Tag Archives: E-mail

Wall Street Journal: Obama’s Department of Justice instructed FBI investigators to “stand down”

Hillary Clinton look bored about the deaths of 4 Americans who asked for her help
Hillary Clinton look bored about the deaths of 4 Americans who asked for her help

Remember when the Obama adminsitration issued a stand down order to American armed forces when the embassy in Benghazi was being attacked? Four people got killed, then Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice lied about the attack being caused by a YouTube video. It seems like the Obama people haven’t learned a thing, because they are doing it again.

I’m going to link to the Daily Wire, because WSJ is behind a pay wall.

Excerpt:

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published a report on Wednesday night describing more internal conflicts at the FBI and Department of Justice (DoJ) regarding investigations into the Clinton Foundation. According to unnamed “people familiar with the matter,” the WSJ claims that agents’ wishes to aggressively pursue an investigation into government corruptions related to the ostensibly charitable philanthropic enterprise were stymied by DoJ prosecutors.

[…]The US attorney for Brooklyn, Robert Capers – an appointee of President Barack Obama – is described as being at “the center of the tension” between the FBI and DOJ. Some at the FBI are said to view him as misleadingly placating both sides of the interagency dispute.

FBI agents and DOJ corruption prosecutors are said to have disagreed over the strength of the evidence regarding allegations that contributors to the Clinton Foundation received favorable political treatment from the State Department during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as its head.

[…]The WSJ’s sources claim that some blame is being directed at the FBI’s second-in-command, deputy director Andrew McCabe. McCabe’s wife is a Democrat senatorial candidate in Virginia who received nearly $500,000 from Virginia Governor and Clinton loyalist Terry McAuliffe.

With the aforementioned tensions beginning in February and continuing today, the DoJ instructed investigators to “stand down” in their investigation of possible corruption related to the Clinton Foundation, according to the WSJ’s sources.

[…]DoJ officials are said to “have become annoyed” with FBI investigators who continued their investigations despite their efforts being rebuffed. Capers is said to have told officials in Washington that the involved FBI agents “won’t let it go.”

A senior DoJ official is said to have called McCabe on August 12 over the matter, concerned that FBI agents were disregarding or disobeying instructions to cease their investigation of possible corruption related to the Clinton Foundation.

Bret Baier of Special Report talked about the ongoing investigation on Wednesday night, and again on Thursday.

Wednesday night:

Thursday:

Real Clear Politics has an article posted about the first video:

Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier reports the latest news about the Clinton Foundation investigation from two sources inside the FBI. He reveals five important new pieces of information in these two short clips:

1. The Clinton Foundation investigation is far more expansive than anybody has reported so far and has been going on for more than a year.

2. The laptops of Clinton aides Cherryl Mills and Heather Samuelson have not been destroyed, and agents are currently combing through them. The investigation has interviewed several people twice, and plans to interview some for a third time.

3. Agents have found emails believed to have originated on Hillary Clinton’s secret server on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. They say the emails are not duplicates and could potentially be classified in nature.

4. Sources within the FBI have told Baier that an indictment is “likely” in the case of pay-for-play at the Clinton Foundation, “barring some obstruction in some way” from the Justice Department.

5. FBI sources say with 99% accuracy that Hillary Clinton’s server has been hacked by at least five foreign intelligence agencies, and that information have been taken from it.

Pay attention to point #5 there – that point shows the importance of not electing a lightweight narcissist who will get us all killed with her carelessness and irresponsibility.

I think the only way that Hillary Clinton will avoid going to prison is by getting elected and replacing all the top leadership at the FBI and DOJ with her cronies, so that the investigations of her unsecure e-mail server and the Clinton Foundation pay-to-play deals get stopped.

Who halted the FBI investigation of Hillary’s private unsecure e-mail server?

Is Barack Obama focused on protecting the American people?
Is Barack Obama focused on protecting the American people?

That’s the question I’ve been asking myself: who killed the FBI investigation of Hillary’s e-mail server and the Clinton Foundation?

Former attorney general Michael Mukasey has an answer to the question in the Wall Street Journal.

First a quick review of the facts:

Nonetheless, in July [FBI director Comey] announced that “no reasonable prosecutor” would seek to charge [Hillary Clinton] with a crime, although Mrs. Clinton had classified information on a private nonsecure server—at least a misdemeanor under one statute; and although she was “extremely careless” in her handling of classified information such that it was exposed to hacking by hostile foreign nations—a felony under another statute; and apparently had caused the destruction of emails—a felony under two other statutes. He then told Congress repeatedly that the investigation into her handling of emails was closed.

Those decisions were not his to make, nor were the reasons he offered for making them at all tenable: that prosecutions for anything but mishandling large amounts of classified information, accompanied by false statements to investigators, were unprecedented; and that criminal prosecutions for gross negligence were constitutionally suspect.

Members of the military have been imprisoned and dishonorably discharged for mishandling far less information, and prosecutions for criminal negligence are commonplace and entirely permissible. Yet the attorney general [Loretta Lynch], whose decisions they were, and who had available to her enough legal voltage to vaporize Mr. Comey’s flimsy reasons for inaction, told Congress she would simply defer to the director.

That July announcement of Mr. Comey, and that testimony by Attorney General Loretta Lynch, also had a history.

When the FBI learned that two of the secretary’s staff members had classified information on their computers, rather than being handed grand-jury subpoenas demanding the surrender of those computers, the staff members received immunity in return for giving them up. In addition, they successfully insisted that the computers not be searched for any data following the date when Congress subpoenaed information relating to its own investigation, and that the computers be physically destroyed after relevant data within the stipulated period was extracted.

The technician who destroyed 30,000 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails after Congress directed that they be preserved lied to investigators even after receiving immunity. He then testified that Clinton aides requested before service of the subpoena that he destroy them, and that he destroyed them afterward on his own initiative.

Why would an FBI director, who at one time was an able and aggressive prosecutor, agree to such terms or accept such a fantastic story?

 

Yes, why did Comey stop the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton given all of these facts?

Mukasey explains who called off the investigation and why:

The search for clues brings us to an email to then-Secretary Clinton from President Obama, writing under a pseudonym, that the FBI showed to Ms. Abedin. That email, along with 21 others that passed between the president and Secretary Clinton, has been withheld by the administration from release on confidentiality grounds not specified but that could only be executive privilege.

After disclosure of those emails, the president said during an interview that he thought Mrs. Clinton should not be criminally charged because there was no evidence that she had intended to harm the nation’s security—a showing required under none of the relevant statutes. As indefensible as his legal reasoning may have been, his practical reasoning is apparent: If Mrs. Clinton was at criminal risk for communicating on her nonsecure system, so was he.

That presented the FBI director with a dilemma that was difficult, but not complex. It offered two choices. He could have tried to proceed along the course marked by the relevant laws. The FBI is powerless to present evidence to a grand jury, or to issue grand-jury subpoenas. That authority lies with the Justice Department, headed by an attorney general who serves, as her certificate of appointment recites, “during the pleasure of the President of the United States for the time being.”

[…]Instead, Mr. Comey acceded to the apparent wish of President Obama that no charges be brought. 

Obama would have wanted the FBI investigation stopped because if the Department of Justice decided that Clinton “was at criminal risk” for communicating on Clinton’s nonsecure system, then so was he. Fortunately for Obama, he appointed Loretta Lynch as attorney general, and we know she won’t prosecute Democrats, because she refused to go after the IRS for persecuting conservative organizations ahead of the 2012 election, so that Obama would win.

So, did Obama know that he was communicating to Secretary Clinton on an unsecure private e-mail server?

"We need to clean this up" = We need to cover this up
“We need to clean this up” = We need to cover this up

His own staff sent e-mails confirming that he knew.

The far-left New York Times reports:

In a March 2015 interview, President Obama said that he had learned about Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state “the same time everybody else learned it, through news reports.”

But that assertion concerned aides of Mrs. Clinton, who knew that the president himself had received emails from the private address, according to a hacked email made public on Tuesday by WikiLeaks.

“We need to clean this up — he has emails from her — they do not say state.gov,” Cheryl D. Mills, a top aide, wrote to John D. Podesta, another senior adviser, on March 7, 2015.

Two days later, Mr. Obama’s spokesman, Josh Earnest, tried to clarify the president’s remarks, saying that he had, in fact, exchanged emails with Mrs. Clinton through her private account.

And far left CNN confirms:

A top Hillary Clinton adviser said President Barack Obama’s answer on Clinton’s private email use as secretary of state needed “clean up,” according to hacked emails from her campaign chairman released Tuesday.

In a March 2015 email chain, Cheryl Mills, a top legal adviser and longtime member of Clinton’s inner circle, told campaign Chairman John Podesta of an interview in which Obama said he learned about Clinton’s private email setup from news reports.

“We need to clean this up — he has emails from her — they do not say state.gov,” Mills wrote to Podesta.

So, who ordered the FBI to stop investigating Hillary’s private e-mail server? Who ordered the Department of Justice not to proceed with the criminal investigation? Obama was the one with the authority to call it off, and Obama had a reason for calling it off: he was at risk of criminal charges himself.

Hillary Clinton gets Four Pinocchios rating for Fox News interview

What difference does national security make?
What difference at this point does national security make? How dare you question the Queen?

There was an interview on Fox News Sunday featuring centrist Chris Wallace and Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Full video:

It was hard work to find any news articles that mentioned the exchanges about Benghazi, her private, unsecure e-mail server and alleged peddling of Secretary of State influence for foreign donations, through the Clinton foundation,

Regarding Benghazi, the Washington Free Beacon noted that Clinton called one of the gold star moms a liar, for contradicting Clinton’s story that the terrorist attack was caused by a YouTube video:

 

With Benghazi playing a major theme in the attacks against Clinton, Wallace played a video clip from the Republican National Convention (RNC) of Pat Smith blaming Clinton for her son’s death.

“I blame Hillary Clinton. I blame Hillary Clinton personally for the death of my son. That’s personally,” Smith said.

Wallace asked Clinton about Smith’s comments that Clinton lied to her and the other families on the day when the Benghazi victims’ bodies returned to the United States.

“I don’t hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn’t said,” Clinton said.

Wallace played the video of Clinton blaming the attack on YouTube video. She’s not just calling the gold star mom a liar, she’s calling the video of her blaming the video a liar, too.

Breitbart News reported on the questions Wallace asked about the Clinton Foundation:

Wallace, in an exclusive sit-down interview, asked Clinton about allegations first made in Clinton Cash, the book and now film/graphic novel, that Clinton used the multi-billion-dollar charity for international “pay-to-play” deals while she served as Secretary of State. Author and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer says that Clinton Foundation donors were on the receiving end of corrupt deals approved by Hillary’s State Department — including the sale of U.S. uranium to Russia and a rare, lucrative mining permit in Haiti.

Clinton retorted that she is “really proud of the Clinton Foundation,” yet not a single speaker at the DNC last week — not even Bill or Chelsea Clinton — mentioned the Foundation or its spinoffs such as the Clinton Global Initiative.

[…]This week, news broke that the IRS is investigating the Clinton Foundation. Earlier this month, FBI Director James Comey would not confirm or deny whether the bureau is investigating the Foundation during congressional testimony. Just days later, The Globe and Mail reported that “The Canadian affiliate of the Clinton Foundation is spending an astounding 78 percent of the money it raises on administrative costs.”

And finally, she got a Four Pinnochios rating from the far-left Washington Post for her comments about her private, unsecure e-mail server – which she used to prevent her employer from reading her e-mails when she was Secretary of State:

The Facts

“Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”
—Hillary Clinton, interview on “Fox News Sunday,” July 31, 2016

Clinton made these remarks after “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace played a video of her saying: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified materials. I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time. I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified.”

As Wallace put it, “After a long investigation, FBI Director James Comey said none of those things that you told the American public were true.”

After Clinton denied that, Wallace played another video of an exchange between Comey and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi:

GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.
So what’s going on here?

The Facts

Clinton is cherry-picking statements by Comey to preserve her narrative about the unusual setup of a private email server. This allows her to skate past the more disturbing findings of the FBI investigation

[…]The Pinocchio Test

As we have seen repeatedly in Clinton’s explanations of the email controversy,she relies on excessively technical and legalistic answers to explain her actions. While Comey did say there was no evidence she lied to the FBI, that is not the same as saying she told the truth to the American public — which was the point of Wallace’s question. Comey has repeatedly not taken a stand on her public statements.

And although Comey did say many emails were retroactively classified, he also said that there were some emails that were already classified that should not have been sent on an unclassified, private server. That’s the uncomfortable truth that Clinton has trouble admitting.

Her final rating:

Four Pinocchios

It’s a firing offense – unless you’re Hillary Clinton. And when you are dealing with classified information, it’s a treason offense – unless you’re Hillary Clinton.

State Department Inspector General: Clinton e-mail use violated Federal Records Act

Hillary Clinton look bored about the deaths of 4 Americans who asked for her help
Hillary Clinton look bored about the deaths of 4 Americans who asked for her help

The Weekly Standard reports:

A State Department watchdog denounced Hillary Clinton’s lax use of a private email server Wednesday, writing that Clinton did not properly preserve correspondence and subjected herself to security risks without seeking counsel.

The report revealed that the former secretary of state did not comply with the Federal Records Act.

[…]”Secretary Clinton should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary,” the report said, according to Politico. “At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.”

[…]The IG also condemned Clinton for not seeking counsel on whether to handle work-related emails on her cell phone. Information officers “would have refused the request because of security risks,” according to the Associated Press.

NBC’s Ken Dilanian said that the IG report shows that “key information technology officials” were “not aware” of Clinton’s use of the server, though the former secretary of state’s office has claimed otherwise.

“They had never approved it, she never asked them. And they’re saying that she should have gotten approval from them, they probably wouldn’t have granted it actually,” Dilanian said.

Another Weekly Standard article lists EIGHT TIMES where Clinton said everyone knew about her private e-mail server.

And her “fact sheet” on her campaign web site says this:

“Her usage was widely known to the over 100 State Department and U.S. government colleagues she emailed, consistent with the practice of prior Secretaries of State and permitted at the time. […] The laws, regulations, and State Department policy in place during her tenure permitted her to use a non-government email for work.”

Whenever a politician says that “everyone” knows something, or “everyone” believes something, it’s a good idea to ask them for one name. Because once they give you a name, they are opening themselves up to fact-checking. This also works when you’re discussion the Christian worldview with a skeptic. Skeptic: “I have read so many smart people with so many arguments against Christianity that I can’t believe in it”. You: “OK, go ahead and name your best argument and tell me who wrote it”.

Now, the obvious question is this – why did Hillary want to have a private e-mail server? All of my e-mails are on my company’s corporate server, and if I leave, they keep them. Why? Because it is important to company business that a record be kept, in case I was taking bribes, or exchanging favors for money. Clinton decided not to let her employers see her e-mails, or have records of them. Why do you think she did that? Remember that all the time that she was Secretary of State, she was taking donations to her “Clinton Foundation” from foreign donors. Do you think that maybe she was exchanging political favors for donations, and didn’t want anyone else to have a record of her communication about that?

What difference does national security make?
What difference does national security make?

Look at this article from the leftist Washington Post, of all places.

They write:

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

[…]In one instance, foundation officials acknowledged they should have sought approval in 2010 from the State Department ethics office, as required by the agreement for new government donors, before accepting a $500,000 donation from the Algerian government.

[…]Some of the donations came from countries with complicated diplomatic, military and financial relationships with the U.S. government, including Kuwait, Qatar and Oman.

[…]The Washington Post reported last week that foreign sources, including governments, made up a third of those who have given the foundation more than $1 million over time. The Post found that the foundation, begun by former president Bill Clinton, has raised nearly $2 billion since its creation in 2001.

[…]Foreign governments and individuals are prohibited from giving money to U.S. political candidates, to prevent outside influence over national leaders. But the foundation has given donors a way to potentially gain favor with the Clintons outside the traditional political limits.

[…]Foreign governments had been major donors to the foundation before President Obama nominated Clinton to become secretary of state in 2009. When the foundation released a list of its donors for the first time in 2008, as a result of the agreement with the Obama administration, it disclosed, for instance, that Saudi Arabia had given between $10 million and $25 million.

[…]Qatar, for instance, spent more than $5.3 million on registered lobbyists while Clinton was secretary of state, according to the Sunlight Foundation.The country’s lobbyists were reported monitoring anti-terrorism activities and efforts to combat violence in Sudan’s Darfur region. Qatar has also come under criticism from some U.S. allies in the region that have accused it of supporting Hamas and other militant groups. Qatar has denied the allegations.

Now I know that Hillary Clinton says that she is very concerned about women’s rights, but then one has to wonder how well she translates those happy sounding words in her speeches into actions with these nations like Saudi Arabia. I don’t think that the women in these countries saw much help from Hillary when she was Secretary of State.

State Dept: 22 “top secret” e-mails on Hillary’s unsecure private e-mail server

Put an orange suit on her and ship her to Gitmo
Put an orange suit on her and ship her to Gitmo

This is from The Federalist.

Excerpt:

Hillary Clinton’s email woes just got a whole lot worse Friday after the State Department announced it considers 22 of her emails to be “top secret.”

Last week, Fox News reported that Clinton has shared extremely sensitive information, including intelligence obtained from human spying, which could have put lives at risk.

Some information contained in the email was classified as “HCS-O,” an intelligence agency code for human spy operations on the ground, or “HUMINT Control System Operations.” Additionally, several of her emails contained information for “special access programs” (SAP), which is a level of classification even higher than “top secret.”

State Department spokesman John Kirby has confirmed that the 22 emails containing SAP information were indeed top secret, though he maintained that the documents were not deemed classified at the time they were sent, according to Politico.

But I thought that Hillary said that there was only yoga routines and e-mails about her daughter’s wedding on her e-mail server?

Why did she do it?

This New York Post article explains why Hillary decided to create a parallel e-mail server system that was not under the control of the government:

The State Department is lying when it says it didn’t know until it was too late that Hillary Clinton was improperly using personal e-mails and a private server to conduct official business — because it never set up an agency e-mail address for her in the first place, the department’s former top watchdog says.

“This was all planned in advance” to skirt rules governing federal records management, said Howard J. Krongard, who served as the agency’s inspector general from 2005 to 2008.

The Harvard-educated lawyer points out that, from Day One, Clinton was never assigned and never used a state.gov e-mail address like previous secretaries.

“That’s a change in the standard. It tells me that this was premeditated. And this eliminates claims by the State Department that they were unaware of her private e-mail server until later,” Krongard said in an exclusive interview. “How else was she supposed to do business without e-mail?”

He also points to the unusual absence of a permanent inspector general during Clinton’s entire 2009-2013 term at the department. He said the 5¹/₂-year vacancy was unprecedented.

“This is a major gap. In fact, it’s without precedent,” he said. “It’s the longest period any department has gone without an IG.”

Inspectors general serve an essential and unique role in the federal government by independently investigating agency waste, fraud and abuse. Their oversight also covers violations of communications security procedures.

“It’s clear she did not want to be subject to internal investigations,” Krongard said. An e-mail audit would have easily uncovered the secret information flowing from classified government networks to the private unprotected system she set up in her New York home.

When Hillary created a private unprotected e-mail system, she was pushing away all of the security measures that are in place on government e-mail systems.

So was she hacked?

This Post and Courier article explains:

As for the Clinton camp’s attempts to dismiss this scandal as election-year politics, consider the bipartisan credentials — and expert perspective — of Robert Gates.

Mr. Gates has worked for presidents of both parties during a distinguished public service career, including tenures as Secretary of Defense under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Mr. Gates is not known for taking politically motivated shots at our nation’s leaders. He has praised Mrs. Clinton’s work as secretary of state in the past.

But last week, Mr. Gates said he agreed with former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morrell that Mrs. Clinton’s personal email account was probably hacked by Russia, China and Iran, among others.

So, Robert Gates and Mike Morell agree –  foreign governments were reading the mail of our Secretary of State. The Secretary of State!

I think that’s enough to indict her. Of course, when I ask my Democrat friends how much they know about the things I wrote about in this post, they have no idea. You don’t learn a lot about reality by watching MSNBC and laughing at Trevor Noah tweets.