Slashdot Mirror
Judge Orders State Dept, FBI To Expand Clinton Email Server Probe
An anonymous reader writes: In a hearing over Freedom of Information Act requests to the State Department, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said that former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn't comply with government policies. He ordered the State Department to reach out to the FBI to see if any relevant emails exist on Hillary Clinton's email server. Judge Sullivan was surprised that the State Department and FBI were not already communicating on the issue following the FBI's seizure of Clinton's email server and three thumb drives of emails. More than 300 emails are being examined for containing classified information, and dozens of the emails were "born classified" based on content. Some of those emails were forwarded outside the government. There are also clues emerging about how some of the classified information made its way onto Clinton's server. The email controversy is beginning to show up on the campaign trail, an unwelcome development for Secretary Clinton. Reporter Bob Woodward, who helped bring down President Nixon, said the scandal reminds him of the Nixon tapes. It is interesting to note that the post-Watergate reforms have helped move the investigation forward.
Lying sack of BENGHAZI!
Watching her act like she doesnt know what a "server wipe" is made me laugh a little. She takes scumbaggery to great heights.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
That is where she belongs!
According to Bloomberg, she only wanted to carry one phone
http://bloom.bg/1MImAWH
I recall it roughly the same when the RNC lost millions of emails from various people, and said they couldn't be recovered during Bush's admiration. No backups or anything... right?
Given the race, arguing I'm as bad as Republicans seems to not be av sensible strategy. However, I expect the same level of punishment for one of the elites.
Even if your a loyal Democrat, this is not good. Keeping highly sensitive documents on personal servers when your a top government official is just wrong. No matter if there is a smoking gun or not. Just the fact this goes against all protocol setup and defined to protect information is very troubling. It shows Mrs. Clinton totally disregarded protocol simply for her own benefit and possibly for a convenient way of controlling history and her legacy in case she messed up.
This goes far beyond a Richard Nixon moment and I cannot believe how many people still thinks she is the best the Democrat's have for President??
In my mind, she is just what America doesn't need in the White house. Another politician who makes up her own rules and disobey's government policy. Really?
We want more of that in government? Hey, if your a Democrat do what you will next year at election time. But if Hillary Clinton is a choice. Do the right thing and don't vote that disgraceful piece of work into office. She has no place in public office of any kind.
Regardless of how you feel about the parties, the Government has rules, which we find yet again have been violated. The SIPR nET is not suppose to be able to talk to NIPR or the Internet at all. If someone SENT out Secret, Top Secret, or Classified emails to the Internet, then the Government servers, network, or staff F'd up. And here we wonder how OPM was breached so often, and lost data that is not allowed on the internet. (They used a secure dial in for taking fingerprints, so how did that get on the internet facing servers......)... Sigh.....
The RNC case and this are worlds apart. The RNC operated email servers for partisan purposes that are illegal to perform using government resources (labor time, equipment, and so forth). Hillary Clinton operated a private email server to keep government records out of the government's hands, contrary to both policy and statute, when both of those were crystal clear about what was required. Any law or policy violations in the RNC case went against specific direction from higher-ups. In the more recent case, the law and policy violations were directed by a member of the Cabinet.
So the United States president and staff does government business on republican part servers sure that fine. They said there was nothing illegal done then erased it all. And that is tooootaly different.
If it is illegal then bring everyone in.
Not just those running for office that you do not like.
This statement is just plain wrong on so many levels, Anonymous Coward.
Even the average person who reads the news knows by now that TS/SCI materials can't legitimately end up in unclassified email systems. The very best she could argue is "I had no idea what it was and deleted it immediately" at which rate she's still guilty of not handing over the machine(s) to the federal government to verify that the data is actually gone.
She needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law because the alternative is that we live in a country where contractors and lower level civil servants go to Leavenworth while the elite gets to make cutesy jokes about destruction of evidence in a national security scandal.
"He ordered the State Department to reach out to the FBI to see if..."
What the FUCK is with this language.
Anonymous Coward notwithstanding, that one went so far over your head that you really can't be blamed for not hearing the woosh.
I still don't understand why this is so bad, especially to the point of being compared to the Nixon tapes. (I'm a Dem, but not really a Hillary fan)
The emails in question were believed to not contain classified info, so they would have been sent on the official unclassified server anyway. It wasn't against the law to have her own server, but possibly against policy. If she fired people for doing the same, that makes her a hypocrite, not a criminal. (although, hypocrites don't make good leaders either)
There has been speculation that she may have tried to intentionally wipe incriminating evidence off the server. So far, that seems to be pure speculation. I haven't seen/heard of any reason yet that makes me think this is even likely true. By all means investigate, but at least consider the possibility that it didn't happen. If this charge seems likely true (based on actual evidence), then we can start trying to compare this to Watergate/Nixon.
Even if she turns out completely/mostly innocent, her reputation has already be irreparably destroyed. Even if her innocence is proven likely, there will be a good number of people that will never believe it.
The RNC is not a Federal agency. And nothing it did or didn't do can in any way justify Hillary's actions.
Hard to tell sometimes. There are plenty of Hillary sycopahts and SJWs out there who would say just this.
If she is found guilty: prison.
Before the fixed for you guys show up I meant to say 'sycophant'
So her email server was running SMTP and IMAP, right? All the emails were unencrypted unless people had security certificates installed in their mailers, and those have painfully short expiration times (thanks NSA). Most of you slashdot guys even her defenders know those emails were sent unencrypted over the open Internet. How can that be excused without willful blindness?
We already know guccifer hacked Sydney Blumenthal and obtained private memos sent HRC involving events in Libya including about Benghazi. And guccifer was no state actor and his "hack" was probably trying Blumenthal's dog's name or whatever. I imagine Russia or China could bring considerably more firepower to bear and if they did, considering how sloppily the server appears to have been run, would anyone even know if they had?
Who was acting as security officer for her server? Was it just some Linux box at her house "guarded by the secret service"?
I'm sure she knows very little about how they work but she made a decision to use a private server so she knows something about it, like that she wanted to do that and she had a reason and obviously it's not just to carry one device, it was also to cull 31,000 messages out of the record.
Finally, you all know they are not going to find anything on that drive. The drive in the server isn't even the one that was in there, erased. No way.
The emails were subpoenaed by Congress for an investigation. She deleted them 14 months AFTER the subpoena, which she then claimed she never got. The Congressman who subpoenaed them came on news the next day showing what he sent her requesting the emails. She deleted evidence during an investigation (obstruction of justice).
Since then they have gotten more evidence of why she deleted them. This is all based on her original obstruction of justice and now they want to find out what she is hiding by not turning them over. She has lied at every step for not giving them over.
1. I wanted to use 1 device. She used 3
2. They were private emails to husband. Bill Clinton doesn't use email
3. No classified documents. There are classified documents
4. No documents were classified at time. They included signal intelligence which is classified at all times
5. Server protected by secret service at her house. It was in a Denver apartment that didn't have an alarm.
6. There are no backups. There is a backup server in New Jersey that is still not in government control.
In other news...
Bill Clinton' personal server at Ashley Madison was turned over to the FBI earlier this week.
Read the effin statutes. The emails are not automatically classified if they are from a foreign government. They are only classified if the foreign government has stated they are classified.
The courts have ruled that being from a foreign government is not sufficient to be classified. The State Department argued that it was in a FOIA case and lost.
The case and the law are discussed in this link,
This provision of Executive Order 12,958 was a significant factor in a 1998 decision by the federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that rejected the government's claim that a communication from the United Kingdom could be withheld from a FOIA requester because it had been classified by the Department of State. Weatherhead v. United States, 157 F. 3d 735 (9th Cir. October 1998), vacated as moot, 528 U.S. 1042 (1999) . The Ninth Circuit found that the government was unable to demonstrate that there was any specific reason for withholding the documents at issue and, therefore, without a presumption that foreign government information should be classified, the government could not justify withholding this document under the 1995 Order. The Court of Appeals panel also examined the letter, and found that its contents were innocuous and disclosure could not reasonably be expected to result in damage to the national security.
http://www.bushsecrecy.org/pag...
I'm sure Hillary's team has a few people in line waiting to take the fall on her behalf.
She is currently applying for the top security spot of the United States
Or in this case, outside of the country. Hillary is just stupid. She used her unsecured email server while in foreign countries, and that potentially opens up a bag of slick that needs to be looked into as these governments could have intercepted the emails and have access to classified info as well as top secret info.
now Hillary gets to be a target of the game Democrats invented. keep expanding the scope of the investigation until the equivalent of Monica's stained dress is found.
This is also one of the few times a politician doesn't get to blame an underling. "But I didn't know Bob was shredding secret documents and working with arms dealers" might be able to pass, but you can't blame Bob for an illegal server full of government emails set up in your f**king house.
If Hilliary has managed to delete any of the more sensitive documents before the servers were seized, the Chinese and Russians probably have backups they can provide for the investigation :-)
https://foia.state.gov/Search/... contains the released docs. Look for the one sent on 12/20/2012, titled H: Libya, Latest Benghazi Intel. It is marked "Confidential" as are many others. Is it really "Confidential?" I don't know. But it was born Confidential. And Sec. Clinton forwarded it on. The real sad thing is that Sec. Clinton decided to have a personal e-mail server, and those working for her will do jail time for getting her information she needed to do her job the only way they could have.
The only votes Mrs. Clinton should be soliciting are from a jury.
This is a case of "It isn't illegal until you're caught". This is the rule of law in government jobs.
Even if your a loyal Democrat, this is not good. Keeping highly sensitive documents on personal servers when your a top government official is just wrong. No matter if there is a smoking gun or not. Just the fact this goes against all protocol setup and defined to protect information is very troubling. It shows Mrs. Clinton totally disregarded protocol simply for her own benefit and possibly for a convenient way of controlling history and her legacy in case she messed up.
This goes far beyond a Richard Nixon moment and I cannot believe how many people still thinks she is the best the Democrat's have for President??
In my mind, she is just what America doesn't need in the White house. Another politician who makes up her own rules and disobey's government policy. Really?
We want more of that in government? Hey, if your a Democrat do what you will next year at election time. But if Hillary Clinton is a choice. Do the right thing and don't vote that disgraceful piece of work into office. She has no place in public office of any kind.
Weird, you should say this, because the republicans have been guilty of the same thing in the past and yet nothing came of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So while everyone is getting on Clinton's ass, this isn't the first time this is happen and I'm guessing she'll get away with it also. Republicans, Democrats, both kinds of politicians that are cheating lying scum. At least we know there is one candidate out there who's had a record of doing what he says and doing what is right.
Be seeing you...
She was an intern for the Senate Judiciary committee....
It's not just RNC servers that were involved, but the White House server as well. There's a CNN story from 2007 that gives more details.
"This story is really now a two-part issue," CREW's Melanie Sloan told CNN. "First there's the use of the RNC e-mail server that's inappropriate by White House officials and secondly we've also learned that there were between March of 2003 and October of 2005 apparently over 5 million e-mail that were not preserved and these are e-mail on the regular White House server."
I cannot believe that an intelligent, average human being would think they can still run and win in the 2016 election under those circumstances. There's something wrong with her head. Clinton for prison 2016.
Day 1 that this even happened there should have been a subpoena issued for the servers and all people involved with this server email debacle.
Her being Sec of State and a former Senator with Top Secret clearance should have been a NOT NOT PASS GO! Go Straight to Jail Event!
So the State Dept. and the Federal gov have allowed her to circle the wagons and to cover her tracks.
So when they call her on the floor to testify are they going to swear her ass in this time? Her not being sworn in to testify on Benghazi was a flagrant avoidance of SOP.
In fact all the Senators who questioned her need to be arrested for not doing their duty.
It's a good joke, even though it's got a hint of truth behind it. Or perhaps because it has a hint of truth behind it. The number of scandals that are also crimes that show up and are then forgotten is so large that one has to suspect an ulterior motive in keeping this one alive. OTOH, there's also the question of why she isn't in jail.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The Clintons have, over the years, demonstrated a supreme ability to shake off controversy. I don't see this going anywhere.
Hillary could have actual blood on her hands and her prints on the weapon and she's look indignant, deny everything and blame it on her political adversaries. It's a strategy that's worked very well for her in the past.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Since so many people have opinions, opinions in which they post about all the things they don't know while delivering their judgement on HC, here's some details that might be useful.
HC did not violate the law in not using a State Dept. email account. She did not even violate State Department Policy, as no policy existed during her tenure. Policy exists now and Kerry is in compliance.
HC's successor, John Kerry, was the first SoS to use a State email account that I'm aware of. Neither Rice nor Powell [Bush Administration] used a State email account.
HC turned over 30,000 pages of email. She claims she deleted emails through normal use. I only know of one person who doesn't delete email and I have constant problems with his quota. She also claims she co-mingled personal and work email and the emails she deleted were private. I know of very few people who don't co-mingle personal and work email, though my personal opinion is that a Secretary of State shouldn't and that they should know better.
Personally, even when I tried to keep my Work and Personal email separate, I found that I accidentally emailed people from my private email accounts and they ended up in co-worker's mail app contact histories.
What she should have done was keep a 'Chinese Wall' between private and personal email. What she apparently did was what most people do.. but most people aren't SoS.
Colin Powell turned over ZERO emails from his time as Secretary of State. This is despite those records being request from investigative committees looking into minor issues like The Iraq War. Powell has stated that no emails still exist from his time as SoS. I'm sure you agree that the uproar over this has been deafening.
Interestingly, Condolizza Rice apparently did use a State email account, but her people claim she very rarely sent email. That seems odd considering she was SoS in the 2000s, not in the 1970s.
This should go without saying to readers of /. but it appears it needs to be said. Emails typically require at least two to tango. One of Clinton's rationales that I had heard [reported by a third party, not from her own mouth] was that any records requirements related to internal communications would be satisfied by the State Dept accounts that emailed her, or the State Dept accounts that she emailed. If State had an archival policy/system and other State employees were on internal email, they have all of her inter-office email already.
Similarly, if she had use a State email account.. she could have just as easily used an external account to communicate with outside email systems if her intent were to hide correspondence. The argument by critics seems to be that she should have used a State Account [Unlike her Predecessors] and she should have also used a 2nd email account for non-State Correspondence. Personally, I agree.. but if she had, those same critics would now be claiming she used the personal account to skirt email archival rules.
Hillary and Bill Clinton employ an IT guy to run their web and email server(s). Like most Sr. Executive types, they probably have little idea how anything other than their regular apps actually work.
HC's successor, John Kerry, was the first SoS to use a State email account that I'm aware of. Neither Rice nor Powell [Bush Administration] used a State email account.
Doh!! I should have dug up my old /. account to post.
I updated most of my post before submitting.. to reflect that I discovered Rice did have a State email account.
I let one bit through that states both her and Powell used private email accounts.
I'm sorry for the contradictory info.
As far as I've been able to determine... Rice had State email, Powell did not.
Now stop using your tinfoil for hats and move on.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
2. Did she claim an income tax deduction for the cost of buying/installing/maintaining her secret e-mail server?
Tax payers want to know.
Error: NSE - No Signature Error
I suspect that some of her technical staff members have broken federal laws in setting up and managing this e-mail system. It seems unlikely that she would have made an decisions about this directly. (Or at least I hope not. A Senator has a lot more important things to worry about than what mail server is being used)
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
1. She was a young Democrat lawyer helping in the impeachment of Nixon - so there is NO WAY she can pretend to be confused by anything related to hiding evidence or obstruction of justice. Remember: She's using the same defense Nixon used on the tapes ("they are MY private property and my private communications, you have no right to see/hear them!") and when Nixon tried that, Hillary told her colleagues that that HE should be denied the right to a defense attorney!
2. When the bodies of the dead from the Benghazi attack came home, she assured the surviving relatives that she would make sure the guy who made a YouTube video would be found and jailed (at the time, nobody knew the maker of that video had done ANYTHING wrong, but he was later located and, when it was discovered he had violated the terms of probation for an earlier offense, he was indeed JAILED) - she has no compunctions about severely punishing a person even before knowing if the person has violated any law.
3. There are TWO importantly separate investigations underway: (A) the congress and outside groups had both over the years sought info on her communications through legal means (congress via subpoena, and outsiders via FOIA request) and the State department replied in all cases that there WAS no information (obscuring the fact that there was a private server, which clearly EVERYONE in the Obama admin who communicated with her KNEW about); THIS is criminal obstruction of justice, and it is being looking into both by congress AND the Inspector General's office. (B) when the private server issue arose, people suddenly realized that classified information must have flowed through it, which would make it far worse than when Gen Petraeus let his biographer (who HAD a clearance) have access to some classified info (the General was prosecuted by the Obama admin). This mishandling of secrets, including NRO stuff, involves multiple serious felonies with no provision in the law of an exemption based on any marking on the documents (a typically Clintonian mis-direction) This issue is what the FBI is investigating and is not directly tied to the Benghazi thing (one led to the discovery of the other, but that's the apparent limit to the connection)
4. Democrats like Clinton are hardly unaware of e-mail security issues or e-mail as a political weapon; a Democrat activist hacked into Sarah Palin's PERSONAL e-mail account (SHE did HER work on er official govt e-mail which Alaska made public) and made the contents available to everybody with even the New York Times gleefully encouraging its readers to help comb-through it looking for wrong-doing (none was found, even though Sarah thought nobody would ever see her private mail and therefore had no reason to be guarded about her writing). For Hillary to now pretend to know nothing about e-mail and servers and pretend that she thinks "wiping" a server involves a dust cloth is a sign of the contempt with which she views the average citizen.
Whether she intended it or not, Hillary's private server and e-mail have had two effects: First: they thwarted multiple lawsuits and FOIA requests and mislead multiple judges - not good for our system of government. Second: they add credence to suspicions on the right that the government has been weaponized against them; the government has clearly failed to honestly and openly respond to legal requests for information AND the tactic used to achieve this was very-closely related to what's happened at the IRS (Where Lois Lerner had multiple private e-mail accounts which she used to try to hide the anti-TEA Party activities she oversaw at the agency) and at DHS and EPA where FOIAs that SHOULD get plenty of data end-up coming-up empty. (it's looking like LOTS of stuff that MUST exist, does NOT...)
So much for "most open and transparent administration in history"...
OK, Hillary supporters: If this exact same situation were the same except it was Dick Cheney instead of Hillary would you be defending HIM? Answer truthfully, and consider why you would need to lie to yourself about it if you don't.
And for those of you who oppose Hillary, would you still oppose if it was Cheney?
As a non-Democrat, I am consistent here - I detest Nixon, and did not like the Bushes either. Anyone in either party who does garbage like this to avoid the scrutiny of the voters should never be permitted near the levers of political power; it's a recipe for abuse of power and evidence of the character of the person involved.
Our founding fathers warned that the character of the person who would be President would be the most important qualification, and this is more so now in the modern era where things like war can happen so much faster and with more-devastating results with decisions needing to be made on behalf of all but with perhaps only minutes to make them. At the moments that matter MOST, it's not the resume, or the political connections, or the campaign funds bundlers, or the gender, or the skin color or the age of the person at 1600 Penn that actually matter; it's that person's judgement and character.
Clinton = Scandal; All 3 Clintons; All the time. Do we really want her running for President?
Be More, Be Manly, The Manly Geek Ubergeek Extraordinaire Blogger: www.manlygeek.com/blog Podcaster: podcast.man
Im sorry this is my commnet test on slashdot... heheh http://jellygamatgoldg-gne.com/obat-darah-tinggi-alami/