Hillary Clinton’s “there’s no evidence of that” line of defense over her email mess continues to crumble in the face of . . . new evidence.
For all her talk of how using a private email account for her work running the State Department was just fine, it’s now plain she left top-secret information vulnerable to hackers.
More evidence is likely to come out. The FBI’s probe has now expanded to include another private server she used, a backup service with Connecticut-based Datto Inc.
And now the Associated Press has confirmed that her main server was the target of repeated cyberattacks from China, South Korea and Germany. And those came after she left office, when her team belatedly agreed to use some threat-monitoring software.
In other news, a FOIA request from the watchdog group Citizens United has uncovered the fact that Hill’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, was forwarding classified info to the Clinton Foundation — so staff there could support Bill Clinton’s work in Africa.
Add to this new details about Hillary’s emails with longtime aide Sidney Blumenthal — emails that somehow didn’t make it into the data she finally handed over once word broke that she’d failed to share her work product with the government.
Her extensive communications with him include the naming of a CIA source (obviously classified) as he pushed for action in Libya — action that would benefit his clients.
“It is curious Secretary Clinton took so much of her advice from someone who had never been to Libya, professed no independent knowledge of the country and who the White House blocked her from hiring,” said Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who heads the select committee trying to finally get to the full facts on the deadly Benghazi attack.
Curious? Hey, in Clintonworld, blending policy with pocket-lining is routine — national security be damned.
Editor’s Note – Last night we heard that the FBI was able to recover emails from Hillary Clinton’s server and now some on the left are calling for her head and noted columnist and talking head Ron Fournier lists the reason below.
In addition, even the State Department is challenging Hillary’s many excuses, most notably on the chain of events leading to her turning over the so-called non-private ones. Her story is so frought with lies and distractions it makes the head spin:
Hillary Rodham Clinton has described her decision last year to turn over thousands of work-related e-mails as a response to a routine-sounding records request.
“When we were asked to help the State Department make sure they had everything from other secretaries of state, not just me, I’m the one who said, ‘Okay, great, I will go through them again,’ ” Clinton said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “And we provided all of them.”
But State Department officials provided new information Tuesday that undercuts Clinton’s characterization. They said the request was not simply about general record-keeping but was prompted entirely by the discovery that Clinton had exclusively used a private e-mail system. They also said they first contacted her in the summer of 2014, at least three months before the agency asked Clinton and three of her predecessors to provide their e-mails.
It’s not just why and when they were turned over, it is also how. Remember, she had them printed out, thus hiding the meta-data and slowing down the search process. In any other criminal case, that is clearly obstruction of justice – 30,000 times. But we want to take Ron Fournier’s article one step further, like prison further.
If the Democratic Party cares to salvage a sliver of moral authority, its leaders and early state voters need to send Hillary Rodham Clinton an urgent message: Come clean or get out. Stop lying and deflecting about how and why you stashed State Department email on a secret server—or stop running.
Tell her: We can’t have another day like this:
Story 1: The State Department confirmed that Clinton turned over her email only after Congress discovered that she had exclusively used a private email system. According to TheWashington Post, the department first contacted her in the summer of 2014, at least three months before the agency asked Clinton and three of her predecessors to provide their emails.
The story undercuts Clinton’s claim that her decision to turn over self-selected email was a response to a routine-sounding records request. She hasn’t been telling the truth.
Story 2: A federal court has helped uncover more emails related to the Benghazi raid that were withheld from congressional investigators. Clinton has insisted she turned over all her work-related email and complied with congressional subpoenas.
Again, she hasn’t been telling the truth.
Story 3: The FBI has recovered personal and work-related e-mails from her private server, raising the possibility that the deleted information becomes public. “The FBI is investigating how and why classified information ended up on Clinton’s server,” Bloomberg reported.
While the Democratic front-runner still insists there was no classified information on the unsecured server, the FBI has moved beyond whether U.S. secrets were involved to how and why. In the language of law enforcement, the FBI is investigating her motive.
On Sunday, Clinton told Face the Nation host John Dickerson: “What I did was allowed. It was fully above board,” and “I tried to be fully transparent.” Both claims are objectively and indisputably false.
From the moment this story broke in March, senior Democrats told me they were worried about where the questions would lead. Several said they feared what the emails might show about the intersection of Clinton’s work at the State Department and the family’s private foundation.
One Clinton loyalist, a credible source who I’ve known for years, told me, “The emails are a related but secondary scandal. Follow the foundation money.”
That is still speculation. But months of dishonesty and deception took their toll: A majority of Americans don’t trust her, and the Democratic nomination fight has shifted from a coronation to a competition. A poll released today by Bloombergshows Clinton barely leading socialist Bernie Sanders and Vice President Joe Biden, who’s not even in the race.
For Democrats, this is an opportunity wasted. A crowded GOP field has been taken hostage by a celebrity billionaire with a history of bankruptcies, sexist behavior, and racially offensive statements. Lacking a firm grip on policy or the truth, Donald Trump is the GOP front-runner.
His closest competition, Dr. Ben Carson, said Sunday he didn’t think a Muslim should be president, and his efforts to clean up the controversy have been as ham-handed as they are dishonest.
Which brings me back to Clinton. Loyalists argue that her policy agenda speaks to America’s new demography and addresses 21st-century challenges. Even if they’re right, the Clinton team has underestimated the value that voters place on a candidate’s character. One top Clinton adviser told me in the spring, “Trust doesn’t matter.”
Oft-burned Americans understand that a policy agenda is a collection of promises. If they can’t count on Clinton to be honest, they can’t count on her to keep her word about income inequality, jobs, health care, and the environment.
She announced a plan Tuesday to reduce prescription-drug costs, promising to cap monthly out-of-pocket expenses at $250 without curbing profits that fund research into life-saving drugs. Can you believe her?
Overshadowing that news was her long-awaited decision on the Keystone pipeline: Clinton now opposes a project she was once inclined to support at the State Department, a flip-flop that she justified with a rhetorical wave of the hand. “I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone pipeline as what I believe it is—a distraction from the important work we have to do to combat climate change.”
A distraction from the important work. That could be her campaign slogan.
But remember what she said at the UN; “there is no classified material… I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.” Oh, the sheer volume of the moving parts…that thumb drive!
She lied, broke the rules repeatedly, stalled, obfuscated, and the story changes almost daily while the State Department barely meets the court ordered release requirements.
“It says the process is slower because of intense scrutiny by U.S. intelligence agencies to ensure that emails from her private server don’t contain any sensitive or classified government secrets…2,206 pages of emails, roughly 12 percent of the 55,000 pages” were released.
Maybe if they had the electronic version it would be a wee bit faster. Again, a lot of noise, a lot of shiny objects, all piece meal, but definitely at a classified level or it wouldn’t take so long.
However, if we look at this from a 40,000 foot macro perspective, we can clearly see that Clinton should be the subject of an investigation either by the FBI or a Select Committee from Congress at a minimum, and for more than just the email scandal.
Hoping another shiny object would distract us, her campaign released tax records at almost the same moment, timed to do just that and today they released more medical records. With so many moving parts in this saga, it is easy to get lost in the details; look, a squirrel.
So let’s begin with a macro question; at what time is any communication transmitted by the Secretary of State of the United States of America not of interest to foreign powers?
For that matter, what about political adversaries, or even the proverbial hacker in his basement on a joy ride to see what he can get into on the net? The answer of course is never, ask Sydney Blumenthal.
All members of a President’s cabinet are by definition some of the most powerful people in the world; all are targets, all the time. That is why we have rules and laws in place to preserve the safety of the information each deals with 24/7; it is called national security.
When it comes to the Secretary of State, the most important cabinet level position and the number four slot for Presidential succession, it is clear that all communications he or she engages in are de facto important and sensitive in nature, even if it’s just about what she wants to eat that day. When does something actually get classified? Is it not often after the fact anyway as we now see?
When considering whether or not a coded stamp is placed on any transmission designating it to be classified at some level is beside the point, and it is folly to split hairs about whether or not Hillary Clinton knew they were or were not.
All her correspondence is important to some enemy. Any responsible person, especially somebody who once resided in the White House knows this and is required to act accordingly, that is, unless you are a Clinton. Her denials are an insult to our intelligence.
What is worse, and we have to keep repeating this point, at no time ever, did Hillary Clinton have any right of ownership of her email as Secretary of State. None, not even “personal” ones! Each and every transmission she made after swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution were automatically the property of the people – case closed!
The proof in just how important her communications are or were, is in the data dump we received yesterday where large portions of her transmissions were heavily redacted and many were classified after the fact as too sensitive to be released to the public. Not only is it a fact that she did not own them, she also harbored them outside the purview of federal security, a crime. Who cares what was in the headline at the NY Times.
Then there is the case of the personal lawyer and others with whom she gave access to view all of her transmissions, and that pesky thumb drive. When did she become the arbiter of who had clearance to view what is now confirmed to be sensitive intelligence? And, what about all those gaps?
The Clinton camp assures us that her personal attorney holds proper clearance, but he is not a State Department employee and has no right to harbor sensitive material let alone even seeing it, especially in a private setting, ask David Petraeus. And why has no one from the State Department sent security agents to secure that thumb drive from David Kendall?
“This raises very serious questions and concerns if a private citizen is somehow retaining classified information,” Grassley’s said in a letter sent late last week. He asked for more information on Kendall’s clearance and whether the lawyer was authorized to “be the custodian of classified national security information.” The FBI has not yet responded. (Politico)
Then there is the curious case of Huma Abedin, another Grassley letter to State:
“The letter sought the status of an inquiry into whether Abedin had violated conflict-of-interest laws related to her special employment situation, which allowed her to work simultaneously for the State Department, the Clinton Foundation and a private firm with close ties to the Clintons.”
How was it that Abedin was given such status, apparently over paid at that, and once again clearly brings the Clinton Foundation and all its moving parts back into the picture?
Everything the Clintons touch is part of a racket, pure and simple, and a personal ATM. From 40,000 feet it all forms a clear picture – Hillary Clinton is not only a dismal campaigner and speaker, she is as corrupt and untrustworthy as any has ever been.
The Clinton campaign worries about the damage that cannot be “unwound” that the NY Times caused in their opinion, but maybe they should worry more about the law and Judge Sullivan who on Friday turned up the heat a bit more:
A federal judge has ordered the State Department to ask Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to certify under penalty of perjury that she has turned over some of the work-related emails she kept on a private server during the four years she served as secretary of state.
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued the order Friday in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit the conservative group Judicial Watch filed in 2013 seeking records about the employment status of Clinton aide Huma Abedin, who worked as Clinton’s deputy chief of staff but later transferred to a part-time job as a so-called “special government employee.”
At such a hearing on Friday, Sullivan—a Bill Clinton appointee—told State to seek certifications from Hillary Clinton, Abedin and former Deputy Secretary of State Cheryl Mills that they’ve produced all records related to Abedin’s employment, even if they kept those records outside official State Department systems.
“As related to Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests in this case, the Government is HEREBY ORDERED to: (1) identify any and all servers, accounts, hard drives, or other devices currently in the possession or control of the State Department or otherwise that may contain responsive information; (2) request that the above named individuals confirm, under penalty of perjury, that they have produced all responsive information that was or is in their possession as a result of their employment at the State Department,” Sullivan wrote in an order issued Friday afternoon.
“If all such information has not yet been produced, the Government shall request the above named individuals produce the information forthwith; and (3) request that the above named individuals describe, under penalty of perjury, the extent to which Ms. Abedin and Ms. Mills used Mrs. Clinton’s email server to conduct official government business.” (Read the rest here at Politico.)
We should turn up the heat as well, and avoid being sucked into the maelstrom they want us to focus upon instead. Our attention must be maintained and we should read more about the “law and the Secretary of State”:
Wait for it though, rumors of another “bimbo eruption” will be sure to confuse and distract us from what we believe makes Hillary Clinton a criminal and unfit to hold any office in America… other than one in a prison cell.
A reprise of the following is warranted here:
THE CRIMINAL ARROGANCE OF HILLARY CLINTON – Bill Whittle
Please support our non-profit work at SUA
JOIN/SUBSCRIBE: Please join our team and receive periodic newsletters and announcements securely. (Your information will never be sold or transferred – Opt-out anytime.)
VOLUNTEER: If you are unable to donate your money, your time is just as valuable.
DONATIONS: Please consider a recurring monthly or a one-time donation.