"Mrs. Clinton sending them in this instance would show her intent much more than would receiving [them],” the source said. "Hillary Clinton was at a minimum grossly negligent in her handling of NDI [National Defense Information] materials merely by her insisting that she utilize a private server versus a [U.S. government] server. Remember, NDI does not have to be classified." According to the Congressional Research Service, NDI is broadly defined to include “information that they have reason to know could be used to harm the national security.”...From: "Source: Clinton IT specialist revealing server details to FBI, 'devastating witness.'"
११ मार्च, २०१६
"The intelligence source said the FBI is 'extremely focused' on the 22 'top secret' emails deemed too damaging to national security to publicly release under any circumstances..."
"... with agents reviewing those sent by Clinton as well her subordinates including former chief of staff Cheryl Mills."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
९६ टिप्पण्या:
Think someone's going to Vince Foster that kid?
She can't win on this. Either she is evil for doing this or a total fucking idiot for doing this. Present the public with these two conclusions and let them argue which one she is. Either way, this seriously wounded new her electability.
Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin.
We have heard Edward Snowden's opinion on apple encryption. Why haven't we heard his opinion on the security risks posed by Hillary's server?
It won't matter to her supporters or to the collection of special interest groups that comprise the Democratic Party. All they care about is getting their vig.
We've seen this play out before with her husband and the National Organization for Women. Remember they lost their voice when it became clear that Bill was getting blow jobs from White House interns.
She installed the server for the purpose of deleting stuff she wanted to delete at a later time.
For Huma and Cheryl Mills, orange is the new black. Heh-heh.
But, without Obama's blessing, I still doubt that AG Loretta Lynch indicts Hillary.
The noose is tightening. There was a report yesterday that a second grand jury has been convened re: the possibility that Clinton traded national security information in exchange for donations to the Clinton Crime Foundation. That's speculation, but the two former DoJ big wigs who commented on it noted that the FBI doesn't assign 150 agents to investigate something akin to a speeding ticket.
This is political intrigue of the highest order. With Obambi worried about his precious legacy one has to wonder if he'll pull the plug and allow an indictment and try to slip Joey B. in as the nominee, or if he's so worried about a mutually assured destruction from the Clinton's dirt on him (which could be extraordinary) that he lets it pass.
I'll be making us all some more popcorn.
Meh. This has turned into another Benghazi where only the Hillary haters give a hoot or pay attention.
By the time of the conventions the Repubs will have grandstanded on this so much the press will be bored and cover something else.
Keep your powder dry until its time.
The problem with AG Lynch not indicting Hillary, if the evidence is there to do so, is that she would be essentially directly ignoring an FBI recommendation for prosecution. And, that fact, along with some/much of the incriminating evidence, will most likely be leaked.
What must be remembered is that this is really bad, from the point of the FBI. They send people to prison for much, much less, and if Hillary, and her clown car of minions, get away with this, then it is going to be quite hard to prosecute anyone in the future for less. And, there goes national security - sending people to prison for mishandling classified information is how our govt. protects national secrets.
But, AG Lynch refusing to indict may not be a done deal yet. There are rumors of a grand jury having been called to look into public corruption in the guise of the Clintons taking in money from parties who had business before the State Dept. Some went to her husband as speaking fees (but is presumably shared with his wife), and some to the family foundation that now includes her name. We are talking some major bribes here - tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds.
The next couple months should be interesting for us, and, more importantly maybe, for Herself.
Dan Hossley said...
...the National Organization for Women. Remember they lost their voice when it became clear that Bill was getting blow jobs from White House interns.
They didn't lose their voice; it's just that their mouths were full.
How is this kid still alive?
I hope they slow walk this until next January. They can leak enough details to keep her out of the white house, and then BOOM!!. The big house lands on her.
I'm still not seeing any Hillary stickers out here in the Soviet of Seattle. I do see Bernie stickers, and there was an article in the paper about Bernie donations per capita were highest here.
@Bruce Hayden: The WSJ ran an article a few weeks ago about the number of people who are currently in prison (prosecuted by the Obama administration) for mishandling as few as a single classified document. I don't remember the exact number, but I think it was close to a dozen.
She won't be indicted. That's Obama's call, and, really, how can he? He was supposed to be her supervisor during this time period. And if DOJ or the FBI demands that charges be brought, he might allow it, but then pardon her.
traditionalguy said...
Their best bet is to have Cruz and Trump both lose out at a rigged Convention replaced by a Paul Ryan dark horse
Paul Ryan was my original pick to win the Red team nomination. I want this on the record, I could still win.
Foxnews doesn't count, that's the rules.
I find myself fascinated by the disconnect on this issue between liberals who like Clinton, who assume that anything negative about her is right-wing-spin-machine nothing, and those of us who kind of see this as a looming disaster for Clinton. Someone is out of touch with reality. I guess we wait.
Obviously the FBI could decide to do nothing - for good reason or pressure - and there would be no recourse at all. No way to discount that.
But it gives this weird feeling when I read places like 538, which continues with its blithe calculations about the Democratic primaries without any thought of what in the world would happen if this blew up, in "six or eight weeks" (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/11/us/politics/7-democrats-in-congress-say-clinton-email-inquiry-is-too-politicized.html). It's just not in their range of possibilities.
"She won't be indicted. That's Obama's call..." Irrelevant. The recommendation to indict would be enough to destroy her candidacy. Democrats would instantly run in all directions. She'd still have some support, people like my mother, but not enough.
If this did go down, the critical question is when.
By the time of the conventions the Repubs will have grandstanded on this so much the press will be bored and cover something else.
Psst. They're not covering it now. Conservative sites are the only ones covering it.
Thank you for your concern.
So the FBI won't release to the US public 22 emails that any moderately competent hacker from age 15 up may have stolen, not to mention that the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, French, Brits, Germans and Indians already have them?
OK then, no problem. I'll await their release by somebody that already has them. Or maybe just expect Hillary to be blackmailed with that sort of thing when she is in office.
And hey, the FBI never had access to the tens of thousands of supposedly "personal" emails wiped from the server, before the emails were turned over, right? I'm sure absolutely none of them were problematic for Hillary, either. And I am the Queen of Romania.
No "Hillary's in trouble" tag. LOL. Probably for good reason. When Obama illegally fired that IG who was investigating a political friend, and nobody made a peep, the rule of law became a joke.
And I am the Queen of Romania.
Elena Ceausescu? The Red Queen? No, Hillary is much more on the mark.
Witness Protection Program for this guy after all is said and done?
The GOP is dumb. They are running solely with the Hillary is evil theme. Need to present the either or. Recklessly incompetent is an easier sell to people inclined to lean toward Hillary and think this is the GOP crying wolf again.
MikeR: "Irrelevant. The recommendation to indict would be enough to destroy her candidacy. Democrats would instantly run in all directions. She'd still have some support, people like my mother, but not enough.
If this did go down, the critical question is when."
And how.
If the recommendation to indict is simply dribbled out via leaks (which it must), then the primary Pravda-elements like the NYT, WP, etc won't even cover it.
Drudge will pick it up and the left will get some republican on record as "knowing about it first" and then the apparatchiks will go into overdrive making that the story as opposed to the substance of the indictment.
I agree "Hillary the ham-handed hawk" is a better take, and has the advantage of being accurate. If you see someone following Hillary around dressed as the zombie corpse of a drowned refugee from her , that might be me.
Mikee is right. Israel will leak the emails before the election. October surprise.
Ann, correct me if I'm wrong, but IF there are grand juries involved and IF statutory immunity has been given, THEN a DOJ US States Attorney AND a federal judge are already involved. This may be much further down the road than many realize. The FBI cannot provide immunity OR impanel a grand jury.
I don't understand the people who say that the MSM isn't covering it, "Conservative sites are the only ones covering it." Just not true. Google clinton emails, you get NYT links like the one I posted, Washington Post, etc. Screen for the last month, or just the last week, and you still get plenty of hits. Server tech given immunity to testify, Democratic Congressmen starting to worry and criticizing the investigation... They're covering it, they just don't have the foxnews "inside source". One hopes that the inside source is reliable.
You are correct, PB. The people you listed are involved and it's much farther down the road than many choose to recognize.
"If the recommendation to indict is simply dribbled out via leaks (which it must)" Can someone clarify that? Does the FBI's recommendation become public, or only the DOJ's decision?
This is the sort of thread that Chuck "the lifelong republican" is likely to avoid at all costs as there is no way to evade criticizing Hillary, and he is quite loathe to do that.
ARM: "Paul Ryan was my original pick to win the Red team nomination. I want this on the record, I could still win."
In for a penny, in for a pound?
Remember when Hillary avoided answering who sorted the emails to determine what to release? At that time it was plain she knew she violated the law. what about the Atty that possessed then handed over the flash drive? Does he have top secret clearance? She can't claim stupid. Her responses to questions are far to obtuse.
Blogger Bruce Hayden said...
What must be remembered is that this is really bad, from the point of the FBI. They send people to prison for much, much less, and if Hillary, and her clown car of minions, get away with this, then it is going to be quite hard to prosecute anyone in the future for less. And, there goes national security -
Is this true? Why can't they prosecute the next time someone mishandled secrets?
Huma stole $35,000 from the State Department and the State IG recommended prosecution. DOJ declined because it wasn't serious enough. I'm sure the next time some slub takes some ghost employment money he will go to jail.
MikeR: "If the recommendation to indict is simply dribbled out via leaks (which it must)" Can someone clarify that? Does the FBI's recommendation become public, or only the DOJ's decision?"
I don't know what the rules are, but then again, who cares what the rules are? Rules are for little people.
The FBI will be unable to avoid coming to a recommendation to indict (there would be full scale internecine warfare at the FBI otherwise)which itself would become public but only through leaks. The recommendation will go to Justice where Lynch will sit on it until after the election and beyond. Why? Because that is what they will want to do, so, you know, to hell with you guys.
Again, if all you read is the NYT, all you will know is that Trump's candidacy is chock full of Nazi's and other Americans who don't appreciate the superior governing structure of communist China.
Still, when she is president, Hillary won't have to bother much with such details as emails or indictments, instead allowing them to be handled by Huma or some other staffer. Because Hillary will be president. God help us all.
They will blow off the classified e-mails and probably get away with it. (It is just sooo complicated!)
The corruption charges are something else. I have always said it is going to be the money that will get her in the end.
Bruce Hayden: "What must be remembered is that this is really bad, from the point of the FBI. They send people to prison for much, much less, and if Hillary, and her clown car of minions, get away with this, then it is going to be quite hard to prosecute anyone in the future for less. "
LOL
The dems won't hesitate to prosecute someone for jaywalking. And if they have to lie to make it stick they will do so.
What is it about the lefties that you have not yet internalized? They don't care and they really don't care if you know they don't care. In fact, they enjoy that part the most.
Welcome to the Obama-nana-"republic".
The dems are already circling the wagons in support of Hillary's transgressions:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/03/lawmakers-raise-doubts-on-igs-clinton-email-review-220580
And if you don't think that ploy will work, then you haven't been paying attention for the last 40 years.
This is so formulaic at this point that the only thing that is shocking is that it might shock anyone.
@Bruce Hayden:They send people to prison for much, much less, and if Hillary, and her clown car of minions, get away with this, then it is going to be quite hard to prosecute anyone in the future for less.
No, the next Republican-associated figure who does it will get the book thrown at them for much less, with the full-throated support of the media, with this instance disappearing down the memory hole.
Who? Whom? There's no principles there, just will-to-power. If a Clinton does it, it's not wrong, just distorted by the right-wing noise machine. If Scooter Libby does it, it's an indictment of the whole Bush administration right up to the top, worth making a movie about. If Sandy Burger does it, that's just him being silly, he probably didn't mean any harm and it certainly couldn't be expected to reflect on the Clintons.
what i don't understand is reading that Hilary's server "may" have been hacked. I thought the Romanian hacker who is being extradited to the US did hack into her emails. so why aren't the press articles saying "Hilary's email server was hacked, and US secrets are known to have been compromised."?
I must be missing something
Do you want to know what else will come out from the FBI talking to the sys admin, Pagliano? He didn't spend all of his days & nights moving email, classified or not, from the State Dept secured network by hand to Hillary's server. I mean, are you nuts? The Secretary of State expected her email to be timely, & there could be no sort of delay introduced by "sneaker-netting" the emails.
Oh, no. It's much worse than that. Pagliano, under orders from Hillary & in open or grudging connivance with the State Dept, introduced what's called a mail relay host, which bridged the air gap between State's secure & Hillary's unsecure network. Now, in computer/network security terms, just like housing construction, a doorway out is a doorway in. In other words, Hillary probably compromised the entire State Dept secure network.
Just wait. This will come out. It can be no other way.
@Johns,
I thought the Romanian hacker who is being extradited to the US did hack into her emails
No, the Romanian hacker hacked into Sidney Blumenthal's email account, and that's where he got Hillary's email from. Now, why Blumenthal, who was explicitly denied a security clearance by State, was still receiving classified email from Hillary, is another story.
I have no idea why the Romanian hacker chose Blumenthal. For myself, if I hacked Sidney Blumenthal, I'd be most curious to discover in what language Satan gives orders to his minions.
Sandy Burger, an interesting reference. I suspect if the shoe were on the other foot [i.e. Hilary (R)] we'd have rehashed the Sandy Burger story a hundred times. It would demonstrate how that wascally Hillawy has always played fast and loose on national security.
Here's the scenario:
Lynch indicts Cheryl and Huma, but not Hillary.
Cheryl and Huma remain out on bail pending trial.
Right after the election they plead guilty to some minor(ish) charges and the other charges are dropped. They remain out on bail pending sentencing.
Sentencing occurs in January. They are each sentenced to six months in jail. One hour later, Obama pardons both.
@holdfast,
I do see a scenario where someone in Hillary's coterie is found to fall on his/her sword for all of this. Needless to say, the Republican candidate, if it happens before the election, will have a field day with this.
If Obama pardons them on the way out, it'll poison the political waters for the Democrats for years. Nixon was pardoned because he was on the way out, resigning in shame, & that was felt by the electorate to be punishment enough. He had, in spite of it all, ended the War & opened up China.
But, to pardon the minions of the incoming administration, those closest to the new President who helped get her there, only to be thrown under the bus, that'll come close to provoking a constitutional crisis.
I have to laugh when I see people who think something will come of this. Our government is thoroughly corrupt and Democrats own the bureaucracy. The statements made by the State Dept. sound like they come directly from her campaign manager. Obama is already ignoring the FBI investigation and publicly defending her. He's sending a message. It doesn't matter how incompetent she is or how much damage she's done to national security. In their eyes she's too big to fail. I don't believe there is literally anything she could do that would be allowed to disqualify her.
It's their world. We just pay to live in it.
Chuck "the lifelong republican" is likely to avoid at all costs as there is no way to evade criticizing Hillary, and he is quite loathe to do that.
Chuck's a Democrat. He didn't even know Palin's side of the story on the Alaska Governor thing and was just blindly bashing her.
Besides, I have never personally met a "lifelong Republican" although I am sure they exist.
Mark said...
Meh. This has turned into another Benghazi where only the Hillary haters give a hoot or pay attention.
You'd think it would be embarrassing for Hillary supporters to admit they don't care about the country, but apparently it isn't.
@Rick,
You'd think it would be embarrassing for Hillary supporters to admit they don't care about the country, but apparently it isn't.
As I can attest from my FB feed, absolutely, unbelievably shameless. Not like "Oh, she's the least awful of a whole crew of disgusting candidates", but actually saying shit like "Hillary is liked & respected by the DC establishment". Whoa, bee-yatch! What you smokin'? Hillary's a bitch, and everyone, including those in her orbit, are pretty open about it. Every expose' or bibliography on the Clintons discusses what an awful temper she has.
Just total disconnect from political reality.
I suspect this will be another lesson on "Rules for Us vs. Rules for Them". I noted how they put a shot across Petraeus bow by threatening his retirement by busting his rank. If that didn't yell "Keep Your Mouth Shut" nothing does.
Remember when Scooter Libby went to prison over a minor issue tangential to Valerie Plame? Good times... good times. That's when Democrats cared about giving up intelligence assets. Or pretended to, anyways.
. I noted how they put a shot across Petraeus bow by threatening his retirement by busting his rank. If that didn't yell "Keep Your Mouth Shut" nothing does.
I remember when Obama assured us there was nothing to the Petraeus thing.
Absolutely nothing will come of this. As noted above, the rule of law doesn't apply to Democrat politicians generally and certainly not to Clintons under any circumstances. This was abundantly clear 20 years ago, and is even clearer today. The good news is that 4 years of Hillary should finish the hollowing out of the Democrat Party.
It's their world. We just pay to live in it.
correction:
It's their world. We just pay for it.
Absent an indictment or Clinton dropping out, an outraged FBI will leak the story. She will lose the election to Cruz. (Via open convention)
It will be the perfect bookend to Watergate and the Clinton era.
#NEVERCLINTON
A question for the lawyers here:
When can a pardon occur? Can it be pre-emptive? For example, if Huma, Hilary, Cheryl have been indicted but not yet tried, before Obama leaves office, could he pardon them and stop the trial? Or do they have to be found guilty before being pardoned?
If Hilary were to be indicted in October but win the presidency, could she pardon herself in January?
I remember Ford pardoned Nixon who had not even been indicted. But I also remember that there was discussion about whether that was legally possible.
John Henry
@YoungHegelian: If what you say at 3:18 is true then it's far worse than anything I would have imagined. I can't begin to comprehend the impact of that scenario, but I would have to guess that anything that blatant couldn't be swept under the rug. FBI, NSA, and CIA officials would never let that stand -- and they have the "resources" to make an issue of it.
The smoking gun is not this email or that--though some of them are pretty damning. Bear in mind that the only email in the possession of the authorities are the ones Hillary choose to turn over.
The smoking gun is the server itself: There is only one reason to have such a setup, it is to avoid oversight--it is to be able to turn over just the emails she wants to turn over and delete the incriminating ones. This should be obvious and it should be repeated over and over again.
The Hillary instinct to avoid oversight is the purest evidence of criminal intent.
Blogger Fabi said..."This is political intrigue of the highest order. With Obambi worried about his precious legacy one has to wonder if he'll pull the plug and allow an indictment and try to slip Joey B. in as the nominee, or if he's so worried about a mutually assured destruction from the Clinton's dirt on him (which could be extraordinary) that he lets it pass."
Agree, especially re Biden. (Notre Dame just awarded him, along with Boehner, their prestigious "Laetare Award" for showing how to play well together. Real religious role models eh?)
The comments re Paul Ryan eventually being the R nom may explain Romney's sudden appearance on the scene.
And OMG, Young Hegelian, that server bridge and "door out is a door in" and how Clinton may have comprised all the State Dept. info--never thought about that. Truly frightening. Yet every day I see these college kids blindly saying "Hillary will be President"--which is just as frightening.
Their best bet is to have Cruz and Trump both lose out at a rigged Convention replaced by a Paul Ryan dark horse
Paul Ryan is no longer acceptable to either Trump or Cruz voters, and if this were to occur, the Democrats would definitely win the presidency, and probably take the Senate.
The part this pisses me off...the Establishment would blame the loss on the conservatives, and the MSM would help them.
Maybe the DOJ is too busy with this to bother with Clinton's potential leaks of our National Security Intel to foreigners:
"On Tuesday, the Justice Department announced "Combating Religious Discrimination Today," a new inter-agency initiative to promote religious freedom, challenge religious discrimination and increase enforcement of religion-based hate crimes. The new community engagement effort launched by 5 federal agencies, will lead a series of community round tables across the country. The first was in Newark, New Jersey on Tuesday and focused on addressing bullying and religious discrimination in schools. Among those addressing the round table were Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. (Full text of remarks.) Subsequent round tables are scheduled for Dallas, Birmingham (AL), Detroit and Palo Alto (CA). They will focus on topics such as hate crimes, employment discrimination and discrimination by local zoning officials." (From regionclauseblogspot.)
Hard to believe that a DC based Grand Jury would indict. And, I think that's the plan - no indictment from a split GJ. That's pretty good cover. FBI will be faced with the option of wasting another year on investigation of then to be President HRC. Not a lot of good career moves in that mix.
This was probably the plan all along. Early on it seemed and presented so well, so egalitarian, so fair and depoliticized. Nice cover. Was this an Eric Holder machination?
@Theranter, Fabi
that server bridge and "door out is a door in" and how Clinton may have comprised all the State Dept. info--
If what you say at 3:18 is true..
Okay, gentlemen, I want to make one thing perfectly clear --- no investigating authority has said that my scenario of a "relay gateway" is what happened. No one, not yet. As such, it is speculative.
I also don't want to leave the impression that I, being in IT in DC for years & years, have some inside dope on this, a "friend of a friend, nudge, nudge", because I don't.
What I do have is years of IT experience doing exactly this sort of stuff. I know full well that an explanation that multiple high level Staffers, who individually received hundreds if not thousands of emails a day, had their emails manually transferred between a secure & an unsecure network is absolutely impossible bullshit. They would need multiple staffers who did nothing but transfer email, 7 by 24 by 365, because the "freedom of the Free world depends on it".
So, how did they do it? If I got this task, how would I do it? A mail relay between the two networks. Technically, it's a piece of cake. Administratively, it would land me in prison unless the right Motherfuckers in Charge signed off on it.
It will be hard to prove gross negligence or any kind of negligence, it seems to me, when at the time she commissioned the private email server all manner of classified material was pouring out through Private Manning and others to WikiLeaks. It raises the question, can you be prosecuted for handling classified material more securely than the government bureaucracy?
That's going to be the Clinton defense, and they are holding it in reserve like President Obama did his birth certificate.
Of course it's hurting her in the primary, because the determined leakers in the government she was hiding her emails from were Sanders socialists.
"So, how did they do it? If I got this task, how would I do it? A mail relay between the two networks. Technically, it's a piece of cake. Administratively, it would land me in prison unless the right Motherfuckers in Charge signed off on it."
It's the government. They have access to unlimited resources. You and me? Not so much.
@YoungHegelian: I knew that you were offering speculation. I had not conceived of an air-gap jump like you described -- and would not conceive it given the incredible illegality involved -- and that's what made the scenario so offensive in consideration. As much as I loathe her, I hope for our national security that it didn't happen that way. I do appreciate your theory. (and the Boobie Bungalow sign)
@Left Bank of the Charles: There are no exceptions regarding the proper handling of classified materials. "He did it, too!" is not a legal defense. Sorry -- can't tell if you're being facetious or not.
Any idea that begins with "as long as our Federal gov. officials do their duty in a nonpartisan, nonideological way..." is already in some serious trouble.
Gov workers may be fine, decent, upstanding people.
Gov OFFICIALS, though, the ones who will ultimately make the important decisions (using their "official discretion") are really politicians & snakes and should be assumed to be Leftist operatives until definitively proven otherwise.
Maybe it's Botox but Mrs. Clinton doesn't seem to be sweating.
Good thing the ACLU decided that mens rea reform isn't needed...so her intentions when taking illegal action doesn't really matter, right?
JK, JK, LOL.
This is all Steroids-Era Baseball.
Everyone recognized it, not many gave a Fuck.
All the Big Players Dope.
I am Laslo.
YoungHegelian is correct, I believe. He also shows self-awareness and class in clarifying his remarks. As another long-time IT professional - NOT in the DC area, and in a major-account sales role, not a "technical" role - I have assumed for some time that there was a direct electronic transfer of the e-mails. As YoungHegelian implied, it probably couldn't have been actually done in any other way.
Is there still an elephant wandering around that no one speaks of publicly? My understanding has been that Hillary! originally had 65,000 emails on her private server and deleted about 30,000 of them before turning the rest over to authorities. Has anyone (besides the Russians and Chinese etc.) actually recovered the deleted emails? If the FBI doesn't have the recovered emails, one can only ask: What the heck was in the 30,00 emails that they deleted?
What the heck was in the 30,00 emails that they deleted?
Should be "30,000" emails.
Meh. This has turned into another Benghazi where only the Hillary haters give a hoot or pay attention.
Sure thing, Mark. Nobody will pay attention if a presidential candidate has a felony indictment. You go with that thought.
PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...
A question for the lawyers here:
When can a pardon occur? Can it be pre-emptive?
Of course. Nixon was pardoned without ever being indicted.
PS: The IT weenie was a political appointee, thus his hiring was approved by the WH. That is very very unusual...
PPS: The whole scandal comes down to Comey. If the FBI thinks it has a case, Comey asks Lynch to indict. If she refuses and Comey resigns, Clinton is toast.
So the real question is... WHO WAS HER MOLE IN THE INTELLIGENCE SERVICE?
Who walked into them, were they have an air gap (no internet connection of ANY kind), and walked out with a memory stick or other device with the info? Someone had to, you know, email her this stuff. Who were they?
Give them immunity and find out what she was doing with all this intelligence.
For you see, the Clinton Foundation has gotten a lot of donations from countries Hillary's State Department had intelligence information on. Was she selling it?
Nobody comes out of NSA, CIA or DIA with a memory stick. None of the machines have working USB ports.
What I think happened is Clinton aides attended SCI briefings and made notes, which were then transcribed into Clinton emails
Could have been by a mole with a camera, or printouts (shades of Sandy Berger), or hand written notes.
BUT WHO SENT THEM? Who had the security clearance?
If you haven't been paying attention to this story until recently, you may not know that the FBI has actually recovered the email from Hillary's server. They are not working off the print-outs of emails the State Department is releasing, they have the actual data from the poorly erased hard drive. They likely also have the thumb drive Hillary gave to her lawyer with all of her emails on it.
Also, the mail server was used not just for Hillary's emails, but also Cheryl Mills's and Huma Abedin's.
So, how did they do it? If I got this task, how would I do it? A mail relay between the two networks. Technically, it's a piece of cake. Administratively, it would land me in prison unless the right Motherfuckers in Charge signed off on it.
3/11/16, 5:57 PM"
YH you are being too modest. The guy given immunity was also vetted by the White House. This shit storm won't end with Hillary; the stench will permeate through various departments and agencies and all the way to the Oval Office. What I find inconceivable is the other soon to be discovered departments and agencies and the White House allowing this. There is or was no upside in allowing this stunt and downside is catastrophic so why would the White House allow it to first happen and second to let it continue?
Once the train gets speed there won't be anyway out for the players except to rat out the others in exchange for being let go and that will probably loosen a lot of tongues. Even if elected president, Hillary would hopelessly crippled politically and eventually impeached and removed if she didn't reprise Nixon and resign. Obama is going to be smeared from head to toe in shit so even though he won't be facing prosecution he won't escape the permanent stain on his watch. I just don't understand why any cabinet officer or agency director who received emails from the SoS containing classified information from a non government server would not have stopped and taken appropriate measures in notifying the agencies in charge of espionage and counterintelligence.
Eric, you folks have been talking about imminent indictments on this for months now.
Just like Benghazi.
After enough crying wolf, the folks who aren't rabid anti-Hillary people ignore all your bleating. Overstatement in the media doesn't strengthen your case (see what Scott Walker did with the overstatement he faced).
My money is on the night shift janitor taking the fall.
Mark didn't give a flying fuck about Valerie Plame either, I have it on good authority.
Eric, you folks have been talking about imminent indictments on this for months now.
And... it's still in the works. Doesn't mean it won't happen, though.
There's no question Lynch is dragging her feet. The problem is Hillary was so sloppy they can't avoid taking official notice. It would be like me sparking up a joint on the steps of the local police station.
If the FBI has recovered all the contents of the server then Hillary's jeopardy has gone way up. If they find even one arguably work-related email which was not originally turned over, then what is that? Obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, conspiracy of same?
"After enough crying wolf, the folks who aren't rabid anti-Hillary people ignore all your bleating."
Forty-four percent of Americans say that they're not satisfied with Clinton's response to the Benghazi attack in 2012, when Clinton served as secretary of state. That includes 77 percent of Republican respondents, 40 percent of independents but just 14 percent of Democrats.
By contrast, 27 percent of Americans are satisfied with her response - including 51 percent of Democrats, 18 percent of independents but just 6 percent of Republicans.
So 49% of Democrats are rabid anti-Hillary people.
Good luck on that election thing, Mark!
I don't believe there is ANY information held by our government that would be "too damaging to national security" that it could never be publicly released "under any circumstances."
There is surely information that would be too damaging to particular actors in our government--revealing crimes, corruption, incompetence, lies, etc.--that those we elect to purportedly represent us will never allow such information to be released in order to protect themselves from us.
When the specifics make your guy look bad, talk generalities, Robert Cook.
I remember the same ploy being used back in 2008:
"Obama is corrupt. Rezko, Jarrett . . . Blago tried to sell his senate seat, fer crying out loud."
"But, all politicians are like that. Obama is no worse than average."
"Mark said...
Eric, you folks have been talking about imminent indictments on this for months now.
Just like Benghazi.
After enough crying wolf, the folks who aren't rabid anti-Hillary people ignore all your bleating. Overstatement in the media doesn't strengthen your case (see what Scott Walker did with the overstatement he faced)."
Funny coming from a guy who predicted a Walker arrest for years even after the investigation found nothing and was closed. Evan Amanda had the sense to simply pass on this thread. But not our resident retard.
All the talk about consequences if Hillary walks presupposes that those in power care about the rule of law or about appearing to care. Neither is true. For them the adverse political consequences of not acting are less than the adverse political consequences of acting. So Hillary walks. Q.E.D.
After all, the rule of law is nothing but a tool of patriarchal oppression.
You do have to admire the balls on this bitch. Anyone else in her position would be researching the extradition laws of small tropical nations, but Hillary is running for President. I guess when you have been filthy, stinking dirty for as long as she and her husband have, with absolutely no consequences, you come to believe that you are simply invulnerable. You just say "there were no markings", and they have to let you go.
And I don't say she is wrong. She will probably be the next President of the United States.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा