The growing scandal surrounding Hillary Clinton’s use of an unsecured server now involves a little known Denver company that she used for the system. Clinton has repeatedly dismissed concerns about her decision not to use the secure State Department system by saying that she had her own security team and that the server was always protected. Now there is a media report that Clinton actually used a small company with Democratic party ties in Denver which reportedly kept its server in a bathroom closet in a loft apartment. The report raises again questions of the security used for the system while there are also questions being raised about Clinton lawyers lacking clearances to deal with possibly classified material in deleting thousands of messages and holding copies of messages. There has not been a response printed to the story thus far and the position of the Clinton campaign (including challenging the accuracy of the story) is unknown at this time.
The company Platte River Networks is described as a “mom and pop” operation by former employees.
Founded in 2002 by entrepreneurs Treve Suazo, Brent Allshouse and Tom Welch, Platte River Networks operated out of a 1,858 square feet loft apartment in downtown Denver until earlier year. The building hardly sounds secure from foreign intelligence penetration.
These concerns arise with the disclosure of hundreds of emails flagged as possibly classified, including at least two at one of the highest levels.
Nicko Thime
When in the land of “It’s Not When We Do”…
… It’s never when Republicans rig an election or two.
Fogdog
“Dogs don’t chase parked cars.”
= = =
However, cars slowly rolling down a Hill…
Until now, I had thought that Mr. Turley was careful with the facts. After reading this, I’m doubtful.
It is not clear that Ms. Clinton received or sent ANY emails that were classified at the time. The emails being called “possibly classified”, retroactively, mind you, really don’t suggest wrongdoing.
Disclosure: I am not a supporter of Hillary. I support Bernie.
Next, the Despicable She and her NinnyOns will be claiming Huma Weiner wiped the hard drive clean!
Wedgie for Hillary? Hardly.
I may be short-sighted, but there’s just one thing I want going into this election cycle.
Not Hillary.
Darren, My comment disappeared. Is it retrievable?
Also, good work on the questions!
Old nurse stated: “Thanks Nicko for the reminder of the dark days of the Bush years. And then there were the dark days of the Obama years. And then there will be the dark days of whichever fool gets elected next year.”
Yep.
old nurse . . . I agree, both parties are a disgrace and why a socialist and businessman are at the top of the presidential contenders list.
Didn’t Walker have secret routers in Wisconsin?
Didn’t Trump say something mean to Megyn Kelly?
Didn’t Rubio have a speedboat?
I mean, c’mon.
We’re talking a few misplaced emails that may or may not have been classified.
Whatever.
Remember what’s important.
Hillary is FEMALE. DEMOCRAT. PRO-ABORTION.
The rest is boring.
(Comment was moderated I’ll try with out the ahem bad word)
I guess I slept through the years when the media was obsessing over the 5 million missing emails from the Bush White House routed through the non-secure RNC server in Chattanooga that also counted the Ohio vote in 2004
@ Nicko
If you have some citations for this please post them.
Also…..you are clueless as to what a server is and how the chain of custody (so to speak) works on emails and how the internet works.
If I have a government server through which I send my classified or non classified or any emails, the emails are scrutinized by designated security types of employees to ensure that my emails don’t contain classified information being sent out. The communications are also archived on a back up server as well so that they can’t be altered or erased at a later more convenient date. When MY government server receives communications they are also archived and backed up. Hillary not only did NOT use a government secured server, she didn’t have back ups, that we know about AND there is no way to know if the emails that she even DID turn over haven’t been altered since there is no archive of the originals. Hinky doesn’t even begin to describe what she is doing.
Next……when I send an email to another party such as the RNC or to another country’s diplomat or any other NON governmental agency of the US…..the emails are now out there in the internet world and if the RNC server isn’t secured that is not my problem. HOWEVER——> THIS is why the emails that I send are scrutinized BEFORE being sent to ensure that the emails out in the wild wilderness of the internet do NOT contain sensitive or classified information.
Hillary didn’t do this.
You are trying to compare apples to oranges and frankly, besides not knowing your rear from a hole in the ground, I think you lie. Are you related to Hillary 😉
Thanks Nicko for the reminder of the dark days of the Bush years. And then there were the dark days of the Obama years. And then there will be the dark days of whichever fool gets elected next year. Anyone who actually believes their party is the good guys and the other party the bad guys [whichever is which] surely can’t have an IQ over 80.
@Nicko Thyme . . . Can you tell me the current year? Can you tell me who is the current president? Can you tell me who your momma is?
Just makin sure!
amazing
The Science Geek
http://www.thesciencegeek.org
I guess I slept through the years when the media was obsessing over the 5 million missing emails from the Bush White House routed through the non-secure RNC server in Chattanooga that also counted the Ohio vote in 2004 and flipped the state into the Bush column and the outrage when the Bush people shrugged and said it was just a glitch that made the email disappear when congress wanted to look into the Iraq war. It’s so nice to see the media treating both parties the same way, like in a democracy or something .
Also, I am confident that she will unravel if interviewed by the FBI and likely will lawyer up if confronted with the possibility of criminal prosecution during the interview.
If the news outlets decide that it is more popular ratings wise to clamp down on her she will lose her protection by much of the U.S media. She will drop like a rock afterward.
When reporters decide to take her to task they need to ask very short, to the point, single idea questions to her. If she is given multi faceted questions she will take one aspect out of the question that she can then attempt to use to her advantage. This is how it would be better.
Did you authorize the use of the server?
Did you authorize the deletion of files
Did you hide information?
Once that is performed move on to succinct questions that bring on a response that makes her extrapolate.
Explain why you authorized the server.
Who had access to the server?
And a real clincher: How will an FBI interview go for you?
Darren, Good analysis of the Hillary video, but it’s easier than that. Her lips are moving, so she’s lying.
And, along w/ all trolls on deck called by the Clinton’s, they have also sent in the Canadian Riddler. Can anyone decipher the 2:54p comment to me?
How is the behavior of the Supreme Court any different from the behavior of Hillary Clinton?
Hillary contends that her illegal acts are not illegal. Bill pondered what the meaning of the word is is.
The SCOTUS “legislates from the bench” in full “overreach” mode, contending that “state” means “federal” and “federal” means “state,” as it subjectively and arbitrarily commingles the definitions of words.
Governor “Moon Beam” in California and “officials” in San Francisco subvert the Constitution and usurp the power of the federal government as they establish international boundaries and set the status of foreign citizens in this country through the formation of “sanctuary states” and “sanctuary cities.”
I wonder what kind of irrationality and lawlessness existed in France just prior to the people hauling out the guillotines to commence the French Revolution.
In the video supplied by David, Hillary Clinton is obviously deflecting the answer and playing dumb about the technology. She is rationalizing that she does not understand the technical part of it, which might be true from an electrical engineering standpoint, but she is using this to make it appear as if she is telling the truth by not knowing the engineering aspects by deflecting away the true question of if she erased the data.
She shows feigned dismay and trying to brush the man asking the question aside. She is showing growing worry about the questions at 0:12.
The anchor covered for her a bit by declaring this a “human moment”. It is really spin in my opinion.
She is showing behavior consistent with deception. If she is interviewed by the FBI, and she doesn’t exercise her right to remain silent, the interviewer is going to take her to task and it will be very bad for her.
Darren, I totally saw it the same way, including the spin by the news commentator.
Darren, I also found it interesting that CNN edited out the shoulder shrug right before the video starts. I think that shoulder shrug is going to be put out on some internet memes. You can see it in this clip:
https://youtu.be/vvs4DVu_I_0