Well, well, well, STATE DEPT HAS NO PAGLIANO EMAILS!(+ Attacks WERE Made on Private Server in 2011)

[berni_mccoy]

http://news10.com/2016/05/09/state-dept-says-it-has-no-emails-from-ex-clinton-staffer/

WASHINGTON (AP) – The State Department says in a new court filing that it can find no emails to or from a former Hillary Clinton aide who worked for the agency and also managed Clinton’s private computer server during her stint as secretary of state.

The revelation was in a filing Monday by government lawyers for the department in a response to a lawsuit by the Republican National Committee. The GOP group had sued over its public records request for all work-related emails sent to or received by Clinton’s former aide, Bryan Pagliano, between 2009 and 2013, covering most of Clinton’s tenure.

Since Pagliano was working for Both the State Dept. AND Hillary at the same time, that means:

1. He never used his .GOV email to send her email and
2. He used the private server clintonemail.com to send her email

Now I think we know more about
1) the 30,000 emails that she deleted and
2) why Pagliano was granted immunity.

PLUS HERE'S THIS NIFTY TIDBIT:

This portion of an email from Hillary Rodham Clinton's private email account when she was secretary of state and released by the State Department on Sept. 30, 2015, shows an email Clinton received early in the morning on Aug. 3, 2011. The newly released emails show Russia-linked hackers tried at least five times to pry into Clinton's private email account while she was secretary of state. It is unclear if she clicked on any attachment and exposed her account. Clinton received the infected emails, disguised as speeding tickets, over four hours early the morning of Aug. 3, 2011. The emails instructed recipients to print the attached tickets, which would have allowed hackers to take control of their computers. Security researchers who analyzed the malicious software have said that infected computers would transmit information from victims to at least three server computers overseas, including one in Russia.
[/div class="excerpt"]

This ATTACK refutes the unnamed sources that the FBI has found no evidence of an attack on Hillary's server. FURTHERMORE, If Russian hackers knew of its presence before GUCCIFER, then other attackers did as well, including STATE SPONSORED ATTACKERS.

I think Hillary needs to resign her candidacy ASAFP.

[tonyt53]

1. Is this ALL Bernie-ites have left?

Sort of pathetic in a sad way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Well you will have to stomach at least four years of more drama

Am afraid...it is the Clinton way

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Ok 16 I know Chelsea is next

But seriously if you are tired, gird those loins.,. This is nothing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. I believe Michelle Obama when she's stated

She is not interested in public office.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. In a country of 330 million people

Current growth taken into account, I am sure we can find others who are interested

Of course, with current climate change trends, by 2030 we will have enterely other concerns, worst case, species survival.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Well then you know we are now at 2 degrees

Ok being argued due to El Niño, and over 400 ppm. Current acceleration of reverse negative feedback loops might bring us to 4 degrees by 2030 on the worst case. You also realize that 4 degrees (centigrade) are not seen as compatible with advanced human civilization i am sure.

I am going to be dead serious, your children (I don't have any) will blame western politicians (yes that includes HRC) for not telling the truth and kicking that can down the path. As I said, we will have other concerns. For me it might mean moving...

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. Well then I hope you are not in the minority

Because increasingly other biologists do not agree and see this as species threatening. As to scales, this will be in your lifetime. I finished mourning for what was...

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. We aren't special

But no organism adapts that fast. Science.

It is science what drives the knowledge that we will have to reduce consumption. It is science that points to leaving 80 percent of known reserves in the ground. It is science that also says why humans suck at doing what needs to be done. In the case psychology

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. Yes there will be

And I predict major floods in San Diego. There will be areas of Miami permanently under water. MOSE in Venice might be obsolete. A few Pacific Islands will be all but gone.

Yes humans can and will try to engineer their way out of this mess. But you are now discounting what other professionals in your field are saying.

And nowhere did I say you were defending it. We disagree. I tend to see things worst than you do. Again, human psychology is at play here.


Oh and politically slow incrementalism is a road towards madness

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. A global crisis

Is much harder than the Maya collapse or the Hindustan collapse or the Euphrates collapse.

And have read Diamond. He is one of the voices that has warned, ironic since you are citing him, that this is unprecedented

[nadinbrzezinski]

145. Wrong. There are indeed science folks who are

Not hysterical. Like you they comparmentalizng very well.
Some of them have even written works warning of the coming mass extinction (which might include ours) in lay books such as "The Sixth Mass Extinction," or had a hall of extinctions in "Cosmos". And the scientific literature is increasingly littered with articles on this subject.

Being aware of it does not mean one is hysterical your choice of language is quite telling. You are keeping this in the future when it will affect others. That is psychology in action.

You brought the issue of climate change. I answered in kind. And since you brought it, her climate change incrementalism is a weak tea version of CA AB 32. Our economy has not been killed yet, and we are already hitting the upper tier goals of her weak tea, and well on me way to 40 percent.

And you know what? It is not enough.

Oh and I do hope you enjoy the Clinton scandals. All I will have to say is...I told you so

And yes, will enjoy the gnashing of teeth. I defended them in the 1990s...not any more

[cui bono]

115. Whatever "character" Obama has, he's still a moderate Republican in policy.

We can and should do better than that.

Character does not determine policy stances. Falling for personalities instead of policy records and stances is a big reason we are in such trouble as a nation. Please pay more attention to what people are enacting and pushing as policy and offering up in "negotiations" rather than their character. There are people suffering from these centrist policies coming from Democrats and they deserve more than others determining their fate based on personalities.

And if you really are already sick of hearing about Hillary's emails, I hope you are a Bernie supporter because if she wins it will be non-stop scandals.

.

[AgadorSparticus]

131. 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

I deleted my other 2 posts because for some reason it is not going under rjsquirrel's post. Whatever. Great post, rjsquirrel.

[nadinbrzezinski]

148. Careful what you wish for

First the Democratic Party is a center right party by economic and somewhat social policy. There they are firmly in the center. Not me saying it, standard political science saying that. It's not malleable either. The Rs are a far right party. So yes, progressives will have to go somewhere else, especially since you keep telling progressives you only need them on Election Day So they will leave, and the realignment is not complete...ironic but you still need them on Election Day to hold their noses that is.

Political purity is another conservative way of saying we don't care what you have to say.

As to Obama being the bestest ever in 60 years, like any other President, remember Bill was great, not anymore, we will have to wait about 20 to 25 years, aka a generation, for the effects of policies to take hold. I will predict right now that the trade agreements will be a millstone in that legacy. And since you are in your sixties, statistically you will not know. So drive over to the rust belt and ask them about nafta. Hell, go down to Mexico and ask the same question. You might want to travel to Canada. The only people happy with it are the ownership class. Never mind that economic growth actually slowed down in Mexico after nafta.

People who have been affected by these neoliberal policies in a direct way are not too happy. And predictably, the Korea Free Trade agreement is having the expected effect on US workers and jobs are bleeding. For the record, the TPP will do the same damage, but in magnified numbers.

So while domestically he is better than Bush, that trade will be the legacy, and for working people, not a good legacy. I know policy is much harder than personalities. Oh and since we were talking climate change...did you know the Obama administration has opened the largest number of fields for fossil fuel extraction in the history of the country? We might make fun of Palin for drill baby drill, but predictably (pesky psychology again) it has been a democrat that went there.

So hold off for at least 20 years. As to the much maligned Carter...he is considered a visionary in that particular field, and by current standards he is way to the left of both parties. I will also say that anybody following Ford and the drawdown from Vietnam was going to have a hell of a time, since military spending went way down, like the mini recession of 1947. That did not happen after Korea because we almost seemlesly moved into Vietnam. So the spending was really not reduced.

I know far more policy than you wanted.

[cui bono]

152. Tell it to Obama then because that's what he called himself, a moderate Republican.

And all one needs to do is look at his policy to know he is correct. He as ABSOLUTELY not a liberal. You are buying into the RW smears about him if you think that. They are the ones who spread that meme. Just compare his policies and record to an actual liberal and you will see. Or just believe what he said about himself.

So you should send him an email telling him to stop being snarky I guess.

My name is a conspiracy theory.

You are showing yourself to not know the history of the Democratic Party if you think I am throwing out purity tests. You know the Dem Party used to stand up for unions and not throw them under the bus? They used to NEVER even THINK about offering up SS but Obama did it and now others are doing it too. It's not just for Republicans anymore. They are beholden to banksters and corporate money - that's why the DLC existed, to turn Dems into a party that courted big business and guess who led the Dem Party to do that? Bill Clinton. Bernie's policies are in line and almost exactly the same as FDR's. You know, the guy who brought you the New Deal. He's quite different than the current Dem leaders who bring you Republican health insurance programs without even trying for a public option, let alone single-payer. I don't believe anyone in his administration ever called liberals "fucking retards" and I don't think he ever told liberals to STFU.

No, today's Dem leadership has little in common with the New Deal Democrats. They have moved center to court big business and now a Democratic president actually pushes for the TPP, enacted NAFTA, refuses to regulate banks, let alone break them up. The front runner Democratic Primary candidate agrees with and supports many of the same things that Republicans have. She lied about what was in a classified document as an excuse for her vote for the IWR.

Do you really not know this stuff and then actually have the gall to post an ignorant rant about purity and conspiracy theories?

Too bad DU has fallen to the depths of yahoo comments.

.

[razorman]

154. Actually, I do not expect to see the next-gen of any of our current political families

attain the presidency. Be they named Clinton, Bush, Kennedy, Obama, or whatever. I believe that the American people are wary of dynasties.

[anigbrowl]

68. No, it's the way of people like you actually

'S/he made me do it' is the oldest and worst excuse in the book. It's pure victim-blaming.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. Look I know it is coming

whether you accept it or not. She wins the election, we will have years of drama. It is just the way it is.

[1StrongBlackMan]

10. Actually, it's just one or two that are flogging it ...

the rest are just hopeful in their embarrassed silence.

[1StrongBlackMan]

21. Yeah ... I was proven incorrect the moment I went to the GD and saw four "new" OPs on the same topic

... I stand corrected.

[SidDithers]

44. Yup...

If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

Sid

[Jackie Wilson Said]

52. Democratic Underground is dedicated to destroying the Democratic Candidate and electing

Drumpf to the White House.

I wish it wasnt, but it is.

[Fawke Em]

95. Not flogging it - but I do know if any one of the analysts I

work with who hold security clearances had tried this shit, they would have been stripped of their clearance and indicted. It's just a fact.

And, I work for a medium sized company. Every single analyst I work with, no matter their personal political leanings, has told me that they would be in deep shit.

It bothers me that it takes a fully-blown FBI investigation into something that would be considered very cut and dry if the average security clearance holder did it just because she is who she is. And, I fully believe that if she's not charged, it will be because of who she is.

What she's admitted to doing - that we know of - should result in her never again having a security clearance in the least and, at this time, a misdemeanor, at the most (it could be a felony, but we don't know what the FBI knows. My opinion on the charge is based solely on what she's admitted to doing).

So, yeah - it bothers me a great deal when the rich and powerful aren't treated like everyone else.

[glowing]

122. If you think hopeful Bernie supporters are bad, just wait

until she hits the President's Office. They are lining ip Impeachment now. If they had an establishment Republican running now, they would be hitting her over the head with all their oppo research... Not sure if you realize of not, but the FOIA's are being requested by the RNC.

It's most likely, for the next 4 or 5 months, all you will hear is about e-mails, corruption, and illegal arguments.

[NWCorona]

16. What's sad is the fact that it was Hillary's poor judgment that brought us to this point.

[frylock]

28. So you don't find it curious that Hillary's IT guy's emails have vanished?

[IdaBriggs]

33. "Unintentionally" endangering national security, evasion of FOIA,

accepting monies from foreign governments, and conspiracy to destroy government records (off the top of my head), and currently under criminal investigation by the FBI, plus lying to the public REPEATEDLY about all of the above --

Yeah, I'm good, cause I don't think we're the ones who can be described as "pathetic"!

[Sheepshank]

46. guesses and conjecture of "what this all means"

good thing courts don't use that standard

[seabeyond]

65. They are literally wetting themselves in the joyous hope a Dem gets in trouble.

[scscholar]

105. This, and...

they have to prove he actually sent email for this to be a problem.

[MrMickeysMom]

110. I don't see this source as Bernie Sanders... Do you?

Of course, you'd have to read, which is a good exercise.

Maybe you'd rather we didn't see, read or hear anything but a clear path for Mrs. Clinton, but I don't think that's how it's supposed to work.

We're supposed to have qualified candidates who don't break laws and lie about it.

[azurnoir]

3. interesting

[leveymg]

5. Shows pretty crappy social intel by the hackers: HRC hasn't driven since 1996

About 12,000,000 results (0.62 seconds)
Search Results
Hillary Clinton hasn't driven a car since 1996 - CBS News
www.cbsnews.com/.../hillary-clinton-hasnt-driven-a-car-since-...
CBS News
Jan 27, 2014 - Former President Bill Clinton has similarly lamented the fact that he doesn't drive. President Obama, meanwhile, told a group of auto workers in ...
W

[berni_mccoy]

12. They may not have been targeting her...

it could have gone to every email on the server... hence a phishing attack...

[leveymg]

29. How would they have her clintonemail.com address? "H"

This is not a common phishing attack you'll see spammed across aol.com.

[berni_mccoy]

32. Agreed, they probably knew it was her server, but were hoping anyone on the staff would fall for it

Remember, the server had an IP address in NY state. So it makes sense that any of her staff might have received a ticket from the state of NY.

[Uncle Joe]

62. Perhaps via the Russian/Clinton Foundation Uranium deal connections?

(snip)

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

(snip)

Before Mrs. Clinton could assume her post as secretary of state, the White House demanded that she sign a memorandum of understanding placing limits on the activities of her husband’s foundation. To avoid the perception of conflicts of interest, beyond the ban on foreign government donations, the foundation was required to publicly disclose all contributors.

To judge from those disclosures — which list the contributions in ranges rather than precise amounts — the only Uranium One official to give to the Clinton Foundation was Mr. Telfer, the chairman, and the amount was relatively small: no more than $250,000, and that was in 2007, before talk of a Rosatom deal began percolating.

But a review of tax records in Canada, where Mr. Telfer has a family charity called the Fernwood Foundation, shows that he donated millions of dollars more, during and after the critical time when the foreign investment committee was reviewing his deal with the Russians. With the Russians offering a special dividend, shareholders like Mr. Telfer stood to profit.

His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said.

The Clinton campaign left it to the foundation to reply to questions about the Fernwood donations; the foundation did not provide a response.

Mr. Telfer’s undisclosed donations came in addition to between $1.3 million and $5.6 million in contributions, which were reported, from a constellation of people with ties to Uranium One or UrAsia, the company that originally acquired Uranium One’s most valuable asset: the Kazakh mines. Without those assets, the Russians would have had no interest in the deal: “It wasn’t the goal to buy the Wyoming mines. The goal was to acquire the Kazakh assets, which are very good,” Mr. Novikov, the Rosatom spokesman, said in an interview.

Amid this influx of Uranium One-connected money, Mr. Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010, the same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One.

The $500,000 fee — among Mr. Clinton’s highest — was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that has invited world leaders, including Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, to speak at its investor conferences.

(snip)


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

[leveymg]

77. Hillary and Bill Clinton are the new Armand Hammers. Not just to the Russians, but to the Saudis.

How is it that the Neocons and the New Cold Warriors don't seem to notice? They're in on the deals. Wars forever for fun and profit, or just to settle a grudge. The Clintons and Disaster Capitalists deliver the goods to all sides. Custom orders always welcome.

[nadinbrzezinski]

149. Key words. Disaster capitalism

We need a hell of a crisis to get rid of the safety net. I predict it is coming

[anigbrowl]

69. From whois records

This is indeed a common phishing attack.

[Lizzie Poppet]

6. If this proves out, this is genuinely big.

None of this may result in an indictment (intent, and all that), but if these things are true, they damn sure point to incompetence.

[msongs]

8. oddly enough the link does not mention or support your contentions nt

[AzDar]

9. Probably wiped. Like with a cloth... Tricky Dick says: "It's the cover-up that gets ya!"

[grasswire]

20. yep, this is like Nixon's missing 18 minutes. nt

[awake]

11. The fact that phishing email were sent means nothing

We have all gotten this sort of emails I bet Hillary even got emails for viagra.

[NWCorona]

19. The fact that phishing emails made it into Hillary's INBOX is a huge deal.

Let alone the fact that she opened the email and apparently tried to open the zip as well.

[ebayfool]

88. I can't find where someone opened the email and tried to open the zip file ...

can you point me at it, please?

[NWCorona]

89. I posted it somewhere on this thread.

[ebayfool]

92. K - I'll look for it.

But sometimes it's easier to ask than to go looking in the swamps, ya know? BRB!

[pdsimdars]

24. It does show that foreign governments were aware of her server.

And if they were aware of it, you don't think they have other, better ways?

[leveymg]

83. We don't quite know that yet. Could have been freelancers, not the Russian A-Team

State sponsored hackers don't leave tracks.

[pdsimdars]

87. Not confirmation but rationality. Guccifer posted her email address all over the place. It is only

rational to expect others who are actually LOOKING for that kind of information would see it.

[leveymg]

90. They got there on 01.22.09. He did on 03.12.13 after she had left office.

The pros were already done and had left the building. One of them probably handed Gulliver the key on the way out.

[Happyhippychick]

15. BENGHAZI!

[TheSarcastinator]

64. more like

WATERGATE!

It ain't just a river in Egypt, ya know.

[MrMickeysMom]

111. No, just incompetence...

... which is not a good quality in a presidential candidate. Neither is being a liar.

[pdsimdars]

18. They can deny all they want, but from the credible people who have talked about it, she needs

to drop out. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, former acting CIA Director Mike Morell, the Inspector General of Intelligence and the Inspector General of the State Department. . . from what they have said, this isn't just some RW talking point. . .

[libdem4life]

36. Not a talking point, a Conspiracy. The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

and applies to anyone else who dares agree with them.

[azurnoir]

23. she will not resign

[pdsimdars]

25. Sounds like Nixon "I will not resign!"

[libdem4life]

35. "I am not a crook." There's that one, too.

[Amaril]

54. .....

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[senz]

50. True.

[frylock]

27. ..

[Art_from_Ark]

113. Poor old Rose Mary

She couldn't reproduce that contorted posture that resulted in the scrubbing of 18 1/2 minutes of her boss's tape recording.

[Zynx]

37. No one really cares what you think.

Also, even if this does amount to something, which I doubt, her delegates would likely select Biden instead. Bernie wouldn't be the nominee in any case.

[berni_mccoy]

39. If you think subverting millions of voters to SELECT a nominee other than Bernie is smart...

then I would recommend that you look in the mirror while the words "no one really cares what you think" comes from your lips.

[Zynx]

42. Why would Bernie have a claim to the nomination?

He hasn't gotten a majority of voters, either.

[berni_mccoy]

43. Why would Biden?

[senz]

49. Bernie beats Trump by much wider margins.

Plus, liberal/progressive Democrats -- and those who don't rely on the MSM -- prefer him hands down to Hillary.

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. LMAO

What part of Biden's heart is not in this are people still missing? As to the rest, whatever. I think the DNC needs to be honest and in 2020 just go back to 1968 and just select that candidate by the leadership, no silly elections whatsoever. Be honest,

By the way, let's go down that rabbit hole. For whatever reason she does not become the nominee. And the party decides to do this, I really want to be in Philly for the riot. I really do want to.

But at this point I consider the Democratic party to be quite... authoritarian. I actually recommend they go back to the 1920s... just do not pretend is democratic.

[ebayfool]

96. No shit! I really, REALLY! - want to go to Philly!

The how is proving problematic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. Alas I know I won't be able to

[Tarc]

40. So this is what McCoy & crew are down to

"Gee, maybe Hillary was silly enough to get fooled by Russian clickbait scammers!"

[NWCorona]

51. She was. Hillary opened the email and still couldn't figure out it was fake.

Tried to open the zip and everything.

[anigbrowl]

70. [citation needed]

[NWCorona]

73. What part?

[anigbrowl]

75. Any of it

The OP does not offer any evidence that any of the emails were opened, so where's yours?

[NWCorona]

81. There's also an email from Hillary forwarding this email to Huma asking about it as she was confused

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-received-speeding-ticket-scam-email-private/story?id=34164936

[Fawke Em]

98. Seems to be crickets after this link.

[NWCorona]

102. Yup!

[Tarc]

91. Yep, I'm sure

With the help of the unicorns?

[Sunlei]

41. so? The IT man didn't send any emails and like millions of people- Russians sent infected emails.

Republican National Committee hard at 'work' for who?

[senz]

48. Looks like they're doing a REAL investigation.

So glad to hear it.

[asuhornets]

57. See Bold words below:

The revelation was in a filing Monday by government lawyers for the department in a response to a lawsuit by the Republican National Committee. The GOP group had sued over its public records request for all work-related emails


Nuff Said

[berni_mccoy]

59. See Italicized words below:

If someone breaks the law, the political party of whoever uncovers the breaking of the law is irrelevant.

[asuhornets]

125. Bernie Sanders is done....Democrats chose Hillary Clinton..eom

[amborin]

63. what's your point? we're seeking the truth! do you think the DNC is going to

investigate this?

[anigbrowl]

71. No you're not, you're seeking political advantage

You don't actually give a flying fuck about the outcome, you just want her out of the way so your guy can win.

[Autumn]

133. No Bernie could drop out tomorrow and I would still want this to go on.

It was a stupid thing to do and her judgment is sadly lacking.

[CoffeeCat]

135. That's the central point

Sending all State correspondence on a vulnerable, homebrew, unsecure server is a violation of the NDA that she signed when she became Secretary of State.

She wanted to control the flow of information and who could see her correspondence. So, she violated her NDA to do so. She also broke laws related to the Freedom of Information Act. All of her correspondence was supposed to happen on a .gov email--because those emails are backed up/copied and are filed and kept on record.

Her server circumvented FOIA laws and the Federal Records Act.

Furthermore, the FBI asked her to turn over her server. She did, but had deleted 30,000 emails that she claims were work related. We know that some of the emails she failed to turn over were between herself and Sidney Blumenthal talking about security in Libya.

Of the 30,000 emails that she did turn over to the FBI--2,000 have been deemed "classified"; 22 have been labeled "Top Secret"--which means that publishing them would "put the United States in grave danger. So, she did send classified information over this server. God only knows what's in those 30,000 emails that she deleted. The FBI was able to recover those. Not looking good for her.

That's Obstruction of Justice or evidence tampering.

All of this displays horrific judgement. She is not fit for office. If she is indicted, it's because she deserves it.

Based on what the FBI has said, we should know something in June--or early July, at the latest. The FBI announced in late March that the groundwork investigation was complete. The only remaining tasks were interviewing Clinton's aids and Clinton. Clinton's aids were interviewed in April; the Clinton interviews should wrap up in May/early June.

Whatever the outcome, and whatever the FBI presents to the FBI--at least we will have answers. It's frustrating to have this hanging over our party when we're in the middle of a Presidential primary and election.

[Autumn]

138. It's a pattern with Hillary. I doubt she will be indicted

I think most of it will be swept under the rug. I agree 100% she is not fit to hold office. I hated it when republicans pulled sneaky shit and I sure as hell have no pass for her.

[CoffeeCat]

139. We don't know what will happen, but a year-long FBI investigation

doesn't bode well for Hillary Clinton. This is not being swept under the rug. If it was being swept under the rug, you and I wouldn't be discussing it on a messageboard.

Also, the FBI granting Brian Pagliano doesn't bode well for her either.

This is a very serious situation. It could implode our party and upend our elections.

We need to be prepared for every eventuality. Good Democrats need to understand what is happening in their own party, so we can logically deal with the potential juggernaut of chaos that may be coming for our party--if the FBI does reveal that they have enough evidence of criminal activity to warrant an indictment.

[Autumn]

142. I think the final results of the investigation will be swept under the rug

Those in power will make sure of that.It's like the "We tortured some folks", an admission and it goes away. I think it has the possibility of upending our election but I think their bases are covered either way.

[CoffeeCat]

143. We'll have to see

I have no idea what the "powers that be" are thinking.

I do know that I researched what Hillary Clinton did. Based on her own words or reports from the New York Times, AP, Reuters and other mainstream sources. I also researched the laws.

She clearly deserves to be indicted. She clearly did not turn over all evidence when the FBI asked her to do so. She clearly violated the NDA she signed as SOS. She clearly sent classified and Top Secret correspondence over that private server of hers.

So, she does deserve to be indicted.

Whether or not she is indicted--remains to be seen. Given how strong the case is, and how strong the evidence against her is (there is a very clear electronic trail in this case, unlike in the Petraeus case)--I would say that all Democrats should be prepared for this eventuality.

I don't think anyone should expect an indictment, nor should they rule out that it may happen. Be informed and prepared for whatever may happen.

[Autumn]

144. I agree with everything you said. I came to my senses about Hillary a long time ago.

I supported her to the very end in 08. I won't waste another minute of my life defending her.

[2cannan]

78. CREW was one of the first groups to file a FOIA request for her emails.

But after David Brock takes CREW over, they decide not to pursue the issue.

snip

Shortly After March 2, 2015: The main government watchdog trying to get Clinton's emails is silenced by a Clinton ally. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) had been pursuing the public release of all of Clinton's emails. CREW has been one of the top political watchdog organizations, targeting unethical and corrupt behavior in both major political parties. But in August 2014, CREW was effectively taken over by David Brock, a close Clinton ally who runs the main Super PAC (political action committee) for her presidential campaign. In December 2012, CREW filed the first Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking Clinton's emails from when she was secretary of state, and that began a long legal battle over the issue. However, after Clinton's email scandal becomes public following a New York Times story on it on March 2, 2015, the new CREW leadership decides not to pursue the issue. Anne Weismann, CREW's chief counsel who led the search for the emails, will later comment, "It was made quite clear to me that CREW and I would not be commenting publicly on the issue of Secretary Clinton using a personal email account to conduct agency business. The fact that we said nothing on that subject says volumes." Weismann soon quits CREW as a result. Others also quit. Louis Mayberg, a cofounder of CREW, quits in March 2015, saying, "I have no desire to serve on a board of an organization devoted to partisanship." He also says that CREW's lack of action regarding the email scandal is another key factor in his departure. (Bloomberg News, 4/11/2016)

Clinton Email Scandal Timeline.
http://thompsontimeline.com/The_Clinton_Email_Scandal_-_Long_Version_-_Part_4

[KoKo]

140. Recommend for exposure..

[nadinbrzezinski]

147. I did not know that

Will have to add to my timeline. Corruption....

[anigbrowl]

67. There is no attack

Look in your spam folder, you probably have thousands of messages like this that could infect your computer with malware if you followed teh instructions within. Does that mean hackers are targeting Berni McCoy or that your computer is insecure? No, that's just how spam email has worked for many years and why every commercial email provider has an anti-spam policy. Trying to equate someone receiving spam with someone staging an actual penetration attack against an individual computer just makes you look laughably ignorant. I could probably sell you a lock to go on your network cables to keep hackers out of your home too.

[ebayfool]

72. These emails are ostensibly gov property (since it's a requirement to have copies). If there are ...

NO copies of his correspondence with Clinton, in his or Clinton's backups, wouldn't that lead to the charge of collusion? On both of them? Though he now has immunity, Clinton does not.

[leveymg]

80. If there are no backup records, the State Dept's sever has been wiped.

Appears Pagliano may have been in a position to do it. Why? At whose orders. What other records?

[ebayfool]

84. No backups at State. No copies in Clintonmail.

Yup. Somebody's ass should be in a sling. And it won't be the guy with immunity.

Intriguing question there, what other records? If Pagliano is the guy doing the wiping/deleting State Dept side, the implications are enormous! I also think he had to have offered something very ummm, tasty, to get that immunity during the negotiations for said immunity.

It's gonna be a long, hot summer.

[GreenPartyVoter]

99. Oh, I think there is the potential for some very serious trouble here.

[NCTraveler]

74. I do like that you included the link that doesn't back up your charge...

And clearly highlights it is a Priebus smear.

[kstewart33]

82. Oh, the horror.

Clinton 2016.

[Faux pas]

85. Kickin'

[silvershadow]

86. The wheels fell of the bus months ago, then the Coast to Coast Disenfranchisement Tour happened,

and Bernie continues to win. I doubt she would end her campaign unless in handcuffs...which, not so ironically, may yet be coming?

[leveymg]

93. Everything that's happened publicly since March 2015 has been Kabuki

Theater. It was the only way to keep the party apparatus from imploding. Her candidacy has been for the sake of the apparatchiks. Bernie has kept the flock from scattering. The investigation concluded years ago. This has all been the for the sake of appearances and morale and an orderly succession.

[karynnj]

109. How do you explain that?

If the investigation resulted in clearing her - we would have known. Had it been more damning, there is no way it was better to allow things to proceed without signalling that others should run. (In March 2015, they certainly could not have foreseen Bernie entering and winning to the degree he did.)

What is the orderly succession?

[leveymg]

126. Her organization has taken over the DNC and it swept the decks of potential challengers a long time

ago. That was before they became aware that she has this vulnerable. I still haven't figured out why her lawyers allowed her to take such enormous legal risks. March 2015 was when Guccifer blew this whole thing wide open and it was at this time that Bernie's candidacy blossomed. I believe Bernie's "I don't want to hear about her damn emails" pronouncement, and that he never even mentions them, is telling.

There is still a remote possibility that there's some sort of backstory behind all this. It sorta boggles the mind that they would set up a disinformation operation around the Secretary's unprotected server and have been feeding that to others abroad. But, that boggles the mind and is probably just the stuff of reading too many books about the Double-Cross system.

The orderly succession outcome they are hoping for is that HRC now has a numerical lock on delegate numbers and can effectively choose her own successor or, I believe, one has been chosen for her.

[karynnj]

128. I completely missed that the Clintons took over the DNC -- even though the

way that DWS and a few others treated the Obamas in 2014 and fawned over Bill and Hillary should have been a clue. That Obama might not still be in control of the DNC etc never occurred to me.

This explains one thing I was having trouble understanding. Many in the Obama administration likely knew about a year earlier, when the SD first informally demanded she give them the emails. President Obama was certainly informed. I suspect that his team might have known or suspected something earlier. The SD had to quickly see that she had no state.gov account as soon as they started to look for requested emails. The lag time would be just that needed to move that info from the people doing the pulls upward. I would bet that Clinton told them then, what she told the media when it went public, that the email was in the system because it would have been caught on the other end at a .gov account. This was a huge lie because her top aides also had accounts on her server.

By March 2014 they knew it could become a problem and that she was dragging her feet in complying. (I was surprised by the word "negotiations" with regards to the SD and Clinton on getting them back.) You are correct that by March 2015, it was clear that this was an issue that hurt her trustworthiness.

I had often thought that OBAMA knowing a lot of what had happened would lead the party to find another candidate if what she did was really a problem. Your comment explains a lot -- Obama was not in control of the DNC etc. He also is conflicted because a Clinton scandal is an Obama administration scandal. What stinks is that I think Obama himself has run a clean administration. It also stinks, that had HRC JUST left email - even if she deleted some - with the SD when she left, it is likely no one would have ever known.

[leveymg]

134. The issues between Obama and HRC were strained to breaking in 2012

My take on the backstory has been summarized here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1927531

What we do know is that Obama signed dual findings authorizing covert actions in Libya and Syria in 2011 and 2012. Actual US covert activities, including support for opposition groups, in both countries goes back decades.

Reportedly, Obama was skeptical and cautious about more direct US involvement in these serial regime change operations, so the four corners of those findings were likely to be narrowly drawn. That reportedly chafed on the regime change sponsors within the Administration. My take is that Hillary, in coordination with Petraus, was operating a far more extensive US operation than has been publicly acknowledged, and the two agencies were involved up to their necks in some very nasty clandestine activities that extended far outside the four corners of Obama's authorization.

These covert operation authorizations are actually multi-stage and require additional White House authorizations as they proceed and escalate. Here's how Reuters described the Libya finding in March 2011: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-usa-order-idUSTRE72T6H220110330

People familiar with U.S. intelligence procedures said that Presidential covert action "findings" are normally crafted to provide broad authorization for a range of potential U.S. government actions to support a particular covert objective.

In order for specific operations to be carried out under the provisions of such a broad authorization -- for example the delivery of cash or weapons to anti-Gaddafi forces -- the White House also would have to give additional "permission" allowing such activities to proceed.

Former officials say these follow-up authorizations are known in the intelligence world as "'Mother may I' findings."

In 2009 Obama gave a similar authorization for the expansion of covert U.S. counter-terrorism actions by the CIA in Yemen. The White House does not normally confirm such orders have been issued.

It wasn't an intelligence gathering operation so much as an arms to Sunni Jihadi groups paramilitary operation run in conjunction with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Turkey, and Jordan. Both Petraeus and Hillary were also known to be strong advocates for overthrow and paramilitary operations against Iran, including assassinations, which were being run by the Israelis. The last known targeted killing of an Iranian nuclear scientist was in January, 2012. Those that have followed have been military commanders, most inside Syria.

We know that after Panetta was replaced at CIA on June 30, 2011, the serial regime change policy was was most forcefully advocated and prosecuted by Petraeus at CIA and Clinton at State. We know that on September 11, 2012 that the arms to rebels program blew up in their faces when the CIA/State Dept arms storage compound in eastern Libya was overrun by militias, resulting in the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens who had taken in-country command of the operation since the previous March. We know that both Petraeus and Clinton's communications were both being monitored by various parties in the US and abroad. Guccifer's hack of Blumenthal's AOL account was not the original source of information about his communications with Hillary. According to his indictment, his hack of that account occurred on March 12, 2013: http://thesmokinggun.com/file/guccifer-indictment?page=5

It was reported that on November 9, 2012, Petraeus was discovered to to have been involved in the extramarital affair. The circumstances of how the FBI discovered this affair are implausible, and appear to have been reverse engineered to cover ongoing surveillance.

It seems likely that the White House, the NSA, and the FBI have known about Petraeus and Hillary's semi-privatized covert operations in real time. They played out the rope. The only question is whether they will now actually hang HRC.

[karynnj]

136. Ugh!

If accurate, and you make a good case for it, Obama really had a terrible decision to make and it all blew up as he fought for re-election.

Even after the election, fighting Clinton would have exposed all of this -- that makes it almost seem as though he lost control of foreign policy or ceded it to Clinton. I know that many Presidents had to fight the mindsets of entrenched bureaucrats in the State and Defense Department, but this goes beyond that.

I really want to read whatever books that Obama writes of his Presidency. It is hard to reconcile the various images - an inspiring leader, a seeker of a new saner foreign policy ... and someone willing to give Clinton, with whom he disagreed, so much control over foreign policy. It might be that he actually saw her as having the best chance to help him lead American foreign policy or it could have been a devil's bargain to align the Clintons' interests to his, so he would not have to watch his back. Either way, troubling. (I can not believe that Obama, who sat on the foreign relations committee, saw Clinton as the best he could get on foreign policy.)

[leveymg]

141. There are alliances, and then there are alignments of interest. They are often not the same.

Hillary's appointment of HRC as SOS and the nearly carte blanch terms conceded by Obama was, as far as I conclude, pretty close to blackmail by Hillary. The tea leaves tell me she may have come away with a promise that all of her communications would be instantly minimized by NSA. That would explain why she believed it was safe to exclusively use her private server and continued to use her Blackberry hooked up to it despite being warned about its vulnerabilities.

It may be connecting her Blackberry to an uncertified private email system was her way of thumbing her nose at the White House and the NSA after the latter refused to clone the President's secure phone for her and five aides.

Despite the literal display of handholding when Chris Stevens' body was returned, I do not get the feeling the two saw eye-to-eye about what happened in Libya, particularly as it fed foreseen outcomes in Syria.

[silvershadow]

112. I agree with you about the Kabuki theater. I hope you are correct on the rest. nt

[Demsrule86]

101. Nope

What is coming is the GE...here and everywhere...then Madam President!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

151. I really don't think Hillary should serve any jail time, unless the FBI can show deliberate intent on her part to circumvent national security.

But, if it's a lesser felony charge, I believe the right thing for soon-to-be President Sanders to do is to pardon Hillary.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Fawke Em]

94. While I do think Clinton's unsecure server is a big deal, we all get Phishing emails.

I wouldn't hang my hat on that one.

What I'm more concerned with is state-sponsored hackers from Russian and China who are far more savvy than a Phisher or even Guccifer, who was a social engineer.

While there aren't any credible sources for this information, Russian news sources say that their foreign service followed Guccifer into her server and copied data. Again, I don't have verification of this from any place I'd call credible, I only mention it because the SCENARIO is very real and could have happened.

Ironically, the Russians usually want our money and the Chinese want our intel, but I wouldn't doubt the Russians would relish in the opportunity to slip into the sitting American secretary of state's server and gather intel.

[Demsrule86]

100. well well well

Who but Bernie supporters and right wing types gives a damn?

[paulthompson]

103. Pagliano

First off, I think this whole story about the parking ticket phishing attempt doesn't mean very much. Everyone gets spammed like that, and there's no evidence Clinton opened the attachment or that the phishing attempt was specifically targeted to her. We know she deleted 31,000 emails, and it's been mentioned that one type of email she deleted was spam. So there doubtless are many more emails like that that got deleted. It's the same junk everyone gets sent.

The only significance of that story in my opinion is that it shows her email address was "out there." If some spammers could know of the existence of Clinton's address, then it wasn't some closely held secret only known to a few aides. But that's no big surprise either. Clinton sent and received emails from hundreds of people, and there's no way that address could have remained a total secret for long. It's just a matter of when hostile foreign intelligence agencies started targeting her server, not if.

The news about Pagliano's emails being missing is more interesting, although this story was largely reported already a few months ago. (I guess the latest news is that they're STILL missing.) I already have this in the timeline:

December 11, 2015: Emails from Clinton's computer technician are missing. The State Department has told Senate investigators that it cannot find the emails of Bryan Pagliano, the Clinton aide who managed her private server. Department officials found a ".pst file" which contains back-up copies of Pagliano's emails from the time period after Clinton was secretary of state, but his .pst file for Clinton's time as secretary of state is missing. But it is also revealed that the FBI has taken possession of Pagliano's government computer, and it is hoped that some of all of the emails will be found there. Senate investigators want the email to help determine if Pagliano should be offered immunity in return for testimony. (Politico, 12/11/2015) However, it will later emerge that Pagliano was given immunity by the FBI some months earlier. (The New York Times, 3/3/2016)

Today, Politico at least noticed that the State Department does have some Pagliano emails from other email inboxes, and that's true. I have some entries about that too, emails from other people have been released due to Freedom of Information Act requests, like this one:

March 20, 2010: Cheryl Mills, Clinton's chief of staff, apparently loses her personal BlackBerry. In an email to State Department IT (intelligence technology) staffer Bryan Pagliano, Mills writes, "Somewhere [between] my house and the plane to NYC yesterday my personal BB got misplaced; no one is answering it though I have called." Mills uses both a personal and a government-issued BlackBerry, and it is her personal BlackBerry that gets lost. However, details in released emails show that Mills sometimes sent and received work-related emails from her personal BlackBerry, including emails that were retroactively classified. It is unclear if Mills ever finds her BlackBerry after losing it. (The Daily Caller, 1/26/2016) (US Department of State, 1/15/2016) A New York Observer article will later comment that Mills "was using her personal BlackBerry for work, including the transmission of classified email. That alone is a crime. Then, in a move worthy of a dark comedy, [she] proceeded to lose that BlackBerry. This would be a career-ender, at best, for any normal US government employee. [But she] suffered no penalties of any kind for this astonishing security lapse." (The New York Observer, 1/28/2016)

Plus, check out these entries:

October 2012: Clinton's computer technician is still managing her private server, but there is no known email trail. Clinton's private email server in Chappaqua, New York, stops working for days after New York is hit by Hurricane Sandy. Bryan Pagliano is still the lead specialist for the server and is tasked to fix it. The email system is not always reliable, and Pagliano is always the one on call to fix problems as they come up. (The Washington Post, 8/4/2015) However, no emails between Pagliano and Clinton will be included in Clinton's over 30,000 publicly released work emails, except for one where he wishes her a happy birthday. (US Department of State, 11/30/2015)

October 26, 2012 - November 14, 2012: An email to Clinton from her computer technician raises the question of if he sent her other emails. On October 26, 2012, Bryan Pagliano sends Clinton an email with the subject line: "Happy Birthday!" His message is, "Happy Birthday Madam Secretary. To many more! Bryan." However, rather than directly replying, on November 14, 2012, Clinton forwards the email to her aide Robert Russo with the comment, "Pls [please] respond." She forwards dozens of other birthday emails to Russo on the same day, as she apparently has been too busy to reply to each one herself. Curiously, Clinton's forward of Pagliano's email (and not his original email) appears to be the only email to or from Pagliano or mentioning his name in the over 30,000 Clinton emails that will later be publicly released, even though he's a State Department employee and is managing Clinton's private server during her four years as secretary of state. (US Department of State, 11/30/2015) In December 2015, it will be reported that a State Department file containing Pagliano's emails from Clinton's time as secretary of state is missing. (Politico, 12/11/2015) Also in December 2015, Senator Chuck Grassley (R), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, will say that his request to the State Department for emails between Pagliano and Clinton is his "highest-priority request." (Business Insider, 3/3/2016)


So we know that Pagliano was the go-to guy when there were problems with BlackBerrys or even with Clinton's private server. Clinton's top aides went straight to him whenever they had a techical problem, which was often. (Especially from 2011 onwards, Clinton's server kept breaking down, and when Platte River Networks took over managing it in 2013, the first thing they did was transfer all the data to a new server and manage that one instead.) Keep in mind that Pagliano lived and worked in Washington, DC, but whenever there was a serious problem with Clinton's server, he would have to travel to Clinton's house in Chappaqua, New York, where it was located.

Thus, it beggars belief that Clinton and Pagliano would never email each other about technical problems, or anything else. Yet when Clinton released her 30,000 emails, which supposedly all her work related emails, the only email between her and Pagliano is one where he wishes her happy birthday!

So, regardless of what the State Department can or cannot find, it seems logical to me that Clinton deleted virtually all of her email correspondance with Pagliano. He's an IT guy - of course he used email a lot. And Clinton was a very busy woman - it's not like he could call her or see her in person to discuss every problem that came up. It makes logical sense that most of their communication would have been through email.

Keep this in mind too:

May 2009 - February 2013: Clinton's computer technician lies about his outside income running Clinton's private server. In May 2009, begins working for the State Department while continuing to be paid by Clinton for managing her private server. However, he does not list his outside income in the required personal financial disclosures he files each year. This continues until his full time department job ends in February 2013, the same month Clinton's tenure as secretary of state ends. In early 2015, a State Department official will say that the department has "found no evidence that he ever informed the department that he had outside income." (The Washington Post, 9/5/2015) To lie on such a financial disclosure form is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. (US Legal Code, 2/24/2012)

In my opinion, this is the reason why Pagliano made an immunity deal with the Justice Department, because he didn't want to go to prison for lying on this form four years in a row. So you can start to see why Clinton might have deleted all her email correspondence with Pagliano.

The question is, did Pagliano lie about his outside job all on his own, or did Clinton direct him to do it as part of her effort to keep her emails away from Freedom of Information Act requests and the like? We don't have direct evidence of what was discussed between him and Clinton, but note that it's been reported that Pagliano has been a "devastating witness."

[GreenPartyVoter]

104. Gonna be a very interesting day if/when the FBI makes the recommendation to indict.

[paulthompson]

106. Indeed

There are lots of different angles to this. She could be in trouble for other reasons no matter what's decided about the classification levels of her emails.

[Barack_America]

108. Why did Clinton delete all her emails back and forth with Pagliano?

This whole thing stinks. Thanks for all of your work on it though.

[paulthompson]

114. I wish I knew

Since nothing has been released, we can only speculate.

But if she knew that he lied on those forms about his outside job managing her server, she might have wanted to disassociate herself from him as much as possible. He might have some proof that she told him to keep everything about the server a secret. Then again, he might not.

[Barack_America]

120. I wonder who culled through her account...

...and deleted those 30,000 emails. Certainly not her. She would have outsourced that just as she did replying to her birthday greetings. And did this person have security clearance to read what he or she did?

Maybe Hillary didn't erase Pagliano's emails. Maybe somebody else did.

[KoKo]

146. Recommend...

[chervilant]

107. So...

On Mon May 9, 2016, 11:07 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Loser says what? nt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1929834

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Do we really need to be calling people losers for posting? Agree or disagree but a childish "loser says what" seems rude and inappropriate.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon May 9, 2016, 11:24 PM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Not at all surprising that a Clinton supporter would resort to a personal attack. I am astonished at the number of people who are struggling to dismiss the fact that the FBI is investigating Clinton, and might soon hand down indictments. SMDH...

Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: BS is the Loser. Deal with it.

Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given


Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Looks like your OP really touched a nerve...

[pnwmom]

118. This story has already been walked back. They do have some but not all of his emails.

The emails weren't saved in a particular format (a pst file) but they have some anyway. And there was no law at the time that required the preservation of anyone's emails. That didn't go into effect till 2014 -- so current rules do require this preservation.

Sorry to disappoint!

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/279233-state-dept-claims-to-have-no-emails-from-clinton-it-aide

However, the department has recovered some of IT specialist Bryan Pagliano’s messages, according to spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau, in apparent contradiction of a Republican National Committee (RNC) court filing earlier in the day.

“The department has searched for Mr. Pagliano’s email pst file and has not located one that covers the time period of Secretary Clinton’s tenure,” Trudeau said in a statement early on Monday evening. A pst file is a format for preserving email messages.

“The absence of this email file, however, does not indicate that the department has no emails sent or received by him,” she added. “In fact, we have previously produced through [the Freedom of Information Act] and to Congress emails sent and received by Mr. Pagliano during Secretary Clinton’s tenure.”

SNIP

“At no point did the State Department convey to the RNC that we did not intend to produce responsive emails within our possession, consistent with our obligations under the law,” Trudeau said in her statement. “As this matter is in ongoing litigation, as is standard, the department cannot comment further on this matter."

______________________________________________

AND A STORY FROM LAST DECEMBER reports that many federal agencies did not systematically save emails as recently last year -- but that current rules now require them to do so.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/hillary-clinton-bryan-pagliano-emails-state-department-216679

State, like many federal agencies, did not have a systematic email archiving system for years. When the server issue first arose in the spring, State acknowledged that it did not automatically archive the email traffic of senior employees — relying on them to make their own backups, or “.pst,” if needed.

Under current rules, federal employees are responsible for ensuring their official emails are saved.

[berni_mccoy]

119. That's not walking it back. The original story reported the same thing

The scandal here is the cover up. The emails from pagliano had his email address censored because it was not his .GOV account. And yes they have emails from him to other staff, but not her. That is the issue.

[pnwmom]

121. Yes, it is. The State Department disputes what the Rethugs claimed in their lawsuit.

And there was no cover-up.

[T]he State Department has represented that no responsive records exist … [of] [a]ny and all emails sent to, or sent by, Bryan Pagliano for the time period May 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013,” the RNC said in a filing as part of the court case.

The State Department’s Monday evening statement, which came hours after the department first addressed the missing emails, seemed to take issue with the RNC’s description of its position.

“At no point did the State Department convey to the RNC that we did not intend to produce responsive emails within our possession, consistent with our obligations under the law,” Trudeau said in her statement. “As this matter is in ongoing litigation, as is standard, the department cannot comment further on this matter."

But this is all beside the point because there was no law then in effect that required his or anyone's emails to be preserved. Emails weren't covered under the old records law. That was changed in a law passed in 2013 that took effect in 2014.

[berni_mccoy]

123. Nothing new offered in your link. Love how Hillary fans say something

And post a link like its factual but the link does nothing to back up their claim.

[pnwmom]

124. Your post is a about a politically-inspired lawsuit-for-show that the State Dept. disputes.

But that's typical of Bernie people, who have dedicated themselves to being the echo-chamber on the left of the Hillary haters on the right.

[Mike Nelson]

127. Bingo...

...if this were true, Hillary would have already stepped down. We're living in a parallel dimension, obviously. In the real dimension, Hillary is in prison. Congratulations, President Sanders!

[FourScore]

132. I just don't understand why the FBI is saying they have found no "wrong-doing".

This boggles the mind. Even Fox News is now reporting that they do not believe indictments will come - not because she is innocent, but because she is now the presumptive democratic nominee for President, and it's just too damn loaded. It would cause national havoc. Then I think, if they don't indict, the RNC and Trump have soooo much ammo now to destroy her - if not in the election, then post-election. Ready for another Clinton impeachment?

I'm so confused. I agree now that they will not indict, but she appears so guilty of so many crimes.

I have to walk away from this because it is just too difficult. I'm getting whiplash - they're going to indict, they're not going to indict, she's guilty, she just made "mistakes"...ugh!

"Patience, grasshopper."

[leveymg]

137. The FBI has not said that. The WaPo/CNN leak said "scant evidence of "intentional" wrongdoing.

As I explained, that framing is preemptive spin. The applicable sections of the Espionage Act don't require proof of intentional lawbreaking anymore than a DWI conviction does. Please, see, http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511917594

[Sparkly]

153. Dot-gov email is not secure either

Which is why neither is to be used for material marked classified.