CLINTON FAILED TO HAND OVER KEY EMAIL TO STATE DEPARTMENT
Source: AP
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.
The email was included within messages exchanged Nov. 13, 2010, between Clinton and one of her closest aides, Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin. At the time, emails sent from Clinton's BlackBerry device and routed through her private clintonemail.com server in the basement of her New York home were being blocked by the State Department's spam filter. A suggested remedy was for Clinton to obtain a state.gov email account.
"Let's get separate address or device but I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible," Clinton responded to Abedin.
Clinton never used a government account that was set up for her, instead continuing to rely on her private server until leaving office.
Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CLINTON_EMAIL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-06-23-17-19-35
CurtEastPoint
(18,638 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)"private homebrew email server," I'm sure those were their very words.
I have lots of homebrew servers. They serve the best beer, but they won't send e-mails.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)The the description is fitting in regards to the one Brian Pagliano built. Hillary had at least two servers actually.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)I am not sure why you are complaining.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)FIND AN EXECUTIONER!
SCantiGOP
(13,868 posts)Shows that I am very, very SERIOUS.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)During the Benghazi hearings.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)And cease to exist. Nay.
I'm concerned about the truth. Any problem with that?
Great message...tell the truth=a Vote for the Buffoon.
chillfactor
(7,573 posts)would you people get over yourselves already? enough of this shit is enough.
Kingofalldems
(38,444 posts)Grassy Knoll
(10,118 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)whenever attacking Clinton.
DemFromPittsburgh
(102 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)It's just tabloid trash, and the FBI, and no one else in the government, has ever said there's even an investigation.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Who knew?
Response to B2G (Reply #20)
Post removed
Loki
(3,825 posts)I'll await your response.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)SouthernDemLinda
(182 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)SusanLarson
(284 posts)It may be from Fox News but even they can't manufacture quotes from the FBI director.
"Hillary Clinton for months has downplayed the FBI investigation into her private email server and practices as a mere security inquiry.
But when asked Wednesday by Fox News about Clinton's characterization of the bureau's probe, FBI Director James Comey said he doesnt know what "security inquiry" means -- adding, Were conducting an investigation. Thats what we do.
The FBI director reiterated that hes not familiar with the term security inquiry when told that is the phrase Clinton has used."
Here's another one from Vice Media..
In a separate, public declaration filed by Hardy in March, he said any documents the FBI retrieved from Clinton's email server, which would be responsive to VICE News' FOIA request, "are potential evidence in the FBI's investigation, or may provide leads to or context for potential evidence" and are exempt from disclosure under FOIA because they would be deemed law enforcement records.
"As this is an active and ongoing investigation, the FBI is continuing to assess the evidentiary value of any materials retrieved for the investigation from any such server equipment/related devices," the filing said. "Disclosure of evidence, potential evidence, or information that has not yet been assessed for evidentiary value while the investigation is active and ongoing could reasonably be expected to undermine the pending investigation by prematurely revealing its scope and focus."
In a footnote to the new declaration filed Monday night, Hardy said, "Due to the sensitive nature of the investigation, the number of FBI personnel and involved in and having knowledge of the pending investigation is limited."
What about directly from Barack Obama's White House?
Barack Obama's spokesman described the FBI's probe into Hillary Clinton's classified email scandal as a 'criminal investigation' on Thursday, less than an hour after the president endorsed his embattled former secretary of state to succeed him.
Josh Earnest told reporters during a White House press briefing that Obama was committed to keeping his hands off the investigation, trusting career investigators and prosecutors to follow evidence wherever it leads.
'That's what their responsibility is,' Earnest said. 'And that's why the president, when discussing this issue in each stage, has reiterated his commitment to this principle that any criminal investigation should be conducted independent of any sort of political interference.'
Then you have the fact that they don't give immunity to people, unless there is a planned prosecution, now it may not be directed at Clinton but it is news, and it is legimate.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Director Comey himself flatly made a point of saying "the Clinton email thing IS an
'investigation', and NOT merely an 'inquiry'.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-director-questions-hillary-clintons-description-fbi-email/story?id=39048269
You cannot just manufacture your 'facts' from thin air.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)about what the FBI does. Please provide a link, especially something on a .gov site, that says there's an investigation.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)that the FBI was merely conducing a "security inquiry" ... and Comey's response is
very clear to everyone with basic reading comprehension skills. But I'll lay it out for
you, here:
Even though Hillary Clinton has repeatedly described the FBI probe over her use of a private email server as a "security inquiry," FBI Director James Comey today questioned the use of that phrase.
I dont know what that means," Comey told reporters today in Washington, D.C "Were conducting an investigation. Thats the bureaus business. Thats what we do."
One reporter noted that former Secretary of State Clinton often refers to it as a "security inquiry."
The word "investigation" -- "its in our name, Comey responded. And Im not familiar with the term security inquiry.
7962
(11,841 posts)The FBI Director says there's an investigation, is he lying?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)is bashing a Dem.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)This is not 'bashing a Democratic presumptive nominee', it is merely reporting
factual news that is relevant to the election cycle.
Duval
(4,280 posts)We're going to hear this over and over again from the Republicans.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)the email issue to hurt her so all the laundry should be well aired before the election that way no surprises can occur.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)more.
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)news articles about the investigation are automatically going to be locked.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Let's see what happens.
Reter
(2,188 posts)What has DU become with this new jury system?
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)alfredo
(60,071 posts)cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)Pauldg47
(640 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Problem? Why should SOS Clinton be held to a different standard?
elleng
(130,860 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)... they hate her.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Before running for office or raising one's public profile in any way, a person sacrifices some privacy. That's part of the deal because we have a free press, social media and most importantly sunshine laws designed to hold people and the government accountable.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Not be a double standard.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)And wouldn't have been if she had done pretty much everyone knows to do if they don't want to mix their personal and professional email. She could have done what Colin Powell did, for example, and had second email account. This was unforced and completely unnecessary.
As it stands, questioning whether she was actually trying to avoid transparency and may possibly have deleted work email is legitimate.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Others she may have had a personal relationship, such as planning her daughter's wedding and her mother's end of life, personal and just as others has done in the past she was entitled to delete those.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Since they're gone, we don't know. It's an open question that can't be confirmed one way or another.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)and family life...just sayin'
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Is that why she assigned a lawyer to make the determination?
Personally, that's why I was so much against the Bush administration mixing war making and war profiteering.
Laurian
(2,593 posts)I'm so over this stuff.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)In addiction terms, an enabler.
Suburban Warrior
(405 posts)Response to Halliburton (Original post)
Post removed
missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)Skinner has said that criticism of the nominee is permitted if it is constructive criticism. How is this constructive??
Pauldg47
(640 posts)missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)But why are we talking about that? How does this discussion fit into the stated purpose of this site, which is getting the democratic nominee elected?
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)They'll impeach no matter what.
Pauldg47
(640 posts)Response to missingthebigdog (Reply #23)
Post removed
missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)She is the presumptive nominee. The primaries are over. The votes have been counted. She has won.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)I see forgot to bold willfully for example, which is rather important because it gives someone a pass if they accidentally deleted something. There's no big smoking gun in the content of this email - which arguably straddles the border between professional and personal, given Huma Abedin's prior relationship to Clinton as her personal aide - and demonstrating the required mens rea for this would be virtually impossible.
Response to Halliburton (Original post)
Post removed
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)elleng
(130,860 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)All of us.
I cannot ignore that dichotomy.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/hillary-clintons-personal-email-use-differed-other-top-officials-n316611
That said, this is by no means a deal breaker, given the options in the running.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)farmbo
(3,121 posts)... Thru a private server at the RNC and your heroic FBI crime stoppers did nothing...zero... Zilch.
No investigation, no seizure of the server... Nothing.
Its only when a Clinton is involved that people get in a tizzy.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I don't recall a single person dismissing or deflecting on that issue.
Igel
(35,296 posts)First, a lot of people flipped out. Many were thoroughly tizzified.
Second, a lot of the restrictions on email handling were put in place as a result.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)I would be perfectly happy to defend Bush against an unfair accusation, and I make a policy of Hanlon's razor - never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. While we put systems and rules in place to overcome the natural tendency of humans to make mistakes and bad decisions, it doesn't follow that every screwup is equally disastrous or mendacious. Carelessness or ineptitude should certainly be criticized, but when people reflexively flip out over anything to the point of being deranged then they are no longer helping their cause or frustrating that of their opponent.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)and this thread reads like Freeperville, circa 2007.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)In the name of "Public Safety".
Just like Freepers did right after 9/11.
But it's all good when Democrats do it.
Yay, team!
7962
(11,841 posts)Whatever the "thing" may be. Not just email, but any action or statement
mercuryblues
(14,530 posts)republicans up in arms over 1 email, when Cheney deleted 4 million? Then set fire to his server?
Why the double standard?
Powell used gmail or yahoo and deleted ALL of his email.
Why the double standard?
Baby boosh and company also ran their emails through the RNC server.
So why the double standard?
If nothing they did was considered illegal, why are people pushing for the indictment fairy to come after H. Clinton?
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)Do you really think it will sway their opinion of her in any meaningful way or did you simply do it to make yourself feel better?
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)and upon reading, it appears that those who poo-pooed it were correct.
This is really no big deal. She obviously considered it a personal email.
Huma turned it over, so there is really nothing there.
It does hurt. I agree. The press, and Judicial Watch and the Republicans will do anything they can to bring her down.
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)I kinda doubt it atleast as long as he keeps opening his big bigoted mouth.
Grassy Knoll
(10,118 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)BootinUp
(47,138 posts)Response to Grassy Knoll (Reply #10)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)63splitwindow
(2,657 posts)Do you support Trump over Clinton?
Response to 63splitwindow (Reply #19)
Post removed
Response to 63splitwindow (Reply #19)
Post removed
63splitwindow
(2,657 posts)that attempting to tear down Clinton serves a good purpose and, if so, what?
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)The simple fact is that the republicans will use this or atleast try to and its probably better to get everything even BS like this out in the open for all to see before the election really kicks in rather than have it end up being a last minute surprise which is harder to counter.
I suspect though that this will once again turn out to be nothing but more smoke because if they actually had something tangible to use against her they would have used it long ago.
George II
(67,782 posts)4139
(1,893 posts)NNadir
(33,512 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Response to NNadir (Reply #26)
Post removed
DemFromPittsburgh
(102 posts)pnwmom
(108,973 posts)retained there.
This one didn't get printed out, but that was obviously inadvertent. She knew that Huma Abedin had the same email at her end so there would have been no reason to attempt to hide it.
broadcaster75201
(387 posts)nt
tavernier
(12,375 posts)mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)mcar
(42,298 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)Response to Halliburton (Original post)
Post removed
Laser102
(816 posts)yardwork
(61,588 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)was in ALL CAPS.
It was also red, although that probably isn't relevant . . . .
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)All I said was the headline was all caps....
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)No, the headline at the link is literally all caps and in a red font.
Loki
(3,825 posts)just won't give up.
alc
(1,151 posts)Like how to respond to people in person who bring up topics like this. "Skinner says we can't discuss it" doesn't go over so well in the real world.
If it's a valid article (AP?) it would be helpful to have an actual discussion like I may have with someone at work.
TwilightZone
(25,456 posts)Freaking out over every "revelation" in the case isn't going to accomplish anything.
It's still Judicial Watch, a right-wing nutjob organization.
It's still a nonsense lawsuit that isn't going anywhere.
That's pretty much all anyone needs to know to counter any argument about the case. The minutiae of the case means little at this point. The underlying ridiculousness of the case hasn't changed.
Pluvious
(4,308 posts)We here should not be like the willfully ignorant climate change deniers.
If mistakes were made, and errors of judgment committed, much better to face them, and work out mitigating solutions and reflect on lessons learned.
Paladin
(28,246 posts)SansACause
(520 posts)Because YEE HAW WE DONE GOT HER THIS TIME!!!
Response to Halliburton (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
randome
(34,845 posts)AntiBank
(1,339 posts)Response to AntiBank (Reply #89)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to AntiBank (Reply #92)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)The interesting part of a post sometimes is who REC's vs who posted. I was born a cynic though.
byronius
(7,392 posts)Right? Silly. Soooo silly.
It's all real in Onion Land.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,069 posts)B2G
(9,766 posts)As is required.
TwilightZone
(25,456 posts)Let's not get ridiculous.
B2G
(9,766 posts)tenderfoot
(8,425 posts)Spare with me with this BULLSHIT!
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Seriously though...who cares who saw or didn't see this e-mail. Unless it's code for something else, it's a big fat zero on the alarm scale.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)Perhaps she should have included it just to be sure but I can easily see how this one might have been tossed in the personal pile.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)Go Hillary!
johnp3907
(3,730 posts)Frances
(8,544 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,444 posts)It's a rule.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)CurtEastPoint
(18,638 posts)videohead5
(2,171 posts)Sent Hillary a list of what to search for on her server.her lawyers did the search and saved the e-mails.her server was never scrubbed or wiped according to the IT company so all those e-mail would be recoverable.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Also Hillary has said that it was her and her attorneys that came up with the search words.
videohead5
(2,171 posts)She only had one she turned over to the FBI.if there was another server the Rethugs would be bitching about it.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)The first one was built by Brian with off the shelf components. When Hillary contracted with that Denver based server farm the original was shipped to secured storage. The new on was a standard rack mounted server. The FBI has both.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,318 posts)nothingburger?
videohead5
(2,171 posts)Then why did she turn over those 22 so called top secret e-mails?...they found this e-mail in Huma Abedin's e-mails that she turned over.Huma is one of the people that did the search for Hillary's emails.if they were trying to keep this email hidden why would Huma turn it over?...this is so stupid.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)that they were asked to provide.
Of course it all could have been avoided if her email server had been done properly and if she had used an official government email address for all her work related correspondence............that or just done what the varies Bush administration officials did and do a better job of getting rid of any truly incriminating emails of a criminal if such emails were to exist on her server at all.
transatlantica
(49 posts)"Last year, Mrs. Clinton certified under oath to a federal court that she had turned over all the work-related emails in her possession on her private server. I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done, she wrote in a document filed in U.S. District Court in August."
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)charge sticking if thats what she said.
videohead5
(2,171 posts)I have had e-mails just disappear on me before.Huma turned this e-mail over.it's not like they were trying to hide it.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)The FBI may have all the email if they were able to recover them. Even if they found them, they would need to prove that she knew this one was missed.
cstanleytech
(26,280 posts)will probably have a hard time proving she hid or withheld any emails deliberately.
ileus
(15,396 posts)You can always trust our side, it's their side that's the enemy.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)Fascinating!
XRubicon
(2,212 posts)Tell Dick I said hello.
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)It was years ago. It's all water under the bridge.
Nothing happened. The bad guys didn't get anything.
Let it go.
coyote
(1,561 posts)Please let the FBI know it's all good and to "let it go"
We can then finally move on and unite.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)--Vladimir Putin
leftyladyfrommo
(18,868 posts)Do you really think she or anyone else could keep track of all of that?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)NoodleyAppendage
(4,619 posts)Reading through the response threads to this the impression I get is that people believe that this is "no big deal," and they may very well be right, but the problem rests not in the likelihood or not of impropriety but in the undeniable appearance of something shifty going on. If Clinton were completely self-aware and prescient, I suspect she may not have taken this private server route during Secretary of State, because it has only come back to haunt her a thousand times beyond any simple FOIA request may have caused her. Love her or hate her, this server problem is a politically self-inflicted wound.
...and what the hell was Bill thinking with the Lynch plane visit!? Another self-inflicted wound.
J