Bob Woodward Compares Clinton Emails To Nixon Tapes, Warns "Answers Won't Be Pretty"

[Lucille]

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5694/20427231858_fa12eda842_b.jpg
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-17/arrival

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-17/bob-woodward-compares-clinton-emails-nixon-tapes-warns-answers-wont-be-pretty


[vid]

As The Hill reports,


Woodward as a younger reporter helped break the Watergate scandal that eventually led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation. He noted the tapes Nixon kept documenting conversations in the Oval Office were eventually turned over.

Clinton, now a Democratic presidential candidate, turned over her server last week to the Justice Department amid a federal probe after questions about her private email haunted her on the campaign trail for months.

“You've got a massive amount of data. It, in a way, reminds me of the Nixon tapes: thousands of hours of secretly recorded conversations that Nixon thought were exclusively his,” Woodward said.

“Follow the trail here,” Woodward said on MSNBC's “Morning Joe,” noting that emails erased from Clinton’s private server when she led the State Department were either sent or received by someone else, too.

And Woodward oiminously conludes,


“This has to go on a long, long time,” Woodward said Monday, “and the answers are probably not going to be pretty.”

Clinton lawyer says her email server was wiped clean
http://www.aol.com/article/2015/08/19/clinton-lawyer-says-her-email-server-was-wiped-clean/21224900/


Forensics experts told The Associated Press this week that many emails and other data can still be extracted from servers even after they are expunged.

Heh.

[Dianne]

It's Obama's Injustice Department. He'll let her go, as soon as she promises to pay him personally, two billion of her Clinton Foundation money.

[rg17]

Hillary Clinton is a tapeworm.

[thoughtomator]

Forensics experts told The Associated Press this week that many emails and other data can still be extracted from servers even after they are expunged.

Only if the person trying to hide the evidence is incompetent.

If you want to make data truly unrecoverable, overwrite the entire disk with random bits seven times and then let the thing sit on top of a powerful magnet for a while, shred the remains and deposit them in many separate dumpsters over a reasonably wide geographic area while not carrying any tracking devices.

Recover THAT, bitch.

[Jan2017]

“Follow the trail here,” Woodward said on MSNBC's “Morning Joe,” noting that emails erased from Clinton’s private server
when she led the State Department were either sent or received by someone else, too.

That is going to do her in . . . somebody saved those emails she sent right ?
A month before 11 September 2012 they were asking for reinforcements in Libya for the Benghazhi outpost,
and what was Hillary up to ?


Hillary Clinton is a tapeworm.
A tapeworm that drinks like a fish

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/hillarygif001a_zpsi9xhowel.gif (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/hillarygif001a_zpsi9xhowel.gif.html)


Only if the person trying to hide the evidence is incompetent.
. . .

It is the emails on the other end that will be the most damage of course. Hillary's incompetence is her trademark now.

[Carlybee]

It's Obama's Injustice Department. He'll let her go, as soon as she promises to pay him personally, two billion of her Clinton Foundation money.


True, the Dems will avoid the taint of an indictment.

[hells_unicorn]

It's Obama's Injustice Department. He'll let her go, as soon as she promises to pay him personally, two billion of her Clinton Foundation money.

He'll let her go after she voluntarily withdraws from the race, Obama and Clinton do not like each other, and I wouldn't be surprised if Obama has been secretly approving leaks to the press on this in order to make way for Biden to run.

[Todd]

https://tipggita32.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/12999_420080858074742_286577647_n.jpg?w=500&h=374

[nobody's_hero]

Clinton has at least 2 things going for her:

1) Liberals tend to downplay everything and people believe them. (you'll hear them say things like: "it's just those far-right fringe nutters who believe this", or "this accusation is just conservative code-speak for 'we hate women'")
2) Conservatives are very limp-dicked when it comes to pursuing Democrat wrong-doings because they don't want to be seen as described in #1, which gets old because they're always rolling over dead and letting Democrats control the narrative.

[tod evans]

A tapeworm that drinks like a fish


I'm no fan of either Clinton but who really gives a rats ass if she drinks or even does blow?

[klamath]

As I read the democratic activist IT company was the one the turned her server over to the FBI. Something tells me more will be done to that server than a standard delete...

[osan]

Hillary Clinton is a tapeworm.

Don't insult the tapeworms, please. It's very bad form.

[osan]

I'm no fan of either Clinton but who really gives a rats ass if she drinks or even does blow?

Well Tod, when she's acting in the capacity of... oh, I dunno... Secretary of Fucking State, I do. Just as with you, I don't give the least damn what one does privately and when their professional duties do not stand to cause me harm. But SoS is a pretty significant position, even in a three-ring freak show like America. I really don't relish the notion that an already dangerously unsound broad is augmenting her batshittery with chronic abuse of blow and liquor. I mean, why stop there? Have some acid and meth, too. I'm all for purest freedoms, but getting high on the job is in no way acceptable to me... unless the job is the effectual equivalent of sweeping the floors or giving blowjobs for cash. This goes 100x for ANY government job, including meter maid and dog catcher. Regardless of the claims made by the pro-drug contingent, getting high fucks with one's judgment - more in some than others and with some drugs over others, but nobody gets through completely unaltered. The thought that this freakishly bad simulation of a woman (or anyone else) would be sitting in negotiation with potential enemies whilst lit does nothing to inspire warm and fuzzy feelings. This is the way bad shit happens... like sharing highly sensitive information with those potential enemies.

None of these offices should exist in the first place, but they do and they will not be going the way of the dodo prior to the meteor strike, or Jesus tap-dancing out from behind a cloud, singing like Michigan J Frog, cane in one hand, top-hat in the other. So until either of those inevitabilities comes to pass, I say every cabinet member and other highly=placed official is pee-tested DAILY for their entire tenure and hair-tested prior to taking their oaths for indications of prior drug use, and only after swearing under oath that they are drug-free, under pain of a very long, cruel, and unusual prison term. That way, when their lies are detected, they go to prison at the military barracks at Leavenworth at hard labor for not a millisecond less than a full decade, every moment they refuse to labor being considered time NOT served. I would also give them the option of a cyanide capsule at any point during their tenure.

[tod evans]

I've gotta agree with the behavior on the job but the post/pics I responded to didn't portray her drinking "on the job", it looked like social events..

But I honestly don't know....

[osan]

Only if the person trying to hide the evidence is incompetent.

If you want to make data truly unrecoverable, overwrite the entire disk with random bits seven times and then let the thing sit on top of a powerful magnet for a while, shred the remains and deposit them in many separate dumpsters over a reasonably wide geographic area while not carrying any tracking devices.

Recover THAT, bitch.

You make a good point, though your process is a bit of lousy. A simple O-A torch and a steel plate or crucible will do in about 3-4 minutes what nothing else will. Apply heat (about 6000*F) and the drive melts to a puddle very rapidly.

But the question you raise, albeit obliquely, is that of what, here, is really going on? This is the secretary of state we're talking about here. Could she be THAT stupid? Perhaps. But if not, then this whole affair has been contrived and would suggest her willing and knowing participation in... what, exactly? A fraud of some sort, yes, but to what end? Could this be the extent to which Theye feel they must go in order to keep the thoughts of Americans occupied with anything other than that which they do not want minds occupying themselves?

America has become the single largest freak-show in all human history, to date. It is simply incomprehensible.

[Todd]

I'm no fan of either Clinton but who really gives a rats ass if she drinks or even does blow?

Because accountability for thee but not for me.

[osan]

I've gotta agree with the behavior on the job but the post/pics I responded to didn't portray her drinking "on the job", it looked like social events..

But I honestly don't know....

Ah, OK, I didn't get that bit. But even then... when your job places the lives of others into your hands, there are certain things you simply must forgo, even off-duty.

Could you picture an ATP making recreational use of meth or coke on "weekends", only to get into the cockpit on his "Monday" with 300 passengers? Largest aircraft I've ever piloted was a 310 Cessna and I would not want to be high or suffering a hangover even flying a roller-skate like that, much less 200 tons of commercial airliner.

[Jan2017]

Ah, OK, I didn't get that bit. But even then... when your job places the lives of others into your hands, there are certain things you simply must forgo, even off-duty.

Could you picture an ATP making recreational use of meth or coke on "weekends", only to get into the cockpit on his "Monday" with 300 passengers? Largest aircraft I've ever piloted was a 310 Cessna and I would not want to be high or suffering a hangover even flying a roller-skate like that, much less 200 tons of commercial airliner.

She sure looks hung over the night after Benghazi - September 12 2012 - in the Rose Garden with President BO . . .

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/hillarymessedupbad004y_zpskii2sakc.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/hillarymessedupbad004y_zpskii2sakc.jpg.html)

As Rand said she would have been relieved of her post - she had a month to read the cables of increased security demands -
hardly a surprise of a September 11 '012 attack that gets covered up . . .

Over 1 million views of this youtube . . . Rand uses the phrase "the original 9-11"

Hillary implicated for a failure of leadership in 9-11 version 2.0 -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jriU_cPU9Vk

.

[tod evans]

I'll be the first one to pile on Hillary for not doing her job.

Why she failed in her duties doesn't matter to me.

[David Sadler]

It looks increasingly likely that Hillary will not be the Democrat nominee.



http://freebeacon.com/national-security/watchdog-two-national-security-laws-appear-broken-in-clinton-email-scandal/

Watchdog: Two National Security Laws Appear Broken in Clinton Email Scandal (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/watchdog-two-national-security-laws-appear-broken-in-clinton-email-scandal/)
Hillary aides refused judge’s order on returning documents
Bill Gertz
FreeBeacon
August 20, 2015

Hillary Clinton and two aides appear to have violated two national security laws by sending classified information on a private email server, according to a former Army counterintelligence agent and investigator for a public interest law group.

Additionally, the two Clinton aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, disregarded a federal judge’s order this month requiring both to make sworn statements to the court that all government documents in their possession will be returned to federal officials, said Chris Farrell, director of investigations for Judicial Watch, the law group.

“What we have is a secretary of state, the only cabinet official in our history, who established her own private email server … in an effort to avoid the normal protocols for unclassified and classified communications. It’s an end run,” he said.

Farrell, in a briefing on the Clinton email affair at the Judicial Watch offices, said supporters of Clinton have sought to portray the use of the private email system to send classified information as a minor administrative matter.

“It is not,” he said. “It is a national security crime, and should be a national security crime investigation,” he said, noting that Clinton created the private email server a week before she took up her duties at Foggy Bottom, indicating that she planned to avoid using official email that must be stored under federal rules.

Two laws apply to the mishandling of classified data on unsecure networks, Farrell said.

The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.

That statute was used to prosecute retired Army General David Petraeus, a former CIA director who provided classified documents to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $40,000 fine as part of a plea deal in March.

A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute Farrell described as a “hammer.”

That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.

Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison.

Farrell said he that as an Army counterintelligence officer, he has conducted investigations in the past that are similar to the Clinton email probe. He also worked at a special security officer who was in charge of SCIFs—special facilities used for handling sensitive intelligence.

“When it comes the law on these, intent doesn’t matter,” Farrell said. Mishandling top-secret information should bring down the full weight of the law on violators, he said.

The Clinton email matter is a “serious national security crime issue,” Farrell said. “It’s not two agencies fighting over classification after the fact.”

Judicial Watch currently has 18 lawsuits pending against the State Department seeking access to records under the Freedom of Information Act.

More at link ...

[Jan2017]

It's Obama's Injustice Department. He'll let her go, as soon as she promises to pay him personally, two billion of her Clinton Foundation money.


True, the Dems will avoid the taint of an indictment.
He'll let her go after she voluntarily withdraws from the race, Obama and Clinton do not like each other, and I wouldn't be surprised if Obama has been secretly approving leaks to the press on this in order to make way for Biden to run.

I think Obama would rather be followed by someone half-way competent - GOP or Dimocrat - Rand Paul or Biden (?)
so DOJ gets Hillary indicted before Iowa
. . . then . . .
in the last weeks of the Obama 8-year reign as the Chief Executive - Obama grants the forthcoming Presidential Pardon.


I'm no fan of either Clinton but who really gives a rats ass if she drinks or even does blow?

Two E words . . .
Ethics
Electability . . . don't really want a stumbler onto Air Force One . . . do ya' ?

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/hillary006a_zpsiq5nfsfh.gif (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/hillary006a_zpsiq5nfsfh.gif.html)

.

[Jan2017]

It looks increasingly likely that Hillary will not be the Democrat nominee.


Two laws apply to the mishandling of classified data on unsecure networks, Farrell said.

The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.

That statute was used to prosecute retired Army General David Petraeus, a former CIA director who provided classified documents to his mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $40,000 fine as part of a plea deal in March.

A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute Farrell described as a “hammer.”

That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.


HUGE . . .

bye bye Hillary . . . drunk, and crazy eyed and all the incompetence . . .

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/hillarycrazyeye04d_zpsnkoeml17.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/hillarycrazyeye04d_zpsnkoeml17.jpg.html)

.

[Acala]

Funny thing about people with her galactic level of ambition and arrogance - they start feeling invincible and get careless. And when you are as corrupt as Hillary, have your filthy fingers in so many pies, and have so many enemies, eventually you get tangled in your own web and get eaten.

[David Sadler]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-says-classified-emails-were-on-server-1440030491

Hillary Clinton Campaign Says Classified Emails Were on Server (http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-says-classified-emails-were-on-server-1440030491)
Democrat’s campaign says material was made secret retroactively
By Byron Tau and Robert McMillan
WSJ
Updated Aug. 19, 2015

WASHINGTON— Hillary Clinton’s campaign said Wednesday that emails on the private server she used when she was secretary of state contained material that is now classified, the clearest explanation thus far of an issue that has roiled her bid for the presidency.

At the same time, the campaign sought to play down the disclosure by saying the material had been retroactively classified out of an abundance of caution by U.S. intelligence agencies.

“She was at worst a passive recipient of unwitting information that subsequently became deemed as classified,” said Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign.


Pass the buck. Burn others. The Clinton way ...

[Lucille]

The FBI Is Investigating Whether Hillary Clinton Violated the Espionage Act, According to Fox News
Also, lots of people think Clinton is a liar.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/28/the-fbi-is-investigating-whether-hillary


The latest spy-thriller-worthy plot point in the ongoing real-life drama over Hillary Clinton's exclusive use of a privately run email account comes via Fox News, which reports, via an anonymous source, that...


An FBI "A-team" is leading the "extremely serious" investigation into Hillary Clinton's server and the focus includes a provision of the law pertaining to "gathering, transmitting or losing defense information," an intelligence source told Fox News.

The section of the Espionage Act is known as 18 US Code 793.

A separate source, who also was not authorized to speak on the record, said the FBI will further determine whether Clinton should have known, based on the quality and detail of the material, that emails passing through her server contained classified information regardless of the markings. The campaign's standard defense and that of Clinton is that she "never sent nor received any email that was marked classified" at the time.

It's worth noting here that Clinton's opening bid on the email controversy, which has since been modified and updated in numerous ways as it has proven to be less than perfectly accurate, was the following quote: "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material." Anyway, take the Fox News report with appropriate skepticism given the lack of clear, on the record sourcing. Even still, it's a reminder that there are lots of potential time bombs that could be hidden in the email story.

In other Hillary Clinton email news this week:

Her campaign has shifted its approach to questions about her email. After some awkward jokes (she loves Snapchat because the messages disappear automatically! the server was wiped...with, what, like, a cloth or something?) she's finally taking the issue seriously.

Probably related: The New York Times interviewed 75 Democrats and Clinton supporters, and found that they don't think she's handling it particularly well. In particular, they don't like her jokes. Also, despite Team Clinton's outward projection of confidence that the issue is trivial and will soon disappear, the Times reports, "aides have privately told supporters that the email issue is not going away anytime soon."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/10/hillary-clinton-email_n_6841218.html


It remains to be seen whether Clinton could be found to have violated the Espionage Act, a law that the Obama administration has used repeatedly against whistleblowers. The relevant section of the law says that it is a crime to retain classified material. Clinton, for her part, said Tuesday that she did not send classified information from the personal address, and that the server she used was protected by the secret service and suffered no security breaches.

The Justice Department leveled just that charge against NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake and James Hitselberger, a former Navy linguist who sent classified documents to an archive at the Hoover Institution. Former Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee also was infamously charged with 10 counts of retaining classified data for storing information on tapes.
[...]
A lawyer who represented Drake saw little difference between the Espionage Act case against him and what Clinton appears to have done, especially if any of her communications could be deemed to be classified.

"Technically she should be vulnerable to the same Espionage Act charges as Tom," said Jesselyn Radack, an attorney with the Government Accountability Project.

She thought Clinton would never face prosecution, not because she hasn't overstepped, but because she's an exalted political figure, unlike the individuals who have been targeted in leak probes.

"Prosecutors have enormous discretion and, as we've seen from the General Petraeus case, political elites disclosing classified information are not subject to the same draconian laws as whistleblowers," she said.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?481162-The-long-slow-death-of-the-rule-of-law


The most disturbing aspect of the scandal around Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server during her tenure as secretary of state is not the former first lady’s penchant for secrecy. In fact, we all ought to be a little taken aback that Mrs. Clinton’s poll numbers are declining as a result of that storyline. It boggles the mind to imagine that, after a quarter-century, there’s a slice of the electorate just now coming to the realization that she is not a terribly forthcoming politician.

What’s truly unsettling is that it has been widely taken as read among both the media and the general public that Mrs. Clinton will likely avoid serious legal consequences for her behavior because the Justice Department is ultimately answerable to President Obama – and Democrats will not use the instruments of government to destroy one of their own. Whether that eventually proves true, the sentiment itself reveals a troubling trend in American politics.

[Jan2017]

This just keeps getting worse and worse. Now we find out that the company who was responsible
for Hillary’s email server kept it in a bathroom in a loft apartment that didn’t even have an alarm system:
http://therightscoop.com/whoa-hillary-email-server-kept-in-a-loft-bathroom/

[Lucille]

Orange is a good color on her anyway!

Another 150 Classified Emails Found in Latest Hillary Clinton Communications Dump
https://reason.com/blog/2015/08/31/another-150-classified-emails-found-in-l


The State Department is set to release another 7,000 pages of Clinton's emails around 9 p.m. tonight. They were initially supposed to be released earlier in the day, but according to Fox News, the release has been delayed because, as the Associated Press reports, about 150 contain classified information that has to be redacted.
[...]
All of the classified material scheduled to be released today falls under the category of "confidential," rather than the more protected classification of "top secret," according to the AP. Previously, however, at least two emails that were part of the group that Clinton turned over were ruled top secret.
[...]
In recent weeks, as it has become clear that there was in fact classified material amongst Clinton's emails, the Democratic presidential candidate and her campaign allies have changed their story, with a campaign spokesperson earlier this month saying, in one of the most weasely political excuses in recent memory, that, "[Clinton] was at worst a passive recipient of unwitting information that subsequently became deemed as classified."
[...]
As Clinton's excuses have started to break down, her campaign has begun to question the very essence of what makes an email classified, suggesting that disagreements between agencies about what constitutes a classified communication render it difficult and perhaps even impossible to know for certain. The status of any given email exists in a state of epistemological uncertainty.
[...]
Last week, Clinton, who had joked awkwardly about the emails, shifted the tone of her response. She says that she takes "responsibility" for the decision to exclusively use her personal, private email account while at State, which she admits was not the best choice. "I want to be as transparent as possible," she said. She also added, "I’m confident that this process will prove that I never sent, nor received, any email that was marked classified." She's confident! The process will be transparent! And provide proof that she did the right thing, and has nothing to hide.