July 7, 2016

"Reading between the lines and following Comey’s logic, it does sound as if the F.B.I. believes a compromise of Clinton’s email is more likely than not."

"Sophisticated attackers would have known of the existence of the account, would have targeted it and would not have been seen," said Adam Segal, an expert on cyberissues at the Council on Foreign Relations, quoted in the NYT.

Also quoted, James A. Lewis, a cyber security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington: "If she used it in Russia or China, they almost certainly picked it up."

85 comments:

Big Mike said...

I'm sure that the hackers working for foreign intelligence services were hacked Hillary Clinton's Email -- based on what I've read, a bored fourteen year old boy could have hacked it with point and click tools downloaded from the Internet. And during Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State, the official State Department servers were equally unprotected -- as head of the department she needs to answer for that as well.

The bottom line is that foreign intelligence services were certainly reading State Department message traffic before the intended recipients.

tim in vermont said...

Just the fact that she used her Blackberry in hostile countries.

- Governments have, as a matter of course, complete access to all of the data channels that her Blackberry used to send and receive mail over public cell networks.

- Yes, Blackberry traffic is encrypted, but by the network equipment under the control of the countries involved. Keys are sent over a separate channel, protocols are known. All that is required to decrypt the traffic is there to pick up like money on the sidewalk. BB encryption doesn't protect you from insider snooping.

- The address information has to be in clear text or networks can't possibly work making the process of picking out Hillary's traffic child's play.

- If she were sending her email in an encrypted manner, every recipient of her emails would have to have the key and the encryption protocol.

I can't see how she could have protected her stuff without severely restricting the people she was sending emails to, which see seems not to have done.

Where did she think half the intelligence she was shown as SoS came from? She is a moron. It never occurred to her that she was just as vulnerable to being hacked? In this case, not even hacked, more like as if she communicated in sign language on a public street in front of a security camera.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Call me naive, but isn't there a vast system set up that extends to even the highest levels of government that takes it as a given that classified/secret/sensitive information will be accessed by parties unauthorized? Aren't there all kinds of safeguards like need-to-know and fake information? It can't be the case that someone -- even the Secretary of State -- gets their email hacked and something terrible happens . . . like . . . like what?

That's a serious question. The general concern seems to be whether her negligence/whatever resulted in information falling into the wrongs hands. Okay, let's assume it did. What of it? Does anyone seriously believe that Hillary Clinton is sending emails about where the invasion forces will land? Anything even remotely close to that?

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Of course it was compromised. Being SoS, she would be one considered one of the top US targets by foreign countries. Cankle's "server in the can" would be no match for sophisticated intelligence services.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

I'm not saying she's not risible. I'm saying this all seems to me to be much ado about nothing. A distraction. Haven't we all got better things to do with our time?

Guess not.

People seem to need to gossip, as if criticizing people we don't like were necessary for our survival.

There's an evolutionary explanation, probably.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Funny how the media is finally recognizing the obvious after spending a year protecting Hillary.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

Hmmmmmm. Now that I've looked it up, it appears that "risible" is not the droid I was looking for.

How about contemptible?

Hmmmmm. Okay. Close enough.

And irony noted.

Hagar said...

Mke Morrell, former acting director of the CIA, has been on TV at least twice stating that he is certain that "all competent intelligence agencies" have hacked Hillary!'s private server system, and General Hayden, former director of the NSA, when asked, said, yes, he he thought so too.

And apparently some of Hillary!'s e-mails contained information that would compromise American secret agents abroad, etc.

Bruce Hayden said...

Let me remind everyone here that the reason that this probably didn't get her indicted, as her mishandling of classified information did not, is likely that Comey and the FBI couldn't find any DoJ prosecutors who would do it, after almost eight years of litmus test hiring of rabid left wingers and SJWs by the Obama/Holder/Lynch DoJ. Of course she compromised national security for her own convenience and protection from FOIA and the VRWC. But that pales in comparison with the historic opportunity to send the most corrupt candidate in a century or so back to the White House.

Hagar said...

And of course, it is to be asumed that Mssrs. Morrell and Hayden consider the CIA and the NSA also to be "competent intelligence agenies."

tim in vermont said...

At the time there were only about ten phones that the president could contact directly on his device, but that didn't make the technology simple to develop. Both phones would either need to have the same encryption algorithms or use a gateway that would decrypt and encrypt the communications. That means the phones needed to speak the same secret language or have a translator fluent in both of their secret languages.
Of course, mobile devices existed long before 2008. George couldn't say for certain which other presidents used smartphones. But if any did, they weren't exactly something that could be carried in a pocket.


- CNN story on Obama's BB.

The funny thing about the "Gateway" he is talking about? How does the BB communicate with it if, for example, the BB is in Russia?

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

The next obvious question asked by no journalists: "Why did the Obama administration allow this?"

Anyone, including Barack, who sent/received classified information to her private email knew what she was doing and is just as culpable.

tim in vermont said...

Right Eric, and all politicians lie.

"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."

"I turned over all of the work related emails."

What this shows is that either she is a pathological liar who can't be trusted, or too stupid to be trusted with the presidency.

traditionalguy said...

The frustrating part of Hillary's victory is that we all know that she set up her own secret Government inside the US Government. And its purpose was simply to sell US government favors to the highest bidder. Everything was for sale.

And on top of that, the Russians and Chinese and many others got to see her doing that work, but the US Government's silly anti espionage laws forbidding a secret government were defied and kept in the dark to this day.

Big Mike said...

Call me naive, but isn't there a vast system set up that extends to even the highest levels of government that takes it as a given that classified/secret/sensitive information will be accessed by parties unauthorized?

@Fruit Bat, yes, you are naive.

The Department of Defense and the intelligence agencies have very secure systems (e.g., SIPRNet) for message traffic that are not exposed to the Internet, and under Colin Powell's leadership there was an effort to make the State Department's Email system multi-level secure. That effort pretty much died with his departure from office.

tim in vermont said...

Anyone, including Barack, who sent/received classified information to her private email knew what she was doing and is just as culpable.

That's how the Clintons skate, they smear their shit on everybody. Smear the victims, smear the accusers, force their "friends" to compromise themselves. It's an old pattern. Honest Democrats recognize it well.

tim in vermont said...

The problem with this part of the story is that it assumes that the hearer has a better understanding of network communications than Hillary's, which seems to have been "it's all X amount of magic"

It leaves way to much room to muddy the waters.

Bruce Hayden said...

I don't frankly think that Crooked Hillary worried about being hacked. It probably wasn't high on her list of things to worry about. What she seems most worried about was FOIA and Congressional oversight, and my guess is that is because she knew that she and her husband were selling influence over her foreign policy to all comers world wide. It is the same paranoia that you see with drug dealers - they know that they are breaking the law, and if they aren't careful, will end up in jail.

Still, it reminds me a bit of the discussion we had yesterday about men being better, statistically, about thinking nationally, and women better dealing with those in the neighborhood. Ms "it takes a village" seems to have never been able to see the bigger picture, that put her own security above that of national security likely compromised both. And, indeed, I wonder if maybe part of her problem as Sec of State was that she really couldn't think globally, and see how her policies were fated to fail so miserably.

tim in vermont said...

There is a scene in For Whom the Bell Tolls, about the Spanish Civil War, which Hemingway witnessed, in which the communists (Republicans) forced the villagers to beat the local "fascists" to death with farm implements, rather than the partisans just executing themselves. They wanted the villagers to share in the guilt to make them part of the revolution.

Brando said...

She may well have been hacked, but the real elephant in the room is the fact that we don't know what she may have willingly sent to foreign sources because she was able to destroy whatever she wanted and leave no trace. Who's to say that a Russian crony of Putin wanted some favorable treatment from State and he and Hillary e-mailed about it? The point is we don't know, we just know she and her husband raised hundreds of millions (through their "charity" and otherwise) from domestic and foreign sources while she was Secretary, and she has brilliantly set everything up on a private server so no one could see what business she was conducting.

But "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring charges, we're told. And now the American people are about to promote her to the highest government position in the land.

Our parties have failed us. To hell with them.

SteveM said...

While I believe that the FBI should have recommended that charges be filed against Hillary, I believe that Comey didn't do so in view of a possible defense that could be raised by Hillary. I believe that it has been reported that there were 22 email exchanges between Hillary and Obama. All Hillary would have say is that it would have been clear to Obama from the very first email that Hillary was using a private server from Hillary's email address. Therefore, by not saying anything contrary after the first email, Obama was giving his continuing tacit approval to Hillary to use that private server with each subsequent email exchange.

The use of private email to conduct government business in an attempt to avoid FOIA seems to be a common practice throughout the Obama administration and state governments such as NY. There was a decision by the DC Circuit on Tuesday that held that federal records on private email are subject to FOIA..

guest101 said...

"The State Department worries so much about corrupted cellphones that visitors to the secretary’s suite on the seventh floor must place their devices in lockers near the guard’s desk. Mrs. Clinton, her campaign said on Wednesday, took her smartphone to the State Department but kept it in a room outside the secure area around her office suite."

Does anyone believe this?

tim in vermont said...

Because I have a detailed knowledge of messaging systems, earned my living plying that knowledge, the IRS destruction of the hard drives, which were, in fact, the one place where Lois Lerner's instant messages could have been forensically recovered (I will be happy to explain chapter and verse to anybody who doubts this) and that both her hard drive, and another subject of the investigation were destroyed makes it worse. Obviously Obama was using the IRS to attack his enemies.

And Hillary's use of a BB overseas, when even Obama's BB was restricted so that it could only talk to ten other specially prepared BBs.

But you can lead a Democrat to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

Big Mike said...

Honest Democrats recognize it well.

All of the honest Democrats? You mean both of them?

Tank said...

Who wants a banana?

Bruce Hayden said...

No reasonable prosecutor would bring charges against her, most likely because they are all Hillary Supporters, after almost eight years of intensive screening by the Obama/Holder/Lynch DoJ. As has been documented, this was intentionally done in order to preserve their legacy after they leave office.

tim in vermont said...

The real elephant in the room is Hillary's reckless incompetence and poor judgement.

Big Mike said...

@tim in vermont, that's what I've been saying all along. Putting official government business on an unsecured server in the 21st century is STUPID.

Corrupt Hillary? Make that Stupid, corrupt Hillary.

Sebastian said...

"Reading between the lines and following Comey’s logic, it does sound as if the F.B.I. believes a compromise of Clinton’s email is more likely than not." Duh. What difference etc.

Why the "Hillary is in trouble" tag? She's out of trouble. Foreign hacks don't count as "trouble" to her or any Dems. Who cares about this so-called trouble?

Bob Ellison said...

Hacking email is not quite as easy as some people are saying and writing. It's not like falling off a log.

What, though, does Hillary care about it? Did she send an email from her Blackberry while in Moscow about Chelsea blending puppies?

We've already seen that Hillary can barely type and doesn't know how to use a fax machine. My guess is there's not much new to report.

cubanbob said...

Eric, really? What exactly do you think the SoS communicates about? Embassy parties and official dinners? Even if none of the emails had what you consider classic high level intelligence information such as military plans, information about spies etc what she did is still beyond the pale. Which country wouldn't want to know about the American government's internal thinking on trade deals? Which major terrorist group doesn't have an interest in what the State Dept. is discussing in policy terms? What major criminal groups?

Bob Ellison said...

My second guess is that if there is something new, the newsworthiness of it will be not the news, but the source and the timing.

Bruce Hayden said...

Here is a question - which Crooked Hillary troll are we going to see first here today trying to hijack the thread? Chuck? One of the Unknown's? Miriam seems to have wandered off. We shall see.

tim in vermont said...

Hacking email is not quite as easy as some people are saying and writing. It's not like falling off a log.

Really Bob? Tell me where I am wrong. Come on. Let's hear your take down of my description of how it can be done.

Bob Ellison said...

tim in vermont, of course you're right that hacking is possible. I'm just sick and tired of people saying things like "a bored fourteen-year-old boy".

We're not dealing with bored fourteen-year-olds. We're dealing with professional black hats, hired by rich governments, with huge financial interests.

Don't let's belittle the problem. The problem is huge, and it's not coming from some guy in his mama's basement.

Bruce Hayden said...

One of the "diplomatic" things that ends up in State Dept emails are proposed drone strikes in, in particular, Pakistan. After some high profile strikes there, esp where innocents died, the Muslim population there started complaining, which resulted in a requirement for State Dept check off before the CIA could hit specific targets in that country. (Supposedly their govt itself was probably happy with the drone strikes, but have to be tough on us for political reasons). Obviously, if Muslim militants can get this information before hand, they can substitute innocents for the designated targets.

Bruce Hayden said...

Let me add to my drone strike scenario. The problem there apparently is timeliness. The CIA and State Dept try to use secure methods to communicate this information. But what happens if the decision makers are not at work at that time? Can't wait until then just in many cases because the targets may move by then. So, email is apparently used. Supposedly secure email, but if CrookedbHillary was involved...

Unknown said...

Or if you like, SoS is a nothing job, and no credential for the Presidency.

But while SoSs may or may not write 'the invasion is for 0400 local time by AB 2506 at Playa Giron, but no air support,'

they might certainly write

'President Cappuccino has accepted the offer of ten million pesos, to be deposited in the Swiss account in the usual fashion, so CIA can scoop up those dissidents anytime after the check clears, and work on them in the old stone fort, but the President asks that the bodies not be found, so make sure that they bring a good woodchipper-the sharks will do the rest.'

The Drill SGT said...

cubanbob said...
Eric, really? What exactly do you think the SoS communicates about? Embassy parties and official dinners?


Eric, there were three types of "royal jewels" in the Clinton emails.

1. clues and identities of US Clandestine officers and their foreign contacts

2. SIGINT Sources and methods

3. Info on multi-imagining capabilities of US Space assets.

BFD's, not dinner parties

tim in vermont said...

tim in vermont, of course you're right that hacking is possible. I'm just sick and tired of people saying things like "a bored fourteen-year-old boy".

The issue here is whether her emails were likely hacked. In this case, "hacked" is the wrong term, they were just read using normal tools like WireShark, most likely.

It's more than possible, it's highly likely that when the US Secretary of State enters a host country that the comms people are on high alert. Even friendly countries. Like your girlfriend's girlfriends never snuck a look at your crotch. They probably had already set "traps" on the various comms "probes" for her Blackberry so that any traffic that happened to cross their path from it would be automatically recorded and forwarded for analysis.

Since we know that unlike Obama's BB, which could only talk to ten others, Hillary's was used to talk to lots of people, we know that it was extremely likely that it was unencrypted and open to be read by anybody with access to the network equipment.

But I am sure that, unlike the US, where we are always searching for terrorists, other countries don't bother with that incredibly rich source of intelligence, right?

PB said...

Her use of private email was known enough for it to come to the attention of foreign intelligence services. Some of whom are quite good with electronic penetration. Also, once that server moved to a 3rd party hosting site, It's likely there was physical penetration as well. Both of which could leave no evidence.

tim in vermont said...

If we had a picture of Putin using a BB and our spy agencies weren't all over it from that minute on, people should be fired.

The Drill SGT said...

Since we know that unlike Obama's BB, which could only talk to ten others, Hillary's was used to talk to lots of people, we know that it was extremely likely that it was unencrypted and open to be read by anybody with access to the network equipment.

Beyond that, way beyond that, how many of those random pencil pushers were dazzled by virtual face time with Her Majesty and sent her email (and it's address) off to friends...

Anybody actually believe that the FSB doesn't still have friends at State?

The "Give Peace a Chance" types?

AprilApple said...

What diff? She can be bribed? So what? - she lives in the world of bribery.

Unknown said...

penetration, however slight...

The Drill SGT said...

Almost more importantly, her enabling Minions, those 10-20 State Staff that also were a part of the conspiracy, should instantly (2 years ago) lose their clearances. In fact, they are slated, due to their loyalty to the crime boss, for bigger things when the boss becomes POTUS, when the only lessons they have learned are very very bad ones.

n.n said...

America was for sale to the highest bidder.

madAsHell said...

Comey went coward because Hillary's email indicted Obama as well.

YoungHegelian said...

The State Department worries so much about corrupted cellphones that visitors to the secretary’s suite on the seventh floor must place their devices in lockers near the guard’s desk.

Yes, I believe it. I believe it because the "Secretary's Suite on the 7th floor" is a SCIF, & a cell phone wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) work in a SCIF, which blocks all radio frequencies going in or out. Also, modern cell phones not only allow their owners to take photos, but they are also USB storage devices, both of which are major, major no-nos in the world of secured facilities.

Tim said...

Honest Democrats recognize it well.

where did you find one?

Tim said...

believe that it has been reported that there were 22 email exchanges between Hillary and Obama

So, one email every four months or so. Of course. It's not like they worked together.

Brando said...

"believe that it has been reported that there were 22 email exchanges between Hillary and Obama

So, one email every four months or so. Of course. It's not like they worked together."

I could actually believe that--I get the idea he just appointed her to keep her unable to run against him in 2012, and dealt with her as little as possible (or at least through intermediaries). I don't picture them ever being close.

Roy Lofquist said...

Of course it can't be detected. If it could be detected it would be blocked.


Michael K said...

Either out of embarrassment or to protect its sources of intelligence, the Obama administration has never publicly blamed Russia for stealing data from the unclassified systems at the State Department and the White House, just as it has never publicly identified China as the culprit in the theft of security-clearance information on nearly 22 million Americans stored by the Office of Personnel Management.

They put a Chinese national as administration of the OPM database.

What's the concern ?

EMD said...

"Anything even remotely close to that?"

Supposedly names of Defense Department officials that should not have been used in insecure traffic.

Ask Scooter Libby about it.

Big Mike said...

@Bob Ellison, I didn't introduce the phrase "bored fourteen year old" to trivialize the issue -- quite the contrary! It's one thing for sophisticated hackers with super computers and the resources of a major nation behind them. But that's not what it took, based on everything I read so far it was vastly easier than that. The lack of security awareness is appalling.

Sebastian said...

"he just appointed her to keep her unable to run against him in 2012, and dealt with her as little as possible (or at least through intermediaries)"

Right.

That's why this whole email imbroglio is the greatest deception in the history of American intelligence. By "allowing" Hill to run her own, easily hackable private server, O and his gang lured enemies foreign and domestic to focus on her communications and to assume they had anything to do with the inner workings of the administration. Of course, he had to communicate with her every couple of months or so, just to keep up appearances. The ruse also explains why no one is concerned about the 30,000 emails that were destroyed, since none could have concerned any actual "work." In short, our operatives used Hill's calculating self-interest, lacking any technical competence, for the government's benefit. As a political bonus, it kept GOP ire aimed at Hill rather than O and made her more dependent on O's favor far longer. Win-win-win!

tim in vermont said...

So Hillary was not put under oath when questioned by the FBI. Just to make sure that when she lied to them, which they knew she would, she couldn't be prosecuted? Naah!

But the billionaires who decided that she would be the nominee must not have their will thwarted!

tim in vermont said...

No transcript either. She did learn a lot from Nixon's downfall.

Joe said...

One theory: Obama told Hillary to set up her own email server. Obama also promised Hillary that he would cover for her to the extent possible. I suspect that the missing emails are likely the key to all of this.

mikee said...

Hillary deleted tens of thousands of emails that nobody in the US can access.

Any country on earth can produce supposed Hillary emails from her time as SecState without fear of being disproven, containing any damn thing whatsoever, no matter how criminal, corrupt or crony-istic.

As Kramer would shout, "Propaganda gold, Jerry! Propaganda GOLD!"

Brando said...

"That's why this whole email imbroglio is the greatest deception in the history of American intelligence."

"One theory: Obama told Hillary to set up her own email server. Obama also promised Hillary that he would cover for her to the extent possible. I suspect that the missing emails are likely the key to all of this."

I think it more likely Obama just parked her at State to keep her from undermining him from the Senate (and earn some Clintonite support) but never much trusted her or thought highly of her opinion (the times he did listen to her, it brought him disaster in Libya). He probably first learned of this private server thing when the press found out, and when he did a few times read e-mails from her he probably didn't think twice about the e-mail address not being from State (figuring maybe she was using a private account, not a private server) and assuming everything was aboveboard (Obama was never one to get into the weeds--he left that to underlings). If he had some other option to support another candidate, he would have dropped her like third period French.

This was likely Clinton Foundation payola, and she was running it out of her official position. Probably all of it recommended by Sid Blumenthal or some other toady, who saw a way to get around FOIA or GOP investigations, and enrich the Clintons and her campaign going into 2016.

And now they got away with it.

Hagar said...

Knowingly making a false statement to a Federal official is a crime in itself. Perjury is a separate crime.

Ask Martha Stewart. And in her case they did not even have a record or field notes of the conversation! It was just, he said/she said.

Sebastian said...

"I think it more likely Obama just parked her at State" Of course, I'm not entirely serious about the email fiasco being a subtle intelligence operation, partly because I hesitate to ascribe such competence to government operatives, but it does connect a number of dots . . .

rightguy2 said...

I believe that we will all be less safe with HRC as president. She, like the democrats in general, are not serious about national security and the war on terror. More Americans died as a result of Obama's policies (with significant input from HRC) , and even more will die if HRC is elected to the same office. These are matters of fact to me.

Brando said...

""I think it more likely Obama just parked her at State" Of course, I'm not entirely serious about the email fiasco being a subtle intelligence operation, partly because I hesitate to ascribe such competence to government operatives, but it does connect a number of dots . . ."

Yeah, I live by the "don't ascribe to cunning what can just as easily be ascribed to stupidity" maxim. And Obama seems to be very aloof, preferring to leave dirty work to underlings and keeping his hands clean. It's what's kept him from getting nailed by scandals--he genuinely doesn't know about them because he prefers to let others do them. Which I guess is pretty cunning!

David Begley said...

Mikee

David Kendall has all of the deleted emails. That's a lock.

Sam's Hideout said...

With the existence of m**a**l**t (characters intentionally elided), for known vulnerabilities it really possible for a bored 14 year old using (nearly) point and click tools downloaded off the internet to penetrate servers.

tim in vermont said...

The didn't record her interview, nor did they make any sort of transcript. This is to make sure they do not even give Hillary the opportunity to commit another prosecutable crime by lying to them. They wanted to be double certain they didn't have to prosecute her.

tim in vermont said...

This is because they know now that Hillary is a stupid idiot who can't be trusted to do the smart thing.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Ask Scooter Libby about it."

-- I think Clinton's more like Richard Armitage.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Hillary deleted tens of thousands of emails that nobody in the US can access."

-- Any other investigation where the subject destroyed things before the government could investigate fully would not end the same.

Big Mike said...

@David Begley, @Mikee -- ditto Julian Assange

Michael K said...

"Ask Martha Stewart. And in her case they did not even have a record or field notes of the conversation! It was just, he said/she said."

Martha was just the canary in the coal mine. I'll bet she still supports Hillary.

rhhardin said...

I thought lying to a government official was a felony oath or not. That's the reason not to talk to them.

tim in vermont said...

I thought lying to a government official was a felony oath or not. That's the reason not to talk to them.

It is, that's one of the reasons they were afraid to take a transcript or to record it.

mccullough said...

The FBI doesn't record or transcribe interviews of suspects not in custody. When you defend someone for lying to the FBI, the first questions on cross are you didn't record the statement? There is a court reporter transcribing every word we are saying right now so that the record is accurate, but you didn't have the interview of my client transcribed, correct?

cubanbob said...

In the interest of making the law equal to all the Republicans should introduce The Comey,Clinton, Lynch and Obama Intent Act of 2016 for a vote and signature by the President. The Act should read notwithstanding all Federal statutes and all federal regulations and Administrative law shall require the incontrovertible and duly recorded and witnessed confession of intent by the accused or the defendant no inference can be made for intent under any Federal statute, Federal Administrative law or regulation effective upon enactment. A simple codification of the Clinton-Comey Doctrine is order in the interest of fairness for all.

Saint Croix said...

I missed this big news

A new investigation of Hillary Clinton is imminent

Rep. Jason Chaffetz asked FBI Director James Comey if presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton had lied under oath when she testified to Congress about her email server. Comey said he would need a recommendation from Congress to investigate whether Clinton lied under oath to Congress.

Chaffetz said Comey would have that recommendation within hours.


More from CNBC here.

Saint Croix said...

Also, apparently Clinton gave classified information to unauthorized people.

That is exactly analogous to what Petraeus did.

Indeed, one wonders why the giving of classified information to unauthorized people was not the focus of the FBI's investigation! After all, the Obama administration prosecutes people for doing that all the time. Obama's DOJ does those prosecutions more than every other administration combined.

And the questions that I would like to know: Who are the unauthorized people that Hillary Clinton leaked to?

From the Comey-Chaffetz exchange (3rd video down at the link), it appears the answer is two groups of people: her lawyers and the people who managed her email server.

I can understand the reluctance to prosecute Hillary for sharing emails with her attorneys while she is under FBI investigation for leaking those same emails. I would say under the due process clause she has a right to do that, regardless of what any federal statue says. Her due process right trumps the criminal statute.

But that argument does not apply to the sharing of classified information with "the people who managed her email server." Why is that not a felony exactly analogous to what Petraeus did, or Jeffrey Sterling did?

madAsHell said...

AP is reporting that the State Department is looking into the Clinton's emails. The focus is on the Huma Abedin, and Cheryl Mills.

tim in vermont said...

On April 1, 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of intentionally removing documents from the National Archives and destroying some of them. He was fined $50,000, sentenced to 100 hours of community service and two years probation. Also, his national security license was stripped for two years.

Messages found stored on Clinton’s private email server show that Berger – a convicted thief of classified documents – had been advising Clinton while she served as secretary of state and had access to emails containing classified information.

For example, in an email dated Sept. 22, 2009, Berger advised Clinton advised how she could leverage information to make Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu more cooperative in discussions with the Obama administration over a settlement freeze.


I am sure that it was just carelessness. The funny thing is that Comey was involved in prosecuting Sandy Burgler, and here he shows up again. Berger and Comey, two bad pennies.

damikesc said...

She didn't know she was breaking the law, he claims.

But he cannot explain why they deleted the info in such a way to make it impossible to retrieve forensically. The evidence of knowledge of what she was doing is all over this case and literally nobody but a Clinton would get this level of benefit of the doubt.

"The State Department worries so much about corrupted cellphones that visitors to the secretary’s suite on the seventh floor must place their devices in lockers near the guard’s desk. Mrs. Clinton, her campaign said on Wednesday, took her smartphone to the State Department but kept it in a room outside the secure area around her office suite."

Does anyone believe this?


Her aides say she was incapable of working a computer and refused to have one in her office, opting for her smartphone instead.

She had it IN HER OFFICE.

So, no, that is not true from what has been reported.

@tim in vermont, that's what I've been saying all along. Putting official government business on an unsecured server in the 21st century is STUPID.

This wasn't "stupidity". There is a clear reason WHY she did it. She even said so in the leaked emails and testimony from aides. She didn't want her "personal" emails to be leaked. Nevermind that she could've just used Google or her own server for her own personal emails --- she felt that ALL of the emails were "hers".

Big Mike said...

@damikesc, yes it was STUPID. If Reince Priebus had the brains that the Good Lord gave an amoeba, the RNC would have hacked her account -- it wouldn't have been that hard -- and be in a position to dump all sorts of Clinton dirty linen all over the Internet. With cutouts to give plausible deniability to the folks at 310 First Street, SE, of course. (And for all I know this may still happen, though as of now I've given up on the notion that Reince Priebus has two or more digits in his IQ.)

Certainly her "personal" Emails are in the hands of countries with whom we maintain an adversarial relationship, and quite possibly in the hands of some of the more technically sophisticated terrorist organizations as well.