Congress, Criminal law, Politics

Newly Released FBI Records Raise Questions of Intentional Destruction of Evidence By Clinton Contractor

Hillary_Clinton_Testimony_to_House_Select_Committee_on_BenghaziOne of the most troubling aspects of the recently released documents from the FBI is a timeline established for when Clinton staffers used BleachBit to try to eradicate emails and prevent them from ever being recovered. It appears that staff may have deleted the email archive after the staff received a subpoena to preserve all such evidence. The staffer working for Platte River Networks (PRN) in Denver, Colorado reportedly had what was described as an “Oh Shit” moment when they realized that the archive could be used to uncover what the Clinton staff deleted.

PRN was a contractor working directly with the Clinton staff in the handling of the email material and has been the subject of long controversy over its lack of security to handle the classified information that was found on the emails.

The date line is troubling. In February, 2013, Clinton resigned as Secretary of State after making the decision to use the personal server for all of her email communications. Throughout 2014, Clinton staff order PRN to make a series of transfers and to wipe clean computers with emails. At the same time, the Clinton staff deletes tens of thousands of emails. While Clinton would repeatedly say that none of these emails contains anything but personal information, it is later discovered that many contained official communications.

In December 2014, Clinton handed over the remaining 55,000 emails to the State Department. In December 2014, Heather Samuelson and Cheryl Mills requested that emails be deleted from their computer using BleachBit. In December 2014/January 2015, what is described as an “unknown Clinton staff member” orders PRN to remove archives of Clinton emails from PRN server.

Then on March 2, 2015, the New York Times blows open the scandal with an article on how Clinton used a personal server. Now here is the critical date: March 4, 2015. That is when Clinton received a subpoena from House Select Committee on Benghazi instructing her to preserve and deliver all emails from her personal servers.

Some 21 days later, a PRN staff member has a conference call with “President Clinton’s Staff” and in March 25-31, 2015, a PRN staff member has what is described as an “oh shit” moment when he realizes that Clinton’s email archive from the PRN server was not wiped clean and that it might be possible to see emails that were deleted. PRN reportedly knew “of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton’s e-mail data on the PRN server.”

If this time line is correct, a Clinton contractor destroyed the evidence on the archive by using BleachBit in full knowledge of the congressional subpoena. In combination with the later confirmation that official communication were deleted, the destruction of the archive record would seem a serious matter for investigation.

2 U.S. Code § 192 states:

Every person who having been summoned as a witness by the authority of either House of Congress to give testimony or to produce papers upon any matter under inquiry before either House, or any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or any committee of either House of Congress, willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 nor less than $100 and imprisonment in a common jail for not less than one month nor more than twelve months.

There are also possible violations under obstruction, perjury, and violations of 18 U.S.C. 1001 that can be raised by such alleged conduct. I cannot imagine a private company or most individuals destroying an archive while under subpoena and not facing a series investigation for criminal charges. I may be missing something in this timeline, but it is hard to justify the destruction of an archive after the receipt of such a subpoena or constructive notice. PRN could claim that they were not subject to the subpoena but the record indicates that they were aware that a congressional committee was demanding all email evidence on the private server.  Moreover, one would expect that one of the large number of lawyers working for Clinton would have immediately contacted their contractor to tell them to halt any further deletions or scrubbing and to preserve all records.  Even when files are deleted on regular schedules in corporations, the Justice Department has reacted with charges in some cases for the failure to halt such “house cleaning” measures.  This was not even a regular practice but an effort to scrub computer after the State Department demanded records and then a congressional committee sent a subpoena.

What do you think?

124 thoughts on “Newly Released FBI Records Raise Questions of Intentional Destruction of Evidence By Clinton Contractor”

  1. @Nick

    Brexit gave the UK back its freedom – I suspect there will be a Frexit, Auxit, etc. Germans are getting restless as well as they see Merkel as an extension of Obama.

  2. Patric, I think you’re incorrect. I see the Brexit vote as the template for what will happen here. Hillary is the EU elitist and she will be rejected. If she doesn’t have a stroke first.

  3. I have worked w/ the FBI for decades. If they wanted Hillary, they could have gotten her EASILY. That tarmac meeting prior to the interview was the final fix.

  4. @Dantes342

    In case you hadn’t noticed the voters do not want politicians with “creds” – elitist technocrats owned by the same corporations. That’s why Trump is doing so well. And Stein’s numbers are increasing – if the MSM didn’t shut her out she’d actually be a viable contender.

    1. Jill Stein can be the best thing that ever happened to the US and the world. US. Voters deserve the president they get. The rest of the world deserves the strong, smart, competent, leadership of Jill Stein.

  5. I think if we really knew the extent of Clinton’s and Trump’s dirty dealings over the length of their careers, our heads would explode.

    The emails that AREN’T written are where the corruption really lies.

  6. Is it an improper request by Mills to end retention of Clinton’s work-related emails?

  7. Surely, if she advocated for Female Genital Mutilation, THEN there would be outrage and a call for prosecution. Right?

  8. Hillary is lying, of course. It’s been her way for years and she relies heavily upon it. If she told the truth she’d have to go to jail like a common criminal and I have learned over the years that Hillary IS above the law.

  9. The facade of the Supreme Court building says “Equal Justice Under Law.” Destroy it at your peril.

  10. It wasn’t anybody on “Clinton’s staff” as Turley either carelessly or dishonestly alleges — which is it Mr Turley?

    It was a confused tech at a private firm who did this on his own initiative because he hadn’t done it earlier and mistakenly thought he should do it now:

    From Mother Jones:

    Pages 18-19: According to Mills, in December 2014, Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days. […] On March 2, 2015, The New York Times (NYT) published an article titled “Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules.” […] In his interviews with the FBI, REDACTED [a PRN techie] indicated that sometime between March 25-31, 2015, he realized he did not make the e-mail retention policy changes to Clinton’s clintonemail.com e-mail account that Mills had requested in December 2014. […] He believed he had an “oh shit” moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton’s e-mails.

    This explains why data was removed from the PRN server after the NYT article and after the Benghazi committee had subpoenaed Hillary’s emails. It had nothing to do with anyone around Hillary Clinton. An IT guy at PRN realized one day that he’d forgotten about the retention order and went ahead and implemented it.

    The report makes clear that Cheryl Mills sent an email, which the PRN techie received, telling PRN about the preservation request from the Benghazi committee. The techie said he knew it meant he shouldn’t disturb the Clinton server, but apparently got confused and didn’t realize this meant he shouldn’t touch the old archives or the backups.

    Rest here:

    http://m.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/14-excerpts-fbis-report-hillary-clintons-email

  11. The Clinton’s have a strange type of sovereign immunity. HRC could strangle a person in broad daylight on live TV and get away with it.

  12. The Enablers will prevail. Just look at the pathos inherent in CGT’s posting of the Mother Jones exoneration.

    The so-called “exoneration” is frightening. At best it suggests an HRC drifting through the State Department unaware, oblivious and/or acting w/o regard to rules or security. She seems to have little anchor to reality. What she does have is a staff.

    Frankly, it would take a total moron not to see what was going on. HRC & her staff were engaged in a giant game of wink-wink deniability. The use of staff who are lawyers to cover actions with attorney-client privilege, the blind obedience of staffers willing to do “what needs to be done” to protect the boss. The entire scenario is a giant example of a lack of responsibility. HRC is not responsible, HRC is not to blame. Of course not, since she appears to be a cross between Mafia don with her various capos & soldiers and an above the law member of a royal house.

    There’s nothing wrong with being a Democrat, but this woman & her husband need to be kept far away from the WH. You’ll be sorry!

  15. “Seems like the FBI knew about this during their investigation, decided to recommend against prosecution because no reasonable prosecutor would do so, & indeed AG & DOJ didn’t prosecute:”

    I personally know two prosecutors who are very familiar with this case. And they believe there is plenty of evidence to send it forward. They destroyed records that were not theirs to destroy.

    My own opinion is that the FBI director knows full well that he never would have gotten the support of the DOJ, and that Hillary is almost certain to become his boss, like . . . real soon.

    I’m guessing he wants to keep his job.

  16. Seems like the FBI knew about this during their investigation, decided to recommend against prosecution because no reasonable prosecutor would do so, & indeed AG & DOJ didn’t prosecute. Innuendo and aspersion does not a case make.

    Your concern, however, is noted.

    1. HRC wasn’t prosecuted because Comey believed her ridiculous claim that a lawyer who’s been around secure documents for decades was such a completely incompetent idiot she couldn’t understand her security protocol briefings like every other government employee does. Even though the only “intent” required by the statute was the intent to put information on an insecure non-government system, he decided additional criminal intent needed to be proved to prosecute.

      If a criminal claims he didn’t realize something he stole belonged to someone else (as these government records belong to US), he is not just blindly believed, it’s up to a jury to decide. Unless the criminal is so powerful from taking Million$ from dictators, warmongers and Wall Street she can corrupt even a Republican FBI chief..

  17. The ugly reality is that it won’t matter. At least, not in any way that will change the outcome of the election.

    It doesn’t matter what Hillary has done or hasn’t gone; it will matter even less what her staff members have or have not done. The majority of voters in this country can be expected to take the identical tack as did the O.J. Simpson jury: That is, facts “nullification.” And they certainly will.

    Hillary says. “vote for our side and we’ll be your enabling parents.” Trump says, “vote for our side and we’ll leave you alone, to succeed or fail on your own merits.”

    The fact is, the demographics of America have rapidly changed, and there is no going back. Neither the majority of the voting blocks of Hispanics, Black folks nor college students, are much interested in towing the self-reliance line. They want Santa Klaus. They don’t want is somebody who might actually act like the new sheriff in town..

    The writing is on the wall: This election is over.

    You read it here first.

    2. Reading your comment reminds me of the old axiom – “You get the government that you deserve.”.

  19. Sadly, HRC seems to be above the law. She could eviscerate an infant on live television and her brain dead partisan supporters would deem it as a mercy killing.

    Jill not Hill 2016

    1. Think you’re talking about Trump-ites, honestly. If the woman actually broke the law, she should pay a price. Otherwise, let’s save the hysteria until there’s actual proof of wrongdoing, and turn your critical focus on Jill Stein whose qualifications for running a country are…what?

Comments are closed.