Slashdot Mirror
FBI Finds 14,900 More Documents From Hillary Clinton's Email Server (go.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ABC News: The FBI uncovered nearly 15,000 more emails and materials sent to or from Hillary Clinton as part of the agency's investigation into her use of private email at the State Department. The documents were not among the 30,000 work-related emails turned over to the State Department by her attorneys in December 2014. The State Department confirmed it has received "tens of thousands" of personal and work-related email materials -- including the 14,900 emails found by the FBI -- that it will review. At a status hearing Monday before federal Judge Emmett Sullivan, who is overseeing that case, the State Department presented a schedule for how it would release the emails found by the FBI. The first group of 14,900 emails was ordered released, and a status hearing on Sept. 23 "will determine the release of the new emails and documents," Sullivan said. "As we have previously explained, the State Department voluntarily agreed to produce to Judicial Watch any emails sent or received by Secretary Clinton in her official capacity during her tenure as secretary of state which are contained within the material turned over by the FBI and which were not already processed for FOIA by the State Department," said State Department spokesman Mark Toner in a statement issued Monday. "We can confirm that the FBI material includes tens of thousands of non-record (meaning personal) and record materials that will have to be carefully appraised at State," it read. "State has not yet had the opportunity to complete a review of the documents to determine whether they are agency records or if they are duplicative of documents State has already produced through the Freedom of Information Act" said Toner, declining further comment.
This is mostly due to media distortion. Her team did not "delete" emails -- that is a deliberately misleading term. What actually happened was normal discovery, but that isn't a field that many slashdotters actually have any familiarity with and so when the journalists misrepresent the facts? People predictably jump to the wrong conclusions.
For example, one "journalist" said that Hillary's team "skimmed the subject lines" when they did no such thing. What *actually* happened is they used discovery software to filter emails based on keywords. As anyone who has had to work with a large data set of barely structured and nearly arbitrary data can tell you, this is more art than science and results are iffy. Now the FBI went through *all* the emails, not just the ones provided by Hillary's legal team. And instead of using filters they put a number of their employees to the mind-numbing task of *manually* combing through the emails. Make no mistake, this is a man-power intensive task and it is easy to make mistakes. So auditing the effort for *that* adds time and takes even more resources. People should really appreciate the amount of effort the FBI put into looking for malfeasance.
I realize the above will rub a number of people the wrong way, but that doesn't change the reality of the situation, nor does not liking it alter the facts. It also does not excuse Hillary or absolve her of wrong doing. James Comey said that she was negligently careless (or words close to that, can't be bothered to get the actual quote) and she has taken the lawyer's way out of never answering questions asked, but instead rephrasing the question to her liking and answering *that*.
In short: this fantasy that Hillary attempted to delete evidence is completely without basis and is essentially due to media fabrication/misrepresentation about what is really a rather mundane and very common task in litigation. What she *has* done is tried to *misrepresent*, the most egregious being her assertion that Comey agrees with her.
Vote for the Libertarian and the Greens and get a proper debate going for once. America has a lot of problems which need real attention. The two major parties are a crapfest of corruption and greed. There needs to be an open dialog. It's time the third parties got a say. It's funny how Americans bang on about free speech yet they deny their political parties a voice.
Her team did not "delete" emails -- that is a deliberately misleading term.
Yes, they did delete them. They even SAID they deleted them. That the server that had contained them had had all of its contents destroyed once they were done picking out the stuff that was work related.
What *actually* happened is they used discovery software to filter emails based on keywords.
But the lie she told was that her lawyers read each and every email. She knew that wasn't true, and so was lying. But that's OK, because her supporters know she lies to them, and they like being lied to.
People should really appreciate the amount of effort the FBI put into looking for malfeasance.
People should also recognize that they FBI could only look for corruption (and worse) within the material they had available. Clinton did not provide all of the requested material. She said she did, but that was another lie. Not an oversight, but a lie. Because we're not talking about "oops, a couple of emails you should have seen slipped through the cracks" - but "oops, thousands and thousands of emails you should have seen in that pile I printed out without header info were deleted."
In short: this fantasy that Hillary attempted to delete evidence is completely without basis
Other than the part where, you know, her records were deleted after her team put on a show of pulling out what they thought would make the appearance of complying with her requirements ... years after she was supposed to have turned ALL of it over to State so their archivists could make the distinction between personal and work-related records from her deliberately co-mingled collection.
What she *has* done is tried to *misrepresent*, the most egregious being her assertion that Comey agrees with her.
That was egregious, but it's hardly the worst of it. She knowingly, willingly, and repeatedly lied about her motivations and actions, and deliberately slow-walked and stonewalled at every turn. The fact that she'd whip up yet another lie to make it sound like the FBI's very clear identification of her multiple "untruths" on the matter is only egregious because it shows that she's still willing to lie even when she knows that we all know she's doing it. None of that matters, of course. Her supporters like that she lies, and none of that is legally meaningful. What IS legally meaningful is her testimony in front of congress. She spent long hours carefully avoiding direct answers to questions to she wouldn't perjure herself. We'll see if she's still as slippery on that front as her reputation suggests.
Separate from all of that, of course, is the actual content of the messages now being read. They exhibit a very clear pattern of tying access to her and her policy influence to being willing to dump piles of cash into her family business while she was in office. Legal jeopardy there? Hard to say. That would once again be Loretta Lynch's call, and we already know where she stands.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Hello obvious shibboleth, is the truth squad money really that good?
Why should take money for telling the truth? Trump is a failure.
Clinton's Success stories:
Movie : Clinton Cash Movie:Free
Movie Fact Sheet: Fact Sheet
Clinton Death Count: Death list Dont forget Julian assanges head attorney hit by a train, the father of the doc that did hillary's checkup who released some info.
Bill Clinton's Rape Sheet: Victim list Not sure if the 19 year old when he was in the CIA in oxford is on that one at 19 or his supposed best friend at 16 either.
Hillary getting a rapist off, while accusing a 12 year old virgin of being hot for older men: Article with sources here is the interview with her last month: Interview with victim 2016 Because you know a 12 year old wants stitches in her vagina.
I dont have to link hopefully what Comey said about all the lies, treason, and death she caused with her pay for play clinton foundation or the fun mails that keep coming out with FOIA. All though this one should give you an idea of the kind of treason we are talking about: Treason so high this guy can't even get access to the pages
Those of you that say I'm voting for Hillary because Trump is a meanie or a scoundrel, take a look at what this woman has caused already. If she is elected you will have done the world the biggest proof is in the pudding injustice ever.
Many people don't know why they're expected to share their returns, or when it started. They don't realize that when President Nixon said, " I am not a crook! " he wasn't talking about the Watergate break-in scandal, he was talking about his low tax rate and was insisting that his lack of direct participation in taxation was legal.
The whole point is to lay your connections bare, show that you pay your share, show what your lot in life actually is.
Trump says, hey, it is none of your business who he is, who he is connected to, what his lot in life is; he's just running for President, he's not required to convince you of all that. And it is true; nothing requires him to campaign in a way that meets the minimum requirements of the mainstream voters.
And WTF does being audited have to do with any of it? You should be telling the truth perfectly during an audit. He hasn't even made any sort of specific case as to why being under audit makes an different. As in, on the level of verbs, what does he think will happen? What is the concern? No answer.
You say something about "criminal" stuff in regards to Clinton, but I don't think that word means what you think it means. I suggest looking it up.
It came out today she lied to the FBI when they questioned her as well.
She said Colin Powell suggested she use a private email server when talking to the FBI, that is her public claim that she told the FBI. Powell said he explained his AOL account usage 9 months into her term as Secretary of State. He said he never encouraged her to use a private email, or private email server. Not that it mattered what he told her, she set it up before he had contact with her.
So she lied under oath to Congress, destroyed evidence, and lied to the FBI when they questioned her.
It's a basic matter of definition. It's not sane to be planning to ride a unicorn in a hores race.
Barring some severe disruption like nuclear war, a massive plague, an assassination, a severe medical event, or the FBI growing a spine and suddenly deciding laws mean things for the elites too, the next POTUS will be either Hillary Clinon or Donald Trump.
You can pretend otherwise and crawl into your "safe space" and not vote, or vote green, or vote libertarian, etc and essentially hand your vote to somebody else and spend the next four years pretending your hands are clean of whatever bad things whichever winner does or says, or you can vote.
Your choice is actually simple:
The lifetime political hack whose experience is: beign married to a governor, married to a president, given a senate seat and voting for war, given a cabinet job and screwing it. A person who has a life-long history of hiding/stealing/destroying government documents to thwart congress, the courts, and the public (from her Watergate activities (1970s), to whitewater(1980s), the White House travel office docs(1990s), the FBI background files(1990s), the StateDept/Benghazi/ClintonFoundation emails(the 2000s and 2010s). A person who claims to have been penniless when leaving the White House in 2000 but become worth $100,000,000.00+ in only a few years by making NOTHING but speeches to bankers and foreign government leaders. This is a person who has been entrusted with government power and regularly and repeatedly abused it, and always gets away with it, a person who, along with her supperters, exhibits supreme confidence that she always gets away with corruption. She rejects the traditional concept that any politician has legitimate political opponents and instead has spent 20+ years insisting that her opponents are illegitimate "enemies" arrayed against her in a "vast right wing conspiracy". This is positively Nixonian, and just as rare in US presidential politics as it is toxic.
The lifelong businessman and real estate developer, who built his image over the years with lots of high-profile pop culture goofyness up to and including a reality TV show, and complementing/funding/hosting nearly every politician in both parties and many celebrities. A guy whose politics were mostly squishy and unknown and not particularly controversial until he tossed his hat into the ring a year ago. Social conservatives are afraid he's actually a social liberal. Fiscal conservatives are frightened that he is actually a [gasp!] populist/agrarian/leftist on economics. He's a guy whose rise to political power has been fuelled more by pointing out the (easily identifiable) failings and lies of regular politicians and promising to "fix" some of the big unresolved issues that a huge part of the population is angry about never seeing solved, without being very sepcific about his plans for the fixes. This is a person who has been accused of abusing people with his businesses but has never been found to have done so more than any other businessman with a similar sized empire, and who cannot be analyzed for abuse of government power because he has never had any. He cannot hold up his government resume because he has never worked in government.
The one is a certainty, and certainly very corrupt. The other is an uncertainty, and of uncertain governing stability.
THAT is the choice: known corruption or unknown possible instability. Anything else is pixie dust.
Obama didn't release his birth certificate for one very good reason, he is very clever and Trump is very stupid.
The fact is that the Republicans will always invent some crazy idiotic 'scandal' that they obsess about and endlessly throw up smoke. The birther conspiracy was mind numbingly ridiculous. It would require someone to go back in time to plant the birth notice in the papers. Or for some group of conspirators to go to an enormous amount of trouble in order to make a particular black kid president.
So rather than release the birth certificate and let the Republicans invent a new scandal, Obama held onto it and let them obsess about a scandal nobody else thought made the slightest sense, knowing that he could knock their house of cards down any time he chose. Which of course he did a week before the Bin Laden raid which was guaranteed to end the story.
George W. Bush opened torture chambers across the world and collected photographs for a sick sexual thrill. Yet nobody ever talks about that. None of the people complaining about Hilary ever complained about GWB refusing to comply with Congressional investigation or the deletion of 5 million emails.
So here is what is going to happen. Trump is going to go down to the biggest defeat since Carter and he is going to drag the rest of his party down with him. And afterwards there is going to be a new civil rights act that prohibits Republican voter suppression tactics and the gerrymandering that give them a 5% advantage in elections. And by the time it is all done the Republican party will have two choices, either boot the racist conspiracy theorists and Trumpists out or face two decades in the wilderness.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/