State Department's knowing complicity with HRC's server.
Emailgate--the gift that keeps on giving! One of the gifts for which I am hoping is an orange pants suite for Medusa. As you are aware, Judicial Watch (JW) has been conducting multiple FOIA-based lawsuits against the Clinton-era State Dept. (DOS). in fact, they have interviewed a spokesperson who represents the DOS and which I have summarized in an earlier post: Karin Lang's deposition
Q:...While Mr. Finney -- while the office of correspondence and management was responding to FOIA requests, did someone within that office know that Mrs. Clinton's practice to preserve government e-mails was to do so by e-mailing State Department employees on their State.gov e-mail account [between January 2009 to February 2014]?
A: No.
Now this interesting because, prior to the 2013-2014 time period in question, Someone at the DOS must have known about HRC's server. Otherwise, why would the DOS do this: shut down DOS servers in order to protect their own network from malware, backdoors, phishing, and other types of cyber-trickery due to infection emanating from HRC's private server? Did the DOS routinely shut down its servers for security reasons? If DOS in those early days of Clintonian administration suspected cyber-threats, would they not have launched a probe into the source of suspected hacking? Correct me if I'm wrong, those of you who are much more computer-literate than I, but would not such a search by DOS IT reveal the existence of that obscured, covert, hidden server in Hillary's basement?
Comments
Probably the entire "hacker world" has had access
to those incriminating emails for quite a while, in addition to Wikileaks (those emails to which J. Hero Assange referred some time ago). I expect that release of the incriminating emails will be blocked (legal and extra-judicial means) by the O'Bummer administration until around 9 November, 2016, at which time it will be too late to do anything about the upcoming, disastrous $hill regime -- a continuation of the spectacularly failed neo-liberal & neocon policies of the past 30 years (talk about a con!).
When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said “How well he spoke”.
When Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said “Let us march”.
What did Bernie know, and when did he know it?
During that debate, I was glad he said what he did about the "damn emails" because I thought it was right wing bs.
It is still being pushed by the right wing, but the democratic administration is investigating.
This ain't happening in a vacuum.
And it is most certainly not bs.
Condi Rice with her mushroom clouds did no worse than Hillarity while SOS.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I wonder what kind of prison Hillary will be staying in
One of those big open space prisons like in Orange Is The New Black?
Beware the bullshit factories.
The White House isn't that kind of prison. The chances
of her being indicted, much less convicted of anything, are approximately zero. We don't have a functioning democracy or justice system.
Correction:
"Identically zero."
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
It will be on a par with
Leona Helmsley's digs.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
Hackery Clinton for President of Leavenworth
The depth and breadth of her and her office's incompetence is staggering. Are these really the people who think they can run the world?
Improve the Resilience Resource Library by adding your links.
Vote Smart - Just the Facts - 40,000 politicians by name or zipcode
Small correction:
Surely "run the world" --> "ruIn the world".
Yes. They. Can.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
That's what they've been doing
Ever since they got Nixon elected. With a slight burp due to Watergate costing them the White House during Carter's administration.
They've sat one of their chosen in the W.H. all but four years since 1968. Think about that. 44 of the past 48 years they've been running the show. Intially, they wanted to dismantle the New Deal. Now they want to install Global Fascism. Their guru is Michael Ledeen. I wrote all about it here.
If you really want to learn about the early days, back when Dick Cheney was the youngest Chief of Staff under Ford and how destroying the New Deal was handed to him as his primary task, read this
This wasn't incompetence.
these were deliberate actions taken to subvert FOIA, empowered by her arrogance.
The bigger question
is why are these the people the voters want running the world?
I woke up this morning determined to drink less, eat right, and exercise.
But that was four hours ago when I was younger and full of hope.
Hypothetical: HRC's Server was a Means to a False Flag Event
oh ... nvm
Please explain.
If this is a false flag event, who planted the flag if not Hillary. Machiavelli is fine but I don't play 9 dimensional chess. Please explain your comment.
It's actuallly worse than what you've written
As you read the rest of my comment remember this point... The latest email that's made the news recently Clinton failed to hand over key email to State Department is the one where she is worried about the "risk of the personal being accessible". This email was sent on November 13th, 2010! The State Department knew about this problem with her emails no later than this date, and probably much earlier!
Now go back and read that AP article again closely. You have a few points incorrect. It was Clinton's server that was shut down do to hacking attempts, not the State Departments. That article points out that the emails reviewed by the AP were from December of 2010. The problems were due to emails from Clinton's server being identified as SPAM on the State Departments computers and not being sent to the intended recipient. What the State Department did is almost unbelievable. They actually disabled security settings on State Department computer systems to attempt to resolve the problem. From your AP article link...
The article doesn't say how long these features were disabled, but I would assume, possibly for weeks. It appears that Hillary, even knowing that their was problem with email from her server, refused to change and use the government system.
But the bigger point is that the people in the State Department damn well knew about her server and these emails prove that. IT staff for the DOS were trying to debug the problem caused by her server and went so far as to disable their own security to accommodate the princesses private server. They had to be looking closely at each of emails that ended up in the SPAM folder trying to figure out why they were put there. Does anyone believed that no one on the IT staff looked at the email address to see where it originated? Not only was her own server unsecured, but she also made the State Departments computers less secure by her refusing to stop using her own server. And all of this goes back to at least to 2010!! We really have no idea how long the State Department left those security features turned off and their own systems vulnerable! For all we know, it could have been the rest of her time there.
But the question you have to ask yourself is, why, why, why?? Why would Hillary be willing to go through all this not to use the DOS email system. Why did someone not demand that she stop? Why would the DOS actually reduce their own system security to accommodate the Princess? One question I don't need a why answer to... Why did Bryan Pagliano, the guy who set up Hillary's basement server and also worked at the State Department during her time as SOS, get immunity in exchange for his testimony? Nope, don't need anyone to give me an answer to that one! He had to be up to his eyeballs in this mess and just want's to save his ass.
Sadly, even if justice plays out, I doubt we'll ever see Hillary in an orange pantsuit. Even as much as I'd love to see it!! But I really can't see how the FBI can't recommend indictments against Hillary and many others in the State Department. If the Justice Department does decide to prosecute the charges, Hillary can rest assured there will be many others joining her!
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
George W. Bush
The video of
Joseph diGenova in MsGrin's essay is good to watch and tells a lot. It explains the immunity granted Pagliano - he knows the most. It's going to continue to build and get very interesting. She may not be indicted, but she may have to drop out. This is where I fear Biden will come in. Bernie may have said he'd vote for hrc because he can't say "they are going to pull a fast one on the people and slip Biden in after the convention because hrc will not be able to continue her bid and they refuse to select me even though I ran and won votes and should be the nominee." Just a thought.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
After posting that comment...
I started to have some very unpleasant thoughts. If you think about those 3 "why" questions I posed, there seems to be only one plausible answer to all 3 of those questions... Someone, higher up the food chain, explicitly approved or condoned the use of her private email server and told others to ignore it. Remember the email where people in the State Department who voiced concerns about her use of the private emails were told, "never mention her private emails again"? I know I'm stepping into the gray area of CT here, and I'm not, at least at this point, suggesting that perhaps Obama himself told others to ignore it, but who else is further up the food chain? Perhaps it might have been done innocently due to Hillary's insistence that she use her own email, perhaps it is more than that? But it would certainly answer those 3 questions I posed and the orders to "never mention it again" could support that theory.
Then I started to question my own thoughts on why Pagliano was so quickly, and so early in the investigation, granted immunity? We all realize he knows a great deal, probably more than anyone else, about Hillary's email server setup. Was he granted immunity in a sincere effort to get to the truth? Or, was he possibly given immunity by the Justice Department so he would, justifiably so, be able to stand on the 5th amendment against any self incrimination, in any other investigation or civil suit so his knowledge of events and any testimony he gave could be concealed from the public? If the FBI recommends indictments, and the Justice Department refuses to prosecute, the public will never learn what Pagliano actually knew and what he openly told the FBI.
I know I'm stepping out on a limb here, but I learned long ago that when things don't make any logical sense, it's only because you don't understand all of the underlying details. Once you understand all those details, everything else falls into place. Sadly, I have absolutely no confidence in our system of justice, nor do I to have any confidence that our so called "Justice Department" seeks actual justice. The scenario I just described is possible. It would answer those 3 questions I posed and also explain why Hillary can stand up and so confidently proclaim that she will "never be indicted". Protecting her is one thing, protecting someone higher up the food chain is something completely different.
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
George W. Bush
wrong and wrong
Actually, you both have it wrong: State shut down the anti-phishing (etc) security on the State servers because it was blocking emails to State employees from the Clinton server.
The reality is just as bad or worse, so let's make sure we get it right.
You must have a reading comprehension problem
That's exactly what I said. And I have no idea why your quoting an obvious misunderstanding of the diarists words when responding to me. Try reading my comment again. I'm not wrong!! You obviously can't read.
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
George W. Bush
How about her memo telling staff not to use personal email?
from June,2011 and signed by her.
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/03/264683-internal-memo-hillary-clintons-st...
Rules are for others.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Which is one more piece
Of evidence that proves she knew what she was doing was wrong, and what the risks were. The hillbots excuse that she didn't knowingly act is demonstrably false.
The ambassador to Kenya...
was either fired or forced to resign because he refused to quit using his private email. And Hillary was the one who did it!
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
George W. Bush
If the emails don't fit ...
You must acquit.
We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.