Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules

Politics US Politics
141

[quote]On Tuesday, Sullivan said he might also at some point direct the State Department to subpoena Clinton, Abedin or others to return all of the emails sent and received from Clinton’s personal email system, not merely those they or their attorneys have deemed work-related and submitted to the State Department.

The suggestion was an ominous sign for Clinton that 31,000 emails she has said were purely personal and deleted could make their way into the public realm.[/quote]

Ominous indeed. If those 31,000 commingled emails hit the fan Clinton II’s worst fears will come true and the public will find out how vast the gulf is between her public and private images.

142

As predicted, from Politico courtesy of electoral-vote.com

[quote]Politico: Clinton Won’t Be Indicted
Politico has done a study of dozens of cases where classified information was mishandled to see if there were any indictments in cases like hers. There weren’t. Prosecutors bring indictments only when an official knowingly passes classified information to unauthorized parties and has some add-on element that makes it worse. One case was an FBI agent who took home secret documents while he was having an affair with a Chinese spy. Another was an employee of the National Security Agency who removed boxes of classified documents and also lied on a job application. Clinton has done nothing vaguely resembling any of this and it has yet to be shown that any of the classified documents on her mail server were classified at the time she sent or received them. Most—maybe all—were classified long after she handled them. Even directly handing a document to an enemy spy is not a crime if the document was unclassified at the time it was handed over and was then classified later.

One obvious case to compare Clinton’s to is that of Gen. David Petraeus, who knowingly gave top-secret documents to a journalist (who just happened to be his lover) and then lied to the FBI about it. The fact that Petraeus knew the documents were secret at the time he handed them over and then lied about it later are major differences with the Clinton case. Petraeus was fined $100,000 but didn’t spend a day in jail.

Most Republican insiders already know what is going to happen: The FBI will issue a massive report saying Clinton violated State Department policy but didn’t commit a crime and didn’t endanger national security. The problem that Republican talk radio hosts have is that they have been preparing their audiences for months for an indictment that is not going to happen. How are they going to explain that their “facts” weren’t facts at all, but wild pipe dreams? Most likely they will say that the administration is corrupt and Obama ordered the FBI to let Clinton off the hook. (V)[/quote]

143

[quote]Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.[/quote]-Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Section 1519

Senator Clinton voted for passage of Sarbanes-Oxley in 2002. Shortly after receiving subpoenas from federal prosecutors for her private server used during her tenure as Secretary of State she deleted 31,000 emails from the server on the grounds they were “private.”.

If you or I deleted emails after being subpoenaed we’d go to jail for obstruction of justice.

HRH won’t be indicted for obstruction of justice though for the same reason Richard Nixon wasn’t.

144

[quote]
Clinton has done nothing vaguely resembling any of this
[/quote]

145

[quote=“fred smith”][quote]
Clinton has done nothing vaguely resembling any of this
[/quote][/quote]

[quote]One part of the story that remains unknown, CNN’s Brianna Keilar says, is when exactly Clinton wiped her email server clean… . .

Keilar, who interviewed Clinton on July 7, said on CNN’s State of the Union July 12 that she was “surprised” Clinton “didn’t show a little more contrition” about her use of a private email account and seemed a bit irked by Clinton’s spin that she “never had a subpoena.” . . .

“What the campaign will say is I was asking her about facing a subpoena that she wiped her server. They’ll say that’s not true,” Keilar said. “But the other thing is, the campaign hasn’t been clear about when she wiped her server of her work emails, so there’s no way to even really completely fact-check what she’s saying, because they don’t want to get into all of the details of those things.” . . .

Our ruling

Keilar said, “The (Clinton) campaign hasn’t been clear about when she wiped her server of her work emails.”

The Clinton campaign told us the work-related emails were deleted off the server “shortly after” she turned them over to the State Department on Dec. 5, 2014, but did not provide a date.

The paper trail so far gives us a window of sometime between December 2014 and March 2015, but no more.

That’s better than nothing, but Keilar is largely correct when she says the picture isn’t clear. We rate her claim Mostly True.[/quote]http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jul/12/brianna-keilar/when-did-hillary-clinton-delete-her-work-emails/

[quote]Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.[/quote]-Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Section 1519

Best regards,
Winston Smith Esq.

146

Still waiting to see when she will be indicted… seems like these predictions have been around for quite some time.

147

I doubt she will. There was a clip a while back, just before she absolutely adored everything Obama has done and just before Obama got on board with her when she was walking with Obama with a big grin like the cat who got the cream, little skip in her step. I thought at the time, the deals been done.

Sanders is not going to be the democrat nominee, anyone who doubts this just doesn’t understand what he’s up against, the media and establishment keep an eye on the polls and numbers, they cranked it up a little with Hillary going into states that favor her. She will take Bernie out in the popular vote, in delegates both pledged and super. There is zero chance they will take her out of play and let Sanders snatch the nomination, Obama will issue a pardon before that happens.

I used to think there may be a slim chance after she takes out Sanders, they move forward with an indictment and put someone else in to take her place in a contested convention. But not now, shes a loyal Democrat all her life, she has served her party and her party I doubt would throw her to the wolves. Besides on the Republican side they have Trump and Cruz, Hillary will have the entire media and establishment backing her, looks like an easy win against either of them. CNN is still going after trump and trying to make Cruz seem like he has a chance, which should tell you something. 

She should have been prosecuted but she won't be because I dont see how the democrats benefit from it. Maybe they will serve up some people close to her, but probably not. I think at the end of all this the FBI is going to be pissed.
148

There is also the possibility that what she did wasn’t really a big deal. Just saying…

149

Sorry Brent, anyone who works with security or has something more than just an AOL account knows what she did was a very big deal. I can understand my mom for example who talks into a mouse thinking it is somehow a microphone thinking its just an email thing. I’m sorry to say if you don’t understand why it’s a big deal, you don’t understand whats being discussed.

Which by the way is the norm for technology, and pisses me off no end that these technological imbeciles are constantly weighing in on technological matters.

150

She won’t be indicted for obstruction of justice for the same reason Richard Nixon wasn’t indicted for obsteuction of justice, even though he was caught red-handed authorizing hush money: she’s too big to fail. Any little person who believes he or she would avoid indictment for obstruction of justice after wiping a hard drive clean during a pending federal investigation is in for a hard landing though.

[quote](Any little person) who conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.[/quote] - Sarbanes -Oxley Act, 2002, courtesy of Senator H. Clinton et al

Don’t mention it.

  • W,S. Esq., Dabbler-at-law
151

This rubbish still rolling on. The lady was the the Secretary of State, one would think people are more
Concerned about her performance on the job not what bloody email
She used. What a joke.

152

[quote=“headhonchoII”]This rubbish still rolling on. The lady was the the Secretary of State, one would think people are more
Concerned about her performance on the job not what bloody email
She used. What a joke.[/quote]

It’s not a joke, I work for a small firm, yet most of my work is done on a laptop that is air gaped (never connects to the internet) completely encrypted, duel hard drives for back up and an external hard disk always connected for backup as well.

Thats a small firm, she was working in the State department. They have entire networks that are “air gaped” and it’s highly illegal to take information from said air gaped system and put it in the public domain, you really don’t understand how this works do you?

The minute information leaves an air gaped environment, it’s considered compromised. So with regards how she did her job, if she carried out her duties on an unsecured server, she did a piss poor job.

153

It doesn’t help the situation when Clinton supporters gloat about her/him being above the law.

We know they are but it’s hard staying silent while having our noses rubbed in it yet again.

154

You will not get me to say Hillary is not a flawed candidate. She is. You will not get me to say that she acts as if she is above the law. She does. But given the other flawed candidates: Bernie? Donald? Ted? Who do you really think is most qualified to be president?

As to the obsessively repetitive postings of first Washington’s farewell address and now Sarbanes Oxley, I have to ask: No good pharmacies anywhere near you? :slight_smile:

155

There’s a synapse missing somewhere but I get your meaning. Also agreed that she’s the best of a bad bunch. You’re not going to get me to say that I’m happy about her being above the law again though. I’m not.

As usual, thank you also for the reminder that I may be overdoing it.

I’m not.

156

[quote=“Mick”][quote=“headhonchoII”]This rubbish still rolling on. The lady was the the Secretary of State, one would think people are more
Concerned about her performance on the job not what bloody email
She used. What a joke.[/quote]

It’s not a joke, I work for a small firm, yet most of my work is done on a laptop that is air gaped (never connects to the internet) completely encrypted, duel hard drives for back up and an external hard disk always connected for backup as well.

Thats a small firm, she was working in the State department. They have entire networks that are “air gaped” and it’s highly illegal to take information from said air gaped system and put it in the public domain, you really don’t understand how this works do you?

The minute information leaves an air gaped environment, it’s considered compromised. So with regards how she did her job, if she carried out her duties on an unsecured server, she did a piss poor job.[/quote]

Well you’re nothing if not consistent Mick. Anytime someone disagrees with you (for very good reasons every time by the way) you try to say some shit about how they don’t understand the issue. Yes Mick, THAT’s the problem. It’s only because they aren’t as informed as you are. If they were, everybody would obviously agree with you right? :roflmao:

Jesus, who cares. She very likely has a country to run soon. I don’t give a rats ass about how she conducts her emails or how many blowjobs her husband got. All I care about is getting the least bad of a multitude of bad choices in the White House so perhaps America can take a few steps in the right direction for a change…

157

[quote=“BrentGolf”]
Well you’re nothing if not consistent Mick. Anytime someone disagrees with you (for very good reasons every time by the way) you try to say some shit about how they don’t understand the issue. Yes Mick, THAT’s the problem. It’s only because they aren’t as informed as you are. If they were, everybody would obviously agree with you right? :roflmao:

Jesus, who cares. She very likely has a country to run soon. I don’t give a rats ass about how she conducts her emails or how many blowjobs her husband got. All I care about is getting the least bad of a multitude of bad choices in the White House so perhaps America can take a few steps in the right direction for a change…[/quote]

Or how many women her husband raped and how many women Hillary intimidated and shut up. Or how many lies she tells even to the faces of relatives morning the loss of their loved ones as their caskets are carried in front of her. Or that shes a warmonger going against advisers and armed the “rebels” perhaps you should ask the Libyans how they feel about a Clinton presidency, because the ones I hear from wish she would fall off the edge of a cliff.

I got it, she’s a Democrat and Democrats are better than Republicans. At least that’s been their MO and rationale to explain to the electorate why they should be elected. Although with Hillary Clinton, they are going to push that axiom to it’s limits.

Lastly, the emails, if you don’t understand why apparently emails from Sid Blumenthal sent out within hours of being sent on an NSA Secure Compartment Information Facility (called a SCIF ) appeared on a non secure server. Word for word, all of them classified “Top Secret / Special Intelligence.” and you can’t see a problem with that. Then yes you don’t understand the issue.

158

While “it was no big deal” using a computer in the basement of her home in Chappaqua, New Yok to conduct government business while Secretary of State let us hope at least HRH doesn’t decide to use a home computer to conduct government business once she becomes president.

159

She isn’t going to be indicted. Republicans came up with nothing in their attempts to prove criminal acts occurred.

160

Not a very auspicious start for a new administration. Let us also hope it’s not a harbinger.