FBI Investigating Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email To Send and Receive Classified Information

[Geee]

Townhall:

Last week the New York Times reported two Inspectors General recommended the Department of Justice look into the security of Hillary Clinton's private email server and asked it be determined whether she kept, sent or received classified information that could have been compromised by an outside source.

 

Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

 

The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton’s private account contained “hundreds of potentially classified emails.” The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management.

[Valin]

@Geee

 

FBI looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail setup

Carol D. Leonnig, Rosalind S. Helderman and Tom Hamburger

August 4 2015

 

The FBI has begun looking into the security of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private e-mail setup, contacting in the past week a Denver-based technology firm that helped manage the unusual system, according to two government officials.

 

Also last week, the FBI contacted Clinton’s lawyer, David Ken­dall, with questions about the security of a thumb drive in his possession that contains copies of work e-mails Clinton sent during her time as secretary of state.

 

The FBI’s interest in Clinton’s e-mail system comes after the intelligence community’s inspector general referred the issue to the Justice Department in July. Intelligence officials expressed concern that some sensitive information was not in the government’s possession and could be “compromised.” The referral did not accuse Clinton of any wrongdoing, and the two officials said Tuesday that the FBI is not targeting her.

 

(Snip)

 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

[Geee]

If the Justice Dept. won't investigate - maybe the FBI will do something. Of course if they find something, I think they would have to turn it over to the Justice Dept.

[Valin]

If the Justice Dept. won't investigate - maybe the FBI will do something. Of course if they find something, I think they would have to turn it over to the Justice Dept.

 

The FBI is part of the Justice Department. So I wouldn't get up hopes up too high. The AG can shut this down any time she wants.

[Valin]

If the Justice Dept. won't investigate - maybe the FBI will do something. Of course if they find something, I think they would have to turn it over to the Justice Dept.

 

Why a Criminal Prosecution of Hillary Clinton Might Not Happen

Brendan Bordelon

August 5, 2015

 

Ever since two inspectors general asked the Justice Department to investigate Hillary Clinton’s retention of “hundreds of potentially classified e-mails” from her time as secretary of state on an unsecured private server, one question has loomed over the Clinton campaign: Will the presumptive Democratic nominee face criminal prosecution?

 

The answer is not a simple one, despite the apparent gravity of Clinton’s actions. Attorney General Loretta Lynch must first agree to open a full-scale investigation, and the DOJ must then find evidence of Clinton’s criminal intent in order to prosecute. National-security lawyers say the decision to charge Clinton would depend largely on whether the offending documents were actually marked “classified.” But given the Justice Department’s history of foot-dragging in cases involving high-level government officials mishandling classified documents, Clinton may well avoid a criminal investigation altogether — much less a prosecution.

 

Pundits have compared Clinton’s case to that of former Army general David Petraeus, who was convicted of storing classified notebooks in an unsecure location and sharing them with his mistress. But legal experts say ex-CIA Director John Deutch’s case is a more apt analogy. Days after his retirement in December 1996, Deutch was found to possess six documents containing classified information on a private, unsecured computer connected to the Internet at his home. “It’s similar in the vulnerability context,” says Bradley Moss, a Washington-based national-security lawyer. “That’s been the biggest angle of all with Hillary’s private server.”

 

But while the information’s exposure to foreign hackers is comparable, the similarity of the documents themselves is less clear-cut. In Deutch’s case, an initial discovery touched off a broader investigation of the former director’s data troves, with CIA analysts finding more documents on unsecured PC cards labeled “Unclassified.” Some of these documents were marked “Secret” or “Top Secret Codeword,” a crucial distinction that cuts to the intent of Deutch’s infraction. The former CIA director couldn’t simply claim he was unaware of the documents’ sensitivity — their classified status blared from the top of each page.

 

(Snip)

[Valin]

Related

 

In Clinton E-Mail Scandal, Sensitive Information Is Just as Important as Classified Information
Andrew C. McCarthy

August 5, 2015

 

Hillary Clinton cannot defend her behavior in setting up a private, extra-government server system in order to could conduct government business without complying with (a) government recordkeeping requirements, ( the protocols for handling national defense information, and © the disclosure mandates of the Freedom of Information Act. It is unsurprising, therefore, that she is – with no small amount of media help – trying to move the goal posts.

 

For instance, Mrs. Clinton emphasizes her private server system’s purportedly elaborate security precautions – which, as I argued in my second post this morning, are beside the point since it was improper to use that system. And she stresses that she did not maintain or transmit classified documents on her private system – which, as I argued in my first post this morning, is beside the point since the issue is how she handled, stored and transmitted national defense information, regardless of whether it was stamped classified or came from documents.

 

Relatedly, Mrs. Clinton’s emphasis on classified documents diverts attention from another significant problem: Most sensitive information in government is not classified, but government officials are still not allowed to communicate, transmit or store it outside government communications channels and filing systems. And quite apart from any criminal liability in this regard, this point goes to Mrs. Clinton’s fitness for high office – since she not only flouted laws, regulations and guidelines; she was head of the State Department at the time and was thus obligated to enforce these laws, regulations and guidelines.

 

I addressed this issue back in March, when news of Mrs. Clinton’s private e-mail system surfaced:

 

(Snip)

[Geee]

Former Intel Officials Call for Revocation of Clinton’s Security Privileges

 

A group of former special operations forces and intelligence community members are calling on the State Department to revoke “any and all security clearances” still held by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her confidants in the wake of revelations Clinton used a private email server to transfer classified information.

OPSEC, an advocacy group comprised of former intelligence and security officials, petitioned Secretary of State John Kerry on Tuesday to revoke classified privileges for Clinton, as well as her former chief of staff Cheryl Mills, her former deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, and her top adviser Huma Abedin, according to a copy of the letter.

The group maintains that Clinton and her allies should have their clearances revoked until government agencies can determine whether they broke the law by exchanging emails on a private email server outside of the State Department’s jurisdiction.

At least two inspectors general at the State Department and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) have come forward to say that classified information had been mishandled during Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.

“These four very senior officials, … while still employed by the Department, violated a plethora of department directives and Title 18 U.S. Code by their involvement with a privately owned and operated email server and domain to send and receive official emails, some of which contained” classified and secret information, OPSEC writes in its letter.

 

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/former-intel-officials-call-for-revocation-of-clintons-security-privileges/

[Valin]

Intelligence watchdog was denied access to Clinton emails
Sarah Westwood

8/5/15

 

Hillary Clinton's attorney has been allowed to keep emails now known to be classified, but the inspector general of the intelligence community was denied access to the same emails upon request, a State Department spokesman said Wednesday.

 

"The counsel for former Secretary Clinton advised the department at the time that [the cache of emails] was subject to a separate document request" from the House Select Committee on Benghazi, said Mark Toner, State Department spokesman.

 

Toner said the intelligence community inspector general's request was denied on "jurisdictional" grounds.

 

The intelligence watchdog raised concerns about the classified information that was transmitted on Clinton's server last month after discovering four classified emails among a sample of 40.

 

However, the State Department apparently prevented him from surveying the rest of Clinton's emails.

 

(Snip)

[Valin]

The FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton is reportedly criminal

Taylor Millard

August 6, 2015

 

The FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s email server security is reportedly a criminal probe. A source told the New York Post it’s definitely a criminal probe and isn’t sure why the feds are saying it’s not.

 

 

The DOJ and FBI can conduct civil investigations in very limited circumstances. In this case, a security violation would lead to criminal charges. Maybe DOJ is trying to protect her campaign.

 

 

This is kind of a “duh factor” because why else would the FBI be investigating the server? It certainly wasn’t to see if Clinton was trading recipes with Huma Abedin. Unless, of course, this probe is simply part of the possible criminal misconduct investigation into Abedin. Clinton could end up being nailed in the same thing which caught General David Petraus. At least that’s what ex-federal prosecutor Bradley Simon said to New York Post.

 

(Snip)

 

This doesn’t mean Clinton could face time behind bars. Petraeus was only given two years probation and a $100K fine, while Bill Clinton’s ex-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger got a $50K fine and two years probation. Both of them admitted to the unauthorized removal of classified documents, although Petraeus’ was in a black book and Berger took something from the National Archives. The Clinton campaign told The Washington Post the emails didn’t contain classified information and want transparency.

 

(Snip)

[Geee]

Judge asked to seize Hillary Clinton email thumb drive

 

A federal judge is being asked to seize the thumb drive that holds copies of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private emails.

 

Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman on Wednesday filed a motion to have a judge take control of the thumb drive, which is being held by Clinton’s lawyer David Kendall, as part of his ongoing racketeering lawsuit against the Democratic presidential frontrunner.

 

“This court has a responsibility to preserve evidence and must do so to avoid its destruction,” Klayman wrote in the new motion. “Importantly, plaintiff has not requested to see the documents, hard and thumb drives at this time, but simply asked that this court take them into its custody for safekeeping.”

Klayman has claimed that Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act by deleting emails and covering up her communications to avoid responding to Freedom of Information Act requests. The missing emails would show how Clinton used waivers and sold her influence in exchange for donations to the Clintons’ foundation, he has alleged.

 

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/250400-judge-asked-to-seize-clinton-email-thumb-drive

[Valin]

From The.....You Can't Make It Up Fast Enough File

 

Not a Parody: Lawyers for Top Clinton Aide Claim Records Request Got Lost in the Mail
Weiner wife Huma Abedin faces conflict-of-interest allegations

Andrew Stiles

August 6, 2015

 

The State Department’s request that Hillary Clinton’s former deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin, return any work-related emails in her possession went unreceived for two months because of issues with delivery of State’s mail and email messages asking for the records, according to Abedin’s lawyers.

 

After the controversy over former secretary of state Clinton’s use of a private email account and server for official business erupted in March, Abedin was among 10 current or former State Department officials asked by their former agency to provide any similar messages on their private accounts.

 

But Abedin’s lawyers said she didn’t receive that request for more than two months after it was sent on March 11…

 

(Snip)

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

[Valin]

A View From The Old Gray Lady

 

Hillary Clinton Emails Take Long Path to Controversy

SCOTT SHANE and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT

AUG. 8, 2015

 

WASHINGTON — Earlier this summer, the inspector general of the nation’s intelligence agencies contacted the longtime lawyer for Hillary and Bill Clinton with a pointed question. Classified information had been found in a small sample of 30,000 messages from the former secretary of state’s private email account. The inspector general, I. Charles McCullough III, wanted to know from the lawyer, David E. Kendall, where copies of the message collection might still be stored.

 

Mr. Kendall’s answer, like so much in the story of the Clinton emails, pointed in an unexpected direction. The official communications of the nation’s 67th secretary of state, it turned out, were handled by a little Colorado I.T. company, Platte River Networks, previously best known for being honored in 2012 as Denver’s “small business of the year.”

 

Last week, F.B.I. agents showed up at Platte River’s modest brick building, opposite a candy factory. Now that government secrets had been found in Mrs. Clinton’s email, the agents wanted to know about the company’s security measures.

 

Whether Americans believe Mrs. Clinton’s decision to use only a private email account for her public business is a troubling scandal well worth an F.B.I. inquiry, a pragmatic move blown out of proportion by Republican enemies, or something in between, may depend more on their partisan leanings than the facts of the affair itself.

 

But the email account and its confusing reverberations have become a significant early chapter in the 2016 presidential race and a new stroke in the portrait of the Democrats’ leading candidate.

 

(Snip)

 

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Cliff Notes Version

 

1. This is all very strange and confusing

2. Hillary is not (I repeat NOT) being investigated

3. there is really nothing to this

4. if there is anything to this it's all John Boehner's fault. Because he is a partisan political hack and is being mean to that nice Ms. Clinton.

5. Trey Gowdy hasn't found anything in the Republican witch hunt.