Is Hillary Hiding Something

[Dos Equis]

Is Julian Assange even credible these days?

Was he ever?  Doesn't matter how credible he is.  What matters is whether the documents he has (if any) are authentic.

[240 is Back]

Is Julian Assange even credible these days?

repubs wanted to feed him to the guillotine back when he was pwning Bush on a daily basis.

Now that he's shitting on Hilary, they are lining up to give him HJs.

Typical.

[Primemuscle]

repubs wanted to feed him to the guillotine back when he was pwning Bush on a daily basis.

Now that he's shitting on Hilary, they are lining up to give him HJs.

Typical.

Isn't Assange's residence still the Ecuadorian embassy in London? It's been his safe-house for three years.

[Soul Crusher]

Hillary looking really fat lately.  She seems to be hiding a gunt. 

[240 is Back]

Hillary looking really fat lately.  She seems to be hiding a gunt. 

THIS.   Her health problems seem to be mounting. 

[Primemuscle]

Hillary looking really fat lately.  She seems to be hiding a gunt. 

Very funny....seriously. 

[Dos Equis]

Clinton IT specialist invokes 5th more than 125 times in deposition
By  Catherine Herridge,  Pamela K. Browne 
Published June 22, 2016
FoxNews.com

Hillary Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano invoked the Fifth more than 125 times during a 90-minute, closed-door deposition Wednesday with the conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, a source with the group told Fox News.

The official said Pagliano was working off an index card and read the same crafted statement each time.

“It was a sad day for government transparency,” the Judicial Watch official said, adding they asked all their questions and Pagliano invoked the Fifth Amendment right not to answer them.

Pagliano was a central figure in the set-up and management of Clinton’s personal server she used exclusively for government business while secretary of state. The State Department inspector general found Clinton violated government rules with that arrangement.

He was deposed as part of Judicial Watch's lawsuit seeking Clinton emails and other records. A federal judge granted discovery, in turn allowing the depositions, which is highly unusual in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The judge cited "reasonable suspicion" Clinton and her aides were trying to avoid federal records law.

Pagliano’s deposition before Judicial Watch is one of several interviews with high-profile Clinton aides, taking place as the FBI separately is continuing its federal criminal investigation.

A federal court agreed to keep sealed Pagliano’s immunity deal struck with the Justice Department in December, citing the sensitivity of the FBI probe and calling it a “criminal” matter. 

The next Clinton aide to testify is Huma Abedin. In an earlier deposition, lawyers for senior Clinton aide Cheryl Mills, during a nearly five-hour deposition in Washington, repeatedly objected to questions about Pagliano’s role in setting up the former secretary of state’s private server.

According to a transcript of that deposition which Judicial Watch released, Mills attorney Beth Wilkinson – as well as Obama administration lawyers – objected to the line of questioning about Pagliano.

“I'm going to instruct her not to answer. It's a legal question,” Wilkinson responded, when asked by Judicial Watch whether Pagliano was an “agent of the Clintons” when the server was set up.

A transcript of the Pagliano deposition will be reviewed and is expected to be released next week.   

Clinton could also be deposed in the Judicial Watch lawsuit.

There was no immediate comment from Pagliano's attorney.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/22/clinton-it-specialist-invokes-5th-more-than-125-times-in-deposition.html?intcmp=hpbt4

[240 is Back]

Clinton IT specialist invokes 5th more than 125 times in deposition

I thought the IT specialist was the one who was going to spill the beans on Hilary?

[Soul Crusher]

I thought the IT specialist was the one who was going to spill the beans on Hilary?

They must not have given him immunity. 

[Dos Equis]

Clinton's State Dept. calendar missing scores of entries
Published June 24, 2016 
Associated Press

An Associated Press review of the official calendar Hillary Clinton kept as secretary of state identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors, loyalists, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were not recorded or were listed without the names of those she met.

The missing entries raise new questions about how Clinton and her inner circle handled government records documenting her State Department tenure -- in this case, why the official chronology of her four-year term does not closely mirror other more detailed records of her daily meetings.

At a time when Clinton's private email system is under scrutiny by an FBI criminal investigation, the calendar omissions reinforce concerns that she sought to eliminate the "risk of the personal being accessible" -- as she wrote in an email exchange that she failed to turn over to the Obama administration but was subsequently uncovered in a top aide's inbox.

The AP found the calendar omissions by comparing the 1,500-page historical record of Clinton's daily activities as secretary of state with separate planning schedules often supplied to Clinton by aides in advance of each day's events. The AP obtained the planning schedules as part of its federal lawsuit against the State Department. At least 114 outsiders who met with Clinton were not listed in her calendar, the AP's review found.

No known federal laws were violated and some omissions could be blamed on Clinton's highly fluid schedule, which sometimes forced cancellations at the last minute. But only seven meetings found in Clinton's planning schedules were replaced by substitute events listed on her calendar. More than 60 other events listed in Clinton's planners were omitted entirely in her calendar, tersely noted or described only as "private meetings" -- all without naming those who met with her.

Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill said Thursday night that the multiple discrepancies between her State Department calendar and her planning schedules "simply reflect a more detailed version in one version as compared to another, all maintained by her staff."

Merrill said that Clinton "has always made an effort to be transparent since entering public life, whether it be the release of over 30 years of tax returns, years of financial disclosure forms, or asking that 55,000 pages of work emails from her time as secretary of state be turned over to the public.

Clinton's State Department calendar omitted the identities of a dozen top Wall Street and business leaders who met with her during a private breakfast at the New York Stock Exchange in September 2009, minutes before she appeared in public at the exchange to ring the market's ceremonial opening bell.

State Department planning schedules from the same day listed the names of all Clinton's breakfast guests -- most of whose firms had lobbied the government and donated to her family's global charity, the Clinton Foundation. The event was closed to the press and merited only a brief mention in her calendar, which omitted all the names -- among them Blackstone Group Chairman Steven Schwarzman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and then-New York Bank of Mellon CEO Robert Kelly.

The missing or heavily edited entries in Clinton's calendar also omitted private dinners with political donors, policy sessions with groups of corporate leaders and "drop-bys" with old Clinton campaign hands. Among those whose names were omitted from her calendar were longtime adviser Sidney Blumenthal, lobbyist and former Clinton White House chief of staff Thomas "Mack" McLarty and Clinton campaign bundler Haim Saban.

The AP first sought Clinton's calendar and schedules from the State Department in August 2013, but the agency would not acknowledge even that it had the material. After nearly two years of delay, the AP sued the State Department in March 2015. The department agreed in a court filing last August to turn over Clinton's calendar, and provided the documents in November. After noticing discrepancies between Clinton's calendar and some schedules, the AP pressed in court for all of Clinton's planning material. The U.S. has released about one-third of those planners to the AP, so far.

The State Department censored both sets of documents for national security and other reasons, but those changes were made after the documents were turned over to the State Department at the end of Clinton's tenure.

The documents obtained by the AP do not show who logged entries in Clinton's calendar or who edited material. Clinton's emails and other records show that she and two close aides, deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin and scheduling assistant Lona J. Valmoro, held weekly meetings and emailed almost every day about Clinton's plans. According to the recent inspector general's audit and a court declaration made last December by the State Department's acting executive secretary, Clinton's aides had access to her calendar through a government Microsoft Outlook account. Both Abedin and Valmoro were political appointees at the State Department and are now aides in her presidential campaign.

Unlike Clinton's planning schedules, which were sent to Clinton each morning, her calendar was edited after each event, AP's review showed. Some calendar entries were accompanied by Valmoro emails -- indicating she may have added those entries. Every meeting entry also included both the planned time of the event and the actual time -- showing that Clinton's calendar was being used to document each meeting after it ended.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/24/clintons-state-dept-calendar-missing-scores-entries.html?intcmp=hplnws

[Dos Equis]

Hillary Clinton Failed to Hand Over Key Email to State Department
In email, she appeared to express concern about her correspondence being accessible to public

In this March 2012 photo, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton checks her mobile phone at U.N. headquarters. A key email wasn’t included in the documents that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department, raising questions about the thoroughness of her disclosures to the government and her record-keeping practices as secretary of state. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
By BYRON TAU
Updated June 24, 2016

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn’t turn over a key email where she appeared to express concern about her correspondence being accessible by the public, the State Department acknowledged Thursday.

In a 2010 email exchange with top aide Huma Abedin, Mrs. Clinton expressed reservations about being put onto the State Department’s email system.

“Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in response to Ms. Abedin’s suggestion that she obtain a government email account.

The email exchange in question was previously uncovered as part of a State Department Inspector General investigation into the use of email by Mrs. Clinton and other secretaries of state. However, it wasn’t included in the emails that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department, raising questions about the thoroughness of her disclosures to the government and her record-keeping practices as secretary of state.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said the email “was not part of the approximately 55,000 pages provided to the State Department by Former Secretary Clinton.” He said it was instead obtained by the department as part of a trove of emails turned over by Ms. Abedin in 2015.


According to federal record-keeping laws, work emails from Mrs. Clinton and her staff were federal records that were required to be preserved and turned over upon their departure from government service. In addition, under the Freedom of Information Act, emails from agencies like the State Department are eligible for possible public release.

Last year, Mrs. Clinton certified under oath to a federal court that she had turned over all the work-related emails in her possession on her private server. “I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done,” she wrote in a document filed in U.S. District Court in August.

Mrs. Clinton’s use of the private email server for all her government work has roiled her presidential campaign since it was made public last year. An independent State Department Inspector General report concluded that Mrs. Clinton failed to follow State Department procedures about record keeping and cybersecurity. She has denied any wrongdoing, saying she believed she was following the precedent of previous secretaries of state in using a personal email account.

Brian Fallon, a Clinton campaign spokesman, said both Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin turned over all work-related correspondence in their possession. “We understand Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have.”

He denied Mrs. Clinton was trying to circumvent any record-keeping requirements.

“This email shows that, contrary to the allegations of some, Secretary Clinton was not seeking to avoid any use of government email. As indicated in this email, she was open to using a state.gov account but she simply wanted her personal emails to remain private, as anyone would want,” Mr. Fallon said.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is conducting a criminal investigation into the possible loss or mishandling of classified information by Mrs. Clinton. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is expected to be interviewed in the coming weeks as part of that investigation.

The State Department’s disclosure Thursday that it was missing an email isn’t the first time gaps in Mrs. Clinton email record have surfaced. No emails from the first two months of Mrs. Clinton’s time in office have been given to the department.

A spokesperson for Mrs. Clinton said those emails weren’t hosted on her personal server and have been lost as part of a transition into government service.

In addition, Mrs. Clinton had several thousand emails deleted before she turned over the documents to the State Department. She has said any emails she deleted were purely personal in nature.

Corrections & Amplifications:
Hillary Clinton had several thousand emails deleted before she turned over the documents to the State Department. An earlier version of this story incorrectly said Mrs. Clinton had several emails deleted.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-failed-to-hand-over-key-email-to-state-department-1466738155

[Soul Crusher]

She looks like a land whale in that pic.  Yikes - clearly bulking for too long.  Fat Hillary needs a diet

Hillary Clinton Failed to Hand Over Key Email to State Department
In email, she appeared to express concern about her correspondence being accessible to public

In this March 2012 photo, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton checks her mobile phone at U.N. headquarters. A key email wasn’t included in the documents that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department, raising questions about the thoroughness of her disclosures to the government and her record-keeping practices as secretary of state. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
By BYRON TAU
Updated June 24, 2016

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn’t turn over a key email where she appeared to express concern about her correspondence being accessible by the public, the State Department acknowledged Thursday.

In a 2010 email exchange with top aide Huma Abedin, Mrs. Clinton expressed reservations about being put onto the State Department’s email system.

“Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in response to Ms. Abedin’s suggestion that she obtain a government email account.

The email exchange in question was previously uncovered as part of a State Department Inspector General investigation into the use of email by Mrs. Clinton and other secretaries of state. However, it wasn’t included in the emails that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department, raising questions about the thoroughness of her disclosures to the government and her record-keeping practices as secretary of state.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said the email “was not part of the approximately 55,000 pages provided to the State Department by Former Secretary Clinton.” He said it was instead obtained by the department as part of a trove of emails turned over by Ms. Abedin in 2015.


According to federal record-keeping laws, work emails from Mrs. Clinton and her staff were federal records that were required to be preserved and turned over upon their departure from government service. In addition, under the Freedom of Information Act, emails from agencies like the State Department are eligible for possible public release.

Last year, Mrs. Clinton certified under oath to a federal court that she had turned over all the work-related emails in her possession on her private server. “I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done,” she wrote in a document filed in U.S. District Court in August.

Mrs. Clinton’s use of the private email server for all her government work has roiled her presidential campaign since it was made public last year. An independent State Department Inspector General report concluded that Mrs. Clinton failed to follow State Department procedures about record keeping and cybersecurity. She has denied any wrongdoing, saying she believed she was following the precedent of previous secretaries of state in using a personal email account.

Brian Fallon, a Clinton campaign spokesman, said both Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin turned over all work-related correspondence in their possession. “We understand Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have.”

He denied Mrs. Clinton was trying to circumvent any record-keeping requirements.

“This email shows that, contrary to the allegations of some, Secretary Clinton was not seeking to avoid any use of government email. As indicated in this email, she was open to using a state.gov account but she simply wanted her personal emails to remain private, as anyone would want,” Mr. Fallon said.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is conducting a criminal investigation into the possible loss or mishandling of classified information by Mrs. Clinton. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is expected to be interviewed in the coming weeks as part of that investigation.

The State Department’s disclosure Thursday that it was missing an email isn’t the first time gaps in Mrs. Clinton email record have surfaced. No emails from the first two months of Mrs. Clinton’s time in office have been given to the department.

A spokesperson for Mrs. Clinton said those emails weren’t hosted on her personal server and have been lost as part of a transition into government service.

In addition, Mrs. Clinton had several thousand emails deleted before she turned over the documents to the State Department. She has said any emails she deleted were purely personal in nature.

Corrections & Amplifications:
Hillary Clinton had several thousand emails deleted before she turned over the documents to the State Department. An earlier version of this story incorrectly said Mrs. Clinton had several emails deleted.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-failed-to-hand-over-key-email-to-state-department-1466738155

[Dos Equis]

More Clinton emails released, including some she deleted
Published June 27, 2016
Associated Press

An additional 165 pages of emails from Hillary Clinton's time at the State Department surfaced Monday, including nearly three dozen that the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee failed to hand over last year that were sent through her private server.

The latest emails were released under court order by the State Department to the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch. The batch includes 34 new emails Clinton exchanged through her private account with her deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin. The aide, who also had a private emailaccount on Clinton's home server, later gave her copies to the government.

The emails were not among the 55,000 pages of work-related messages that Clinton turned over to the agency in response to public records lawsuits seeking copies of her official correspondence. They include a March 2009 message where the then-secretary of state discusses how her official records would be kept.

"I have just realized I have no idea how my papers are treated at State," Clinton wrote to Abedin and a second aide. "Who manages both my personal and official files? ... I think we need to get on this asap to be sure we know and design the system we want."

In a blistering audit released last month, the State Department's inspector general concluded Clintonand her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup violated federal records-keeping standards and could have left sensitive material vulnerable to hackers.

The audit also cited a then-unreleased copy of a November 2010 email Clinton sent Abedin in which the secretary discussed using a government email account, expressing concern that she didn't want "any risk of the personal being accessible."

Clinton never used a government account that was set up for her, instead continuing to rely on her private server until leaving office in 2013. Though Clinton's work-related emails were government records, she didn't turn over copies until more than 30 lawsuits were filed, including one by The Associated Press.

Before providing her correspondence, Clinton and her lawyers withheld and subsequently deleted tens of thousands of messages that she claimed were personal, such as emails about her daughter's wedding plans, family vacations, yoga routines and condolence notes.

With the new release Monday, more than 50 work-related emails sent or received by Clinton have since surfaced that were not among those she provided.

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon on Monday repeated past statements that Clinton had provided "all potentially work-related emails" that were still in her possession when she received the 2014 request from the State Department.

Fallon has declined to say whether Clinton deleted any work-related emails before they were reviewed by her legal team.

Dozens of the emails sent or received by Clinton through her private server were later determined to contain classified material. The FBI has been investigating for months whether Clinton's use of the private email server imperiled government secrets. Agents recently interviewed several of Clinton's top aides, including Abedin.

As part of the probe, Clinton turned over the hard drive from her email server to the FBI. It had been wiped clean, and Clinton has said she did not keep copies of the emails she choose to withhold.

In a report released Monday by Democrats on the House select panel probing the 2012 attacks on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, Republican congressional investigators asked questions about Clinton'suse of the private email server in interviews with her close aides.

Abedin told interviewers that she was aware of Clinton's heavy use of private emails from the start and that Clinton continued a practice that she had developed as a U.S. senator for New York and as a 2008 presidential candidate. "It was a natural progression from what she was doing previously, and she continued to do so."

Asked repeatedly who serviced Clinton's private server in the basement of her New York home, Abedin identified Justin Cooper, a technology staffer at that time for former President Bill Clinton, and Bryan Pagliano, a State Department technology official who is cooperating with an FBI investigation ofClinton's private server under an immunity deal with prosecutors. Abedin was hazy about Pagliano's role at the agency and his private work overseeing Clinton's server in New York.

Pagliano, who previously worked for Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, invoked his constitutional right against self-incrimination and declined to answer the committee's questions. In a sworn deposition last week, Pagliano also refused to answer questions posed by lawyers from Judicial Watch, including who paid for the system and who else at the State Department used email accounts on it. Pagliano also would not answer whether he discussed setting up a home server with Clinton prior to her tenure as secretary of state, according to a transcript.

Other State Department officials told congressional investigators that Clinton never responded to internal offers to set her up with an official State account and an agency computer. Patrick Kennedy, the undersecretary for management at the State Department, said Clinton did "not know how to use a computer to do email. So it was never set up."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/27/more-clinton-emails-released-including-some-deleted.html?intcmp=hpbt4

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/gowdy-faced-heavy-opposition-from-state-pentagon-and-cia-in-benghazi-probe-224845


 

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-benghazi-democrats-20160627-snap-story.html

House Democrats mistakenly release transcript confirming big payout to Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal
Sidney Blumenthal

Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime confidant of Hillary Clinton's, told congressional investigators he earned "about $200,000 a year" from a pro-Clinton nonprofit. (Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

Evan Halper
 
The Democrats on the House Benghazi committee released their final conclusions from the inquiry into attacks on Americans in that Libyan city in 2012, and in the report they say, once again, that the investigation is a politically motivated sham aimed at damaging the reputation of Hillary Clinton.

But the report, which the Democrats published as a preemptive strike before the Republican majority releases findings likely to charge ineptitude and deception by the former secretary of State, also revealed, apparently unintentionally, details about the eye-popping amount of money a close Clinton friend and advisor made in a contract with a pro-Clinton nonprofit.

ADVERTISING

Democrats released but redacted a transcript of Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal answering the committee’s questions to make the point that Republicans do not want the public to know what went on during the his interrogation, during which GOP members arguably used their subpoena power to conduct political opposition research unrelated to Benghazi. 

Election 2016 | Live coverage on Trail Guide | Sign up for the newsletter 

But the redaction marks are easily erased by anyone able to use a computer’s cut-and-paste function. Once the marks are lifted, the transcript portion reveals some unflattering things for any partisans on the committee, Republican or Democrat. It shows that Republicans did, indeed, leverage their subpoena of Blumenthal for political gain, digging into his financial contracts with David Brock and forcing him to reveal the details of a lucrative financial arrangement that congressional sources would ultimately leak to Fox News.

And for Democrats, the exchange exposes once again the absurd amounts of money people in the orbit of the Clintons sometimes seem to rake in just for, well, being in the orbit of the Clintons. “I’d say it’s about $200,000 a year,” Blumenthal said when asked by a committee member how much the part-time work offering up advice and ideas was worth. 

“Redacted due to Chairman Gowdy’s refusal to allow release of transcript,” says a footnote to the pages of thick black redaction marks. “If released, the transcript would show that Republicans asked Mr. Blumenthal questions about his relationship with Media Matters, David Brock and Correct the Record.” Brock is a longtime Clinton loyalist, and Correct the Record and Media Matters are among the nonprofits he uses to attack Clinton opponents.

And how did Blumenthal get such a contract? “I have had a very long friendship with the chairman of Media Matters, whose name is David Brock, from before he founded this organization, and I have sustained that friendship. And he asked me to help provide ideas and advice to him and his organizations,” Blumenthal said.

Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren combine for energetic attack on Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren combine for energetic attack on Donald Trump
Actually, the two got to know each other during the impeachment of Bill Clinton, during Brock’s former incarnation as a right-wing “hit man” journalist. He was starting to undergo his political conversion and in the process was feeding then-White House aide Blumenthal intelligence about what the right was plotting against Bill Clinton. Both men wrote about it in their books.

Below is the full transcript excerpt that Democrats intended not to publish. It is unclear who the questioner is in the first section.

Q: Did you ever receive any payment from an organization called Media Matters?

A: Oh, yes. I did — I did receive payment in that period from Media Matters.

Q: Okay. And what was your relationship with Media Matters at that time period?

A: I was a consultant to Media Matters. I’m sorry I—

Q: That’s okay.

A: I overlooked that.

Q: When did you become a consultant for Media Matters?

A: I would say the very end of 2012.

Q: Okay. And how did that come about, that you became a consultant for Media Matters?

A: I have had a very long friendship with the chairman of Media Matters, whose name is David Brock, from before he founded this organization, and I have sustained that friendship. And he asked me to help provide ideas and advice to him and his organizations.

Q: So you began your relationship, your paid relationship, with Media Matters at the end of 2012.

A: Right.

Q: Does that continue to this day?

A: It does.

Q: Okay. And what is your salary or your contract with Media Matters?  How much money are you earning from them?

A: I’d say it’s about $200,000 a year.

Q: And has that been roughly consistent from when you began receiving payment from Media Matters?

*[redacted due to Chairman Gowdy’s refusal to allow release of transcript].

A: I would say it’s — I’d have to check. I think it’s increased a little bit. It’s increased some.

Q: Okay. Are you familiar with the organization American Bridge?

A: Yes.

Q: Have you received any compensation from American Bridge over the last five years?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. And how much compensation have you received from American Bridge?

A: Well, when I talk about that amount of money, I mean all of those organizations.

Q: So all of David Brock’s entities —

A: Right.

Q: — combined are 200,000?

A: About.

Q: Okay.

A: Something like that.

Q: Okay. So there’s American Bridge.

A: Yes.

Q: There’s Media Matters.


A: Right.

Q: Are there any other organizations on which you have done work for Mr. Brock?

A: Correct the Record

Q: Okay.

A: — is another organization.

Q: Okay.

A: And then there’s the American Independent Institute, which is a journalistic foundation.

Q: So, when you receive your paycheck, who signs the paycheck? Where does that come from?

A: It’s deposited directly. I imagine it comes from David Brock.

Q: Okay. Not David Brock personally but one of his —

A: Whoever — whoever is responsible for that payment.

Blumenthal and Republican Select Committee Member Mike Pompeo had the following exchange about Correct the Record:

Q: Fair enough. I’m going to jump around a little bit. You said I think earlier this morning that you still are working for Correct the Record?

A: I am.

Q: And tell me what the mission of Correct the Record is. 

A: Correct the Record is pretty much what it says, to correct — it’s a nonprofit organization to correct the record about public misstatements about prominent Democrats.

Q: Including this committee. If this committee said something, Correct the Record might comment on things that it said incorrectly and indeed it has?

A: That may well be so.

Q: Have you written any of that?

A: No.

All things Clinton
All things Clinton
Q: Yeah. So you haven’t made any comments as part of your role in Correct the Record related to this committee’s work?  You haven’t written any —

A: I have not written those.

evan.halper@latimes.com

Follow me: @evanhalper

 

ALSO:

[Soul Crusher]

Politics
New analysis shows 160 emails missing from Clinton’s disclosure to State

 
Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, accompanied by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), speaks to and meets Ohio voters during a rally at the Cincinnati Museum Center at Union Terminal on Monday, June 27. (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
By Rosalind S. Helderman June 29 at 1:56 PM
Ths story has been updated:

As Hillary Clinton tries to put to rest the controversy over her private email server that has dogged her presidential campaign, she has repeatedly cited her willingness to make her work correspondence public as evidence that she has nothing to hide.

“I have provided all of my work-related emails, and I’ve asked that they be made public, and I think that demonstrates that I wanted to make sure that this information was part of the official records,” she told ABC News last month.

But disclosures over the past several weeks have revealed dozens of emails related to Clinton’s official duties that crossed her private server and were not included in the 55,000 pages of correspondence she turned over to the State Department when the agency sought her emails in 2014.

At least 160 such emails have come to light so far, many of them through public-records lawsuits brought by the conservative group Judicial Watch.

In one email released by Judicial Watch on Monday, Clinton queried aide Huma Abedin and another staffer about how her official records were being maintained. “I have just realized I have no idea how my papers are treated at State. Who manages both my personal and official files?” she wrote on March 22, 2009.

A 2010 Clinton email, which was disclosed last month by the State Department’s inspector general but had not been submitted by the former secretary, appears to show that she was concerned about ensuring privacy for her personal emails if she was given an official government account.

“Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” Clinton wrote.

The newly disclosed gaps in Clinton’s correspondence raise questions about the process used by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee and her lawyers to determine which emails she turned over to the department.

Clinton has said she deleted nearly 32,000 emails from her time as secretary because they were purely personal, dealing with such matters as arrangements for her daughter’s wedding and her yoga routine. But Republicans have said there is no way to know whether Clinton also deleted potentially embarrassing work-related emails.


The State Department has released redacted copies of the emails Clinton handed over. The newly disclosed emails have emerged as the agency has released copies of Abedin’s correspondence, which in some cases includes previously undisclosed exchanges with Clinton.

Brian Fallon, a Clinton campaign spokesman, said that both Clinton and Abedin provided “all potentially work-related emails in their possession” to the State Department.

Fallon added: “We understand Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have.”

The email controversy has haunted Clinton’s candidacy for more than a year and contributed to her rising unfavorable poll numbers. Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump’s negative ratings are higher, and Clinton has taken a solid lead in recent national surveys.

But the email disclosures come as part of ongoing litigation that is likely to cause Clinton’s campaign continued discomfort in coming months.

[Officials: Scant evidence Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails]

Judicial Watch was scheduled to spend seven hours on Tuesday taking sworn testimony from Abedin, a Clinton confidante and former State Department deputy chief of staff. A transcript of the session could be released as early as this week and is likely to provide new information about Clinton’s email setup. Another former top aide, Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy, will be interviewed Wednesday. Judicial Watch has also requested permission to interview Clinton herself.

The group will also receive hundreds of additional pages of emails sent and received by Abedin using a personal email account routed through Clinton’s personal server. Abedin turned those records over to the State Department in 2015, and the department, in turn, is under a court order requiring that they be released to Judicial Watch in monthly batches over the next year. That process could well result in the publication of additional emails that Clinton had not provided to the State Department.


Another conservative group, Citizens United, has also been receiving documents showing how Clinton’s department operated.

On Monday, a judge ordered the State Department to turn over emails from Clinton’s scheduler for the weeks leading up to 14 foreign trips taken while Clinton was in office. The group hopes to use them to show that Clinton met with political donors while overseas and did not record the meetings on official schedules.

Meanwhile, an FBI investigation into the security of Clinton’s email server has yet to be resolved.

Clinton filed a sworn statement to a federal judge certifying that she submitted all emails in her possession that might have been federal records to the State Department in December 2014.

[How Clinton’s email scandal took root]

Her campaign has said she no longer had access to some of her emails, particularly from her first two months in office, while she was transitioning into the role and switching from an account linked to her AT&T BlackBerry to one routed through her home server. But her spokesman has not provided a full explanation for all of the gaps.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the growing number of Clinton work emails that she did not turn over undermined her vows of transparency.

“The most charitable interpretation is that the process she and her attorneys used to cull government emails from the emails she took with her didn’t work,” he said. “The less charitable interpretation is that these emails were not helpful to Mrs. Clinton, so they were not turned over.”

In a statement Monday night, the Trump campaign cited new emails released by Judicial Watch as a sign that Clinton had “lied” about turning over all her work-related correspondence. “We now know that Clinton’s repeated assertion that she turned over everything work-related from her time at the State Department is not true,” the campaign said.

In a report issued last month about Clinton’s email practices, the State Department inspector general’s office formally concluded that Clinton’s production of emails had been “incomplete.” Among the gaps, the IG found, were all emails Clinton sent and received between Jan. 21, 2009, when she took office, and March 17, 2009. The IG said emails were also missing that Clinton sent from the start of her term until April 12, 2009.


Among those the IG said she had not turned over were 19 emails exchanged with Gen. David H. Petraeus in January and February 2009. Approximately 15 additional emails that Clinton exchanged with informal adviser Sidney Blumenthal were turned over by Blumenthal to the House committee investigating the 2012 attacks on U.S. outposts in Benghazi, Libya, but did not appear among the emails she had turned over.

An additional 127 have emerged through Judicial Watch litigation, according to a new analysis by the group.

The State Department has not addressed the gaps in Clinton’s emails other than to note that it is methodically responding to public records requests as they are received, which has included releasing all of Clinton’s emails, as well as some emails from Abedin and other aides.

[State Dept. inspector general sharply criticizes Clinton’s email practices]

A steady stream of internal State Department documents released in response to public records requests promises new revelations until Election Day about Clinton’s leadership of the department.

One series of documents requested by Citizens United and then published by ABC News and other news organizations appears to show that Clinton’s top staff intervened to appoint a Democratic donor to a sensitive arms control advisory panel even though the donor, a Chicago securities trader, had no experience in the field.

Local Politics Alerts
Breaking news about local government in D.C., Md., Va.
Sign up
The emails show that some State Department staffers were initially puzzled when they received questions regarding the appointment of Rajiv K. Fernando to the International Security Advisory Board in 2011. “The true answer,” one official wrote at the time, explaining the inclusion of Fernando on a list of candidates, is that Clinton’s chief of staff Cheryl Mills “added him.”

Fernando had also been a major donor to the Clinton Foundation, the global charity started by former president Bill Clinton. He resigned the board position shortly after ABC News inquired about the appointment in 2011.

Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill noted the board was a volunteer advisory panel, its charter called for members with a diverse set of experiences, and that this was one of several foreign policy-oriented organizations with which Fernando was involved.

[Soul Crusher]

EXCLUSIVE: State Department Won’t Release Clinton Foundation Emails for 27 Months

Department of Justice officials filed a motion in federal court late Wednesday seeking a 27-month delay in producing correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s four top aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a closely allied public relations firm that Bill Clinton helped launch.

Drudge linked to

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/30/exclusive-state-department-wont-release-clinton-foundation-emails-for-27-months/

[240 is Back]

EXCLUSIVE: State Department Won’t Release Clinton Foundation Emails for 27 Months

Department of Justice officials filed a motion in federal court late Wednesday seeking a 27-month delay in producing correspondence between former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s four top aides and officials with the Clinton Foundation and Teneo Holdings, a closely allied public relations firm that Bill Clinton helped launch.

Drudge linked to

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/30/exclusive-state-department-wont-release-clinton-foundation-emails-for-27-months/

at least we know what scandal the repubs will be using in 2018 to attack President Hilary in their fundraising efforts. 

[Dos Equis]

FBI Source to Fox News: Agents Are 'Livid' About Clinton-Lynch Meeting 
Jul 01, 2016 // 12:18pm     
As seen on Outnumbered

FBI agents are "livid" about Attorney General Loretta Lynch's meeting with Bill Clinton, Fox News chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge reported today on Outnumbered.

Herridge said that, according to a well-placed FBI source, the agents are not just upset about the poor optics of the meeting.

She explained that Bill Clinton is a potential witness because the FBI is separately investigating corruption allegations against the Clinton Foundation.

Herridge noted that the Lynch-Clinton meeting may never have become public if a local reporter had not gotten a tip about it.

Meantime, Lynch said today she will not recuse herself from the FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton's private server, but will leave the decision-making about potential charges to non-political subordinates.

"I'll be briefed on it and I will be accepting their recommendation," said Lynch.

She noted that this was her plan even before Mr. Clinton came aboard her plane earlier this week in Phoenix.

"I certainly wouldn't do it again," she said about the meeting with Clinton, lamenting that it has "cast a shadow" over the investigation.

In a light moment during the Aspen Institute Forum, the moderator asked Lynch to name one thing her predecessor Eric Holder didn't tell her about being attorney general.

"Where the lock on the plane door was," she joked, drawing a lot of laughs from the crowd.

Herridge pointed out the extraordinary nature of what is happening right now with the Clintons and the Obama administration just weeks before the Democratic National Convention.

"What has happened in the last 24 hours has never happened before in Washington," she said.

Watch her full report above and hear from the local Phoenix reporter who broke the story, here.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/07/01/fbi-source-fox-news-agents-are-livid-about-clinton-lynch-meeting

[240 is Back]

this meeting is going to end up being a key part of things.    "talked about grandkids" for 30 minutes with recording devices and phones and reporters banned?   Come on.... They would have been better entering the same bathroom and chatting in the stall for a half hour.

The big news about hilary FBI is coming, she's meeting with them and Bill wanted to work his magic, promises, whatever he does.   Clintons can be VERY convincing... decades of them getting their way after meetings like this.

Bill chatted with Trump last summer... and not hilary doesn't have to face Jeb or Walker

This story is awesome, BUT I gotta say... repubs should be careful what they wish for.  The moment HIlary is bounced, the DNC rallies around warren/sanders, and then the "reformist" Trump is up against two reformists who aren't as inept as he has proven to be...

Sanders/Warren would absolutely decimate Trump.

[Dos Equis]

Vindicated.   

Comey: FBI Recommends No Charges for Clinton in Email Probe
By Sandy Fitzgerald   |    Tuesday, 05 Jul 2016

There is no basis for criminal charges to be filed against presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State, FBI Director James Comey said Tuesday.

Even so, he emphasized that Clinton and her staff were "reckless" and "extremely careless" in handling official and personal communications.

"Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges," said Comey in a press conference, noting that there are obvious considerations like the strength of the evidence and the matter of using responsible decisions.

"They also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past," said Comey. "In looking back at our investigations, into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts."

Over the weekend, following the controversy surrounding a private meeting between U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton, Lynch said that she would not remove herself from the case, but would likely follow the FBI's recommendations.

Comey said Tuesday that all decisions to prosecute cases rest with a prosecutor's office, and would have to involve "some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of information exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the United States or an effort to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

But, he said to be clear, the findings are not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person engaged in such activity would face no consequences, Comey said.

"To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions but that's not what we are deciding here," said Comey. "As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice to argue that no charges are appropriate in this case."

Comey said he knows there will be "intense public debate" in wake of the FBI's recommendation, and he can assure the American people that "the investigation was done honestly, confidently and independently."

And while only a small number of emails in Clinton's server contained information that they were classified, said Comey, those sending or receiving it should have known whether or not it was marked they were still "obligated to protect it. "

"The use of unclassified systems in particular was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the U.S. government," said Comey.

He said he did not coordinate the statement or review it first with the Department of Justice or with any other part of the government, and "they do not know what I am about to say."

The investigation began following a referral from the intelligence community's inspector general about Clinton's use of a personal email server and about whether classified information had been transmitted.

"Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system in violation of a federal statute that makes it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way," said Comey, and "for a second statute, making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities."

While Comey referred to the use of one email server, over Clinton's four years as Secretary of State, she used "several different servers and administrators of those servers," and as new equipment was used, the older ones were decommissioned and email software was removed, while the content was saved.

"It was like removing the frame from a huge unfinished jigsaw puzzle and then dumping all the pieces on the floor," said Comey. "The effect was that millions of email fragments ended up in the servers unused or its lack space. We searched through all of it to understand what was there and what parts of the puzzle we could put back together again.

Investigators also read all of the 30,000 emails Clinton provided to the State Department in 2014, and where emails were assessed as containing classified information, the FBI referred the documents to the pertinent government agencies, Comey continued.
 
"From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received," said Comey.

"Eight of those chains contain information that was top-secret at the time they were sent, 36 of those chains contain secret information at the time and eight contain confidential information at the time."

The FBI also discovered thousands of other work-related emails that were not among those released in 2014, through messages that deleted or through archived accounts of other government employees.

There was no evidence that the work emails were intentionally deleted, he continued, and the assessment was that Clinton periodically deleted emails, like many other people do, and conceded that some of the additional work emails could be among those deleted as being personal by her attorneys.

And last, there was extensive work to determine if Clinton's email was compromised, and "although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," said Comey, including her use of email systems while in foreign countries.

"With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton's personal email domain and its various configurations from 2009 was hacked successfully," said Comey.

"But given the nature of the system, and of the actors potentially involved, we assess it would be unlikely to see such direct efforts."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/comey-fbi-hillary-clinton/2016/07/05/id/737074/#ixzz4DYvrABCl

[Las Vegas]

some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of information exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the United States or an effort to obstruct justice

I'll admit to pretty much igoring this situation until very recently, but it seems there was something about stripping-off header information from classified documents.  I wonder how (or even if) the "justice" department answered that to themselves, as to why something like that would have been done.

[Dos Equis]

Obama’s Corrupt NC Appearance With Hillary
Posted on July 5, 2016
by Keith Koffler

Democrats are the best at crying “conflict of interest” and claiming that malevolent, hidden forces are robbing average folks of their rights. And so, let’s take a moment to observe the utter hypocrisy of the sanctimonious Left in not calling out the Obama administration for its rank attempts to influence an ongoing criminal investigation. Efforts which may have played a part in FBI Director James Comey’s announcement today that Hillary Clinton would not be indicted.

The banner child for this campaign is, of course, President Obama himself. A president who was actually a “constitutional scholar,” as Obama pretends to be, or who cared the least bit about the American criminal justice system, would at least resist openly embracing Hillary Clinton until the decision had been made on whether to indict her. It’s not like that decision was to be long in coming. Many expected it this week or next, which would have left Obama plenty of time to campaign for Mrs. Clinton.

3484046377_415b58c1cb_z

Instead, the president endorsed Clinton and today campaigns with her in Charlotte, North Carolina — an appearance scheduled before Comey made his announcement. The purpose was clear. And even if it weren’t intended, which it is, the result would be obvious. The people within the FBI and the Department of Justice received a clear signal from the president about how he wanted this investigation to pan out.

Imagine if you, at your job, were performing some kind of analysis. And the company CEO, or the firm’s owner, gave you an indication about what he or she wanted you to deduce. You might decide to ignore their wishes. But it wouldn’t be easy. And even if you told yourself you were doing an independent analysis, the fact of the boss’s preferences could not help but subtly affect what you are doing. That’s human nature.

Add into this Attorney General Lynch’s egregious decision to meet with Bill Clinton – which should be a firing offense – and Sunday’s reported whispering by Democrats to the New York Times that Hillary might just, you know, keep Lynch as attorney general – and you have a full plate of corruption on your table.

Corruption in the service of installing the next corrupt regime, that of Hillary and Bill Clinton.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2016/07/05/obamas-corrupt-appearance-hillary/

[GigantorX]

Vindicated.   

Comey: FBI Recommends No Charges for Clinton in Email Probe
By Sandy Fitzgerald   |    Tuesday, 05 Jul 2016

There is no basis for criminal charges to be filed against presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State, FBI Director James Comey said Tuesday.

Even so, he emphasized that Clinton and her staff were "reckless" and "extremely careless" in handling official and personal communications.

"Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges," said Comey in a press conference, noting that there are obvious considerations like the strength of the evidence and the matter of using responsible decisions.

"They also consider the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past," said Comey. "In looking back at our investigations, into the mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts."

Over the weekend, following the controversy surrounding a private meeting between U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton, Lynch said that she would not remove herself from the case, but would likely follow the FBI's recommendations.

Comey said Tuesday that all decisions to prosecute cases rest with a prosecutor's office, and would have to involve "some combination of clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information or vast quantities of information exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct or indications of disloyalty to the United States or an effort to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

But, he said to be clear, the findings are not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person engaged in such activity would face no consequences, Comey said.

"To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions but that's not what we are deciding here," said Comey. "As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice to argue that no charges are appropriate in this case."

Comey said he knows there will be "intense public debate" in wake of the FBI's recommendation, and he can assure the American people that "the investigation was done honestly, confidently and independently."

And while only a small number of emails in Clinton's server contained information that they were classified, said Comey, those sending or receiving it should have known whether or not it was marked they were still "obligated to protect it. "

"The use of unclassified systems in particular was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the U.S. government," said Comey.

He said he did not coordinate the statement or review it first with the Department of Justice or with any other part of the government, and "they do not know what I am about to say."

The investigation began following a referral from the intelligence community's inspector general about Clinton's use of a personal email server and about whether classified information had been transmitted.

"Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system in violation of a federal statute that makes it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way," said Comey, and "for a second statute, making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities."

While Comey referred to the use of one email server, over Clinton's four years as Secretary of State, she used "several different servers and administrators of those servers," and as new equipment was used, the older ones were decommissioned and email software was removed, while the content was saved.

"It was like removing the frame from a huge unfinished jigsaw puzzle and then dumping all the pieces on the floor," said Comey. "The effect was that millions of email fragments ended up in the servers unused or its lack space. We searched through all of it to understand what was there and what parts of the puzzle we could put back together again.

Investigators also read all of the 30,000 emails Clinton provided to the State Department in 2014, and where emails were assessed as containing classified information, the FBI referred the documents to the pertinent government agencies, Comey continued.
 
"From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department in 2014, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received," said Comey.

"Eight of those chains contain information that was top-secret at the time they were sent, 36 of those chains contain secret information at the time and eight contain confidential information at the time."

The FBI also discovered thousands of other work-related emails that were not among those released in 2014, through messages that deleted or through archived accounts of other government employees.

There was no evidence that the work emails were intentionally deleted, he continued, and the assessment was that Clinton periodically deleted emails, like many other people do, and conceded that some of the additional work emails could be among those deleted as being personal by her attorneys.

And last, there was extensive work to determine if Clinton's email was compromised, and "although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," said Comey, including her use of email systems while in foreign countries.

"With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton's personal email domain and its various configurations from 2009 was hacked successfully," said Comey.

"But given the nature of the system, and of the actors potentially involved, we assess it would be unlikely to see such direct efforts."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/comey-fbi-hillary-clinton/2016/07/05/id/737074/#ixzz4DYvrABCl

The entire transcript is surreal. Comey lays out in detail why Clinton should be indicted and then says they don't have a case.

Although this will provide fuel for a thousand fires until the election.

[Soul Crusher]

I wonder if Bill slipped the old Cuban Cigar to Lynch