State without any oversight by We, the People. In doing so, there is every reason to assume that much of this information has been made available to hostile entities.

    Hillary is in no possible way suitable to be President of the United States. When she’s not lying, she’s being incompetent. Your work of continuing to protect and defend her is really cut out for you, Greg.

  19. 25

    Greg

    @Bill, #24:

    Well, I’m sort of confused. What happens to that information when it gets onto Hillary’s server… it suddenly BECOMES classified on its own? Did it gain consciousness and become classified by itself?

    Some of Clinton’s email was classified by the State Department as it was being reviewed for release to an audience that might be unauthorized have possession of some of it.

    Believe it or not, it might not be in the best interest of the nation for every email a U.S. Secretary of State has sent or received to be plastered across the front page of the Daily Mail, even when the topic under discussion wasn’t top secret spy satellite photographs.

    Do you honestly believe all routine correspondence of upper level U.S. governmental officials should be available to whoever wants to read them? Everything has to be reviewed, and some things they’re not going to release to people who might let it go public.

    Hillary is in no possible way suitable to be President of the United States.

    Compared to who? Got anyone in particular in mind? That’s the problem republicans should be focused on. Hillary Clinton is far better qualified than anyone republicans have to offer.

  20. 26

    Randy

    @Greg: Greg as always, you are wrong about there being no legal reason for Clinton to protect the messages if they are not labeled classified. She had a legal requirement to protect all information that could be used by the enemy to damage the US. Just by having a company not approved/vetted by the US Government running her servers is a criminal offence.

  21. 27

    Greg

    Why do you think information on her server was unprotected? I have yet to hear any specific technical vulnerabilities described. I also have yet heard about any conclusive evidence proving that classified information was ever stored on the server, or ever transmitted over insecure channels.

    All we’ve heard is incessant jabber from people who pretend they know something. It’s as if someone walked into a monkey house carrying a bunch of bananas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *