Is Hillary Hiding Something

[Dos Equis]

Good grief.  http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/hillary-clintons-laughable-process-for-flagging-work-emails/387670/

[blacken700]

[Dos Equis]

Carville 'Suspects' Hillary's Private Server Intended to Dodge Congressional Scrutiny
By Tom Blumer | March 16, 2015

After his appearance yesterday on ABC's "This Week," Hillary Clinton may be wondering whose side James Carville is on.

Never mind Carville's frequent and rude interruptions of other guests, his seemingly calculated incoherence, and his false claims about the Clintons' past record of corruption. Even though that behavior doesn't represent the Clintons well, they have to know that's part of the package when they use Carville as a defender. What wasn't expected is that Mr. Mary Matalin would admit that Mrs. Clinton may have set up her private server at her home in Chappaqua, New York specifically to hamper any future efforts by congress to carry out its consitutionally assigned oversight functions. But he did, as will be seen after the jump.

A Republican or conservative spokesman making such as assertion would have been raked over the coals on the spot by "This Week" host George Stephanopolous, a Clintonista himself (the operating assumption is that one never becomes a former Clintonista). But Steffie, after allowing Carville to play stall-ball for a bit, let it pass without challenge (HT Hot Air; bold is mine):

Transcript:

(ABC REPORTER JONATHAN) KARL: ... while Hillary Clinton said that the e-mails that she was sending to employees on their State Department e-mail accounts were being preserved, it now turns out that that was often not the case.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: And lots more questions coming from Congress.

OK, Jon, thanks very much.

Let's dig into this now with James Carville, long-time Clinton ally, Ana Navarro, confidante of Jeb Bush, Republican strategist, Greta van Susteren from Fox News and the editor of "The New Yorker," David Remnick.

Welcome to all of you.

James, let me begin with you.

JAMES CARVILLE, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: All right.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I heard you laughing during that part that Democrats are having second thoughts.

But what has the Clinton camp taken away from this?

CARVILLE: Well, first of all, we've go to start with what a former Obama aide had concerns. OK. But let's get serious here.

What this is is the latest in a continuation and if you take it all and you put it together and you subtract 3.1415 from pi, you're left with not very much. And that's what -- at the end of the day, so the Republicans can't pass a budget. All right, we've got another investigation, just like we had the Whitewater, just like you go through the Filegate, you go through Travelgate, you go through seven or eight different Congressional committees you wonder why the public is not following this. Because they know what it is.

It was something that she did. It was legal. I suspect she didn't want Louis Gohmert rifling through her e-mails, which seems to me to be a kind of reasonable position for someone to take.

It amounts to — just like everything else before it, it amounts to nothing but a bunch of people flapping their jaws about nothing.

Mr. Gohmert is a Republican Congressman from Texas who is among many representatives in the People's House attempting to carry out their constitutional oversight duties.

By admitting to a suspicion that former Secretary of State Clinton set up her own private email server because she didn't want Gohmert "rifling through her e-mails," Carville has opened up the possibility — given her secretive, paranoid history, that probably means the high likelihood — that the former Secretary of State did what she did to make it more difficult and perhaps impossible, thanks to an apparent penchant for deleting emails under her direct control, for Congress to do its job.

Regardless of the fact that Stephanopolous pretended that Carville's admitted suspicion and his petulant, defiant and condescending "about nothing" assertion aren't extraordinary, they are, especially in regards to Mrs. Clinton's potential presidential candidacy. "I proactively prevented a branch of government from carrying out its constitutional oversight duties" will not be a resume enhancer with the American people, perhaps even low-information voters and even a plurality of dedicated Democrats.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2015/03/16/carville-suspects-hillarys-private-server-intended-dodge-congressional#sthash.oAAH5Ich.dpuf

[Dos Equis]

Rank dishonesty is in the air.

Clinton camp issues clarification on deleted emails, claims ‘every’ message was reviewed
Published March 16, 2015
FoxNews.com

Hillary Clinton’s camp late Sunday issued a significant clarification about the steps they say were taken to review thousands of personal emails before they were deleted, claiming her team individually read “every email” before discarding those deemed private.

Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill made the clarification in a written statement to Fox News. This comes after the former secretary of state’s office revealed last week that while more than 30,000 “work-related” emails were turned over to the State Department, nearly 32,000 were deemed “private” and deleted.

This admission raised questions over how her team decided to get rid of those messages. Merrill on Sunday clarified an earlier fact sheet that described some of those methods but did not say every email was read.

“We simply took for granted that reading every single email came across as the most important, fundamental and exhaustive step that was performed.  The fact sheet should have been clearer in stating that every email was read,” Merrill said.

Clinton, a likely Democratic presidential candidate, tried to tamp down the controversy over her exclusive use of personal email while secretary of state during a press conference last week. But the admission that she deleted thousands of messages, and her insistence that her personal server remain private, stirred the ire – and curiosity -- of lawmakers who want greater access to her communications as secretary and complain much of it may be gone forever.

More on this...

Trey Gowdy on efforts to retrieve Hillary Clinton's emails
Whether the assurance that “every email” was read before being either deleted or turned over eases those concerns remains to be seen.

“I have zero interest in looking at her personal emails,” South Carolina GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy said on “Fox News Sunday.” “But who gets to decide what’s personal and what’s public? And if it’s a mixed-use email, and lots of the emails we get in life are both personal and work, I just can’t trust her lawyers to make the determination that the public’s getting everything they’re entitled to.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/16/clinton-camp-issues-clarification-on-deleted-emails-claims-every-message-was/?intcmp=HPBucket

[Dos Equis]

[Dos Equis]

VIDEO: She Did It… Megyn Kelly Just Exposed Truth About Hillary

Our favorite conservative power-hitter, Megyn Kelly, recently kicked the hornet’s nest in D.C. by filing a Freedom of Information Act in an attempt to find out if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed the required OF-109 form upon her exit from the State Department in 2013.

The request was filed last week. Typically, those types of requests take the full legal limit of 20 days — but not if you’re Megyn Kelly. Though it wasn’t officially confirmed that her FOIA request got the ball rolling, a former White House press secretary said that was probably the case.

And the inconvenient truth has been exposed. According to findings from the FOIA request announced yesterday, the State Department concluded that they couldn’t find any record indicating that Clinton signed the required form upon her resignation as Secretary of State.

“I don’t know whether there was a form last Tuesday and today, said form has suddenly disappeared,” Kelly stated, indicating how convenient it was for the form to have vanished, if there ever was one to begin with.

Either way, Clinton isn’t coming out smelling like a rose because suddenly claiming there wasn’t a form is just about as shady as actually having signed one and then breaking the regulations it referred to.

“And we’ll probably never know, but I will say, they’re going to have to certify something at some point that’s a lot more official than what (State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki) just did,” Kelly added.

Even Psaki, tried to spin the situation and claim that there was a difference between the actual secretary of state position and the average staff member, implying that Clinton wouldn’t have had to sign forms made for peasants.

But Kelly from the official regulation that yes, even the secretary is required to sign and submit such forms upon leaving office.

“The bottom line is, what she said today was an attempt to wiggle out of responsibility — there was a form, there should be a form and guess who’s responsible for ensuring that these documents are maintained? The head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton,” Kelly stated.

She’s exactly right. We have a feeling the coming weeks will be a bit rough for Clinton, as she’s battling major media and is now under six known official investigations.

And while we are loathe to indulge ourselves in schadenfreude over Hillary’s misfortunes, we do hope that her troubles continue long into the 2016 presidential campaign season.

http://conservativetribune.com/megyn-kelly-exposed-hillary/

[blacken700]

VIDEO: She Did It… Megyn Kelly Just Exposed Truth About Hillary

Our favorite conservative power-hitter, Megyn Kelly, recently kicked the hornet’s nest in D.C. by filing a Freedom of Information Act in an attempt to find out if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed the required OF-109 form upon her exit from the State Department in 2013.

The request was filed last week. Typically, those types of requests take the full legal limit of 20 days — but not if you’re Megyn Kelly. Though it wasn’t officially confirmed that her FOIA request got the ball rolling, a former White House press secretary said that was probably the case.

And the inconvenient truth has been exposed. According to findings from the FOIA request announced yesterday, the State Department concluded that they couldn’t find any record indicating that Clinton signed the required form upon her resignation as Secretary of State.

“I don’t know whether there was a form last Tuesday and today, said form has suddenly disappeared,” Kelly stated, indicating how convenient it was for the form to have vanished, if there ever was one to begin with.

Either way, Clinton isn’t coming out smelling like a rose because suddenly claiming there wasn’t a form is just about as shady as actually having signed one and then breaking the regulations it referred to.

“And we’ll probably never know, but I will say, they’re going to have to certify something at some point that’s a lot more official than what (State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki) just did,” Kelly added.

Even Psaki, tried to spin the situation and claim that there was a difference between the actual secretary of state position and the average staff member, implying that Clinton wouldn’t have had to sign forms made for peasants.

But Kelly from the official regulation that yes, even the secretary is required to sign and submit such forms upon leaving office.

“The bottom line is, what she said today was an attempt to wiggle out of responsibility — there was a form, there should be a form and guess who’s responsible for ensuring that these documents are maintained? The head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton,” Kelly stated.

She’s exactly right. We have a feeling the coming weeks will be a bit rough for Clinton, as she’s battling major media and is now under six known official investigations.

And while we are loathe to indulge ourselves in schadenfreude over Hillary’s misfortunes, we do hope that her troubles continue long into the 2016 presidential campaign season.

http://conservativetribune.com/megyn-kelly-exposed-hillary/

another fake scandal

After the Associated Press accepted the premise that a separation document should be produced, the State Department made clear that neither Clinton nor her predecessors, Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell, were required to sign that document.

[headhuntersix]

Was there a requirement  for them to do so? This aint fake and needs to be dug into. This isn't like the Clintons have a shining record of telling the truth.

[blacken700]

Was there a requirement  for them to do so? This aint fake and needs to be dug into. This isn't like the Clintons have a shining record of telling the truth.

if there is a requirement they didn't enforce it, you can't blame Clinton, Rice or Powell for that

[Primemuscle]

if there is a requirement they didn't enforce it, you can't blame Clinton, Rice or Powell for that

If the only time folks obeyed the law was when they knew they'd be caught if they didn't, it would create havoc. There will always be some people who will try an get away with whatever they think they can.

[240 is Back]

the missing emails... right after benghazi... big fucking surprise!!

we all saw this coming.  I said it the next day - they let it happen to avoid wasted 200 bad guys right before the 2012 election. 

now we see hilary hid it.   Of course.   She's doing what bush did, what clinton did, etc.  Everyone's okay with it.  sucks. 

[Dos Equis]

the missing emails... right after benghazi... big fucking surprise!!

we all saw this coming.  I said it the next day - they let it happen to avoid wasted 200 bad guys right before the 2012 election. 

now we see hilary hid it.   Of course.   She's doing what bush did, what clinton did, etc.  Everyone's okay with it.  sucks. 

Trying to deter attention away from Obama, Hillary, and any other liberal engaged in misconduct.  What a surprise. 

[240 is Back]

Trying to deter attention away from Obama, Hillary, and any other liberal engaged in misconduct.  What a surprise. 

I'm probably one of the only people on getbig saying hilary committed a felony by putting classified email on her silly little unprotected server.  We know it wasn't protected from the ghost addressing, it was laid out on Hannity's show today, you should have listened to it.  very interesting. 

she wanted to hide her emails around benghazi, and had no problem riskign sensitive info to do it.   Disgusting. 

[Dos Equis]

I'm probably one of the only people on getbig saying hilary committed a felony by putting classified email on her silly little unprotected server.  We know it wasn't protected from the ghost addressing, it was laid out on Hannity's show today, you should have listened to it.  very interesting. 

she wanted to hide her emails around benghazi, and had no problem riskign sensitive info to do it.   Disgusting. 

You are probably the only person posting on this board who repeatedly mentions some Republican whenever a Democrat is accused of doing anything wrong.

[2Thick]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/20/benghazi-panel-head-gowdy-asks-clinton-to-relinquish-personal-server/?intcmp=latestnews

[Skip8282]

You are probably the only person posting on this board who repeatedly mentions some Republican whenever a Democrat is accused of doing anything wrong.

Nah, they all do it.  Then cry like bitches when it's done to them claiming it should be discussed in another thread.

[Dos Equis]

Nah, they all do it.  Then cry like bitches when it's done to them claiming it should be discussed in another thread.

True.  Good point.

[Dos Equis]

Long read, but good summary of why Hillary needs to turn over her server to a neutral person.  Good letter. 

http://benghazi.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/TG%20letter%20to%20Kendall%203.19.15.pdf

[Dos Equis]

Politico: Hillary's Emails Might Still Be Recoverable
Tuesday, 31 Mar 2015
By Jason Devaney

Hillary Clinton may have deleted all of the emails she deemed personal from the private email server she used during her days as Secretary of State, but those messages still might be recoverable, according to one report.

Politico spoke with computer forensics experts who said Clinton's messages might still be floating around — albeit in pieces — on the server, her computer, and her Blackberry.

The manner in which the emails were deleted matters a great deal, experts told Politico. But if the trashed emails were not overwritten by other deleted messages, they could still exist.

The House Select Committee on Benghazi, led by Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., has asked Clinton to testify by May 1  as it investigates the events surrounding the 2012 attack on the U.S. Embassy in Libya that left four Americans dead, including the ambassador.

Many questions remain about what happened in Benghazi, including the United States' immediate response to the attack. Congressional investigators are trying to determine if any of the answers lie in Clinton's mountain of more than 30,000 deleted emails.

The Politico story details the process by which emails are typically deleted, and how they might still be available for recovery depending on how much traffic is on the server.

The House Benghazi committee asked Clinton to turn over the server for review, but she declined. Now the committee wants Clinton to answer its questions sometime in April.

The emails, which were deleted between October and December 2014, could still be recovered, but there's also a chance they are gone forever from the server.

"Obviously Clinton has someone with technical capability to run a mail server for her," computer forensics expert Hal Pomeranz told Politico. "Whether that person is actively capable of interfering with an investigation, I don't know. That's another technological step up."

At any rate, Politico notes that copies of Clinton's emails are most likely sitting on the servers tied to people's emails she corresponded with.

"It's an obvious point, but you can't delete email," former federal prosecutor Mark Rasch told Politico. "By definition, I have sent my emails to or received them from someone else, which means … someone else has a copy.

"Deleting emails is really not an effective way to conceal what you're doing."

Clinton has been under fire regarding her use of a private email address linked to a private email server that was located at her Chappaqua, N.Y. home. She turned over 30,000 emails from the server to the State Department to preserve them as public record, and said the remaining 32,000 or so messages were private and they were deleted.

Clinton said her reason for using a private email address was because she wanted to carry one device — in this case a Blackberry — for all of her email, both personal and professional. It was revealed Tuesday, however, that Clinton also used an iPad to send and receive email.

Clinton is mulling a presidential run and could announce her candidacy in April.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Hillary-clinton-server-emails-never/2015/03/31/id/635639/#ixzz3W0krWlu2

[240 is Back]

LOL @ "they could still exist".

I'm absolutely positive she didn't just "delete" them, but by this time she's used a scrubber and overwritten the data ten thousand times to ensure we never get to read them.

Gowdy was pathetic in letting obama/hilary off the hook for Benghazi, and his resorting to "maybe we'll get ahold of them, and maybe something might be recoverable..."

Another dickless repub in-name-only willing to let Dems get away with everything, while screaming loudly for FOX viewers and political donors.  He's Issa part 2.

[Dos Equis]

Court Rejects State's Plan for Jan. Release of Clinton Emails

Image: Court Rejects State's Plan for Jan. Release of Clinton Emails (Andrew Burton/Getty Images)
Tuesday, 19 May 2015

A federal judge rejected the State Department's proposal to release portions of 55,000 pages of emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by next January, saying the agency must instead conduct a "rolling production" of the emails.

In a Tuesday hearing, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras gave the State Department a week to craft a schedule for releasing the records, according to Vice News lawyer Jeffrey Light.

The agency made its initial proposal in a federal court filing Monday night, in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Vice News.

In the filing, John F. Hackett, who is responsible for the department's responses to FOIA requests, said that following a review of the emails, the department will post the releasable portions of the 55,000 pages on its website. He said the review will take until the end of the year — and asked the court to adopt a completion date of Jan. 15, 2016, to factor in the holidays. That's just a couple of weeks before the Iowa caucuses and early state primaries that follow.

Clinton, the Democratic front-runner in the 2016 presidential election, has said she wants the department to release the emails as soon as possible. The disclosure that she conducted State Department business on a private email account has been a controversy from the very inception of her campaign this year.

Clinton took questions from reporters Tuesday, saying she wants e-mails that are at the heart of a controversy on Capitol Hill released as soon as possible.

"I want them out as soon as they can get out," she said.

The brief session with reporters followed a roundtable in Iowa, where she was asked about another question dogging her campaign: where she stands on the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement. She said she's withholding judgement until she sees the final deal.

In Monday night's filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Hackett said the State Department received the 55,000 pages of emails from Clinton in paper form.

"Given the breadth and importance of the many foreign policy issues on which the secretary of state and the department work, the review of these materials will likely require consultation with a broad range of subject matter experts within the department and other agencies, as well as potentially with foreign governments," he said. "...The department is committed to processing the 55,000 pages as expeditiously as possible, while taking into consideration the department's other legal obligations."

He said he the department understands the considerable public interest in the records, but said the size of the collection, the nature of the emails and the interest of several agencies present challenges.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/court-rejects-clinton-state/2015/05/19/id/645459/#ixzz3acIb73bn

[240 is Back]

hilary is guilty as shit.   she had a 2nd email address, and there is proof now.  her lawyer lied, or he was lied to, but there is no denying it - she claimed one, and there are more.  lies.

Hannity broke down the case very nicely today.

[Dos Equis]

Emails reportedly show confidant told Clinton Benghazi attack planned by fighters tied to Al Qaeda
Published May 21, 2015
FoxNews.com

A longtime Clinton confidant reportedly advised then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two days after the 2012 Benghazi terror attack that an Al Qaeda-tied group had planned the deadly assault and used a protest as cover -- but despite this warning, Clinton's U.N. ambassador went on to publicly claim the attack was "spontaneous."

The guidance from ex-Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal was contained in a memo sent Sept. 13, according to The New York Times. It is the latest documentation effectively contradicting the administration's early narrative that the attack was driven by protests over an anti-Islam Internet video -- and raising questions over why officials stuck to that story for days.

According to the Times, Blumenthal initially blamed "demonstrators" angry over that video for the attacks. But the next day, he sent Clinton a very different memo.

According to the Times, Blumenthal told Clinton the attack was driven by Al Qaeda-tied Ansar al-Shariah members who had planned it for a month and used a protest as cover. He cited "sensitive sources."

"We should get this around asap," Clinton reportedly told an adviser in response.

Yet, despite this guidance, then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice would go on several television programs Sept. 16 to claim the attacks were "spontaneous," and not premeditated, and link them to protests over the anti-Islam video.

The State Department would later admit there was no protest on the ground in Benghazi that day. The role of the video continues to be debated to this day, but a mounting body of evidence has emerged showing multiple assessments that the attack was to some degree planned.

Fox News reported earlier this week that a Defense Intelligence Agency report from Sept. 12 also said there were indicators the attack was planned and meant as retaliation for a drone strike that killed an Al Qaeda strategist.

The memo, obtained through a federal lawsuit by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, said: "The attack was planned ten or more days prior to approximately 01 September 2012. The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for the US killing of Aboyahiye (Alaliby) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center buildings."

Additional memos surfaced last year indicating Rice -- now the national security adviser -- was prepped before those Sept. 16 Sunday shows. One email from a top administration adviser specifically drew attention to the anti-Islam Internet video, without distinguishing whether the Benghazi attack was different from protests elsewhere in the region which were over the video.

The email listed the following goal, among others: "To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."

A congressional committee is probing the handling of the Benghazi attacks, and the administration's Internet-video narrative is sure to be just one of many aspects investigated.

The emails reported by the Times were part of a batch given to that committee. The Times reported that Blumenthal, who has been subpoenaed by the committee, sent at least 25 memos on Libya to Clinton, including several on the 2012 attacks.

The Times earlier reported that while he was sending memos, Blumenthal also was advising business associates who were hoping to win contracts from Libya's transitional post-Qaddafi government. The Times report did not make clear what, if anything, Clinton and the State Department knew of Blumenthal's involvement in any potential business projects in Libya.

The Times also reported Thursday that the former secretary of state's emails reflected she had "sensitive but unclassified" information in her account -- operated on a personal email address.

This reportedly included information on travel plans of U.S. officials in Libya.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/21/emails-reportedly-show-confidant-told-clinton-benghazi-attack-planned-by-aq/?intcmp=populardiscussions

[240 is Back]

lol @ the repubs suddenly acting all fcking surprised.

beck called this, but because it was only prison planet and Beck, you didn't admit it.  stupid little sheep.

[Dos Equis]

I think we need blacken to come tell us again that there is nothing to see here.

AP: Hillary Clinton Received Now-Classified Benghazi Info on Private Email Server, Documents Show
Published May 22, 2015
BY LISA LERER AND MATTHEW LEE, ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP)   - Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton received information on her private email server that has now been classified about the deadly attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi.

The email in question, forwarded to Clinton by her deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, relates to reports of arrests in Libya of possible suspects in the attack.

The information was not classified at the time the email was sent but was upgraded from "unclassified" to "secret" on Friday at the request of the FBI, according to State Department officials. They said 23 words of the Nov. 18, 2012, message were redacted from the day's release of 296 emails totaling 896 pages to protect information that could damage foreign relations.

Because the information was not classified at the time the email was sent, no laws were violated, but Friday's redaction shows that Clinton received sensitive information on her unsecured personal server.

No other redactions were made to the collection of Benghazi-related emails for classification reasons, the officials said. They added that the Justice Department had not raised classification concerns about the now-redacted 1 1/2 lines when the documents were turned over to the special House committee looking into the Benghazi attack in February. The committee retains a complete copy of the email, the officials said.

It is at the end of a chain of communication that originated with Bill Roebuck, the then-director of the Office of Maghreb Affairs, that pointed out that Libyan police had arrested several people who might have connections to the attack. The redacted portion appears to relate to who provided the information about the alleged suspects to the Libyans. A total of five lines related to the source of the information were affected, but only the 23 words were deleted because the FBI deemed them to be classified.

Read the full story at AP.org→

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/05/22/ap-hillary-clinton-received-now-classified-benghazi-info-private-email-server-documents