Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton: Too Important to Make an Example Of?

Would the administration actually charge the candidate promising to extend Obama's policies?

|

"How do I get John Kerry to stop inviting me to play 'Candy Crush Saga'?"
Twitter

The scandal over Hillary Clinton's secretive, private handling of classified communications while secretary of state has got legs with muscle-bound thighs precisely because it hits her in all of her well-established negatives: that's she's secretive, paranoid, is beholden to a cadre of insiders, and is fundamentally dishonest and untrustworthy. It is the perfect scandal to derail her campaign among anybody who isn't already a loyal supporter. (Even now, the Clinton campaign's unresponsiveness is drawing attention even on MSNBC.)

But there's even more. Because President Barack Obama's administration has blown to bits its promise of transparency and has set a record for going after anybody who leaks information the government doesn't want to get out, everybody has their eyes open for evidence that somebody connected to Clinton saw something they weren't supposed to see. The State Department has flagged several hundred of the e-mails she had kept on her private servers as possibly having classified information. They have to be looked over and possibly have some content redacted before being publicly released.

With the possibility that Clinton wasn't handling her information properly, some are wondering if she'll be treated by the Obama administration and the Department of Justice like other people they've targeted. Fox News spoke with John Kiriakou, the ex-CIA agent who served two years in prison essentially for the crime of revealing that the United States was, in fact, waterboarding and torturing Al Qaeda prisoners (technically he was convicted of revealing CIA undercover identities as part of providing this information). He sees a likely double-standard coming into play for Clinton.

"The FBI is going to investigate [Hillary Clinton], but it is not up to them," he told FoxNews.com. 

"If they [the FBI] want to charge Hillary Clinton with a crime, they can certainly find a crime with which to charge her," he added. "But there is no way the Obama administration is going to prosecute her. No way." 

A former CIA spy, Bob Baer, told CNN over the weekend he would be fired and possibly jailed if he had tried to do what Clinton did:

"Even [Edward] Snowden didn't get into that," Baer said. "If this in fact was on a private server, you and I would get fired and possibly jailed. This could be a felony."

Baer said that when he was on assignment, he wasn't allowed to receive messages at that level of classification, and that putting it on a private server or handheld device was a major mistake.

"If this was on her server and it got into her smartphone, there's a big problem there," he claimed. "Seriously, if I had sent a document like this over the open Internet, I'd get fired the same day — escorted to the door, and gone for good, and probably charged with mishandling classified information."

On the other end, Richard Lempert of the Brookings Institution penned an extremely detailed, possibly too detailed, explanation of how the complex rules regarding government classification mean we should be careful not to jump to conclusions. Lempert, though, overplays his biases a bit further down the piece:

Most likely there were risks in using a personal server, but it is also likely that the risks were not realized, and it is quite possible that the risks were no greater, and perhaps less, than they would have been had Clinton used a State Department server.

Clinton, no doubt, had firewalls and other protections in place to guard her personal server, and it is likely that she only discussed sensitive topics with people whose discretion she could trust since she could be damaged politically by any untoward revelations.

As for the risk of being hacked, the wave of hacked government sites and the betrayals of Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden mean it is not silly to think that using a privately protected, unadvertised server could have made Clinton's emails less vulnerable to surreptitious acquisition than they would have been on a State Department server, which is most likely a regular target of attempted intrusions.

First of all, "betrayals" of Manning and Snowden? Really? Second of all, both of these leaks took place after Hillary Clinton was well entrenched in her position as secretary of state and had made the decision to have the private server. Actually, Snowden's leaks didn't begin until months after Clinton stepped down. And, of course, the wave of federal records hacking was only recently revealed. The idea that Clinton had any of this in mind when she embarked on this secret storage system is absurd. And finally, extending Lempert's argument means that all government officials should be secretly storing sensitive government information on private servers to keep it away from hackers. Consider the accountability consequences of such a shift.

Ultimately the problem with trying to trust Clinton is that problem she has with being not entirely trustworthy. Last week Peter Suderman documented all the things that Clinton has claimed to defend herself from accusations of information mismanagement that have turned out to be untrue. Gawker sued the State Department because it insisted that it had no e-mails that a former deputy assistant secretary of state under Clinton had sent to several journalists. In reality, Gawker found out this week there were more than 17,000 emails that matched the request. It has taken them three years just to get that information, let alone the actual content of said emails.

As for Kiriakou's claim that Clinton will be treated differently, we'll just have to wait and see. Maybe she'll have leaked information to the press that the Obama administration found embarrassing. Even so, it's more likely that somebody in her inner circle will jump on that grenade in order to protect her candidacy. 

NEXT: Instapundit: Markets Work to Transmit Bad News. No Wonder They're Unpopular.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You know who else was never charged with any crimes….

      1. well they have been shot… then hanged.
        Death of Mussolini

      2. The Ceausescu’s were unavailable for comment?

      3. I thought those top men gave you permission to own your house.

      4. Only Democrat Top. Men. Automatically get that kind of comsideration.

    1. Holder?

    2. Santa Claus? No…not Santa. Not after that mommy molesting scandal some years ago..

    3. Jesus?

      1. What about that ‘stop and frisk’ bust in NYC? The one where he had the pot seeds. You’re talking about Jesus Ramirez, right?

      2. Well, no, he was accused of Blasphemy by the priests and presented to the governor [Pilate] as seditious — the charge was even put on the cross:

        Pilate also had an inscription written and put on the cross. It read, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.”

    4. That unindicted co-consprirator? That was easy.

    5. Baron Underbeiht?

    6. Bill Clinton?

    7. Well, anyone who comes under the Constitution’s ‘Connected Persons Clause’. As HRC does.

  2. Surprised this latest scandal hasn’t faded away yet. Would love to see Hillary prosecuted, but I know that’ll never happen. Meanwhile, little people like us could face life sentences for driving a friend to buy weed.

    1. CUZ YOU TEAM RED SHILLZ, IT IS A PHAKE SKANDULL!

      /derp

    2. Watching ol’ dirty Hillary, and the rest of the progfascist elite, operate their organized capital crime syndicates with absolute impunity – all while knowing well that as a mere commoner one will be locked into a rape/gladiator cage and the key thrown away over even the smallest of infractions – is destroying the morale of the American citizenry.

      1. Yes, it’s infuriating. I try not to think about these things because I feel so helpless to do anything about it. I’m sure a lot of people feel as we do, but how will this ever change without the majority of people demanding it? Most of us are too busy working and living our lives to get involved in a meaningful way.

        1. That’s about it.

          1. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
            ? Edmund Burke

            1. As long as “good men” aren’t suffering unbearably, “good men,” like most everything else in nature, will always choose the path of least resistance.

              1. Guilty as charged…

              2. Lost my career trying to be a good man! (doctor) Love not swimming with the sharks, any more!

        2. Well, I think the last of those involved in a meaningful way were the likes of DeMint in the Senate and former Comptroller General Walker (stepped down in 2008). Once these guys bowed out I was pretty much certain that this all isn’t going to end pretty, and that terribly soon there will be plenty of people getting involved in a meaningful way – with plenty of free time and empty stomachs.

      2. You say “rape/gladiator cage” like it’s a bad thing…?

    3. She won’t be prosecuted, but I don’t think this one is fading away, either. I believe this scandal has effectively torpedoed her campaign.

      1. A lot of people wrote off Bill when his womanizing stories broke while he was seeking the nomination, and we all know how that worked out. Then again, Hillary is nowhere near as charming or charismatic as her ‘husband.’ I hope you’re right but evil seldom gives up without a brutal and bloody fight.

        1. Politicians and womanizing go hand in hand, so to an extent, I think voters have largely resigned themselves to that. Criminal mishandling of classified information – when you’re the Secretary of State – is an entirely different animal altogether. I think this thing has legs. And while she won’t suffer the same consequences you or I would suffer – or that some low-level flunkies of hers will likely suffer – I think her campaign will end in the coming months. At least I have my fingers crossed. The sheer chaos that will unfold within the Democratic Party will be truly wonderful to behold. And that’s even if she’s not indicted.

          1. Politicians and womanizing go hand in hand

            Only if you’re a Democrat! Remember, Herman Cain was riding high until stories of his affairs came out and then he was finished. But that’s because most people understand and look down on infidelity. Do you think the average person comprehends the idea of private servers and network security? Hillary does a great job at presenting herself as a victim, and I’m sure the average person believes that those mean old Republicans are just picking on Hillary because she’s a girl. Would love for this incident to bring her down, but I’m not holding my breath.

          2. Politicians and crime go hand in hand, too. Somehow the ruling class always seems to overlook the crimes of its own.

          3. Hard to think of anything involving Hildabeast as having “legs” in any overly-literal sense of the word.

        2. The press is going to beat their chests about it and then cheer on Hillary after she gets the nomination. After that, it will be like the second coming of Obama.

        3. Hillary is nowhere near as charming or charismatic as her husband’s used underwear. She would have difficulty winning a charm contest with a horned toad.

          1. You’ve obviously never picked up a horned toad and rubbed its belly until it went to sleep. They are cuter than you imagine.

      2. Especially with Bernie Sanders growing in popularity…

  3. Of course she won’t be charged with anything. This isn’t even a D vs R thing, specifically.

    The only time Big Important People are charged with these kinds of crimes is when it is also aligned with the political interest of somebody doing the charging. It’s all part of the 3-felonies-a-day paradigm.

    1. The only people in a position to hold Hillary accountable have no desire to do so.

      1. True dat. Shall we return to the good ol’ days were we tar and feather the rascal?

      2. The only people in a position to hold Hillary accountable have no intention of starting trouble since they’re dirty, too.

        1. I think JG is right, here. If someone makes a real, genuine effort to get at all her lost information (much of which ISN”T actually lost because she surely communicated with the state department, who did follow the law), there is a very strong chance that some of The Big Bosses will be implicated.

          Did Kerry know about it? Obama? Holder? How many big names SENT her confidential information, knowing it was off the official servers? If Hill goes, she will be many many many big names with her.

          1. It’s a dirty game; politics.

          2. Good point. It was reported earlier this year that the White House did know about her private email address in 2009. But they played stupid, acting like they didn’t understand how extensive her set-up was.

            Anyway, it stands to reason that if Hillary was breaking the law and flagrantly jeopardizing classified information (which seems obvious, to me), then whoever in the administration knew about it and allowed it to go on is guilty, too. It would be a total dereliction of duty.

            1. At which point the probability that said administration pursues the case against hrc goes into negative numbers.

          3. “Did Kerry know about it? Obama? Holder? How many big names SENT her confidential information, knowing it was off the official servers? If Hill goes, she will be many many many big names with her.”

            Exactly why she won’t be charged. :/

      3. Hard to say. Obama REALLY hates the Clintons. And Hillary becoming president will diminish his control over the DNC after he leaves office. So maybe he throws her under the bus. I hope so. This bitch needs to die of old age in prison.

        1. “Hillary becoming president will diminish his control over the DNC after he leaves office”
          —————–
          This. Why on earth would he trust the Clintons to perpetuate his legacy? I bet he’d rather see it smashed outright by a Republican successor who’s an official enemy than fixed and rebranded by the Clintons.

      4. …and she has a vagina. Presumably.

      5. That assumes that Obama lokes the bitch, and wants her to follow him to the White House. I doubt he loathes her enough to want to see a Republican win in 2016, but if he thinks there’s another viable Democrat candidate, we might see some action about the time the primaries get hot and heavy.

  4. Hmm. Perhaps Owdensnay can, um, leverage this.

    1. Owdensnay oesnday’tay antway otay ebay oundfay eadday.

  5. I’m way more interested in having the DOJ subpoena her phone so we can see all the late-night sexts between her and Barry.

    1. You know, NutraSweet might have a passing idea what those sexts might say. Maybe if we’re lucky, he’ll share with us.

      1. NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

        *hides under desk*

    2. I just threw up a little bit in my mouth.

      1. Is it bad that SF’s writings don’t shock or disturb me at all?

        1. Yes.

    3. I’m way more interested in having the DOJ subpoena her phone so we can see all the late-night sexts between her and Barry Huma.

      1. If Hill was mowing Huma that would be news already. Phillandering, power obsessed husband? Trysts with another woman? The “Stress of the job”? Finally admitting their true sexuality? This would be solid gold with so many. First woman in the whitehouse AND lesbian?

        Fuck it, she could eat live monkeys on live TV and they would still want her if this was the story.

  6. it is quite possible that the risks were no greater, and perhaps less, than they would have been had Clinton used a State Department server.

    I guess, in some minds, this creates more answers than questions.

    1. Which doesn’t matter, legally speaking.

      This stuff was not allowed on that system. Period, end of investigation, go straight to sentencing.

      Unless, of course, you are in the unprecedented position of laughing it up with the President while a criminal investigation into your activities is underway.

      1. This stuff was not allowed on that system. Period, end of investigation, go straight to sentencing.

        “Reasonable mistake of law.” — SCOTUS

      2. Which doesn’t matter, legally speaking.

        I’m pretty sure (at least around here) that we’re all pretty well into FYTW legal territory. I was more… caught off-guard by the irrelevant comment that not only admits her crime but paints the State Department as incompetent as well.

  7. Though it was just a poll, a recent one showed only 2% believed Hillary with regards to her e-mails. That’s both less than the margin of error, and within the margin of “I’ll say outrageous shit to the pollster for the lulz”.

    1. and I think the entire 2% are commenters on The Daily Beast

  8. everybody has their eyes open for evidence that somebody connected to Clinton saw something they weren’t supposed to see.

    Based on the super-high-level classification of some of the emails that we already know about, isn’t this pretty much of a given? Even assuming (extremely optimistically) that her email wasn’t hacked by just about every competent intelligence apparat on the planet?

    For that matter, legally speaking, I don’t think it matters who actually saw the stuff. Just handling it on the same basis as you do your yoga schedule and daughter’s wedding plans is automatically a serious crime, isn’t it?

    1. For peons? Certainly such practices would be a crime.

    2. is automatically a serious crime, isn’t it?

      For the little people, yes. No intent is required for a violation. For the upper ruling class, not so much. If this was some mid-grade flunky at one of our intelligence agencies they would already be taking a plea bargain.

    3. Just handling it on the same basis as you do your yoga schedule and daughter’s wedding plans is automatically a serious crime, isn’t it?

      Au contraire, R C. It shows how comfortable Hillary is in managing serious matters.

      1. Only the poor commit crimes. The very rich and connected perpetrate amusing little peccadilloes.

        1. I try not to imagine what Hillabeast’s “pecadillos” look or taste like.

          1. I’m imaging a labia crossed with an armadillo. Then completely regretting it while emptying my stomach into the wastebasket.

  9. Awesome, it appears that the IT company managing Queen Hillary’s personal cloud is a little mom and pop outfit called Platte River Networks in Denver, Colorado, operating out of a residential apartment with the servers stored in a freaking bathroom closet.

    1. Guess Mom and Pop are looking at doing hard time now. It’s understandable that Hillary didn’t know what she was doing was wrong–but they should have!

      1. I’m just relieved that they finally found the culprit in this whole mess.

      2. You know Hillary will get nothing while they serve 20 years hard time.

        1. Of course. Ignorance of the law may be an acceptable excuse for cops and politicians, but it doesn’t fly for us peons. My sympathies for the poor sap who gets nailed for this.

    2. totally secure, I bet. Guarded by an aged rotweiller with asthma.

      1. And access to a smart phone.

    3. I take Lemperts comment at face value. This outfit is “perhaps less” risky than using the State Department’s servers.

      I mean how many millions of personnel files have they had compromised?

    4. Just in case you were wondering, the current headline on CNN is

      ‘I don’t believe you change hearts’
      Clinton warns Black Lives Matter of ‘lip service’ from whites

      1. Clinton warns Black Lives Matter of ‘lip service’ from whites

        She should know since her and her ‘husband’ are masters of that.

        But Hillary does have a point about the tactics of the BLM crowd. I am far less sympathetic to their cause now than I was before. Since they don’t give two shits about my life (or anyone who looks like me), then why should I give a flying fuck about any of them (BLM people, not Blacks as a whole)?

      2. Oh, she ‘White-splained’ them.

      3. Is that really the headline? Because from what I know of the video it was mainly the BLM people and Hildabeast taking turns criticizing each other.

        #Spin

      4. Clinton warns Black Lives Matter of ‘lip service’ from whites

        Is that like a kind of b.j.?

    5. And I’m sure the emails were all encrypted, and that everyone who worked there or had access to the server itself had the proper clearance, right?

  10. The corruption is reaching a point where even the sheep are noticing that something is seriously wrong over at Sodom on the Potomac. All the Elected Politicians become millionaires overnight, on $170K/yr salary. The stoopit are beginning to notice that TEAM RED, or, TEAM BLUE is does not matter. This looks like a job for STEVE SMITH. Mexican Ass Rape the whole lot of them … and then get nasty.

    1. “This looks like a job for STEVE SMITH. ”

      Because if the women don’t find you handsome, they should at least find you handy!

      1. +1 roll of duct tape

      2. I thought that was Red Green?

        1. There’s a difference?

        2. Steve smith is Red Green (for real, though not STEVE SMITH)

    2. “Mexican Ass Rape”

      Is this better or worse than Sri Lankan Ass rape?

      1. Depends on whether the beach sand option is used. Your call.

    3. But no pot. For them. Maybe for the audience.

  11. Disregarding any security issues, I believe she was being investigated for using a private network when she ‘wiped’ the server.
    Isn’t that destruction of evidence?

    1. Not if you’re too big to fail.

      1. Too big to jail, more like.

    2. Absolutely. That server was under subpoena when it was wiped. Another per se violation of the law.

      Before we’re done here, I believe somebody is going to go to jail. The only interesting questions are (1) which Hillary flunky will take the fall and (2) how much are they going to extract from the foundation to do so.

      I’m thinking I would probably tell Bill and Hill I’ll take the fall for $2mm per year in jail, rounded up. I’m gonna want that in gold coins, BTW, at today’s prices, delivered overseas to a trusted party of mine, before I sign the plea documents.

      1. The Clintons are too cheap to pay off a patsy (in that sense, they’re less honorable than the Mafia), and will likely threaten someone into confessing and taking the fall for them. And if their patsy refuses, something very bad will happen to them or someone they care about.

        1. Threaten them with what?

          Maybe the Clintons are connected to MS-13 or somebody who would do a hit in prison, but once they ask for it, they have given MS-13 the keys to their bank vault.

          1. I’m talking before prison. They can threaten with any of the multitude of arcane, obscure laws that most of us break every day without realizing it. The Clintons are connected, and there’s no doubt they could make a single phone call that would destroy the life of a regular person.

            1. Threatening somebody who is about to turn state’s evidence is both (a) a pretty empty threat and (b) an excellent way to do time yourself.

              1. I doubt they would hesitate long enough to make a threat. Their reply to your offer would be un-announced action.

        2. Clintons? No, it’ll come from the foundation

      2. That person would be the next on top of the Clinton Hit List.

        A “horrible” accident would happen in jail.

        1. No need to kill you. Once you’re in prison they can manufacture tons of “previously overlooked” evidence of your other crimes to keep you there forever.

    3. That’s how they got Martha Stewart.

    4. ^This (plus just about everything else mentioned above). But the leftist punditry is going to try to distract with shit like, “But is was actually more secure” and “Jeb Bush did it” and the like

  12. If Biden jumps in the race, it may be an indicator the DOJ is going to come down hard on Clinton.

    1. the DOJ is going to come down hard on Clinton.

      As long as Obama is president the DOJ won’t come down hard on Hillary.

      My guess is she’ll eventually drop out of the race leaving room for Warren or Sanders or another champion without really being held accountable for this little mixup.

      I’m enjoying the establishment types (journalists and other dems) with concerned faces on. This, apparently, is a bridge too far. My feeling is that they hate her guts nearly as much as I do and are enjoying some schadenfreude.

      1. I don’t know. She and Jarrett openly dislike each other. The Administration could, on a whim or due to a perceived slight, decided to open a for-real RICO investigation on her and Bill.

        At that point, she would be dead meat.

      2. Why not? They supposedly hate each other, and putting Hillary in federal prison for the rest of her life could be less “dangerous” to him than letting her roam around.

        1. God, it would be so sweet to see her marched into prison. I know it’ll never happen, but I can dream, can’t I?

          1. That would be beautiful. I would record it and watch it over and over. Brilliant.

          2. She would have some medical “episode” that would necessitate some form of non-jail time.

            1. It’s fun talking about Obama smashing Hillary down. For once you’d hear me praise him to high heaven.

              Unfortunately, like others here, I don’t think it’s gonna happen. Someone will take the fall for her.

        2. As long as the Obama machine has serious goods on the Clinton machine, there is nobody Obama would rather have in office.

          1. The Bill and Hill may have stuff that Obama would rather not have revealed – I’d beat she could embarrasses him about Benghazi.

          2. HRC playing bitch to the bitch of the Daley machine. It’s january layers of bitch all the way down.

  13. “Seriously, if I had sent a document like this over the open Internet

    This is the part that hangs me up. Where were these emails coming from/going to? You can’t just send emails from unclass to classified domains. This means plenty of folks were participating.

    1. Yeah, from what I’ve read, some of these documents are on air-gapped servers, and are never supposed to leave that system. That means somebody had to transfer them to a disk or drive and walk them to an un-gapped machine in order for them to make their way to Hillary’s server.

      Serious, serious felony, that.

      1. Huma told some staffer to do it and the Clinton said yes, but neither was aware that the other was telling the staffer to include classified matrtial, so some GS-10 is going to prison.

        1. The GS-10 is going to prison if they don’t roll over on the Clintons.

          Making sure that doesn’t happen is going to put a dent in the foundation’s balance sheet.

          1. Put a dent in the foundation’s balance sheet?

            I dunno but I imagine that the GS-10 can be killed for much less than what the foundation is paying its most junior staffer this year.

            (Not that I approve of that.)

            1. Yeah, but now they’ve got somebody out there with even better blackmail material.

              Conspiracy to commit murder to obstruct an investigation: ain’t nobody can cover that up or give you a free pass.

              So, they would just give whoever they hired the keys to vault. And a bigger sack to haul money out with.

  14. I assume Team Clinton has the leverage to keep the President from allowing her to be charged. It would be nice if she actually got in trouble but if we can keep her out of the White House that’d be good enough.

    I’m sure the President promised to support Hillary in 2016 in exchange for her acquiescence in 2008 but his heart has never been in it and I don’t think he’d be all that disappointed if she bowed out.

    Great to see she upgraded her security by using Snapchat. She is so funny and spontaneous, and it’s neat to see her making light of all this partisan bickering over her unconscionable security lapses.

    1. Barry has been silent on Hillary so far. From what I understand, there is no love between the Clintons and the Obamas. I think he’s waiting for the right moment to drive in the knife and twist, personally.

      1. Jarrett hates her guts.

      2. I dunno how, but I think BO is beholden to the Clintons. Somehow they are keeping the screws on him or his family to keep him quiet. Shrill Hill doesn’t play games — she will break him like a twig if he steps out of line, and she knows it. She is playing a long game, here, and knows how to keep her pieces in check.

        1. If Hillary had dirt on Obama why didn’t she use it to destroy him before he ‘stole’ the nomination from her? This is one of the many reasons I thought the whole ‘birther’ movement was foolish: if there was any evidence that Obama was not eligible then Hillary would have discovered it and used it against him. Hillary would have been President if not for Obama. Can you imagine how much she must despise him for that?

          1. Obama was the first birther.

            1. Yes, I think it’s obvious he’s been trolling the conspiracy crowd since the beginning. And it’s the only explanation for that peculiar, layered official birth certificate he released to the public. I’m no birther, but examining that document in Adobe Illustrator almost made me believe he must be hiding something.

              1. http://www.breitbart.com/big-g…..ia-hawaii/

                I’m not claiming he wasn’t born in the US, just that he’s an opportunist who will claim whatever is convenient to help himself in the moment. (See also, the rest of his presidency.)

        2. My bet is both the Clinton and Obama camps have dirt they could use against each other. An all-out airing would be very messy. But I can’t tell who has the upper hand in that fight. Seems like Obama has gotten the best of Hillary since 2008, and he’s not doing anything yet to kill this investigation or support her candidacy. I kind of get the impression he enjoys watching her twist in the wind and can afford to let her. I very much doubt he wants her to be president.

          Still, not saying you’re wrong. The Clintons are very, very ruthless.

          1. At this point, its probably a MAD situation.

            Which is a shame, really. I’d love for them to turn on each other.

            But wait! The FBI says they can recover data from the sterilized server! This could get interesting.

  15. “it is not silly to think that using a privately protected, unadvertised server could have made Clinton’s emails less vulnerable to surreptitious acquisition than they would have been on a State Department server”

    By this token, burying your money in a hole in a field is “safer” than depositing it in an FDIC-insured bank that has security systems, vaults, armed guards, etc.

    Only, in this case, its not someone’s personal money… its classified intelligence.

    Making the claim all the more absurd… State Dept networks are only targeted because of Who uses them. Snoopers don’t care about the location, they care about the users.

    Whether those networks are protected by the security infrastructure of the US Govt, or some dude in Denver with a computer in the toilet, makes a difference. Most importantly it changes the nature of “who is responsible” for keeping them secure

    By taking her traffic out of the government loop, Clinton created needless risks that only she can bear responsibility for. in Lempert’s desperate evocation of the risks of a “manning or Snowden”, he obviates the distinction that *those risks* are exactly why Government security protocols are so strict. rather than expose herself to the risk of a single lone-wolf threat within the Govt system, Clinton decided to circulate classified intelligence in a wide-open network where endless packs of wolves roam. Never mind her reliance on non-govt 3rd parties lacking clearances in the first place.

    1. It may not be silly to think that.

      But its illegal to do it.

  16. re: how exposed Hillary’s private accounts were to political hackers?

    Sydney Blumenthal got hacked back in 2012… during the peak of the Benghazi frothing, when he was consulting with her regularly…. while Hillary’s private server was still being serviced at home by some former political consultant

    “By breaching Blumenthal’s account, “Guccifer” was able to access his correspondence (dating back to at least 2005) with an array of Washington insiders, including political operatives, journalists, and government officials. As with the hacker’s other victims, it is unclear how Blumenthal’s account was illegally accessed or why he was targeted.

    However, based on screen grabs made by “Guccifer,” the hacker specifically zeroed in on Blumenthal’s extensive correspondence with Hillary Clinton, sorting Blumenthal’s account so as to single out all e-mail sent to Clinton. Additionally, “Guccifer” further sorted the mail to list (and presumably download) all Word files attached to e-mails sent to Clinton.

    It is unknown what plans “Guccifer” has for these documents, which include foreign policy and intelligence memos that Blumenthal sent to Clinton while she served as Secretary of State”

    It was around this time that clinton decided to hire the Platte River goofballs to take responsibility for her server.

    1. This is why you know she was hacked a long time ago.

      Also, Russia and China aren’t dumb. They have entire teams whose only job is to get Secretary of State emails…they would ask around and find her information very quickly.

      In fact, Hillary has made paid speeches in China, they probably had her email from setting those up.

  17. Something tells me Herr President Hillary will make certain all peons pay very dearly for their past insolence.

  18. that’s she’s secretive, paranoid, is beholden to a cadre of insiders, and is fundamentally dishonest and untrustworthy

    That makes her a shoe-in for Democratic politics!

    1. MOAST TRANSPAIRINT ADMINUSTRAISHUN EVARZ!!!11!!!

  19. Baer said that when he was on assignment, he wasn’t allowed to receive messages at that level of classification, and that putting it on a private server or handheld device was a major mistake.

    The fact that people are even mulling this question proves that the whole process is broken.

    Corporations don’t like when employees use personal email for business because of all the liability concerns. Why do we think it would be OK for Hillary to do the same for official State fucking Department business? And yes, she absolutely DID have classified shit in there, otherwise she’d have released the emails on day one.

    1. This is why when Apple hired Lisa Jackson from the EPA it was obvious it was a favor done for the Democrats. No one hires a government flack who used private pseudonymous email for work.

  20. One of the complications in this whole debacle is the fact that the Secretary of State is a “Original Classification Authority” that is his or her office hold the authority to decide what information is and is not classified in that agency’s particular sphere. Now I haven’t been able to determine how much latitude an OCA has with another OCA’s information (e.g. can the Director of Central Intelligence declassify information classified by the Director of NSA?). I am sure that there is a policy somewhere that is designed to address this but I haven’t found something that explicitly addresses it.

    One of the many things that bugs me about this is the fact that, as Sec. of State, you *have* to know that pretty much every foreign intelligence agency is going to have a significant intelligence effort underway to get as much information on and about you as possible. Despite this she chose to have her communications go through an unsecure email server… Well I imagine the 3rd Department of the PLA and the FIS will miss her…

    1. “‘as Sec. of State, you *have* to know that pretty much every foreign intelligence agency is going to have a significant intelligence effort underway to get as much information on and about you as possible.”

      Additionally, there are a number of professionals in her department whose job its supposed to be to ensure that these efforts are thwarted and secured against.

      Yet apparently everyone in the State Department stayed mum about the fact that Hil was off the reservation. And continue to pretend its all “c’est normale”

      1. After all these years Hillary has gotten used to receiving a pass from mainstream journalists and pundits. Did her hubris finally undo her? Still doubt this will amount to much, but I would love to be proven wrong.

    2. The system is set up in a way that classifying information is far easier than declassifying it.

      Furthermore, there is no way in hell that the SoS or anyone in State would ever have the authority to declassify Signals Intelligence data, which is under the purview of the N.S.A.

      1. See, I would imagine that this is the case, but my normally black belt level google-fu failed to reveal anything directly… oh wait, I was using Bing, that explains it…

    3. the Secretary of State is a “Original Classification Authority” that is his or her office hold the authority to decide what information is and is not classified in that agency’s particular sphere.

      Doesn’t really matter. None of this shit was ever declassified. The fact that she could have (maybe; I doubt she could declassify sigint or satellite intelligence) is irrelevant if she never did.

      And there’s a process for that. The SecState just handing shit over to people doesn’t make it declassified.

      1. You are most likely correct, but I was unclear on the actual policy, I can just see it as a fig leaf that the Clintonites will undoubtedly try and hide behind.

        1. Unclear is probably a little imprecise, I figured that this is the case, but I couldn’t document it.

  21. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.jobnet10.com

    1. Have you met my fucking family, Carol? More time with them? DIAF, bitch!

    2. Are we speculating about how Hillary could better spend her remaining time out of prison?

      1. It should say “Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access, as well as a few cucumbers”

  22. Clinton, no doubt, had firewalls and other protections in place to guard her personal server, and

    BZZZT! What do the lawyers say? Assuming facts not in evidence?

    1. And even if she did I can hazard a guess that they didn’t come anywhere close to meeting the encryption or physical security requirements needed to handle classified information..

      1. Hey, the server was in a bathroom, for crying out loud. What could be more private than that?

        1. The intern from China liked to work while going to the bathroom. Said the privacy helped him think. You don’t think he was a spy, do you?

  23. ed sensitive topics with people whose discretion she could trust since she could be damaged politically by any untoward revelations.

    This is Pimpwagon two six to Hot Sauce Actual, we have a target rich environment here, request grid for fire support!

    Untoward revelations like, oh, I dunno, she used a personal email server configured by a contributor’s kid going through his Microsoft Exchange cert and needed practice?

  24. Orange jumpsuits… I’m not gonna be happy ’til I see orange jumpsuits.

    1. You might, but it won’t be Hillary in it. As nice as that would be to see.

  25. Nice alt-text, Shackford.

  26. Would the administration actually charge the candidate promising to extend Obama’s policies?

    Oh, I think we all know the answer to that question.

  27. Of course, the real problem is that we don’t know who has this stuff, what stuff, really, they have, and what kind of leverage that gives them over Hillary. The risk of putting her in charge of anything, at this point, is simply unacceptable.

    How anybody could seriously think about voting for a candidate who is this compromised, from a pure national security standpoint, is simply beyond me.

    1. You know it’s really bad when even liberals are questioning whether or not to vote for her

  28. secretary of state has got legs with muscle-bound thighs precisely because it hits her in all of her well-established negatives

    NO!

    Shackford once again plays into right the theory that his supposed sexuality is just a long con.

  29. So, I was talking about this with a liberal friend of mine. I mentioned the scandal and her response is “Well, it isn’t her fault! She had to set up her own server because she couldn’t get the IT department to give her an email address!”

    I, dumbfoundedly, stared at her and blinked. I think my next words were, “Right oh, i’m sure that is correct, let’s get back to DND.”

    Anybody hear anything about this idea before?

    1. No, but it doesn’t matter.

      Anyone who believes it is too stupid to be convinced of anything else.

    2. You should have just told her that her comment proved she was possibly the smartest person you know, and as a result the only one you can trust to hold onto a great sum of money. So, if she could just give you her account number so you could transfer the money in…

    3. “Well, it isn’t her fault! She had to set up her own server because she couldn’t get the IT department to give her an email address!”

      That’s so stupid it doesn’t even deserve a response.

  30. I think we might be overly pessimistic about the chances of any prosecutors taking a run at Clinton. We are overly simplifying the situation. There are likely some very Machiavelian politics going on within the Administration and the Dem’s right now. Clinton will never serve a day in prison or face huge public repercussions. But I don’t think the Administration will be blowing any political capital to shield her at this point.

    Everyone says Hillary will be the one to “safeguard” Obama’s legacy. That is likely not how Obama or Valerie Jarrett sees it. I doubt they believe what she says and instead look to the past Clinton administration. Plus lets be hinest the Obama’s and Clinton’s HATE each other. Behind closed doors they are the two opposing forces vying for long term control of the Democratic party. Obama has no compelling reason to risk damaging his legacy by inserting himself or his administration into the self destruction of his political rival. He does not want to be Gerald Ford. he will take a lesson from Bill Clinton’s book and throw her a pardon as he runs out the door. But he’s not going to rescue her from a mess of her own making. If anything he or rather Jarett will stoke the fires.

  31. She knows where bodies are buried (not figuratively). The WH will not touch her.

  32. Is it concerning that, as of right now, Tom Brady is in more trouble than Hillary is? And Hillary has deflated way more balls than Brady ever has.

        1. That was more awkward than, “What What (in the butt)”

    1. Tom won’t get any sympathy because he’s a Republican. I’m pretty sure he knew everything but that’s besides the report. If he was a liberal Democrat then the only thing that the media would have against him is that he’s white.

      1. Meant to say “that’s besides the point” sorry

  33. The D party is just like the R party. They will back anyone in the race that they think will win the general. Right now, that’s Hillary. If she ever gets serious competition, i.e. someone the D faithful think has a good chance to win the general (Biden, Warren, etc.) then I think they’ll drop her, and quickly.

  34. One reason she may be let off is that vast swathes of government are using private email, particularly the political appointees.

    They do this to avoid accountability and to do dirty stuff.

    Lisa Jackson ex-head of the EPA used a pseudonum Richard Windsor to get emails…

    She was hired by Apple of course.

  35. “Too big to fail,” and close variants, such as, “too important to make an example of,” are examples of the intellectually and ethically bankrupt mentality that has put us in our current general predicament. If what HRC did would result in felony charges and potential jail time for anyone BUT her, then it is vitally important that SHE receive that same justice, not just to demonstrate, but to actualize our rule of law. We can’t have rule of law unless we practice it with discipline and consistency. If we have lapsed in the past, we can always get back up on that horse and try again. If the HRC case would be such a restart, then why NOT? We need it!

    1. Too big to jail, you mean.

      Sorry, I’m just trying to make that a thing.

    2. Rule of law, if anything, should mean the opposite of “too big to jail.”

  36. I don’t think that the Obama Justice Department’s main objective is conviction. Just so long as she’s put in a position to lose the primary than it will be considered a job well done. http://www.wrongthinking.com/h…..en-played/

  37. I’m not that convinced the average voter won’t understand what she did wrong. It’s not like email accounts are not used daily by just about everyone these days. You are told that you’re work communication is very sensitive and classified and that you MUST use the company email accounts (and therefore servers) but you choose to ignore that and do all your business with your private gmail or yahoo or whatever account. What’s not to get about that?

    Prosecution and jail time? I highly doubt it. Not for her. But what I do see happening is internal pressure from within the DNC for her to set aside her campaign. Especially with the popularity of Bernie, and the fact that there is still a long way to go to the nomination, she may be convinced to make some kind of announcement that she “wants to spend more time with family” and that she is throwing her support behind Bernie, or the Maryland guy (I forget his name), or even that Sitting Bullshit lady.

    I’m sure it’s important for the Dems to win and “extend” Obama’s legacy. They can’t risk a weak, damaged candidate in the general. She has her hardcore supporters for sure, who wouldn’t care if she murdered toddlers on prime time TV, but they need the support of soft Dems and some independents too if they are going to win. I think they are smart enough to realize that.

  38. I think it depends upon Biden. If he decides to run, Hillary will be indicted. If not, it will all be whitewashed for the remainder of Obama’s term.

  39. Hillary and Obama are locked in a scorpion death group of mutual annihilation should one or the other try to get the other. Nothing will come of this.

    1. That imagery is lovely.

  40. If the Republic is to survive, Hillary must answer for any crimes she committed, as should her staff.
    Otherwise, we have become just another Rule Of Man Kleptocracy.

  41. Gee, ya think she’ll get disbarred for this?
    A donation to the Clinton Foundation gets you a subscription to the Hillary Server Newsletter with all the latest info on high level diplomacy and great stock tips. Plus, for a limited time, if you act now, Bill will speak at your next function and Chelsea will meet privately with you on your yacht.

  42. I think she’ll get the nomination and win. Maybe a few more revelations a few months into her crappy presidency, but we’ve all seen that movie before. Steady as she goes.

  43. Gotta love these quotes from WaPo:

    In a testy exchange with reporters following a town hall meeting in North Las Vegas, Clinton responded, “What, like with a cloth or something?” when asked if the server had been wiped. “I don’t know how it works at all,” she added.

    “Look, my personal emails are my personal business. Right?” she told reporters, when asked if the e-mails were wiped from the server. “So we went through a painstaking process and through 55,000 pages we thought could be worth relating. Under the law, that decision is made by the official. I was the official. I made those decisions.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..was-wiped/

    1. ” “I don’t know how it works at all,” she added.”
      Yep, the mafia don really isn’t interested in the details; was the concrete hard before they tossed him off the boat? ‘I don’t know how is works at all’.

      ” Under the law, that decision is made by the official. I was the official. I made those decisions.””
      “l’?tat, c’est moi!”

    2. I’m a GS-11 and I’d say to her “how the fuck are you secretary of state, and not know these things.”

      Being a computer whiz is one thing but anyone that has a clearance in the government has an understanding of what is and isn’t classified.

      It’s a web of deceit and lies, but unlike Bill she’s not good at it.

  44. I suspect that, particularly with the Obama administration, that Hillary knows where to many skeletons are hidden for her to ever face criminal prosecution, it matters not what she might do. Should it turn out that I do “the system” an injustice, I doubt that possibility, my apologies are here offed.

    1. The server was next to the FBI files.

  45. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

    http://www.homejobs90.com

  46. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.online-jobs9.com

  47. The State Department has flagged several hundred of the e-mails she had kept on her private servers as possibly having classified information. They have to be looked over and possibly have some content redacted before being publicly released.

    Looked over and redacted? Why? The Chinese already have them, if they’re actually important.

  48. Listen, Hillary has gone above and beyond with compliance and providing information to the FBI. She didn’t have to turn her server over, but she did, just for the sake of being above board, and transparency.

    And she didn’t have to wipe her server clean beforehand, but she did. Just to make sure she didn’t give the FBI any incriminating evidence.

    Above and beyond, people. Fake scandal.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.