One 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?
For a legal blog, I am amazed at some novel legal terms being thrown about. Unindicted felon has to be one of the more outlandish ones. There is no need for a trial, or finding of guilt, just the bald assertion that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and there is malfeasance on the part of Justice Dept career prosecutors. I guess that such persons think that Clinton is also guilty of the murder of Foster, and many others too. At least they have a grand view of themselves as far more brilliant and worthy than the rest of us who demand proof. and charges. I am amazed that the Clintons have been subjected to the most searching investigations of any public figures in our history, and have come up clean. So far I have seen nothing that backs up any claims of felony, nor has the legal system. Of course, that lack is always attributed to corruption on the part of the entire system, and cannot be the fault of the accusers not having a legal case. The megalomania of such folks is truly breathtaking.
Randy Jet:
I’ve seen absolutely no evidence that the Clintons were behind the possible attempted assassination of Putin which only resulted in the death of his favorite Chauffeur. The noive of their accusers who seem to think that these fine public servants would ever engage in any unsavory conduct is just appalling.
It is probable that a Hillary Clinton administration will rival that of the Grant administration with regard to the level of corruption and sleaze it engage in. The defining difference will be that unlike Clinton, Grant was genuinely and honest man albeit naïve in allowing his cabinet to run amok.
One aspect that has not been discussed much, at least in this forum, is how much of an existential threat Donald Trump poses to the Clinton’s freedom and, for lack of better words, empire. If he was to become president I suspect strongly he will direct the Justice Department to go after the Clinton Foundation and by extensions the Clintons themselves.
The Clintons have been protected for so long and engaged in so many unholy alliances that if the law finally cracks that shell many, many people are going to take a big fall. We will see the unraveling of many things and with so much to lose by so many people they are invested heavily in Hillary Clinton, both for profit and for fear of prosecution, they will do whatever it takes to support her and themselves.
Help! I made some comments that aren’t showing in the thread. One is a duplicate,
Thank you!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I checked the filters Squeeky but did not find any. There were some on the Gonzaga thread that might be where they are presently.
I’d vote for him in a minute if I were even 3/4 sure of that. The other possibility, a dismal one, but probably more likely is that Trump will fall into line fairly quickly by an army of “yes” men and women who will use all manner of flattery, misdirection, half truths, etc., to “guide” him toward decisions acceptable to the powers that be. Those and others in power who have a lot to loose, will work on him to see that he too has a lot to loose by breaking out of the acceptable mold.
As to HIllary, our government and it’s machinery as well as it’s complexity is vast by comparison to that of the 1870’s. Also, Grant turned out to be a fairly weak president as well as a basically good person. Hillary will be an iron fisted, resentful president that will seek to go after any perceived slight or harm with a vengeance. She will further cement into place a dual system of justice along with many other neoliberal policies that may seem ideologically attractive to those on the right and center, but which will simply further undermine the vitality of the nation as a collection of people under a representative government.
The FBI did not clear Hillary of anything. It chose not to recommend her prosecution.
The statute requires the prosecution prove “gross negligence”. Comey is philosophically opposed to criminal statutes for which “intent” is not an element of the crime: “In our system of law, there’s a thing called mens rea,” he said. “We don’t want to put people in jail unless we prove that they knew they were doing something they shouldn’t do. That is the characteristic of all the prosecutions involving mishandling of classified information.”
I wholly agree with him. People should only lose their liberty if they engaged in conduct they knew was unlawful.
But the duly elected Congress and the duly elected President who enacted the statute Clinton violated does not agree with Comey and me. The DOJ’s job is to prosecute people who violate those duly enacted statutes.
He said she acted “extremely careless” and was “negligent”. That seems to satisfy the “gross negligence” standard of the statute. He effectively told the country that Clinton violated the statute but he would not recommend her prosecution. He did not clear her of anything. He effectively said she is guilty but he doesn’t like the statute so he’s not going to recommend her prosecution.
He is leaving it up to the country if we want to knowingly elect an unindicted felon. Since the Democrat Party ideology is based on theft – using the force of government to steal money from people who have it and give it to people who want it in exchange for votes – and since most of the country is Democratic, I think she wins in a landslide. It will be historic: the country will knowingly elect an unindicted felon.
Scott, as Prof. Turley pointed out several months ago, she signed a Form 312, probably sometime around January 2009. Although the PDF below is the July 2013 revision of the same document, I can only assume it’s substantially the same in its substantive content as the document she signed in 2009.
http://www.archives.gov/isoo/security-forms/sf312.pdf
Among other relevant provisions regarding her knowledge of mishandling classified information, it states:
“1. Intending to be legally bound, I hereby accept the obligations contained in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted access to classified information. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications, that is classified under the standards of Executive Order 13526, or under any other Executive order or statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of information in the interest of national security; and unclassified information that meets the standards for classification and is in the process of a classification determination as provided in sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4(e) of Executive Order 13526, or under any other Executive order or statute that requires protection for such information in the interest of national security. I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information, special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States Government. . . .
“3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States
Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. . . .”
“7. I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree that I shall return all classified materials which have, or may come into my possession or for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand by an authorized representative of the United States
Government; (b) upon the conclusion of my employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency that last granted me a security clearance or that provided me access to classified information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of sections 793 and/or 1924, title 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law. . . .”
She knew that the “[u]nauthorized negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States by a foreign nation.” Had she secured authorization for her webmaster to have access to her personal server database? Had she been given prior written notice of authorization by the State Department or is it she as Secretary of State who has authority to authorize the disclosure?
She knew that if “I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of sections 793 and/or 1924, title 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law. . . .”
18 USC 793, subsecs. (d)-(f) state:
“(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, . . . willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
“(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, . . . willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
“(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody . . . or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, . . .
—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
Willful retention is a felony.
Removal from proper custody through gross negligence is a felony.
I have already explained the Clinton email situation more than a year ago. Nothing will happen. The Clintons are not subject to the rules and laws that you speak of. They simply don’t apply to people of their standing. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. When you become politically powerful enough and juiced into the corrupt system, then you too can evade the law with impunity. But until then, it’s tough noogies for you.
So forget about any more stories about the Clintons and the email situation. Nor should you be “troubled” by anything about it. It’s the way our corrupt system works. Get used to it.
Ralph,
You advice will keep the powerful unaccountable. We need to stand up to wrong doing. We may have little chance of success but silence guarantees the powerful will remain immune from justice.
Right now protesters are pouring into to protest the DAP. Their courage and perseverance is a model for taking on the powerful. We should never “get used to” the destruction of our air, water and land and we should never “get used to” the abuse of the powerful.
Citizens must try to hold the powerful oligarchs accountable for their misdeeds. Not doing so assures their success and degrades who we are as a people.
Ralph,
Your admonition to “get use to” the abuse of the powerful guarantees their success. Citizens should have the dignity and self respect to try and hold oligarchs to account. We may not be successful, but submission to them is what they want and we should never give that to them.
Right now, protesters at the DAP are saying “NO” to the destruction of our air, water and land. Their courage is inspiring and shows us a model of resistance to the injustice of the powerful.
We should no more “get use to” allowing the injustice of powerful political figures like Clinton than we should get use to the destruction of our land, water and air. We need to work to bring about justice. Your way guarantees success of the powerful. We should never willingly bow before injustice.
I apologize for any offending comment and for hitting the “Post Command” multiple times. Never been “moderated” here before and didn’t think my comment had any offensive language or crossed any lines.
Judicial Watch is asking Clinton 25 questions under oath by court order. Here are the first three questions.
“Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.
Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you.
When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision?” (See their website for the rest and other details.)
Clinton has so far remained above the law. Like others here I find the powerful oligarchs’ exemption from our legal system wrong. Our system is no longer functional. Her supporters do not want to grapple with what her actions mean for our nation. Just as the actions of Bush/Cheney in trying to hide their misdeeds by using private contractors or private task forces was not acceptable, neither are Clinton’s actions acceptable.
It is disturbing that her voters simply dismiss this wrong doing, or worse, attack anyone who would like to get to the bottom of this situation as russian stoogers or right wing useful idiots. If Russians or right wing organizations bring out facts, then pay attention. The source does not erase the importance of what these e-mails show-corruption, lies and a presidential candidate who already believes she doesn’t answer to the Constitution.
Dark Scholar,
Who would you nominate?
In terms of the presidential race, I think most of us would agree that we wish there was a viable third choice.
The most troubling part of all of this that ought to be of great concern to anyone interested in good government regardless of partisan identification, is that this whole parade of issues indicates either a disturbing lack of competence on the part of Clinton herself as well as staff or intentional dishonesty. Which is worse? Both are enough for me to feel uncomfortable having her or her organization at the helm of our federal government. Fundamental dishonesty is one of those tip of the iceberg character flaws. it is disturbing to think how big and potentially dangerous the rest of the iceberg might be.
Well said. It is also an alarming indictment of our current system of justice. Our government , with only the thinnest veneer of respectability separating them from what’s going on in Brazil and elsewhere, has ceased to hold the powerful to account through it’s judicial arm or by any other means, which results in an upward spiral of corruption.
As the non democratic Investor State Dispute System of our NAFTA-On-Steroids trade bills illustrate, the TTP and TTIP among others, there is no downside to plunder.
Well said!
Well said. It is also an alarming indictment of our current system of justice. Our government , with only the thinnest veneer of respectability separating it from what’s going on in Brazil and other law challenged countries, has ceased to hold the powerful to account through it’s judicial arm or by any other means, which results in an upward spiral of corruption.
As the non democratic Investor State Dispute System of our NAFTA-On-Steroids trade bills (the TTP, TTIP…) illustrate, there is no downside to plunder.
I find two things really depressing:
One is that no matter what happens, Hillary will get away with it and will be elected. The powers that be, both Republican and Democrat want it that way. If she isn’t, and I’m being sarcastic here – because she WILL BE, but if apples fall upwards and she isn’t, it will be because Vladimir Putin master minded a cyber attack on the voting process and, in an irony many will be blind to, Putin (innocent or otherwise) will be used as reason to double down on electronic voting with even less ability than before to audit who voters actually voted for or if their votes were even counted.
The second depressing reality is just how many people still cling to the bankrupt ideology of “teams” as if membership in one team or the other (Americans can apparently only count up to two of them before conceptual exhaustion expressed as boredom sets in) excuses all manner of corruption. And visa versa. Amazing, and, to use the coin of realm, disturbing to say the least.
Nick Spinelli said:
“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.”
Nick –
I would absolutely, positively, without-a-doodle-of-a-doubt LOVE to be wrong on this one.
But I bet you a $10 bill I’m not.
Hillary will win by a 3%-5% margin. She will win because:
1. The last thing the Hispanic population wants, is anybody who doesn’t agree they hold the God-given pink slip to North America.
2. The last thing most college students want, is anybody who won’t coddle to their God-given right to entitlements.
3. The last thing the Black folks want, is anybody who might insist that Black Lives Matter would be far more effective, if they simply focused on their own 2% lunatic fringe.
I am no Trump fan. I simply believe at this point in America’s history, we would be better off with a reigning in some of the “selfie” madness.
Those who think like I think . . . are rapidly outnumbered.
Pity.
.
1. The last thing the Hispanic population wants, is anybody who doesn’t agree they hold the God-given pink slip to North America.
Not sure about the domestic population. RM Kaus quoted some recent survey research done in Mexico which indicated that 66% of the population therein fancies they have the right to travel to and settle in the United States whenever they feel like it.
3. The last thing the Black folks want, is anybody who might insist that Black Lives Matter would be far more effective, if they simply focused on their own 2% lunatic fringe
I’ve seen survey research recently that indicated that about 30% of blacks buy into the chauvinism incorporated into the phrase ‘Black Lives Matter’. To what extent the other 70% understand that the whole controversy is utter humbug and they’re in about as much danger from rogue cops as they are from drowning in their bathtub is a matter of conjecture.
PatricParamedic And the blatant stereotyping in that comment is the reason large contingents of Americans despise Trump and his supporters.
I agree with you, except that I think the 2% black fringe number is far too low. More like 25%+.
I agree that we have reached a “Stupidity Tripping Point” in the country. Even if Trump wins, we will only get a brief respite in our downward spiral. Too many white people have it too good, and are as unaware of real life as Marie Antoinette was in The Ancien Regime.
Now if we get a good meteor strike, super-volcano, massive and prolonged financial depression, widespread plague, etc., then there is a chance for us! But until and unless the college-educated white folks are knocked off their high horses, or forced outside their bubble, their safe zone, productive change just ain’t gonna happen. They can just keep living in delusion. IMHO.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Hillary was not “cleared” by the FBI. She was not under oath. Many federal prosecutors have criticized the lack of follow-up questions and questions not asked in the first place. The meeting between Slick Willy and Loretta Lynch was probably a set-up for Hllary’s meeting with the FBI. The Clintons are corrupt, they corrupt others. The Director of the FBI was not in the meeting. His comments were based on notes taken by others. If we want honest government we need to deny office to known deceivers. Hillary is certainly that. I dislike Obama intensely, but he said he would transform America. If he had specified his changes, I don’t think he would have been elected.
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/09/isis-new-top-military-commander-trained-u-s-blackwater-state-department.html?utm_source=Activist+Post+Subscribers&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=c773d12627-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_term=0_b0c7fb76bd-c773d12627-387744166
Randyjet and philat,
I agree, both candidates should be covered. However, while I do not like Trump (I want both candidates to be dumped), I think Clinton is a threat to any pretense that the rule of law matters. As a public official, she had a private server set up and used for government business (but effectively hidden from FOIA requests as far as I understand it). (Note: If Bush/Cheney did such things, I want that brought to light, too, and dealt with.) None of this would be known without Guccifer, a hacker. On top of having an unapproved private server maintenanced by a private company, emails were inappropriately deleted and had to recovered, or not since Bleach Bit was used.
Double standards have no place in a country supposedly devoted to the rule of law and blind justice.
Perhaps the biggest difference between the two candidates re: legality is that only one is an attorney and thus unscrupulous in the classic sense. The other was reared without scruples in any sense.
More than 22 Million, that’s million with an “M” went missing in the Bush administration when Karl Rove was running official White House business on an RNC email account. This was during the scandal about the dismissal of the US Attorneys. It was a clear attempt to subvert justice and hide what they were doing.
Bush and Cheney refused to cooperate, and though it was a clear violation of the Hatch Act and probably several other laws, nothing ever came of it.
After reading and hearing about Hilly for nearly 30 years now my conclusion about her is she is not as bright as she and her cohorts would like to tell us. Start back in Arkansas, her position at the prestigious Rose law firm, did Bill being Governor have anything to do with that? Didn’t she make a killing on some cattle futures trades? turning $6,500 into $100,000? Why? Was she this smart or did someone pad her account. And on it goes to her latest fiasco as Sec State. She can’t remember if she had any security briefings? She was not able to handle two devices for communication? Even with an aid at her side 24/7? Please. I’m sorry, this lady is not the smartest cookie on the street. She has a very smart husband and she has been used for her connection to said smart person.
I have not a clue what a Hillary presidency will be like. It may turn out to be the best ever, it may be really bad. I don’t think it will have anything to do with Hillary. Look who is at her side and those who are funding her. These will be the people and policies put forward.
I find it VERY disturbing that Prof Turley has ignored the clear case of bribery that Trump has engaged in with the FL AG. He strains at the gnat in Clinton’s eye which hardly exists, yet ignores out right bribery, fraud, and criminal activity of the GOP Attorney Generals in TX and FL. The FBI report said it all. There is nothing there folks. The best Turley can some up with is a misdemeanor to cite. Incredible!
Prof Turley has ignored the clear case of bribery that Trump has engaged in with the FL AG.
Perhaps because its a ‘clear case of bribery’ only in the mind of the DNC press staff.
Well said, Steve!
“That’s all fine and dandy until the calculation includes the thousands who will be killed abroad”
I read in the FBI papers (p.53) that she was not worried about the classification of email deliberations about drone strikes due to their routine nature.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/02/us/politics/document-Hillary-Clinton-FBI-Investigation.html?_r=0
So, drone strikes are routine (never mind the noncombatant casualties), and, classifying such things is of little concern. What a mess.
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/09/isis-new-top-military-commander-trained-u-s-blackwater-state-department.html?utm_source=Activist+Post+Subscribers&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=c773d12627-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_term=0_b0c7fb76bd-c773d12627-387744166
At least take a look at the YouTube videos of Jill Stein’s positions to see if you agree or not.
Thank god! Another post about the Clinton email scandal! It’s been days since you posted about this and I was getting really worried that you had either come to your senses and realized that there’s nothing going on or that perhaps you had joined the ranks of those hundreds of murdered Arkansas state troopers she killed with her bare hands.
She has been completely cleared by the FBI. The State Departments own IG has cleared her AND corrected several items the FBI got wrong about what was and wasn’t classified. And the Bengahzi fiasco? Nothing there either
Snooooooooooze.
Meanwhile when are you going to start your daily coverage of the Trump bribe to a FL Attorney General to drop their pursuit against Trump U.?
Not only did he pay a bribe of $25K after which she dropped the suit, but he tried to hide it by making the donation through his charitable foundation, for which he had to pay a fine to the IRS.
Professor? Anyone? Bueller?
What Autumn wrote!
This is a prelude to how matter-of-fact she will deride constitutional and statutory limits on her authority when she’s elected, and she will be elected. She needs be held accountable now and not after she shrugs off the next crime by saying it was a mistake.
She’ll spend half her time in office paying back favors to donors and the other half responding to congressional inquiries resulting from the eff’ed up shi’ite she’ll pull.
That’s all fine and dandy until the calculation includes the thousands who will be killed abroad or lose their homes and land to multinational corporations and the further suppression of civil rights at home, all for her donors’ economic gain. Will she whitewash this with an apology for having always been a Goldwater Republican and imperialist?
Appoint an independent prosecutor to explain how one proves the element of intent.
What really scares me if Hillary gets elected…..Slick Willy will be back & up to no good.