State Dept and CIA IGs Recommend Criminal Probe of HRC...
- Thread starter Nuk'EM Heels
- Start date
Actually what it screams is the boy is an idiot that is lost in so many ways. Such a damn joke you are.
Top U.S. intelligence officials are running out of patience with the State Department's reluctance to turn over emails from the server.
The intelligence community's inspector general has requested approximately 30,000 emails from Clinton's tenure as secretary of state in order to conduct its own review.
Those emails are in possession of the State Department, which has been gradually releasing them to the public.
The intelligence community says the State Department has pushed back on the government intelligence watchdog's request, and that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is considering intervening. The inspector general wants to check the controls on the redaction process and ensure that the office can get a handle on all of the potentially sensitive information that was contained in the Clinton emails.
The intelligence community's inspector general has requested approximately 30,000 emails from Clinton's tenure as secretary of state in order to conduct its own review.
Those emails are in possession of the State Department, which has been gradually releasing them to the public.
The intelligence community says the State Department has pushed back on the government intelligence watchdog's request, and that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is considering intervening. The inspector general wants to check the controls on the redaction process and ensure that the office can get a handle on all of the potentially sensitive information that was contained in the Clinton emails.
They are going to get every email from the company that was monitoring her server. I promise you that they backed up daily at the very least and they didnt delete their records.
You boys can mark it down- this is the Clinton swan song.
Dont pat yourself on the back too hard- dude seems to have nothing but exposed nerves.
I think he lives in upstate though- maybe yall could get together for a beer?
If you're looking for morons you'd have better luck at Bob Jones "University"
Or just find a mirror
I think we know what you see in the mirror, but don't worry that acne will clear up, maybe, and I'm sure that other testicle will drop soon. If not, there's always gender reassignment.
That should clear up your confusion.
Ah yes now I'm remembering that lesson about not arguing with idiots...
The list of classified emails has grown to over 300, growing daily. At this rate, the number could be close to 2000 classified emails. I guess you're going to break the law, do it up right.
***UPDATE***
Hillary Clinton and two aides appear to have violated two national security laws by sending classified information on a private email server, according to a former Army counterintelligence agent and investigator for a public interest law group.
Additionally, the two Clinton aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, disregarded a federal judge’s order this month requiring both to make sworn statements to the court that all government documents in their possession will be returned to federal officials, said Chris Farrell, director of investigations for Judicial Watch, the law group.
“What we have is a secretary of state, the only cabinet official in our history, who established her own private email server … in an effort to avoid the normal protocols for unclassified and classified communications. It’s an end run,” he said.
Farrell, in a briefing on the Clinton email affair at the Judicial Watch offices, said supporters of Clinton have sought to portray the use of the private email system to send classified information as a minor administrative matter.
“It is not,” he said. “It is a national security crime, and should be a national security crime investigation,” he said, noting that Clinton created the private email server a week before she took up her duties at Foggy Bottom, indicating that she planned to avoid using official email that must be stored under federal rules.
Two laws apply to the mishandling of classified data on unsecure networks, Farrell said.
The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.
That statute was used to prosecute retired Army General David Petraeus, a former CIA director who provided classified documents to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $40,000 fine as part of a plea deal in March.
A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute Farrell described as a “hammer.”
That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.
Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison.
Farrell said he that as an Army counterintelligence officer, he has conducted investigations in the past that are similar to the Clinton email probe. He also worked at a special security officer who was in charge of SCIFs—special facilities used for handling sensitive intelligence.
“When it comes the law on these, intent doesn’t matter,” Farrell said. Mishandling top-secret information should bring down the full weight of the law on violators, he said.
The Clinton email matter is a “serious national security crime issue,” Farrell said. “It’s not two agencies fighting over classification after the fact.”
Judicial Watch currently has 18 lawsuits pending against the State Department seeking access to records under the Freedom of Information Act.
The State Department disclosed to Judicial Watch earlier this year that it had discovered an “another universe” of information sought by the group under FOIA on Clinton’s emails involving several cases that had been closed earlier. The data followed discovery of the private email server used by Clinton.
A hearing on one of the lawsuits is set for Thursday before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, who recently ordered Clinton, Abedin, and Mills to make the sworn statements regarding federal documents in their possession.
According to Farrell, only Clinton supplied the sworn statement that promised to return all government data and not destroy any records involved in the case. Abedin and Mills, however, did not and instead supplied the court with statements from their lawyers.
Thursday’s court hearing will be the latest turn in an unfolding security scandal involving the former secretary of state that has the potential to undermine her bid to win the Democratic presidential nomination.
Hillary Clinton and two aides appear to have violated two national security laws by sending classified information on a private email server, according to a former Army counterintelligence agent and investigator for a public interest law group.
Additionally, the two Clinton aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, disregarded a federal judge’s order this month requiring both to make sworn statements to the court that all government documents in their possession will be returned to federal officials, said Chris Farrell, director of investigations for Judicial Watch, the law group.
“What we have is a secretary of state, the only cabinet official in our history, who established her own private email server … in an effort to avoid the normal protocols for unclassified and classified communications. It’s an end run,” he said.
Farrell, in a briefing on the Clinton email affair at the Judicial Watch offices, said supporters of Clinton have sought to portray the use of the private email system to send classified information as a minor administrative matter.
“It is not,” he said. “It is a national security crime, and should be a national security crime investigation,” he said, noting that Clinton created the private email server a week before she took up her duties at Foggy Bottom, indicating that she planned to avoid using official email that must be stored under federal rules.
Two laws apply to the mishandling of classified data on unsecure networks, Farrell said.
The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.
That statute was used to prosecute retired Army General David Petraeus, a former CIA director who provided classified documents to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $40,000 fine as part of a plea deal in March.
A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute Farrell described as a “hammer.”
That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.
Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison.
Farrell said he that as an Army counterintelligence officer, he has conducted investigations in the past that are similar to the Clinton email probe. He also worked at a special security officer who was in charge of SCIFs—special facilities used for handling sensitive intelligence.
“When it comes the law on these, intent doesn’t matter,” Farrell said. Mishandling top-secret information should bring down the full weight of the law on violators, he said.
The Clinton email matter is a “serious national security crime issue,” Farrell said. “It’s not two agencies fighting over classification after the fact.”
Judicial Watch currently has 18 lawsuits pending against the State Department seeking access to records under the Freedom of Information Act.
The State Department disclosed to Judicial Watch earlier this year that it had discovered an “another universe” of information sought by the group under FOIA on Clinton’s emails involving several cases that had been closed earlier. The data followed discovery of the private email server used by Clinton.
A hearing on one of the lawsuits is set for Thursday before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, who recently ordered Clinton, Abedin, and Mills to make the sworn statements regarding federal documents in their possession.
According to Farrell, only Clinton supplied the sworn statement that promised to return all government data and not destroy any records involved in the case. Abedin and Mills, however, did not and instead supplied the court with statements from their lawyers.
Thursday’s court hearing will be the latest turn in an unfolding security scandal involving the former secretary of state that has the potential to undermine her bid to win the Democratic presidential nomination.
The Clinton campaign is still groping for two sentences to put together to explain why Hillary’s email server was wiped clean.
Campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri appeared on CNN moments ago to try again to come up with an answer. Instead, it was largely rambling and incoherent.
"So, she made this decision, I think is, obviously, you know, she was former secretary of state, so we want to be sure people understand, uh, how she handled classified information when shew as secretary of state, she was very careful with it, she didn’t deal with it online, she dealt with it on hard copy, in meetings, not on the computer,” Palmieri said."
So, another blatant lie. Government message traffic is distributed to all end-users via email. Classified information, including National Recon Office information and highly compartmentalized information requiring special access permissions above and beyond Top Secret classification, was found in her emails by intelligence officials. She, and a couple of her very close aides, are so toast... All because HRC insisted upon her personal convenience over proper handling of classified information.
Campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri appeared on CNN moments ago to try again to come up with an answer. Instead, it was largely rambling and incoherent.
"So, she made this decision, I think is, obviously, you know, she was former secretary of state, so we want to be sure people understand, uh, how she handled classified information when shew as secretary of state, she was very careful with it, she didn’t deal with it online, she dealt with it on hard copy, in meetings, not on the computer,” Palmieri said."
So, another blatant lie. Government message traffic is distributed to all end-users via email. Classified information, including National Recon Office information and highly compartmentalized information requiring special access permissions above and beyond Top Secret classification, was found in her emails by intelligence officials. She, and a couple of her very close aides, are so toast... All because HRC insisted upon her personal convenience over proper handling of classified information.
Last edited:
***UPDATE***
The tens of thousands of emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server from when she was secretary of state could also be on a second device or server, according to news reports.
The FBI now has the only confirmed private server, as part of a Justice Department probe to determine whether it sent of received classified information for Clinton when she was the country’s top diplomat from 2009 to 2013.
Platte River Networks, which managed Clinton's server and private email network after she left the State Department, has indicated it transfer – or “transferred” – emails from the original server in 2013, according to The Washington Examiner.
DOOOOOOOOOHHHH!!!
The tens of thousands of emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server from when she was secretary of state could also be on a second device or server, according to news reports.
The FBI now has the only confirmed private server, as part of a Justice Department probe to determine whether it sent of received classified information for Clinton when she was the country’s top diplomat from 2009 to 2013.
Platte River Networks, which managed Clinton's server and private email network after she left the State Department, has indicated it transfer – or “transferred” – emails from the original server in 2013, according to The Washington Examiner.
DOOOOOOOOOHHHH!!!
There is no way that all of those emails are gone forever, and Im not talking about the copies being held by every foreign intelligence service from here to Timbuktu.
It is really, really difficult to completely delete anything from a hard drive- the only certain way is to take an ax to it and spread the remains across the deep sea. I doubt seriously that any Network Service company which stores servers in a bathroom closet has the capability to delete data past the point of no return.
It is really, really difficult to completely delete anything from a hard drive- the only certain way is to take an ax to it and spread the remains across the deep sea. I doubt seriously that any Network Service company which stores servers in a bathroom closet has the capability to delete data past the point of no return.
***UPDATE***
The State Department does not appear to have submitted legally required information regarding Hillary Clinton's secret computer server to the Department of Homeland Security during her term as secretary, FoxNews.com has learned.
All federal government agencies are mandated to submit a list of systems, vulnerabilities and configuration issues to DHS every 30 days. The department then performs a "cyberscope audit" to ensure security, a responsibility the agency has had since 2010.
FoxNews.com learned of the lapse as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request submitted June 11. It is not clear if State Department officials in charge of compliance with the DHS audits knew of their boss's server, which has been shown to have included "top secret" information in emails.
Clinton headed the agency from 2009-2013. The DHS established the "Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation" program in 2010, amid growing concerns government systems could be vulnerable to cyber attack. But Clinton's computer server, through which she and key aides sent and received tens of thousands of emails, was apparently never audited, according to DHS, which conducted a comprehensive search of Office of Cyber Security and Communications records after FoxNews.com lodged its request.
"Unfortunately, we were unable to locate or identify any responsive records," wrote Sandy Ford Page, chief of Freedom of Information Act operations for DHS.
The revelation means DHS never audited Clinton's server, and the State Department allowed Clinton to operate outside the federal mandate aimed at hardening defenses in federal networks, one cyber expert told Fox News.
The State Department has not provided a substantive response to a similar FOIA submitted by FoxNews.com in early June.
The State Department did not comment on media requests about why it did not comply with the DHS security review requirement.
"There are reviews and investigations under way, including by the IG and Congress," said State Department Spokesman Alec Gerlach. "It would not be appropriate to comment on these matters at this time."
Denver-based Platte River Networks upgraded and maintained the server Clinton shares with her husband, former President Bill Clinton, after she left the State Department.
The company is not on the list of contractors approved by the Pentagon's Defense Security Service, the only federal agency with the authority to review and approve private contractors. The department administers the National Industrial Security Program on behalf of the Pentagon and 30 other federal agencies, including the State Department. About 13,000 companies have received clearance.
"But Platte River is not one of them," a spokesman for the DSS told Fox News. "As Platte River Networks is not a cleared facility under the National Industrial Security Program, DSS has no cognizance over the facility and cannot comment further."
Clinton, the leading contender for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, and the State Department have been under fire in recent months after it was revealed Clinton had a "homebrew" server and private Blackberry system that could have left classified or sensitive government data open to hackers.
Clinton maintains her use of a private email server was allowed under government regulations and her system was secure.
The State Department does not appear to have submitted legally required information regarding Hillary Clinton's secret computer server to the Department of Homeland Security during her term as secretary, FoxNews.com has learned.
All federal government agencies are mandated to submit a list of systems, vulnerabilities and configuration issues to DHS every 30 days. The department then performs a "cyberscope audit" to ensure security, a responsibility the agency has had since 2010.
FoxNews.com learned of the lapse as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request submitted June 11. It is not clear if State Department officials in charge of compliance with the DHS audits knew of their boss's server, which has been shown to have included "top secret" information in emails.
Clinton headed the agency from 2009-2013. The DHS established the "Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation" program in 2010, amid growing concerns government systems could be vulnerable to cyber attack. But Clinton's computer server, through which she and key aides sent and received tens of thousands of emails, was apparently never audited, according to DHS, which conducted a comprehensive search of Office of Cyber Security and Communications records after FoxNews.com lodged its request.
"Unfortunately, we were unable to locate or identify any responsive records," wrote Sandy Ford Page, chief of Freedom of Information Act operations for DHS.
The revelation means DHS never audited Clinton's server, and the State Department allowed Clinton to operate outside the federal mandate aimed at hardening defenses in federal networks, one cyber expert told Fox News.
The State Department has not provided a substantive response to a similar FOIA submitted by FoxNews.com in early June.
The State Department did not comment on media requests about why it did not comply with the DHS security review requirement.
"There are reviews and investigations under way, including by the IG and Congress," said State Department Spokesman Alec Gerlach. "It would not be appropriate to comment on these matters at this time."
Denver-based Platte River Networks upgraded and maintained the server Clinton shares with her husband, former President Bill Clinton, after she left the State Department.
The company is not on the list of contractors approved by the Pentagon's Defense Security Service, the only federal agency with the authority to review and approve private contractors. The department administers the National Industrial Security Program on behalf of the Pentagon and 30 other federal agencies, including the State Department. About 13,000 companies have received clearance.
"But Platte River is not one of them," a spokesman for the DSS told Fox News. "As Platte River Networks is not a cleared facility under the National Industrial Security Program, DSS has no cognizance over the facility and cannot comment further."
Clinton, the leading contender for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, and the State Department have been under fire in recent months after it was revealed Clinton had a "homebrew" server and private Blackberry system that could have left classified or sensitive government data open to hackers.
Clinton maintains her use of a private email server was allowed under government regulations and her system was secure.
And, you are way beyond the level of denial. This is an extremely important issue, but you are evidently in line with HRC in trying to laugh it off (she lols, you LOL). So, when are you going to start humping the Biden train?
She may not go to jail over this, but we can rest easy now, knowing that her chances of winning the Presidency are slim and none. Love it!!!
Denial of what precisely? I won't be voting for Hillary regardless, obviously you're not the sharpest spoon in the drawer considering you still haven't figured that out. I never said it was a trivial matter, its just kinda funny watching your updates every. single. day. You clearly spend way more time hating anyone on the other side of the fence than you do actually thinking about your own ideas.
First, I don't believe you. Second, everything you post screams liberal, including the majority of your policy positions. Third, none of your supposed "ideas" are your own - none. I googled every one of them and they are straight out of the DNC playbook. So, stick your ideas where the sun doesn't shine. And, I will continue to post ***UPDATES*** EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. until HRC is political history and perp walked out of her bathroom server closet.
LOL I'm voting for Bernie Sanders even if I have to write him in. Considering the fact you base the majority of your thinking off of a bronze age fairy tale, what you believe couldn't possibly concern me any less.
Nukey, come into the 21st century. Not everyone that's left of center is a democrat. When are we going to get this through that thick skull of yours? The world isn't exclusively divided between republicans and democrats. But you wouldn't know that because you're too busy eating up whatever crap Bill O' Reilly is spewing.
By your own ideas I was referring to policies that you support. I never claimed to have originally come up with any ideas. However you're very clearly mistaken, if for example legalization of cannabis were straight out of the DNC playbook then why hasn't Obama done it yet? Why didn't Clinton or Carter do it? Because they're all funded by the same crooks who prey on the simple minded by convincing them the real enemy are people with the opposite political opinion of themselves. Play the siege mentality card and people like you get riled up in no time. Meanwhile the entire republican party has been bought and paid for by the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson.
If people like you ran the world we'd still have slavery, women wouldn't be able to vote, and children would still be working in factories. And you'd probably justify it all in the name of your imaginary friend in the sky.
Nukey, come into the 21st century. Not everyone that's left of center is a democrat. When are we going to get this through that thick skull of yours? The world isn't exclusively divided between republicans and democrats. But you wouldn't know that because you're too busy eating up whatever crap Bill O' Reilly is spewing.
By your own ideas I was referring to policies that you support. I never claimed to have originally come up with any ideas. However you're very clearly mistaken, if for example legalization of cannabis were straight out of the DNC playbook then why hasn't Obama done it yet? Why didn't Clinton or Carter do it? Because they're all funded by the same crooks who prey on the simple minded by convincing them the real enemy are people with the opposite political opinion of themselves. Play the siege mentality card and people like you get riled up in no time. Meanwhile the entire republican party has been bought and paid for by the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson.
If people like you ran the world we'd still have slavery, women wouldn't be able to vote, and children would still be working in factories. And you'd probably justify it all in the name of your imaginary friend in the sky.
Also, why are you under the impression liberal is a dirty word? You are aware of the fact that conservatism was based on the philosophy of classical liberalism right? Since you're such a staunch nationalist I would also assume you're aware of the fact that this country was founded upon the ideas of that same philosophy right?...
I get it! You're even more of a far left loon than I imagined. Got it.
I make arguments. You pretty much exclusively use insults. Which one of us is the loon?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
Do some reading. Maybe you'll learn something
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
Do some reading. Maybe you'll learn something
This hilarious and sad part is that you defend not being a democrat by stating you're a socialist. As if that's better. It 's not. It's worse. Much worse. We live in a representative republic, we don't want socialism, so instead of trying to change this country to something else, why don't you go find a socialist country and be miserable there? Collectively, I'm sure they would love to have you.
Not true. I'm typically on the receiving end of insults on this board. I've had my deceased mother insulted by BillyL, been told to get out of the country by BillyL, been called all kinds of names by Strum, the list goes on and on. But, that's OK. I have thick skin.
Didn't you start this latest salvo between you two by calling Nuk sad, obsessed and with nothing better to do? If Nuk is all of these you are the flip side of that same coin.
Classical liberalism has no resemblance to "modern liberalism" espoused by you, your socialist pals, or the DEM party. The Founding Fathers would puke in the face of modern liberals like yourself.
LOL do you really think Bernie is planning to do away with capitalism?
You already have socialism whether you like it or not. Every single thing paid for by taxes is an example of socialism. Democratic Socialism and state communism are two entirely different things. Socialism in the context proposed by Bernie Sanders is not a socioeconomic system that would oppose capitalism in any way. You should really drop that crap. It just makes you sound silly and uneducated. What he is proposing is a reallocation of taxes revenue. Less corporate welfare and more education sounds pretty good to me. So does guaranteed healthcare, like every single other developed nation in the world has.
And where did I say I was a socialist anyways? Supporting Bernie Sanders doesn't make me a socialist. It means I support a candidate for president that identifies as a democratic socialist. I try not to participate in identity politics. Obviously not a popular or even well understood position on this board...
Last edited:
If you actually took the time to read my posts you would know my views are much more libertarian than modern liberal. Instead you spend all of your time trying to corner me into some party allegiance
I may throw in a jive or two, even a less than nice one every now and then, but that is never my only argument. You don't see me spouting off about how anyone on the right is a loony toon, or any of the other ridiculous partisan rhetoric. I have no problem conceding there are extremely intelligent self-identifying conservatives and republicans, even some with policies I support. Rand Paul's flat tax would be one example. But this tribal nonsense about how anyone on the other side of the political spectrum is an idiot, or wants to secretly kill America is downright silly, and counterproductive.
Meanwhile the middle class is disappearing, yet those at the top of the pyramid are getting richer at a rate that has never before been seen. And now thanks to Citizens United they've bought our democracy. It's not a secret politicians are catering to the fat cats that fund their campaigns. But do people care? Of course not. Who cares about people buying off politicians? There's still liberals at large, and they're the real threat...
Last edited:
Similar threads
