Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘email scandal’

Clinton Cheerleader & Democratic Pollster Just DUMPED Hillary On Live TV


waving flagPublished on October 31, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/10/clinton-cheerleader-democratic-pollster-just-dumped-hillary-live-tv-watch/

This is what someone who puts his love of country ahead of personal politics looks like. He’s been a friend of the Clintons since 1994. But his integrity will not permit him to vote for her now.

This partial transcript is courtesy of Real Clear Politics:

DOUG SCHOEN: As you know, I have been a supporter of Secretary Clinton… But given that this investigation is going to go on for many months after the election… But if the Secretary of State wins, we will have a president under criminal investigation, with Huma Abedin under criminal investigation, with the Secretary of State, the president-elect, should she win under investigation.

Harris, under these circumstances, I am actively reassessing my support. I’m not a Trump — 

HARRIS FAULKNER, FOX NEWS: Whoa, whoa, wait a minute. You are not going to vote for Hillary Clinton?

Never-Hillary-Egl-sm

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

SCHOEN: Harris, I’m deeply concerned that we’ll have a constitutional crisis if she’s elected.

FAULKNER: Wow!

SCHOEN: I want to learn more this week. See what we see. But as of today, I am not a supporter of the Secretary of State for the nation’s highest office.

FAULKNER: How long have you known the clintons.

SCHOEN: I’ve known the clintons since ’94.

FAULKNER: Wow! But their friend here has said he’s reconsidering.

SCHOEN: I have to, because of the impact on the governance of the country and our international situation.

FAULKNER: So the news in that is are there other people, I would imagine, like Doug Schoen.

A Democrat with integrity is making the call that he cannot pull the lever for Hillary. Good for him!

Why is this PARTICULAR guy jumping ship a big deal?

Here’s a little background on the man.

Schoen was on a panel with fellow Democrat pollster Pat Caddell and former Republican Congressman John LeBoutillier.

Schoen’s bio reads in part:

Douglas E. Schoen has been one of the most influential Democratic campaign consultants for over thirty years. A founding partner and principle strategist for Penn, Schoen & Berland, he is widely recognized as one of the co-inventors of overnight polling.

Schoen was named Pollster of the Year in 1996 by the American Association of Political Consultants for his contributions to the President Bill Clinton reelection campaign.

His political clients include New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Indiana Governor Evan Bayh, and his corporate clients include AOL Time Warner, Procter & Gamble and AT&T. Internationally, he has worked for the heads of states of over 15 countries, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and three Israeli Prime Ministers…” — Gateway Pundit

There are LOTS of Democrats out there … DECENT people, who pick their candidate actually thinking they will do good for the country … who should take a look at Shoen’s example. Many of them will want to follow it.or a liar

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagBrain Freeze

Monday September 5, 2016

Hillary told the FBI she couldn’t recall 35 times regarding classified information in her emails. What will she not recall once she’s in the White House?

Hillary Can’t Recall / Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2016.

For the complete back story to this cartoon, Click Here

To see more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

or a liar

“You’ll Beat it – Just Delete It”: Awesome Video Parody of Hillary (Michael-Jackson Style)


waving flagReported by Josie Rudd, September 1, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://minutemennews.com/youll-beat-just-delete-awesome-video-parody-hillary-michael-jackson-style/

If you haven’t seen this video parody by Demand The Outdoors, it’s TOTALLY worth seeing.

Our favorite line just might be… “Send Bill over to the FBI – let them know they’ll go missing or die.”   Either that or.. “You’ll Beat it.  Just Delete it.”

delete it

or a liar

 

6 Claims Hillary Made About Her Emails are FACT CHECKED–And Guess What…


waving flagPosted on July 6, 2016

Screen Shot 2016-07-06 at 9.47.49 AM

Hillary’s main claims about the email scandal have been proven as lies. Read below and find out just exactly how she lied.

Key assertions by Hillary Clinton in defense of her email practices have collapsed under FBI scrutiny, as Associated Press fact check has found.

A look at Clinton’s claims since questions about her email practices as secretary of state surfaced and how they compare with facts established in the FBI probe:

CLASSIFIED MATERIAL ON EMAIL

CLINTON: ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.’ News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Actually, the FBI identified at least 113 emails that passed through Clinton’s server and contained materials that were classified at the time they were sent, including some that were Top Secret and referred to a highly classified special access program, Comey said.

Most of those emails — 110 of them — were included among 30,000 emails that Clinton returned to the State Department around the time her use of a private email server was discovered. The three others were recovered from a forensic analysis of Clinton’s server. ‘Any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,’ Comey said. Clinton and her aides ‘were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,’ he said.

CLASSIFIED MARKINGS 

CLINTON: ‘I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified.’ NBC interview, July 2016.

THE FACTS: Clinton has separately clung to her rationale that there were no classification markings on her emails that would have warned her and others not to transmit the sensitive material. But the private system did, in fact, handle emails that bore markings indicating they contained classified information, Comey said.

He said the marked emails were ‘a very small number.’ But that’s not the only standard for judging how officials handle sensitive material, he added. ‘Even if information is not marked classified in an email, participants who know, or should know, that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.’

‘I PROVIDED ALL MY EMAILS THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE WORK RELATED’ 

CLINTON: ‘I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related’ to the State Department. News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Not so, the FBI found.

Comey said that when his forensic team examined Clinton’s server it found there were ‘several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000’ that had been returned by Clinton to the State Department.

‘I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE EASIER TO CARRY JUST ONE DEVICE’

CLINTON: ‘I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for personal emails instead of two.’ News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: This reasoning for using private email both for public business and private correspondence didn’t hold up in the investigation. Clinton ‘used numerous mobile devices to view and send email’ using her personal account, Comey said. He also said Clinton had used different servers.

‘THERE WERE NO SECURITY BREACHES’ 

CLINTON: ‘It was on property guarded by the Secret Service, and there were no security breaches. … The use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure.’ News conference, March 2015.

CLINTON campaign website: ‘There is no evidence there was ever a breach.’

THE FACTS: The campaign website claimed ‘no evidence’ of a breach, a less categorical statement than Clinton herself made last year, when she said there was no breach. The FBI did not uncover a breach but made clear that that possibility cannot be ruled out.

‘We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account,’ Comey said.

He said evidence would be hard to find because hackers are sophisticated and can cover their tracks. Comey said his investigators learned that Clinton’s security lapses included using ‘her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.’ Comey also noted that hackers breached the email accounts of several outsiders who messaged with Clinton.

Comey did not mention names, but a Romanian hacker who called himself Guccifer accessed and later leaked emails from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside adviser to Clinton who regularly communicated with her.lying so long

fight Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagNot So Sharp Shooter

Not So Sharp Shooter – Is Hillary Qualified to be POTUS given her carelessness and recklessness with classified information.

Hillary Qualified / Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2016.

A.F. Branco Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

2.0 FOR PRISON Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server


March 2, 2016

FOR PRISON

The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009. As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents are likely to want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.

So far, there is no indication that prosecutors have convened a grand jury in the email investigation to subpoena testimony or documents, which would require the participation of a U.S. attorney’s office.

Spokesmen at the FBI and Justice Department would not discuss the investigation. Pagliano’s attorney, Mark J. MacDougall, also declined to comment.

In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said: “As we have said since last summer, Secretary Clinton has been cooperating with the Department of Justice’s security inquiry, including offering in August to meet with them to assist their efforts if needed.”

He also said the campaign is “pleased” that Pagliano, who invoked his Fifth Amendment rights before a congressional panel in September, is now cooperating with prosecutors. The campaign had encouraged Pagliano to testify before Congress.

As part of the inquiry, law enforcement officials will look at the potential damage had the classified information in the emails been exposed. The Clinton campaign has described the probe as a security review. But current and former officials in the FBI and at the Justice Department have said investigators are trying to determine whether a crime was committed.

“There was wrongdoing,” said a former senior law enforcement official. “But was it criminal wrongdoing?”

Any decision to charge someone would involve Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, who told Congress when asked last month about the email inquiry: “That matter is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents, FBI agents, as well as the career independent attorneys in the Department of Justice. They follow the evidence, they look at the law and they’ll make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate.”

She added, “We will review all the facts and all the evidence and come to an independent conclusion as how to best handle it.”Picture1

Current and former officials said the conviction of retired four-star general and CIA director David H. Petraeus for mishandling classified information is casting a shadow over the email investigation.

The officials said they think that Petraeus’s actions were more egregious than those of Clinton and her aides because he lied to the FBI, and classified information he shared with his biographer contained top secret code words, identities of covert officers, war strategy and intelligence capabilities. Prosecutors initially threatened to charge him with three felonies, including conspiracy, violating the Espionage Act and lying to the FBI. But after negotiations, Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information.

He was fined $100,000 and sentenced to two years of probation. FBI officials were angered by the deal and predicted it would affect the outcome of other cases involving classified information. Petraeus “was handled so lightly for his offense there isn’t a whole lot you can do,” said a former U.S. law enforcement official who oversaw counterintelligence investigations and described the email controversy as “a lesser set of circumstances.”

The State Department has been analyzing the contents of Clinton’s correspondence, as it has prepared 52,000 pages of Clinton’s emails for public release in batches, a process that began in May and concluded Monday. The State Department has said 2,093 of Clinton’s released emails were redacted in all or part because they contained classified material, the vast majority of them rated “confidential,” the lowest level of sensitivity in the classification system.

Clinton and the State Department have said that none of the material was marked classified at the time it was sent. However, it is the responsibility of individual government officials to properly handle sensitive material.FOR PRISON

The email investigation is being conducted by FBI counterintelligence agents and supervised by the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

In a letter filed last month in federal court as part of ongoing civil litigation over Clinton’s emails, the FBI confirmed that it was “working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.” The agency declined to publicly detail the investigation’s “specific focus, scope or potential targets.”

On Tuesday, FBI Director James B. Comey said he was “very close” to the investigation.

Former federal prosecutor Glen Kopp said it is not surprising that agents want to interview Clinton and her aides.

“They are within the zone of interest of the investigation,” he said.

A request to interview her would have to be reviewed by top level officials at both the FBI and the Justice Department, a former official said. As part of those interviews, the FBI would also seek to establish that Clinton and her aides understood the policies and protocols for handling classified information, former officials said.

Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, declined to comment.

Kendall, who also has represented President Bill Clinton and Petraeus, has navigated similar issues in other cases. During the investigation of President Clinton by independent counsel Ken Starr, for instance, Kendall rebuffed several requests for interviews.

The president was then subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury. In a deal brokered by Kendall, the subpoena was withdrawn and Clinton testified voluntarily in 1998.

Former prosecutors said investigators were probably feeling the pressure of time because of the election. Take action before the election, they said, and you risk being perceived as trying to influence the result. Take action after and face criticism for not letting voters know there was an issue with their preferred candidate.

“The timing is terrible whether you do it before or after,” Kopp said.

The issue of Clinton’s use of a private email server was referred to the FBI in July after the Office of the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community determined that some of the emails that traversed Clinton’s server contained classified material.

Emails that contain material now deemed classified were authored by Clinton but also by many of her top aides, including Jacob Sullivan, who was her director of policy planning and her deputy chief of staff. He is now advising Clinton’s campaign on foreign policy and is thought to be a likely candidate for national security adviser if she is elected president.

The State Department has said that, at the request of intelligence agencies, it has classified 22 Clinton emails as “top secret” and will not release those emails, even in redacted form. “Top secret” is the highest level of classification, reserved for material whose release could cause “exceptionally grave damage to the national security.”

I. Charles McCullough III, the inspector general of the intelligence community, has indicated that some of the material intelligence officials have reviewed contained information that was classified at the time it was sent; the State Department has indicated that it has not analyzed whether the material should have been marked classified when it was sent, only whether it requires classification before being released now.Picture2

Rosalind S. Helderman, Julie Tate and Matt Zapotosky contributed to this report.

Read more:

State Department releases final batch of Clinton emails

The State Department: Hillary Clinton’s email correspondence contained ‘top secret’ material

Aides’ email-server testimony could throw Clinton campaign a curveball

2.0 different or same lying so long Die In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Judge suspects ‘bad faith’ from Obama administration on Hillary Clinton emails


– The Washington Times – Tuesday, February 23, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/23/judge-threatens-subpoena-against-clinton-emails

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks during a Nevada Democratic caucus rally, Saturday, Feb. 20, 2016, in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/John Locher)

A federal judge questioned the Obama administration’s “good faith” in helping keep former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails secret for six years and said he may end up issuing a subpoena to force her to turn over her entire account to the government. For now, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said he will grant limited discovery to Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group that has sued to get a look at Mrs. Clinton’s emails.FOR PRISON

That could give the group — and the broader public — answers as to who approved Mrs. Clinton’s unique arrangement, who else in government knew about it and why they shielded it for so long. It also could force Mrs. Clinton to answer questions about how she sorted through her account and decided which messages she didn’t want to turn over to the government.

Judge Sullivan said he is “inclined” to issue a subpoena demanding that Mrs. Clinton and top aide Huma Abedin turn over the entire email system they used. He delayed that decision, saying he will wait to see what he learns from the discovery process, but was irked by answers the Obama administration has given.

“How on earth can the court conclude there is not at minimum a reasonable suspicion of bad faith?” Judge Sullivan said.

With Mrs. Clinton fighting for the presidency, news that her emails could remain a controversy for months is troubling. But Judge Sullivan said it’s all the result of her unique arrangement, in which she rejected use of the State Department’s server and instead conducted all of her official business on an account tied to a server she kept at her home in New York.

“We’re not talking about any federal employee. We’re talking about the secretary of state,” he said.

With Mrs. Clinton out of office and on the campaign trail, it has been left to President Obama and his team to pick up her defense. The administration repeatedly tried to derail Judge Sullivan on Tuesday, saying the State Department has already pleaded with Mrs. Clinton to return any government emails she has.

“State has really done everything it can to get these records,” said Steven Myers, a Justice Department lawyer handling the case for the government.Bull

Mrs. Clinton left office in early 2013. Nearly two years later, and only after prodding by the congressional probe into the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack, she turned over to the State Department some 32,000 emails covering 55,000 printed pages.

But she said another 30,000 messages were sent during her four years in office that her attorneys deemed to be purely private. She said they dealt with issues such as scheduling her yoga classes or planning her daughter Chelsea’s wedding. She refused to turn over those messages, saying it was her right as a government employee to decide what emails were official records.REALLY

Judicial Watch, though, said Mrs. Clinton lost that right when she left the government. The group argued that it should be current government employees, either at the National Archives or the State Department, who make that determination. Judge Sullivan seemed to agree, saying that even if Mrs. Clinton were still in office, it would be some other open-records officer, not Mrs. Clinton herself, who would be going through her emails. The judge repeatedly questioned how the State Department could have allowed the situation in the first place.

He said it was clear that top officials knew about Mrs. Clinton’s secret account, yet for years, open-records requests were handled without any of those emails being produced.

“We’re talking about a Cabinet-level official who was accommodated by the government, for reasons unknown,” he said. “This is about the public’s right to know.”

Mrs. Clinton has said she rejected the State Department’s offer of an email account out of convenience for herself. She said she wanted to carry only one device and handle all of her public and private business on it.

The FBI is investigating Mrs. Clinton’s use of the server, where she kept more than 1,700 messages now deemed to have classified information, 22 of which contain top-secret material.FOR PRISON

The State Department’s internal watchdog is also looking into the arrangement, Mr. Myers said, pleading with Judge Sullivan to stand down and wait for those investigations to play out.

Judicial Watch’s original open-records request sought information on Ms. Abedin’s own unique arrangement with the State Department, in which she was allowed to work for outside interests while collecting her government salary.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the organization was happy with the ruling Tuesday.

“It’s a significant victory for public accountability,” he said.

Dozens of other cases also have been filed seeking other messages from Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Abedin and several other top aides.

Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager said Judge Sullivan was caving to “a right-wing group” in Judicial Watch.Leftist Propagandist

“Our campaign is accustomed to these right-wing attacks, and they’re going to continue,” Robby Mook told CNN.

The Republican National Committee said that response was curious, given that Judge Sullivan was appointed by President Clinton in 1994.

Judge Sullivan repeatedly questioned how the Obama administration could have allowed the situation, calling it “troubling.” He said the entire process of creating and maintaining the secret email system, which Mrs. Clinton kept at her home in New York, raises questions about whether she was trying to thwart the law. He said he has not come to that conclusion yet.

He also said the State Department has hurt its own case by claiming several times that it had conducted a full search only to later come back and acknowledge it found places it hadn’t checked.

“It just boggles the mind that the State Department allowed this circumstance to arise in the first place,” the judge said.

Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies Die Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Did Clinton Email Lead to Afghan Asset’s Death


waving flagWritten by Michael Ware, Feb 18, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/did-clinton-email-lead-to-afghan-assets-death

The Hillary Clinton email saga continues this week. It seems to be never ending, the stream of information that passed through Hillary’s unsecured server. But, even with irrefutable evidence that top secret material was mishandled, there has yet to be any charges leveled.FOR PRISON

It makes one wonder what height of illegal activity this breach of protocol would have to reach before the FBI acts. We might soon find out, as there seems to be the possibly of more than the speculative damage done.

Fox reports

One of the classified email chains discovered on Hillary Clinton’s personal unsecured server discussed an Afghan national’s ties to the CIA and a report that he was on the agency’s payroll, a U.S. government official with knowledge of the document told Fox News.

One of the questions that have to be cleared up is when exactly was the email conversation held. If the timing lines up, this email might be to blame for that Afghan national’s death.

Fox continued

Based on the timing and other details, the email chain likely refers to either anOctober 2009 Times story that identified Afghan national Ahmed Wali Karzai, the half-brother of then-Afghan president Hamid Karzai, as a person who received “regular payments from the Central Intelligence Agency” — or an August 2010 Times story that identified Karzai aide Mohammed Zia Salehi as being on the CIA payroll. Ahmed Wali Karzai was murdered during a 2011 shoot-out, a killing later claimed by the Taliban.

Now, many would like to think that this was simply an error on Hillary’s part. She probably did not realize that they were classified. Well, that is highly unlikely according to Fox News sources. And how could it not be recognized that this would be highly sensitive information?

And if this sensitivity is not known, what does that say about Hillary Clinton? Would you want that person to have the highest position of power in the country, if not the world? I mean that argument might keep Hillary Clinton out of jail, but it sure makes her look stupid.

And there is one thing that that crook is not, and that’s stupid. You can count on that.

lying so long Alibi In Review Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagIn Her Defense

Hillary is Dirty up to her you-know-what in the email scandal, but she has a defense –  others did it too.

Hillary is Dirty

Political Cartoon A.F. Branco ©2016.

More A.F. Branco cartoons at Patriot Update here.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

FOR PRISON different or same Alibi In Review lying so long Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagYou’ve Got Mail-ed

Hillary Email Dump consisting of 22 top secret emails. Will her campaign be flattened over this?

The White House is Covering for Hillary Clinton and the FBI is “Super Pissed-Off”!


waving flagBy / 1 February 2016

The FBI has been investigating the scandal surrounding Hillary Clinton’s lawless use of a private email server during her time as Secretary of State. Sadly, much of their work has been roundly abused by the Obama administration and the Democrat Party. Unjustly so. The FBI is not at fault for pursuing an investigation into obviously criminal behavior, but if their investigation uncovers proof of Mrs. Clinton’s malfeasance, then the Democrat Party could lose many of the gains they’ve made during the Obama era. This is something that the President seems dead-set against allowing.

How sold-out is the Obama team to discrediting the investigation against Clinton? They are prepared to sacrifice the sanctity of our system of justice to defend the law-breaking Clinton.

When asked during a recent press conference whether or not Clinton would be indicted, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest had this to say, “That will be a decision made by the Department of Justice and prosecutors over there. What I know that some officials over there have said is that she is not a target of the investigation. So that does not seem to be the direction that it’s trending. But I’m certainly not going to weigh in on a decision or in that process in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by independent prosecutors but again, based on what we know from the Department of Justice, it does not seem to be headed in that direction.”

Anyone who understands the way the justice system in America works knows that this type of statement from the White House is completely out of place, as it undercuts the investigators and the way an investigation must be handled. Fox News’s Catherine Herridge explains. “That statement by Josh Earnest has got the back up of our contacts at the FBI and Justice Department for two reasons… They are SUPER PISSED OFF to use a technical term. Number one, Josh Earnest has absolutely no clearance or visibility in the FBI investigation. Number two, they say it really seems part of a troubling pattern from the White House because the president earlier said he did not see any national security implications to the Clinton emails and then we found out he had never been briefed.”

243 emails released Friday were classified at some level, bringing the overall number of classified Clinton emails to 1,583. The State Department also announced Friday that it is withholding in full and into perpetuity 22 emails that contain “Top Secret” information — the highest classification category.

However, none of these facts will deter President Obama or the Democrat Party for fighting tooth and nail to stop justice from taking its course. Why? Because the Democrat Party doesn’t care about justice. The Democrat Party doesn’t care about truth. No, the only thing the Democrat Party cares about, as evidenced by the life and career of Hillary Rodham Clinton, is POWER.

Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Inspector General: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs


waving flagBy ; Published January 19, 2016; FoxNews.com

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton’s emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government’s most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter from a top inspector general to senior lawmakers. Fox News exclusively obtained the unclassified letter, sent Jan. 14 from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III. It laid out the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified “several dozen” additional classified emails — including specific intelligence known as “special access programs” (SAP).  

That indicates a level of classification beyond even “top secret,” the label previously given to two emails found on her server, and brings even more scrutiny to the presidential candidate’s handling of the government’s closely held secrets.

“To date, I have received two sworn declarations from one [intelligence community] element. These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels,” said the IG letter to lawmakers with oversight of the intelligence community and State Department. “According to the declarant, these documents contain information derived from classified IC element sources.”

Intelligence from a “special access program,” or SAP, is even more sensitive than that designated as “top secret” – as were two emails identified last summer in a random sample pulled from Clinton’s private server she used as secretary of state. Access to a SAP is restricted to those with a “need-to-know” because exposure of the intelligence would likely reveal the source, putting a method of intelligence collection — or a human asset — at risk. Currently, some 1,340 emails designated “classified” have been found on Clinton’s server, though the Democratic presidential candidate insists the information was not classified at the time.

“There is absolutely no way that one could not recognize SAP material,” a former senior law enforcement with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures told Fox News. “It is the most sensitive of the sensitive.”

Executive Order 13526 — called “Classified National Security Information” and signed Dec. 29, 2009 — sets out the legal framework for establishing special access programs. The order says the programs can only be authorized by the president, “the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, or the principal deputy of each.”

The programs are created when “the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional,” and “the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved,” it states.

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009. 

Fox News is told that the recent IG letter was sent to the leadership of the House and Senate intelligence committees and leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and State Department inspector general.

Representatives for the ODNI and intelligence community inspector general had no comment.

In a statement, State Department spokesman John Kirby said, “The State Department is focused on and committed to releasing former Secretary Clinton’s emails in a manner that protects sensitive information. No one takes this more seriously than we do.”lying so long

The intelligence community IG was responding in his message to a November letter from the Republican chairmen of the Senate intelligence and foreign relations committees that questioned the State Department email review process after it was wrongly reported the intelligence community was retreating from the “top secret” designation.

As Fox News first reported, those two emails were “top secret” when they hit the server, and it is now considered a settled matter.

The intelligence agencies now have their own reviewers embedded at the State Department as part of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process. The reviewers are identifying intelligence of a potentially classified nature, and referring it to the relevant intelligence agency for further review.

There is no formal appeals process for classification, and the agency that generates the intelligence has final say. The State Department only has control over the fraction of emails that pertain to their own intelligence.

While the State Department and Clinton campaign have said the emails in questions were “retroactively classified” or “upgraded” – to justify the more than 1,300 classified emails on her server – those terms are meaningless under federal law.

The former federal law enforcement official said the finding in the January IG letter represents a potential violation of USC 18 Section 793, “gross negligence” in the handling of secure information under the Espionage Act.

Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.

SEE FOX NEWS BROADCAST ON THIS STORY BELOW:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4698845779001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>&#8221; href=”http://http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4698845779001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>&#8221; rel=”http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4698845779001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>”&gt;http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4698845779001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript&gt; aligncenter wp-image-21968″ title=”http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4698845779001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>&#8221; src=”https://mrb562.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/fbiemails.jpg&#8221; alt=”fbiemails” width=”861″ height=”622″ />
different or same Alibi In Review In God We Trust freedom combo 2

SARAH PALIN: Posts Pic On Facebook Of Hillary And It’s Wickedly Delicious


waving flagPosted on August 17, 2015

11880359_10153570076618588_822147005175424235_nSarah Palin just compared Hillary Clinton to Edward Snowden in the best way possible. She posted this picture on her Facebook page and has received almost 95K ‘likes’ so far.

Teflon In God We Trust freedom combo 2

It Begins… “Hillary for Prison” Signs Spotted in Missouri


waving flagPosted By Gateway Pundit | Jim Hoft On August 15, 2015

Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/it-begins-hillary-for-prison-signs-spotted-in-missouri

Author Marinka Peschmann started selling these “Prison or POTUS” bumper stickers months ago.

hillary prison or potus

It was a tough week for Hillary.

Top secret documents were found in her email stash. The FBI seized her email server.

Now this…

“Hillary for Prison 2016″ signs were spotted in St. Charles, Missouri today.

hillary for prison
The sign was posted on 5th Street in St Charles.  The goat was a nice touch.

Here’s another one…

hillary01

And another one… Not sure where this one is at…

hillary02


In God We Trust freedom combo 2

New York Times Stealth-Edits Clinton Email Story at Her Command


waving flagby John Hayward24 Jul 2015

On Thursday evening, the New York Times broke a bombshell story that could spell doom for Hillary Clinton’s already-faltering campaign.  The headline read, “Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email.”

The article began as follows: “Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.”

But suddenly, without notice to readers or attribution, the headline was changed to, “Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account.”

It’s so very, very, very good to be Democrat royalty.  You never get asked tough questions about issues that make your big supporters squirm, like Planned Parenthood’s baby parts-harvesting operation.  You’re completely insulated from everything other members of your Party do and say, while every Republican is instantly joined at the hip with the most controversial members of theirs.  Your court media will leap into action at the snap of your fingers, suppressing or blunting stories and headlines that are incredibly damaging to your campaign.cartoon-media-blinders-500

The opening paragraph of the story was stealth-edited to an even more absurd degree, to distance Clinton herself from the story.  It now reads as if she was a bystander to the potentially illegal activity: “Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.” [emphasis added]

The Times even altered the URL of the web page to cover its tracks, evidently having learned that one of the favorite tactics of media watchdogs is to check the URL – which usually defaults to the initial headline – against what the story currently says.

As of Friday morning, there was nothing in the article to indicate it had been changed, or why.  This isn’t a correction or an update – it’s chicanery.Party of Deciet and lies

And there’s no mystery about why, as reporter Michael Schmidt explained to Politico: “It was a response to complaints we received from the Clinton camp that we thought were reasonable, and we made them.”

As for the story itself, interested readers might want to check it out before Hillary Clinton demands more stealth edits from her good friends in the editorial room.  At the moment, it explains that the unnamed inspectors general sent a memo to Patrick F. Kennedy, under secretary of state for management, saying that hundreds of the emails sent through Clinton’s secret, possibly illegal mail server were “potentially classified.”

Clinton has always maintained no formally classified information was sent through the insecure server, although a great deal of unquestionably sensitive material was.  Students of the email scandal have wondered how anyone could effectively serve as Secretary of State without sending or receiving any classified information, although Hillary Clinton’s disastrous performance in the office might actually make her claims of never handling secret documents more plausible.

One of the details that needs clearing up is whether material pumped through Clinton’s basement server was classified at the time.  At least two dozen of the emails she decided to hand over to Congress, rather than pronouncing them “personal” and defying subpoenas to destroy them, were redacted because they have been retroactively classified by the State Department.  It would have been nice to have a Secretary of State who knew better than to send information so sensitive it would be retroactively classified through a hacker-vulnerable mail account she wasn’t supposed to be using in the first place, but here we are.

However, the Times adds: “In a second memo to Mr. Kennedy, sent on July 17, the inspectors general said that at least one email made public by the State Department contained classified information. The inspectors general did not identify the email or reveal its substance.”

The article goes on to discuss the State Department’s generally slipshod handling of sensitive material and its foot-dragging response to Freedom of Information Act requests and congressional subpoenas it has been ignoring, in some cases for years.

Amusingly, the Times reports that “some State Department officials said they believe that many senior officials did not initially take the [House Select Committee on Benghazi] seriously, which slowed document production and created an appearance of stonewalling.”

A branch of Barack Obama’s corrupt, hyper-partisan Administration didn’t think it had to bother with a lawful investigation conducted by the Republican House majority?  Who could have seen that coming?Leftist Giant called Tyranny

On the subject of corruption, don’t hold your breath waiting for Obama’s Justice Department to investigate Hillary Clinton’s email abuses.  They’re too busy launching investigations into the people who would dare expose Planned Parenthood’s possible violation of the law to harvest baby organs for sale, in pursuit of the cash needed to buy expensive sports cars.  This story isn’t likely to go any further than the inspectors general making their recommendation, which is enormously embarrassing for Clinton, and will get people talking about a subject she’s been hoping her loyal friends, financial supporters, and former employees in the press could bury while she lays low during the Trump Moment.

It’s a measure of just how embarrassing it is that she was able to pick up the phone, or maybe fire off an email from one of those portable devices she claims she hates carrying, and get the story stealth-edited in a matter of minutes.

freedom combo 2

2 Of Hillary’s Libya Emails Are Missing


Reported by Photo of Chuck Ross Chuck Ross, Reporter, 05/26/2015

Sidney Blumenthal emailed Hillary Clinton at least two intelligence reports about Libya which were not included in the trove of 296 emails released by the State Department on Friday. Clinton has claimed that in December she turned over all official government emails she sent or received from her personal account while in office. In turn, the agency has claimed it turned all Clinton emails related to Libya or Benghazi over to the House Select Committee investigating the Benghazi attack.Clinton Democrat Party

But a screenshot of Blumenthal’s email inbox, which the Romanian hacker Guccifer published in March 2013, shows two reports about Libya emailed to Clinton which were not released in Friday’s batch. Blumenthal’s hacked inbox shows that he sent a Jan. 15, 2013, report under the subject line “H: Latest Libya intel; internal discussions” and another on Jan. 26 with the subject line “H: Libya security latest.” The State Department release — which was published on the agency’s Freedom of Information Act portal — does not include those two reports. It does, however, include some 20 other intelligence reports Blumenthal sent Clinton about Libya and Benghazi between March 2, 2011. and Dec. 18, 2012.

Screengrab of Sidney Blumenthal's email inbox

The discrepancy suggests that the system that Clinton and the State Department have in place to account for her emails failed in some regard. It also raises questions over whether other emails are unaccounted for. Clinton and her team made the unilateral determination about which emails counted as official government records. The State Department had no oversight in the process and likely will not in the future. Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, denied the Benghazi Committee’s request to inspect a private server Clinton used to maintain the personal email account. Kendall told the committee that the server has been wiped clean.

statefoia

Blumenthal, a former journalist turned Clinton crony, routinely sent Clinton reports based on intelligence gathered from his own sources. Clinton’s emails show she regularly forwarded the reports to aides to have them circulated to other State Department officials or to print them off for later reading. Blumenthal’s hacked inbox shows other intelligence reports sent to Clinton’s email account — HDR22@clintonemail.com — but it is unclear from their titles if they contain material related to Benghazi or Libya.

It also remains to be seen whether those other reports are included in the 55,000 pages of emails Clinton turned over to State. The agency will likely turn those emails over sometime later this year. The discrepancy has at least three possible explanations: Clinton purposely hid the two reports; she overlooked the emails and failed to turn them over; the State Department has the emails in the larger batch of records provided by Clinton but for some reason failed to turn the two in question over to the Benghazi Committee.

Clinton and her team reportedly used a four-step process to decide which emails to turn over to the State Department. The team searched all Clinton emails for the period between 2007 and 2013 to some 100 State Department and other federal officials. From there, the Clinton team reportedly searched for non-obvious and idiosyncratic terms. Finally, emails were searched for references to “Benghazi” and “Libya.”

Clinton has said she turned over about half of all emails from her personal account. She claimed the others were personal messages which she “chose not to keep.”In Review freedom combo 2

While Hillary Slept


waving flagReported by @noahcrothman 05.22.2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/05/22/while-hillary-slept/ Society

Only the most conspiratorial among us suspected that the State Department’s decision to release a tranche of Hillary Clinton’s private emails on the Friday before a long holiday weekend just might be an effort to bury the revelations. Well, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

The journalists who combed through the emails learned, among other things, that State officials spent quite a bit of their time investigating leads sent to Clinton via her longtime associate Sidney Blumenthal. Though Barack Obama’s White House blocked Clinton’s request to add Blumenthal to her staff at State as a speechwriter, it seems that the Clinton confidant served as a key outside advisor to the former secretary of state.

But some of the most compelling details in those emails regarding Clinton’s conduct were in regards to the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi. The emails reveal that the White House regarded Clinton as the “public face of the U.S. effort in Libya” in 2012. “She was instrumental in security the authorization, building the coalition, and tightening the noose around Qadhafi and his regime.” The White House noted that Clinton had been a “critical voice on Libya,” working closely with the president, NATO, and a number of contact groups both during the coalition intervention and in its aftermath. And when officials received a presidential briefing three days after the September 11, 2012 attack that took the life of a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans, Hillary Clinton was asleep.pretenders

“I just woke up,” Clinton wrote in an email sent at 10:43 a.m. ET on the morning of Saturday September 15, 2012. Surely, those Republicans tasked with crafting political advertisements in 2016 will not fail to contrast this revelation with Clinton’s famous 2008 spot in which she suggested that she would be a better candidate to take the crisis call that comes in at 3 a.m. When the crisis arrived, Hillary was literally napping.O-for-H-NRD-600

When Clinton’s first private email account was exposed earlier this year, she belatedly took to a podium at the United Nations to control the spiraling damage that the scandalous revelation was doing to her political prospects. Clinton was asked if she was ever “specifically briefed on the security implications” of using a private email to conduct State affairs. To this inquiry, Clinton launched into a response that centered on the fact that she had never sent classified information over the one “homebrew” server of which the public was aware.

“I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email,” Clinton insisted. “There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”  Once again, America, whether Clinton engaged in any impropriety depends on what the definition of “is” is.Hillary Song

No one asked Clinton about classified information, per se. And it was revealed this week that Clinton had, in fact, received sensitive/unclassified materials via her email account. One of the emails released by the State Department on Friday indicated that the former secretary of state had receive electronic correspondences that included a classified document, but that document was only officially awarded classified status on the same day those emails were released – more than 32 months after the Benghazi attack. Curious.

As The Washington Free Beacon’s Lachlan Markay observed, Clinton wrote in her 2014 autobiography Hard Choices that her first thoughts after she learned of the attack were with the late U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens. In an interview with Wall Street Journal reporter Monica Langley, an exchange apparently so fawning that Clinton’s aides exchanged a series of emails mocking the reporter’s obsequiousness and repeated invasions of Clinton’s personal space, the secretary made it clear how hard she had taken his loss.

“I sent Chris Stevens to Benghazi at the height of the Libyan conflict [during the Arab Spring],” Clinton told Langley. “He was eager to go and was very effective. I recommended him as ambassador.” Except that Clinton was apparently not even fully aware of Stevens’ name. In an email sent to her confidants at state on the evening of the attack, Clinton referred to him as Chris Smith, noted that she had received informal confirmation of his death, and asked when that news should be disclosed.Clinton Democrat Party

Finally, Clinton seemed to be acutely aware of the political damage that might have been done by the administration’s ill-considered efforts to blame the attacks on a spontaneous demonstration related to a YouTube video. In a September 30 email to her aides at State, Clinton asked if she had ever described the conditions prior to the assault on the Benghazi outpost as a “spontaneous” demonstration. Her aides relieved her of any stress when they noted that she had been appropriately cautious with her words.

Indeed, even Reuters noted that the frequency with which Clinton and her cadre of aides prioritized protecting Clinton’s image in the wake of the deadly attack was conspicuous. “The emails from Clinton’s personal email account made public by the State Department do not appear to contain any revelations that could badly damage her bid for the presidency in 2016 or provide fodder for Republicans who accuse her of being negligent before the Benghazi attacks,” the Reuters dispatch read. “But they offer a glimpse into how Clinton’s team was concerned about her image immediately afterward.”

There is nothing like a little beauty rest to help image maintenance. These emails are only a fraction of those released to the State Department for review, and those are just the emails that Clinton’s team did not summarily delete. Surely, these are not the only embarrassing revelations about Clinton’s behavior at State that will be disclosed in coming days.freedom combo 2

Emails reportedly show confidant told Clinton Benghazi attack planned by fighters tied to Al Qaeda


Published May 21, 2015, FoxNews.com

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/21/emails-reportedly-show-confidant-told-clinton-benghazi-attack-planned-by-aq/

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.

VIEW THE FOX NEWS CHANNEL REPORT BELOW:

foxnews

freedom combo 2

Hillary Clinton email case reopened by federal judge


– The Washington Times – Sunday, May 10, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/10/federal-judge-reopens-hillary-clinton-email-case/

A federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's emails as Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch. (Associated Press)
A federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails as Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch. (Associated … more >

Clinton Democrat PartyA federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails, marking the first time a court has taken action on the email scandal. Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed Friday to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch, which sued in 2012 to get a look at some of Mrs. Clinton’s documents concerning a public relations push. Both sides agreed that the revelation that Mrs. Clinton had kept her own email server separate from the government, and exclusively used her own email account created on that server, meant that she had shielded her messages from valid open-records requests.

Now that she has belatedly turned some emails over, the government offered — and Judge Walton confirmed in his ruling — that the agency should search them all to see whether any should have been released to Judicial Watch. “This is the first case that’s been reopened,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said Friday. “It’s a significant development. It points to the fraud by this administration and Mrs. Clinton.”

Judicial Watch has filed a series of open-records requests seeking State Department emails and, when the administration failed to comply, has gone to court to force them. Just last week Judicial Watch filed a new batch of eight lawsuits trying to shake loose some of the secret emails, and said that was just the first round.

The State Department said it doesn’t comment on open-records lawsuits.Party of Deciet and lies

Publicly, the department has struggled to handle the inquiries over Mrs. Clinton’s emails. Officials didn’t acknowledge that there were missing emails until prodded by the House committee investigating the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya. After that prod, the department asked Mrs. Clinton to turn over emails that contained government business. She provided about 30,000 emails, but said she discarded another 32,000 she deemed weren’t government business, and then wiped the server. She has refused requests by the Benghazi inquiry chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, South Carolina Republican, to turn the server over to a neutral third party.

On Friday, Mr. Gowdy released an interim report detailing his first year of investigation, citing “obstacles and frustrations” in dealing with the administration. He said they have talked with new witnesses who hadn’t been interviewed by any other Benghazi probe, and had unearthed documents that haven’t been part of other investigations. But he said Mrs. Clinton’s emails remain a large question mark, and the State Department still hasn’t turned over emails from her senior staff.

“The State Department has told the committee that it cannot certify that it has turned over all documents responsive to the committee’s request regarding the former secretary’s emails,” Mr. Gowdy said in his report.

Mr. Gowdy also hinted that Congress’s investigative powers may be limited when it comes to trying to force a president and his team to come clean.

“The legislative branch’s constitutional toolbox seems inadequate to uphold our task in seeking the truth,” Mr. Gowdy said, pointing to the administration’s unwillingness to serve subpoenas on itself, neutering much of Congress’s investigative power.

Mr. Fitton said that’s why his group’s lawsuits are so critical, saying Congress’s hands are tied and the Justice Department hasn’t committed to conduct an investigation of another part of the Obama administration.freedom

“It’s going to be independent actions by JW at this point,” Mr. Fitton said. “This is how anything is going to break loose.”

OARLogo Picture6

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagIf Hillary Were a Republican


URL of the Original Posting Site: http://conservativebyte.com/2015/04/if-hillary-were-a-republican/

H-Cell-600-LI
In Review OARLogo Picture6

Many Clinton charity donors also got State Department awards under Hillary


waving flagBy Sarah Westwood | April 23, 2015 

Enemy-Email-NRD-600Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation. The published donor records of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation don’t give exact dates or amounts of its contributors, but it is possible to create a general timeline for when many of the corporations donated and when they were either nominated or selected for the award.

  • Silicon Valley giant Cisco was the biggest foundation contributor nominated in 2009, giving the Clinton charity between $1 million and $5 million. The company then won the award in 2010 when eight of the 12 finalists and two of the three winners had donated to the foundation.
  • The other Clinton contributor to win that year, candy-maker Mars, Inc., had given between $25,000 and $50,000. Coca-Cola was the most generous foundation donor to be honored as a finalist in 2010, giving a $5-10 million donation.
  • TOM’s Shoes, a 2009 winner for its work in Argentina, donated between $100,000 and $250,000.
  • The other 2009 winner, Trilogy International Partners, gave between $50,000 and $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Overall, seven of the 10 finalists in 2009 were foundation donors.
  • Seven of the 12 finalists for the award in 2011 gave to the charity. One of the winners, Procter & Gamble, had contributed $1-5 million. The other 2011 winner, Sahlman Seafoods, does not appear to have been a donor.
  • Tiger Machinery, a 2011 finalist, is the Russian dealer of Caterpillar, Inc. tractors and other heavy equipment. Caterpillar gave between $1,000 and $5,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
  • Intel, another Silicon Valley giant, was nominated for an award each year of Clinton’s time in office, winning the award in 2012. The technology company donated between $250,000 and $500,000.
  • Five of the eight finalists and one of the two winners were foundation donors in 2012. A finalist that year, Esso Angola, is an international subsidiary of Exxon-Mobil, a prolific contributor to the Clinton Foundation. Exxon-Mobil gave between $1 million and $5 million.Party of Deciet and lies

Each of the companies listed appear to have made at least a portion of their donations before 2013. However, the Clinton Foundation’s vague listings prevent a more thorough review.

Kerry Humphrey, spokesman for the department’s Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, said “senior representatives” from multiple federal agencies selected winners from among those nominated by U.S. embassies for “corporate excellence” abroad, including “demonstrating respect for human rights” and “promoting respect for the environment.”

The early days of Clinton’s second presidential campaign have been overshadowed by widespread criticism from across the political spectrum of foreign donations to the former chief U.S. diplomat’s family foundation, as well of her use of a private email and server to conduct government business while Secretary of State. She then unilaterally destroyed an estimated 30,000 emails she claimed were personal.

A forthcoming book by Peter Schweizer called Clinton Cash purports to show “a pattern of financial transactions involving the Clintons that occurred contemporaneous with favorable U.S. policy decisions benefiting those providing the funds.”In Review OARLogo Picture6

Here’s Two Reasons Why Hillary’s Email Server Was Scrubbed


Posted by “The Right Curmudgeon”, Mar 28, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://therightcurmudgeon.com/2015/03/heres-two-reasons-why-hillarys-email-server-was-scrubbed/

collection

And both reasons add up to “it’s none of your damn business.”  After all she IS Hillary and she answers to different standards than the rest of the world.  And Hillary’s email is at the top of the list of things that are none of your business.

  1. The first reason is foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation.  The Foundation was barred from accepting donations from foreign countries while Hillary was Secretary of State.  It appears that they got around that by accepting multi-million dollar contributions from foreign individuals instead. It’s very likely that the server held emails related to those donations and under the definitions used by Hillary’s lawyers, those would not have been archived and would have been wiped from the server.
  2. The second reason relates directly to Benghazi.

Starting weeks before Islamic militants attacked the U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, longtime Clinton family confidante Sidney Blumenthal supplied intelligence to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gathered by a secret network that included a former CIA clandestine service officer, according to hacked emails from Blumenthal’s account.Clinton Obama

[…]

Blumenthal’s emails to Clinton, which were directed to her private email account, include at least a dozen detailed reports on events on the deteriorating political and security climate in Libya as well as events in other nations. They came to light after a hacker broke into Blumenthal’s account and have taken on new significance in light of the disclosure that she conducted State Department and personal business exclusively over an email server that she controlled and kept secret from State Department officials and which only recently was discovered by congressional investigators.Party of Deciet and lies

If you take the time to read everything Hillary and her mouthpieces have said about what they turned over to the State Department, they always talk about “her emails.”  A Clintonesque parsing of that term would exclude email FROM others to Hillary.  After all, everything depends on the meaning of “is.”  The State Department says that Blumenthal’s emails were turned over to them and that they turned them over to the Committee.  And we have some great land in Florida for you to build your retirement home.

Blumenthal’s emails raise a number of other questions, chief among them would be, does Blumenthal have a security clearance?  What was he doing working on Benghazi related matters, he wasn’t a State Department employee, nor, to our knowledge, was he a contractor.

It’s unclear who tasked Blumenthal, known for his fierce loyalty to the Clintons, with preparing detailed intelligence briefs. It’s also not known who was paying him, or where the operation got its money. The memos were marked “confidential” and relied in many cases on “sensitive” sources in the Libyan opposition and Western intelligence and security services. Other reports focused on Egypt, Germany, and Turkey.

Indeed, though they were sent under Blumenthal’s name, the reports appear to have been gathered and prepared by Tyler Drumheller, a former chief of the CIA’s clandestine service in Europe who left the agency in 2005.Really with logo

The State Department has declined comment on the issue, and even if they did comment, it would come from Marie Harf.  Barf.  Hillary is, thus far, silent on the issue as well. Picture6

AP Fact-Check: Hillary’s Email Excuses Don’t Hold Water


 

 by Breitbart News 10 Mar 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/03/10/ap-fact-check-hillarys-email-excuses-dont-hold-water/

CLINTON: “Others had done it.”

THE FACTS: Although email practices varied among her predecessors, Clinton is the only secretary of state known to have conducted all official unclassified government business on a private email address. Years earlier, when emailing was not the ubiquitous practice it is now among high officials, Colin Powell used both a government and a private account. It’s a striking departure from the norm for top officials to rely exclusively on private email for official business.

CLINTON: “I fully complied with every rule I was governed by.”

THE FACTS: At the very least, Clinton appears to have violated what the White House has called “very specific guidance” that officials should use government email to conduct business.

Clinton provided no details about whether she had initially consulted with the department or other government officials before using the private email system. She did not answer several questions about whether she sought any clearances before she began relying exclusively on private emails for government business.

Federal officials are allowed to communicate on private email and are generally allowed to conduct government business in those exchanges, but that ability is constrained, both by federal regulations and by their supervisors.

Federal law during Clinton’s tenure called for the archiving of such private email records when used for government work, but did not set out clear rules or punishments for violations until rules were tightened in November. In 2011, when Clinton was secretary, a cable from her office sent to all employees advised them to avoid conducting any official business on their private email accounts because of targeting by unspecified “online adversaries.”

CLINTON: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

THE FACTS: The assertion fits with the facts as known but skirts the issue of exchanging information in a private account that, while falling below the level of classified, is still sensitive.

The State Department and other national security agencies have specified rules for the handling of such sensitive material, which could affect national security, diplomatic and privacy concerns, and may include material such as personnel, medical and law enforcement data. In reviewing the 30,000 emails she turned over to the State Department, officials are looking for any security lapses concerning sensitive but unclassified material that may have been disclosed.

CLINTON: “It had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches.”

THE FACTS: While Clinton’s server was physically guarded by the Secret Service, she provided no evidence it hadn’t been compromised by hackers or foreign adversaries. She also didn’t detail who administered the email system, if it received appropriate software security updates, or if it was monitored routinely for unauthorized access.

Clinton also didn’t answer whether the homebrew computer system on her property had the same level of safeguards provided at professional data facilities, such as regulated temperatures, offsite backups, generators in case of power outages and fire-suppression systems. It was unclear what, if any, encryption software Clinton’s server may have used to communicate with U.S. government email accounts.

Recent high-profile breaches, including at Sony Pictures Entertainment, have raised scrutiny on how well corporations and private individuals protect their computer networks from attack.

CLINTON: “When I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two. Looking back, it would’ve been better if I’d simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn’t seem like an issue.”

THE FACTS: If multiple devices were an inconvenience in the past, they may be something of an obsession now. Clinton told an event in California’s Silicon Valley last month that she has an iPad, a mini-iPad, an iPhone and a BlackBerry. “I’m like two steps short of a hoarder,” she said. She suggested she started out in Washington with a BlackBerry but her devices grew in number.

Smartphones were capable of multiple emails when she became secretary; it’s not clear whether the particular phone she used then was permitted to do so under State Department rules.

Picture6

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: