Judicial Watch: Hillary e-mail requested printout “without any identifiers”

posted at 12:41 pm on February 9, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

A new release from the State Department of e-mails involving Hillary Clinton aides and the secret, unauthorized private server once more calls into question denials by Hillary of sending or receiving classified data. Judicial Watch received dozens of pages in response to a FIOA lawsuit filed last May that specifically sought e-mails from Huma Abedin in the scandal. They note that Abedin discussed Hillary’s movements through unsecured e-mail, potentially putting the Secretary of State at risk, and found a number of other issues within the trove, too:

Judicial Watch today released nearly 70 pages of State Department records that show that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top aides, Deputy Chiefs of Staff Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan, received and sent classified information on their non-state.gov email accounts. …

The new documents show that Hillary Clinton used the clintonemail.com system to ask Huma Abedin (also on a non-state.gov email account) to print two March 2011 emails, which were sent from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair (using the moniker “aclb”) to Jake Sullivan on Sullivan’s non-state.gov email account.  The Obama State Department redacted the Blair emails under Exemption (b)(1) which allows the withholding of classified material.  The material is marked as being classified as “Foreign government information” and “foreign relations or foreign activities of the US, including confidential sources.”

Another email shows that Clinton wanted to know how meetings in Washington, including a four-hour meeting concerning America’s war on Libya, would impact her Hampton vacation.  Responding to an email that details the sensitive meetings in DC, Clinton emails Abedin on August 26, 2011, “Ok. What time would I get back to Hamptons?”  Again, this email discussion takes place on non-state.gov email accounts.

The documents also include advice to Clinton on Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, a Clinton Foundation employee who, according to a Judicial Watch investigative report, also had business interests in Libya.  Clinton wanted Blumenthal’s March 9, 2011, Libya memo to be printed “without any identifiers.”

That memo is less problematic than others. The memo from Sid Blumenthal has “CONFIDENTIAL” at the top of the message, but that’s from Blumenthal, not a government classification. State released that memo without redactions.  The need to strip “identifiers” off of it almost certainly reflected the need to keep Blumenthal’s involvement quiet in the face of intense dislike of him at the White House.

The Tony Blair e-mail will be much more difficult to explain:

jw2

These redactions are justified under 5 USC 552 (b)(1), which allows the government to block the release of classified information in the FOIA process. As Judicial Watch points out, the designations 1.4(B) and (D) refer to foreign government information; the (D) can also refer to “confidential sources,” which might describe Blair or perhaps someone else Blair discussed in the redacted message. Note too that both Jake Sullivan and Hillary got this from Blair, with Hillary getting it on her personal e-mail. She then forwards it to Huma Abedin with instructions to print it out. So much for never sending or receiving classified information. Note too that this time the classification notice comes from State, and not the IG from the intel community.

This isn’t the only curiosity in the trove. Samantha Power e-mailed Jake Sullivan on March 9, 2011 — the same date as the Blumenthal memo — about issues regarding a no-fly zone in Libya that got redacted in its entirety. The State Department’s label B5 indicates communications that fall within “the deliberative process,” but the strategy of no-fly zones in Libya would almost certainly involve both diplomatic and military issues that are normally classified. This e-mail went from Power’s official government address to Sullivan’s official address, but Sullivan then forwarded it out of the government system to Hillary’s unauthorized private server. She replied back — keeping the classified info in-line — by asking Huma to print it out, which would be another security violation if this turns out to be classified information and not just “deliberative process.”

jw1

Jeff Dunetz points to these e-mails as incontrovertible evidence that Hillary has lied about the e-mail server:

At the very least these Huma Abedin emails prove once again that Hillary Clinton has been lying to the American people–not only did she keep and send classified information from her private server, but she knew damn well what she was doing.

True, but that much has been established already from 1500-plus e-mails we’ve seen, and especially the 29 e-emails that are so sensitive that the redacted versions cannot be released at all. It also shows that Sullivan converted sensitive and classified information from government communications systems to Hillary’s private system. Those are not insignificant developments, but they still pale in comparison to the exposure of SAP and human intelligence in the withheld e-mails.

The only question now is whether the FBI investigation leads to any action. Loretta Lynch says that will be in the hands of career lawyers at the agency, not political appointees elsewhere:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is reaffirming that the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state is free of outside political influence.

She told The Associated Press on Monday that the FBI investigation is independent and is being conducted by career lawyers looking at the facts and evidence.

We’ll see. We’ll see.

Update: A good point from Twitter:

That has more to do with Blumenthal’s legal exposure than Hillary’s, of course, but will the DoJ look into that?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Well, me and the FBI.
Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:31 PM

“Since that time, in public statements and testimony, the bureau has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server,” James A. Baker, the FBI attorney, said in the letter.

Nope, just you.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 7:01 PM

C’mon TMHOB. All that says is the “use” of a private email server. Not Clinton herself. You’re just speculating that the FBI cares one single bit about HRC. Can’t you read? //

I’m going to remember this line of thought if I’m ever audited, as clearly the IRS is looking into my returns. The fact I had anything to do with that inanimate object or the information contained in it is irrelevant.

byepartisan on February 9, 2016 at 7:09 PM

Rules are for the little people, not the “elite” of the ruling class.

GarandFan on February 9, 2016 at 7:34 PM

So you claim, except you don’t know. The fact that I don’t know either is irrelevant.

Kenny Bania on February 9, 2016 at 6:51 PM

F-IXED.

Del Dolemonte on February 9, 2016 at 7:00 PM

Amazingly, you’re correct here, it is irrelevant since I’m not the one making the claim that someone is guilty of a crime.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:38 PM

“Since that time, in public statements and testimony, the bureau has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server,” James A. Baker, the FBI attorney, said in the letter.

Nope, just you.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 7:01 PM

It’s interesting that you keep reading the bolded statement above as so very different than what it actually says. It’s like you prefer to lie to yourself.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:39 PM

So you claim, except you don’t know.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:51 PM

Except I do know and so do you. The FBI doesn’t investigate inanimate objects for no reason. They investigate based on a person. Only a person can break the law. Servers can’t.

Neitherleftorright on February 9, 2016 at 7:46 PM

It’s interesting that you keep reading the bolded statement above as so very different than what it actually says. It’s like you prefer to lie to yourself.
Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:39 PM

So the FBI attorney explicitly says they are investigating Hilary’s use of a private server, not the server itself. But then again, maybe they’re not investigating her so they can clear her.

When one finds himself in a hole, it’s usually best to stop digging, not grabbing a bigger shovel.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 7:48 PM

Except I do know and so do you. The FBI doesn’t investigate inanimate objects for no reason. They investigate based on a person. Only a person can break the law. Servers can’t.

Neitherleftorright on February 9, 2016 at 7:46 PM

But there are a rather large number of people connected to the server that could be piquing their interest, that’s where you argument keeps falling apart.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:52 PM

So the FBI attorney explicitly says they are investigating Hilary’s use of a private server, not the server itself. But then again, maybe they’re not investigating her so they can clear her.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 7:48 PM

Except they didn’t say what you think they said. They said they are investigating events related to the use of her server. Not the same thing as investigating “Hilary’s use of a private server.” Like at all.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:54 PM

When one finds himself in a hole, it’s usually best to stop digging, not grabbing a bigger shovel.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 7:48 PM

Your preference seems to be to stare at the sides of your hole and will it not to be what it is.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:55 PM

Except they didn’t say what you think they said. They said they are investigating events related to the use of her server. Not the same thing as investigating “Hilary’s use of a private server.” Like at all.
Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:54 PM

“…matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server…”

Clinton’s use of the server, not the use of Clinton’s server.

I’ve always wondered how the average American reads at a seventh grade level, but now I see why it’s so low, though I doubt my five year old niece would be able to differentiate the ideas. Maybe she could explain it to in a way you’d be able to comprehend, though I doubt it.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 8:07 PM

“…matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server…”

Clinton’s use of the server, not the use of Clinton’s server.

I’ve always wondered how the average American reads at a seventh grade level, but now I see why it’s so low, though I doubt my five year old niece would be able to differentiate the ideas. Maybe she could explain it to in a way you’d be able to comprehend, though I doubt it.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 8:07 PM

Funny given your tortured attempt to read what you want into that sentence. The key is “matters related” to the server. If they were investigating hacking attempts on the server that would be a matter related to her server. if they were investigating her subordinate emails that’d also be matters related to the server. Neither of which is targeting Clinton.

but you;ll just pretend that can’t be the case…

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 8:10 PM

Hey Bucky, I think tlaloc is onto not just a bigger shovel, but a backhoe.

Keep digging. This is really funny.

byepartisan on February 9, 2016 at 8:14 PM

Funny given your tortured attempt to read what you want into that sentence. The key is “matters related” to the server. If they were investigating hacking attempts on the server that would be a matter related to her server. if they were investigating her subordinate emails that’d also be matters related to the server. Neither of which is targeting Clinton.
but you;ll just pretend that can’t be the case…
Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 8:10 PM

The key is not matters related. If they were investigating hacking attempts thwarted by the Secret Service agents in the closet with the server, that would not be related to Clinton’s use of the server, that would be matters related to Clinton’s server. The key is matters related to Clinton’s use of the server. Maybe if the attorney had said, “We’re investigating matters related to the server,” your argument would hold water. When in fact what he said was, “matters related to Clinton’s use of the server.”

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 8:22 PM

If they were investigating hacking attempts thwarted by the Secret Service agents in the closet with the server, that would not be related to Clinton’s use of the server, that would be matters related to Clinton’s server.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 8:22 PM

Of course it would be related to Clinton’s use if the hackers were deliberately trying to hack Clinton’s servers to get at her materials.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 8:29 PM

Except I do know and so do you. The FBI doesn’t investigate inanimate objects for no reason. They investigate based on a person. Only a person can break the law. Servers can’t.

Neitherleftorright on February 9, 2016 at 7:46 PM

But there are a rather large number of people connected to the server that could be piquing their interest, and none of them are Hillary. J. Edgar Hoover’s Ghost told me so.

Kenny Bania on February 9, 2016 at 7:52 PM

F-IXED.

Del Dolemonte on February 9, 2016 at 8:37 PM

They’re not targeting her. You yourself said so numerous times.

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 5:38 PM

I said you have no knowledge to the contrary.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:24 PM

This is a lie. You explicitly said she was not a target. This has been pointed out to you more than once.

A server despite being owned by one person generally serves files to multiple people.

Everyone served by this server was on Hillary’s staff and explicitly instructed by her to use this server to conduct their business.

If I’m ridiculing anything it’s that I have to explain this to people who apparently use the internet but have no concept of how it works.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:30 PM

People who have a concept of how the Internet works are not trying to compare Hillary’s personal email server to an Internet Service Provider. Every indication is that you are, and despite repeated yes-or-no questions to clarify this, you have made no attempt to dispel notions of your misunderstanding.

Maybe it’s about the installation itself. Maybe it’s about allegations of the server being hacked. Maybe it’s about specific correspondences that involved Hillary. Maybe it’s about specific correspondences that didn’t involve Hillary. Maybe it’s something else entirely.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:33 PM

For issues with the installation and correspondences involving Hillary, Hillary is culpable.

Correspondences not involving Hillary would not be found on a server set up by Hillary for use by Hillary and Hillary’s staff to conduct Hillary’s business.

Any hacking of her server by foreign powers would be investigated by the CIA, not the FBI.

Actually your argument is akin to saying if the cops are looking at your car they must be investigating you, and not say the previous owner or a passenger of yours or even the other party in a traffic collision you were involved it (all of which are possible).

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:35 PM

You’d be surprised what police can hold you liable for, even if it is somebody else doing something in or with your car.

…and Hillary has admitted to having the server…

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 6:36 PM

And for whatever reason, it doesn’t strike you at all as odd that we are talking about this in the context of Hillary “admitting” she had a server, which is distinct from, say, disclosing her server. There were numerous FOIA requests made of the State Department. No disclosure. The State Department was being investigated by a Congressional panel regarding an attack on a US embassy. No disclosure. If Sidney Blumenthal had not been hacked, there would be zero public (or Congressional!) knowledge of this server or any of its contents. In addition to which, any State knowledge she shared with Blumenthal is now in the wild. And yet we’re expected to believe that this was done above-board and in full compliance with government policy.

But there are a rather large number of people connected to the server that could be piquing their interest

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:52 PM

All of whom work for Hillary and were explicitly instructed by Hillary to use the server to conduct their business.

They said they are investigating events related to the use of her server. Not the same thing as investigating “Hilary’s use of a private server.” Like at all.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:54 PM

It’s not the same thing, you’re right. Except the second quote is what they said.

The key is “matters related” to the server.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 8:10 PM

It wasn’t the key directly above, where you tried to distinguish between “THE use of HER server” and “HER use of THE server”. Which again, the second of which is what they said.

Of course it would be related to Clinton’s use if the hackers were deliberately trying to hack Clinton’s servers to get at her materials.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 8:29 PM

In addition to the previous point that the CIA would be involved if a foreign power were trying to access her materials, there is also the simple fact that if they were investigating hacking attempts, the government’s track record of noting various breaches in recent months/years suggests no reason they would not be similarly forthcoming in this case.

Your insistence on paying attention to the fine parsing only raises the question of why so much effort would be made not to explicitly state she’s under criminal investigation, rather than taking the simple step to explicitly state that she is not. If she’s not and there is no intention of doing so, there’s no reason not to make the exonerating statement you seem to think it’s important for them to make regarding her “court of public opinion”.

The Schaef on February 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM

Of course it would be related to Clinton’s use if the hackers were deliberately trying to hack Clinton’s servers to get at her materials.
Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 8:29 PM

Clinton using the server has absolutely nothing to do with outside attempts to access said server. But that’s probably why the took her thumb drive too, right?

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 8:39 PM

*why they

Teach me how to Bucky on February 9, 2016 at 8:41 PM

When life gives you aides, make lemon aides.

jayhokie on February 9, 2016 at 9:14 PM

Nixon laughing from the grave,Hillary your going down,Hillary at least I was President,Hillary your going to jail,hahaha haha HAHAHA

IXXINY on February 9, 2016 at 10:00 PM

I keep feeling that the GOP is missing the mark by focusing too much on the classified aspect of HDR’s email server.

No one addresses the fact of why she set up her own domain, with her own server in the first place. She said it was out of convenience, she didn’t want to have two devices (which is totally laughable). How the hell is it “convenient” to go through the process of having a company manage your email communication rather than simply use Google Apps or some such service? If so, why did she insist her staff also use emails from that same domain? And THAT is the elephant in the room in which she cannot possibly have an explanation for.

We all know the real reason…that she wanted her email communication out of government oversight. The GOP needs to hammer these points home. That she feels she is above the law and different than everyone else. The classified material issue is important, but I feel the GOP is hanging their hat on their being a smoking gun with this, when it there are these obvious motif reasons to score on instead.

pjwal on February 10, 2016 at 3:35 AM

your tortured attempt to read what you want into that sentence.

Tiaioc on February 9, 2016 at 8:10 PM

Pure Irony.

blink on February 9, 2016 at 9:41 PM

Poor, Poor Bania.

I keep wondering-why is Kenny hitching his Little Red Wagon to Hillario!’s fading star?

Does he enjoy going to her “speeches”, which are actually a half an hour or so of her yelling and screeching at her gullible robots in her tiny “audiences”?

Or is it her wardrobe? She no longer wears pants suits, she wears tents. And the tent size is getting bigger and bigger by the day. If she were a Republican, Kenny would call her “Christine Christie”, in reference to the male NJ Governor who is now actually skinnier than she is.

Or is he proud of her taking hundreds of thousand of dollars from the financial sector for “speeches” that she’s now afraid to release to the public, because they will show her to be a total and utter hypocrite? (as if we didn’t know that 20 years ago!)

Only one conclusion is possible.

Hillario! reminds Kenny Bania of his own mother! You know, the one who brings him down his Spaghetti-O’s for lunch…..

CASE CLOSED.

Del Dolemonte on February 10, 2016 at 7:23 AM

Only one conclusion is possible.

Another is that Kenny is Chelsea and fearful that her meal ticket will be toast.

F X Muldoon on February 10, 2016 at 7:57 AM

It has always been the policy of the FBI not to release/announce the targets of their investigations. So, in that respect, this is no different.

Add to that the probability that BHO has instructed the FBI not to release the target and entire scope of their investigation. Otherwise, the presidential campaign of HRC is over. Done. Kaput.

Even without announcing her as the target of their investigation, all sane minds know that she is the target. How anyone could even consider voting for such a corrupt, vile, criminal such as HRC is beyond me. She been involved in more shady escapades than any other POTUS candidate in history. The list goes on, and on, and on.

Watergate investigation dismissal
Whitewater
Rose Billing records
Cattle futures
TravelGate
FBI files
Bimbo eruptions
Vince Foster’s death
State Department “losing” $6,000,000,000
State Department/Clinton Foundation corruption
Speaker fees
Benghazi
ServerGate
1,583 classified emails illegally maintained
30,000 federal records destroyed
Serial lying (named after Sir Edmund Hillary, Snipers, all 4 grandparents were immigrants, turned down by the Marines)

And those are just the ones we know about.

GAlpha10 on February 10, 2016 at 9:12 AM

The next major step will be the appointment of a special prosecutor by Loretta Lynch, but that will be delayed as long as possible. My guess is that they can wait for perhaps another month to take that step. They’d like to get closer to November, however.

Once the SP is in place, the pace of the investigation will change to something that might be described as “glacial.” The FBI and other involved agencies will then be gagged and unable to comment on the course of an ongoing investigation. At that point, this debacle disappears from media attention.

If an indictment is ever issued, Obama will only then pardon Hillary. Her minions, however, are toast.

DaveK on February 10, 2016 at 9:46 AM

I keep wondering-why is Kenny hitching his Little Red Wagon to Hillario!’s fading star?

Del Dolemonte on February 10, 2016 at 7:23 AM

He cares not a whit for Hillary. He just sees her as an opportunity to stomp around claiming intellectual superiority over a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists.

That’s the only reason he ever does anything: to act like he’s better than people and take the more outlandish responses as proof positive.

The Schaef on February 10, 2016 at 9:54 AM

He cares not a whit for Hillary. He just sees her as an opportunity to stomp around claiming intellectual superiority over a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists.

That’s the only reason he ever does anything: to act like he’s better than people and take the more outlandish responses as proof positive.

The Schaef on February 10, 2016 at 9:54 AM

Then he/she/it disappears.

GAlpha10 on February 10, 2016 at 10:01 AM

that’s where you argument keeps falling apart.

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 7:52 PM

Do you have lots of imaginary friends?
The investigation centers on the owner of the server. The owner was the Secretary of State, the buck stops there. You can pretend it is about someone else, but that is still pretending.

You think and argue like a child. If you wanted to argue whether or not she has done anything wrong your arguments might have weight. But to argue that the investigation doesn’t center around her and the transmissions she was responsible for is illogical and not the way law enforcement investigations work.

Neitherleftorright on February 10, 2016 at 10:50 AM

Neitherleftorright on February 10, 2016 at 10:50 AM

He/she/it doesn’t care.

If you said the sun rises in the east, he would say it rises in the west and that you cannot prove that it doesn’t.

If you said that the needle of a compass points North, he would argue that it doesn’t point to “True North” (except for certain areas), so you are wrong and cannot prove it.

If you said that 1583 classified documents have been found on the private, unsecure email server owned and operated by Hillary Clinton and those 1583 classified documents have been posted on the official State Department FIOA site (with redactions), he/she/it says that you have no proof that they are, in fact, classified documents (although the State Department, various IG’s, and the Intelligence Community says they are).

GAlpha10 on February 10, 2016 at 11:34 AM

GAlpha10 on February 10, 2016 at 11:34 AM

True.
The most delusional person I have met.

TLALOC’S THEME SONG

Welcome to the grand delusion
Come on in and see what’s happening
Pay the price, get your tickets for the show
The stage is set, the band starts playing
Suddenly your heart is pounding
You’re wishing secretly Hillary was able to tell the truth..

But don’t be fooled by the radio
The TV or the magazines
They’ll show you photographs of how her life should be
But they’re just the West Wing conspiracy
So if you think your life is complete confusion
‘Cause she’ll never win the game
Just remember that it’s a grand delusion
And deep inside we’re all to blame
We’re all to blame

Neitherleftorright on February 10, 2016 at 12:33 PM

a) the FBI is investigating Hillary’s use of the server
b) …
c) …
d) …

Notice that not all of those involve Hillary herself …

Tlaloc on February 9, 2016 at 3:17 PM

Tlaloc is completely missing the point here. The FBI is not investigating Hilllary’s personal use of her personal server. The issues go much, much deeper than this.

1. She owned and operated the server that she, and other people were using to illegally transmit classified data, and she had full knowledge of what they were doing.
2. She was Secretary of State of the United States of America at the time. A yuge part of her job was to know inside and out the classification guides for all of the agencies that State deals with. SHE, as SECSTATE, held the ultimate responsibility to make sure that all security safeguards were being followed at State. If they weren’t, she was responsible. It didn’t matter if she agreed with the guidelines, she was still responsible by law to follow them.
3. She only had the authority to modify security guidelines at the State Department. For all other agencies she was required by law to know and to follow the classification guides for the other agencies.
4. Even if she hadn’t been SECSTATE, and even if it someone else’s server that was being used to violate our security national security policies, the fact that she knew that classified material was being mishandled, and she did not take action to stop it is by itself a crime, punishable by fine and imprisonment.
5. She signed a document stating that she agreed to all of the conditions stated above.

Hillary was NOT an innocent bystander in all of this, as you seem to imply. She has put our country into some deep, deep sh1t, and God help us all now.

dcavinated on February 10, 2016 at 12:44 PM

The thing that bugs me about this entire fiasco is that nobody in the media have pressed her on why she had the server.

She stated early on that it was a matter of “convenience”.

She’s never been asked “why” it was more convenient. Why was it more convenient to go to the expense and trouble to hire someone to setup a private server as opposed to simply calling the State Department IT folks and asking for an email in their secure system.

Why? Please explain why it was more convenient.

There’s only one answer to that question.

BacaDog on February 9, 2016 at 1:05 PM

Very early on in this business, Hillary herself provided a fuller answer to this question. Remember that is was so that she didn’t have to carry around two devices upon which to conduct her email. Because officially, email sent to a .gov email address should be received on a mobile device ONLY if it is prepared by, and configured for, ONLY the proper handling of information. And such a device could not also be permitted to handle personal email.

Now do the math.

While she was attempting to suggest that convenience in having her personal emails (you know, cookie recipes and girl-talk with Chelsea) available on the same device as her business emails (you know, official and often classified State Dept. communications) made her better at her job, it also makes her a criminal the moment that ANY classified information was transmitted to or from that device without her informing the appropriate agency and taking steps to contain said information.

So, now that it has been proven that such information was so mishandled, where is the indictment? They have tried to carefully managed this in a drip-drip manner, sort of a boiling the frog technique, to drag along the unsuspecting public from point to point without them realizing it all adds up to felony behavior.

Anybody interested in the truth who connects the dots can come to only one conclusion. Hillary was hiding her corruption (and doing a horrible job of it), and that was the only reason for the existence of her private email system.

Freelancer on February 10, 2016 at 12:48 PM

A question for Tlaloc:

Who crashed the Exxon Valdez?

Freelancer on February 10, 2016 at 1:02 PM

Neitherleftorright on February 10, 2016 at 12:33 PM

Dennis DeYoung demands an apology.

Freelancer on February 10, 2016 at 1:04 PM

Freelancer on February 10, 2016 at 1:04 PM

Probably does. Most of the entertainment world are clueless leftists.

Neitherleftorright on February 10, 2016 at 1:23 PM

2. She was Secretary of State of the United States of America at the time. A yuge part of her job was to know inside and out the classification guides for all of the agencies that State deals with. SHE, as SECSTATE, held the ultimate responsibility to make sure that all security safeguards were being followed at State. If they weren’t, she was responsible. It didn’t matter if she agreed with the guidelines, she was still responsible by law to follow them.

dcavinated on February 10, 2016 at 12:44 PM

It was also reported that, as Secretary of State, she participated in additional training on classifying materials, so there is no way she can claim ignorance of the requirements.

GAlpha10 on February 10, 2016 at 2:11 PM

Tlaloc is completely missing the point here. The FBI is not investigating Hilllary’s personal use of her personal server. The issues go much, much deeper than this…

Hillary was NOT an innocent bystander in all of this, as you seem to imply. She has put our country into some deep, deep sh1t, and God help us all now.

dcavinated on February 10, 2016 at 12:44 PM

Tlaloc is of the mistaken impression that Hillary is only in the wrong if she overtly abuses her powers, or that national security is only compromised if we can see direct impact from foreign powers in the short term. That violates several Ferengi principles:

It was a test, to see if you were ready to take my place! And you failed, miserably!

You don’t grab power, you accumulate it quietly, without anyone noticing… You could have sat there quietly at your leisure and gathered up all the information you needed about the Gamma Quadrant… You could have let him hold the sceptre while you controlled everything from the shadows. And then, when everything was running smoothly, only then would you take over.

The Schaef on February 10, 2016 at 2:32 PM

Freelancer on February 10, 2016 at 12:48 PM

I have a government owned/provided Blackberry and while it is capable of encrypting data, it is not authorized for sending or receiving classified materials, nor are any other government issued Blackberry. Blackberry does not even sell one of their devices in the US that is certified for handling classified information. In fact, none of their devices, worldwide, are certified for classified information, and Blackberry has some of the highest levels of security.

It is against the law to send or receive classified information on a portable device. The fact that Clinton was composing, sending, receiving, and maintaining classified information on an unauthorized device adds additional felony charges for each and every email on her device(s).

GAlpha10 on February 10, 2016 at 2:55 PM