[FONT=ARIAL,VERDANA,HELVETICA][SIZE=+7]
TOP SECRET//SI//TK//NOFORN
T U R M O I L
DEM PANIC MODE[/SIZE][/FONT]
TOP SECRET//SI//TK//NOFORN
T U R M O I L
DEM PANIC MODE[/SIZE][/FONT]
[h=2]Clinton Foundation Quietly Revises Mexican Billionaire’s Donation[/h]Carlos Slim was listed as a seven-figure donor last year. Now the foundation says he’s given far less
SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
BY: Lachlan Markay
August 12, 2015 2:35 pm
Hillary Clinton’s family foundation quietly updated its list of donors last week, significantly reducing the amount that it says has been given by a Mexican telecom tycoon whose company was recently accused of deceptive U.S. advertising.
The little-noticed update to the website of the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation added contributions made in the first half of this year. But it also dramatically reduced listed contributions from billionaire Carlos Slim.
Prior to the update, Slim was listed as a $1 million to $5 million contributor. The updated version of the site says he has donated between $250,000 and $500,000.
A spokesman for the group declined to speak on the record about the change, but a foundation official who asked to remain anonymous acknowledged the change. “If needed, we correct the attribution on our list to accurately reflect the source of the support,” the official said.
The Clinton Foundation voluntarily discloses its donors, but the lack of any legal disclosure requirement makes it difficult to know whether its publicly available list of contributors is accurate and complete.
Slim, the world’s second-wealthiest man, runs a number of telecommunications companies in his native Mexico. One of them, TracFone, is a prominent U.S. federal government contractor. The company paid $40 million to the Federal Trade Commission in January to settle allegations of deceptive advertising practices.
TracFone has donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to its website.
Another Slim company, Inmobiliaria Carso, appeared on the Clinton Foundation’s donor lists for the first time this year. The company contributed between $1 million and $5 million, according to the foundation’s website.
A charitable group associated with Slim’s Telmex, which controls most of Mexico’s landline phone market, has donated another $1 million to $5 million, including contributions in 2015 (the dates of its contributions, and the extent of its support this year, are not known).
The foundation appears to have used the update to its website to correct other discrepancies in its donor rolls.
Clinton supporter Ira Lessfield was listed last year as a $250,000 to $500,000 donor. His Leesfield Foundation was listed as having given just $1,000 to $5,000. However, the latter’s tax filingsrevealed it has given at least $200,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
The updated donor list merges the two, putting “Ira H. Leesfield and Leesfield Family Charitable Foundation, Inc.” in the $250,000 to $500,000 category.
The website appears to have corrected a similar discrepancy with respect to Fred Eychaner, combining the Chicago media mogul’s personal and foundation giving into one line item.
Unlike the Eychaner and Lessfield updates, however, Slim’s revised contribution numbers reveal a new vehicle for his donations to the foundation in Inmobiliaria Carso, which had not previously appeared on the foundation’s donor list.
The company’s donations are also of note given controversy over ties between the foundation and the New York Times. Inmobiliaria Carso is the investment vehicle through which Slim owns his sizable stake in the New York Times Company, according to publicly available financial statements.
Slim did not respond to a request for comment made through his personal website.
SHARE
TWEET
Carlos Slim / AP
BY: Lachlan Markay
August 12, 2015 2:35 pm
Hillary Clinton’s family foundation quietly updated its list of donors last week, significantly reducing the amount that it says has been given by a Mexican telecom tycoon whose company was recently accused of deceptive U.S. advertising.
The little-noticed update to the website of the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation added contributions made in the first half of this year. But it also dramatically reduced listed contributions from billionaire Carlos Slim.
Prior to the update, Slim was listed as a $1 million to $5 million contributor. The updated version of the site says he has donated between $250,000 and $500,000.
A spokesman for the group declined to speak on the record about the change, but a foundation official who asked to remain anonymous acknowledged the change. “If needed, we correct the attribution on our list to accurately reflect the source of the support,” the official said.
The Clinton Foundation voluntarily discloses its donors, but the lack of any legal disclosure requirement makes it difficult to know whether its publicly available list of contributors is accurate and complete.
Slim, the world’s second-wealthiest man, runs a number of telecommunications companies in his native Mexico. One of them, TracFone, is a prominent U.S. federal government contractor. The company paid $40 million to the Federal Trade Commission in January to settle allegations of deceptive advertising practices.
TracFone has donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to its website.
Another Slim company, Inmobiliaria Carso, appeared on the Clinton Foundation’s donor lists for the first time this year. The company contributed between $1 million and $5 million, according to the foundation’s website.
A charitable group associated with Slim’s Telmex, which controls most of Mexico’s landline phone market, has donated another $1 million to $5 million, including contributions in 2015 (the dates of its contributions, and the extent of its support this year, are not known).
The foundation appears to have used the update to its website to correct other discrepancies in its donor rolls.
Clinton supporter Ira Lessfield was listed last year as a $250,000 to $500,000 donor. His Leesfield Foundation was listed as having given just $1,000 to $5,000. However, the latter’s tax filingsrevealed it has given at least $200,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
The updated donor list merges the two, putting “Ira H. Leesfield and Leesfield Family Charitable Foundation, Inc.” in the $250,000 to $500,000 category.
The website appears to have corrected a similar discrepancy with respect to Fred Eychaner, combining the Chicago media mogul’s personal and foundation giving into one line item.
Unlike the Eychaner and Lessfield updates, however, Slim’s revised contribution numbers reveal a new vehicle for his donations to the foundation in Inmobiliaria Carso, which had not previously appeared on the foundation’s donor list.
The company’s donations are also of note given controversy over ties between the foundation and the New York Times. Inmobiliaria Carso is the investment vehicle through which Slim owns his sizable stake in the New York Times Company, according to publicly available financial statements.
Slim did not respond to a request for comment made through his personal website.
[h=1]EXCLUSIVE: SOURCES SAY CLINTON CAMPAIGN LYING IN EMAIL COVER-UP[/h]
by PATRICK HOWLEY12 Aug 20152,850
[h=2]The Hillary Clinton campaign is pushing outright falsehoods as it attempts to defend itself against its private-email scandal, according to a top-level source and an inspector general memo.[/h]A high-level government source familiar with the investigation spoke to Breitbart News on condition of anonymity, telling us the inspector general for the intelligence community confirms that some of Clinton’s emails were “classified when originated.”
And according to a memo signed Tuesday by I. Charles McCullough III, the inspector general of the intelligence community:
For its part, Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri blasted out an email to supporters Wednesday addressing the controversy over Clinton’s emails.
That comes after the Democratic candidate finally turned over two thumb drives containing emails from her tenure at the State Department. The emails, which had been held by Clinton lawyer David Kendall, are now in the possession of the Department of Justice and are being reviewed by an inter-government agency that includes the FBI and the NSA.
Palmieri called the matter “complicated” and attempted to explain away the controversy over Clinton’s use of a private email server for State Department business. She writes:
The Clinton campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.
by PATRICK HOWLEY12 Aug 20152,850
[h=2]The Hillary Clinton campaign is pushing outright falsehoods as it attempts to defend itself against its private-email scandal, according to a top-level source and an inspector general memo.[/h]A high-level government source familiar with the investigation spoke to Breitbart News on condition of anonymity, telling us the inspector general for the intelligence community confirms that some of Clinton’s emails were “classified when originated.”
And according to a memo signed Tuesday by I. Charles McCullough III, the inspector general of the intelligence community:
IC classification officials reviewed two additional emails and judged that they contained classified State Department information when originated. These officials referred the emails to State Department classification officials on 7 August 2015 for final determination on current classification. We will provide these documents once they have been properly marked by the State Department.
In total, the inter-government agency is looking at seven different emails to determine whether or not they should be classified. Two of those emails have been referred back to the State Department for internal review and two others were marked “Top Secret” by the CIA.
For its part, Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri blasted out an email to supporters Wednesday addressing the controversy over Clinton’s emails.
That comes after the Democratic candidate finally turned over two thumb drives containing emails from her tenure at the State Department. The emails, which had been held by Clinton lawyer David Kendall, are now in the possession of the Department of Justice and are being reviewed by an inter-government agency that includes the FBI and the NSA.
Palmieri called the matter “complicated” and attempted to explain away the controversy over Clinton’s use of a private email server for State Department business. She writes:
What makes it complicated: It’s common for information previously considered unclassified to be upgraded to classified before being publicly released. Some emails that weren’t secret at the time she sent or received them might be secret now. And sometimes government agencies disagree about what should be classified, so it isn’t surprising that another agency might want to conduct its own review, even though the State Department has repeatedly confirmed that Hillary’s emails contained no classified information at the time she sent or received them.
But as Breitbart News reported, at least two of Clinton’s emails actually were classified at the time that she sent them but now might no longer be classified.
The Clinton campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.
[h=1]IS HILLARY’S LONG-DELAYED SERVER SURRENDER A HEAD FAKE?[/h]
Kevin Lamarque AP
by JOHN HAYWARD12 Aug 2015453
[h=2]You have to give Hillary Clinton this much: she and her political team (which includes much of the mainstream media) fight spin warfare down to the trenches. Throughout her email scandal, she’s lied furiously and retracted quietly, giving up every tiny inch of truth only after a vicious battle.[/h]At every step of the way, she and her friends and former employees in the media have worked to erase the memory of her intransigence and obfuscations. She’s forced to give up little nuggets of information… but instantly recasts herself as a champion of transparency who “gave” whatever was taken from her voluntarily, as though she were handing out cookies to good little congressional investigators, inspectors general, and federal law enforcement agents.
Wednesday’s desperate spin, which is unlikely to last beyond Thursday, is that Clinton suddenly decided to hand over her secret email server, and the thumb drive full of email data her lawyer has been hoarding, out of the goodness of her bountiful heart. That was too much for Ron Fournier of National Journal, who is probably still cleaning Cheerios off his computer monitor:
On the first point, Fournier comes right out and says the FBI might find more classified material sprinkled through recovered copies of the emails Hillary deleted in defiance of subpoena, because she deemed them “personal” missives about yoga, party planning, and the like. He also wonders what new revelations about Benghazi and the “intersection of Clinton Foundation donors and State Department business” might emerge. I would add that some uncomfortable truths about how recklessly Clinton handled these sensitive communications may be exposed, such as her long-rumored failure to encrypt her emails properly.
What are the odds that such devastating information remains on Clinton’s server, or on the thumb drive her lawyer David Kendall has finally surrendered to the FBI?
Clinton and her crew have had a long time to work those electronics over and destroy incriminating evidence, which is one of the reasons people who destroy subpoenaed documents are generally presumed guilty. The FBI is still supposedly working on “the logistics of the handover” before agents take physical possession of Clinton’s server. We’re talking about a machine that would not be difficult for a small group of people to move, not a towering doomsday super-computer that stretches hundreds of feet into the sky. Do those “logistical” issues involve signs of physical tampering with the computer?
Computer security experts have varying opinions about the possibility of data recovery from thoroughly-scrubbed hard drives and storage media. The amount of time given to Hillary’s team for cleansing these devices is so long that total vaporization of the data seems possible… but her IT people have also made some major blunders in the past, which is one reason the idea of top-secret classified material flowing through her server is so terrifying.
While we’re on that subject, we might learn a few interesting things about Clinton’s tech-support crew by reviewing her server’s usage logs. We still don’t know much about the people who set up and maintained this system, what sort of security clearance they had, and whether their activities were tracked as closely as a proper State Department team would have been.
There is a positively interstellar gap between the security procedures surrounding the mail system Secretary of State Clinton was supposed to be using, and the home-brew system she cooked up. That gap is of particular relevance now that we know her system was processing top-secret classified information. Maintaining operation security around a big multi-user mail system – remember, Clinton’s aides were using it too – is a daunting task; plugging security leaks is akin to quarantining a virus. There has been no indication Clinton’s team was equal to this task.
There is also the question of whether the work done on Hillary’s private server would be as responsive to congressional inquiry and Freedom of Information Act requests as the official State Department system and its support personnel are. As they say in the computer industry, to Clinton that’s a feature, not a bug.
Maybe the absurdly delayed handover of Clinton’s equipment is another head-fake in the spin wars, meant primarily to give her a talking point about how committed to transparency she is, and set up an opportunity to crow that her “partisan” tormentors overreached again when nothing new is found on the thoroughly sanitized hardware.
Rest assured that if you, dear reader, are ever suspected of destroying subpoenaed documents, it won’t take six months for law enforcement to confiscate your computer. (Unless, of course, you happen to be Chelsea Clinton, or some other scion of the corrupt Ruling Class.)
As for that thumb drive, current reporting suggests it contains only the 30,000 or so emails Clinton didn’t decide to classify as “personal correspondence” and destroy. Up until a few days ago, Clinton World assured us her lawyer David Kendall was also a super-spy with all the security clearances necessary to handle the former Secretary of State’s email.
All of a sudden, that’s not true, as the Associated Press reports: “Kendall gave the thumb drives, containing copies of roughly 30,000 emails, to the FBI after the agency determined he could not remain in possession of the classified information contained in some of the emails, according to a U.S. official briefed on the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly.”
It has always been curious indeed that Clinton dropped boxes full of dead-tree hardcopy printouts on Congress, while handing a thumb drive with vastly more convenient electronic copies of the email (which she is technically required to surrender to Congress and the State Department) off to her lawyer. The obvious reason for bombing Congress with paper copies was to drag the story out until Clinton’s supporters in the mainstream media could declare it dead of old age. It takes a lot of time and effort to comb through all those printouts and get them uploaded in a scanned, searchable format.
There’s another reason for handing over printouts: it gave Clinton one last chance to edit her correspondence. Will the comparison between that finally-secured thumb drive and the records she gave Congress reveal any discrepancies? Is there some meta-data in those emails – information about sender, recipient, and transmission method – we weren’t supposed to see?
Presidential candidate and Wisconsin governor Scott Walker acted quickly to put the evolving situation in context on Wednesday morning:
The answers to such questions are time-critical; like any other acid, they do more damage with prolonged exposure. For no good reason whatsoever, Hillary Clinton left the national security of the United States dangerously exposed, and her stonewalling tactics have burdened this country with additional months of uncertainty… months during which a new story about massive hacking attacks by foreign operatives have appeared with fearsome regularity.
The reason for having the security policies Clinton so recklessly ignored is to prevent us from being put in the position where we can only cross our fingers and hope the damage has been contained. The Justice Department and intelligence community should have acted far more quickly and decisively to contain that damage, no matter how many political headaches it caused for the front-running Democrat presidential candidate.
If Clinton is not held to account for what she has done, the damage to our security procedures going forward will be incalculable. How many other politicians will decide top-secret classifications are mere suggestions, to be discarded at the whim of D.C. aristocrats? Even if one is actually gullible enough to believe the story Clinton gave about not wanting to carry two small portable electronic devices to check her official mail, she’s saying that she caused all this chaos for a matter of minor personal convenience. There are people serving time for less serious offenses who have more plausible excuses.
by JOHN HAYWARD12 Aug 2015453
[h=2]You have to give Hillary Clinton this much: she and her political team (which includes much of the mainstream media) fight spin warfare down to the trenches. Throughout her email scandal, she’s lied furiously and retracted quietly, giving up every tiny inch of truth only after a vicious battle.[/h]At every step of the way, she and her friends and former employees in the media have worked to erase the memory of her intransigence and obfuscations. She’s forced to give up little nuggets of information… but instantly recasts herself as a champion of transparency who “gave” whatever was taken from her voluntarily, as though she were handing out cookies to good little congressional investigators, inspectors general, and federal law enforcement agents.
Wednesday’s desperate spin, which is unlikely to last beyond Thursday, is that Clinton suddenly decided to hand over her secret email server, and the thumb drive full of email data her lawyer has been hoarding, out of the goodness of her bountiful heart. That was too much for Ron Fournier of National Journal, who is probably still cleaning Cheerios off his computer monitor:
I’m old enough to remember Team @HillaryClinton claiming this fiasco was about the actions of @nytimespic.twitter.com/42wlMP73VS
— Ron Fournier (@ron_fournier) August 12, 2015
As Fournier wrote at greater length, the illusion Clinton and her loyal media pals are attempting to create is a “ridiculous” load of “bunk,” because back in March, Clinton was thundering that her server would remain private forever, even as Congress demanded a review of her machine by independent technicians to discover (a) what she’s been hiding, and (b) how much of it might have been taken by hackers and foreign spies.— Ron Fournier (@ron_fournier) August 12, 2015
On the first point, Fournier comes right out and says the FBI might find more classified material sprinkled through recovered copies of the emails Hillary deleted in defiance of subpoena, because she deemed them “personal” missives about yoga, party planning, and the like. He also wonders what new revelations about Benghazi and the “intersection of Clinton Foundation donors and State Department business” might emerge. I would add that some uncomfortable truths about how recklessly Clinton handled these sensitive communications may be exposed, such as her long-rumored failure to encrypt her emails properly.
What are the odds that such devastating information remains on Clinton’s server, or on the thumb drive her lawyer David Kendall has finally surrendered to the FBI?
Clinton and her crew have had a long time to work those electronics over and destroy incriminating evidence, which is one of the reasons people who destroy subpoenaed documents are generally presumed guilty. The FBI is still supposedly working on “the logistics of the handover” before agents take physical possession of Clinton’s server. We’re talking about a machine that would not be difficult for a small group of people to move, not a towering doomsday super-computer that stretches hundreds of feet into the sky. Do those “logistical” issues involve signs of physical tampering with the computer?
Computer security experts have varying opinions about the possibility of data recovery from thoroughly-scrubbed hard drives and storage media. The amount of time given to Hillary’s team for cleansing these devices is so long that total vaporization of the data seems possible… but her IT people have also made some major blunders in the past, which is one reason the idea of top-secret classified material flowing through her server is so terrifying.
While we’re on that subject, we might learn a few interesting things about Clinton’s tech-support crew by reviewing her server’s usage logs. We still don’t know much about the people who set up and maintained this system, what sort of security clearance they had, and whether their activities were tracked as closely as a proper State Department team would have been.
There is a positively interstellar gap between the security procedures surrounding the mail system Secretary of State Clinton was supposed to be using, and the home-brew system she cooked up. That gap is of particular relevance now that we know her system was processing top-secret classified information. Maintaining operation security around a big multi-user mail system – remember, Clinton’s aides were using it too – is a daunting task; plugging security leaks is akin to quarantining a virus. There has been no indication Clinton’s team was equal to this task.
There is also the question of whether the work done on Hillary’s private server would be as responsive to congressional inquiry and Freedom of Information Act requests as the official State Department system and its support personnel are. As they say in the computer industry, to Clinton that’s a feature, not a bug.
Maybe the absurdly delayed handover of Clinton’s equipment is another head-fake in the spin wars, meant primarily to give her a talking point about how committed to transparency she is, and set up an opportunity to crow that her “partisan” tormentors overreached again when nothing new is found on the thoroughly sanitized hardware.
Rest assured that if you, dear reader, are ever suspected of destroying subpoenaed documents, it won’t take six months for law enforcement to confiscate your computer. (Unless, of course, you happen to be Chelsea Clinton, or some other scion of the corrupt Ruling Class.)
As for that thumb drive, current reporting suggests it contains only the 30,000 or so emails Clinton didn’t decide to classify as “personal correspondence” and destroy. Up until a few days ago, Clinton World assured us her lawyer David Kendall was also a super-spy with all the security clearances necessary to handle the former Secretary of State’s email.
All of a sudden, that’s not true, as the Associated Press reports: “Kendall gave the thumb drives, containing copies of roughly 30,000 emails, to the FBI after the agency determined he could not remain in possession of the classified information contained in some of the emails, according to a U.S. official briefed on the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly.”
It has always been curious indeed that Clinton dropped boxes full of dead-tree hardcopy printouts on Congress, while handing a thumb drive with vastly more convenient electronic copies of the email (which she is technically required to surrender to Congress and the State Department) off to her lawyer. The obvious reason for bombing Congress with paper copies was to drag the story out until Clinton’s supporters in the mainstream media could declare it dead of old age. It takes a lot of time and effort to comb through all those printouts and get them uploaded in a scanned, searchable format.
There’s another reason for handing over printouts: it gave Clinton one last chance to edit her correspondence. Will the comparison between that finally-secured thumb drive and the records she gave Congress reveal any discrepancies? Is there some meta-data in those emails – information about sender, recipient, and transmission method – we weren’t supposed to see?
Presidential candidate and Wisconsin governor Scott Walker acted quickly to put the evolving situation in context on Wednesday morning:
Top secret emails on @HillaryClinton‘s server is a serious and potentially criminal offense. -SW pic.twitter.com/ld2mbpUrha
— Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) August 12, 2015
Bottom line: unresolved questions are the acid in which national security dissolves.— Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) August 12, 2015
The answers to such questions are time-critical; like any other acid, they do more damage with prolonged exposure. For no good reason whatsoever, Hillary Clinton left the national security of the United States dangerously exposed, and her stonewalling tactics have burdened this country with additional months of uncertainty… months during which a new story about massive hacking attacks by foreign operatives have appeared with fearsome regularity.
The reason for having the security policies Clinton so recklessly ignored is to prevent us from being put in the position where we can only cross our fingers and hope the damage has been contained. The Justice Department and intelligence community should have acted far more quickly and decisively to contain that damage, no matter how many political headaches it caused for the front-running Democrat presidential candidate.
If Clinton is not held to account for what she has done, the damage to our security procedures going forward will be incalculable. How many other politicians will decide top-secret classifications are mere suggestions, to be discarded at the whim of D.C. aristocrats? Even if one is actually gullible enough to believe the story Clinton gave about not wanting to carry two small portable electronic devices to check her official mail, she’s saying that she caused all this chaos for a matter of minor personal convenience. There are people serving time for less serious offenses who have more plausible excuses.
[h=1]GOWDY: HILLARY GOT RID OF EMAILS ‘ONLY WHEN OUR COMMITTEE BEGAN TO ASK’ FOR THEM[/h]
[COLOR=#FFFFFF !important]
Gowdy: Hillary Got Rid Of Emails 'Only When Our Committee Began To Ask' For Them
Breitbart Non-Syndicated
[COLOR=#DDDDDD !important]
[/COLOR]
[/COLOR]
by IAN HANCHETT12 Aug 2015164
Benghazi Select Committee Chairman Representative
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
stated that Hillary Clinton only decided to get rid of emails “when our committee began to ask the State Department for her emails” in an interview broadcast on Wednesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports.”Gowdy was asked, “What do you think happened in this case? Do you have any understanding as to whether the server was wiped clean?” He answered, “Well, I just know what her attorney said, which is it wouldn’t matter if we had the server or not. So, the bureau is really good at reconstructing things. There are folks in the past who have thought that they have deleted or wiped things clean, and the forensic computer experts are able to reconstruct it. I find it interesting, however, that it was 20 months after she separated from the State Department when she decided to wipe the server clean or delete. So, for 20 months those emails were neither too burdensome, nor too cumbersome. It was only when our committee began to ask the State Department for her emails that she said, ‘You know what, it’s been 20 months, gosh, I really need to get rid of this stuff.’ I just don’t think that passes the laugh test, but I haven’t had a chance to ask her about it either.”
Earlier Gowdy said, “you and I probably both delete emails all the time, but we don’t go through the extra steps of wiping something clean. Deleting it because you just find it too cumbersome, or burdensome to carry it in your inbox is one thing. Taking affirmative steps to actually wipe a server, clean denotes, or can denote, a desire, or a willingness, or an intention to conceal far beyond simply just deleting something.”
[COLOR=#FFFFFF !important]
Breitbart Non-Syndicated
[COLOR=#DDDDDD !important]
[/COLOR]
[/COLOR]
by IAN HANCHETT12 Aug 2015164
Benghazi Select Committee Chairman Representative
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
85%
stated that Hillary Clinton only decided to get rid of emails “when our committee began to ask the State Department for her emails” in an interview broadcast on Wednesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports.”Gowdy was asked, “What do you think happened in this case? Do you have any understanding as to whether the server was wiped clean?” He answered, “Well, I just know what her attorney said, which is it wouldn’t matter if we had the server or not. So, the bureau is really good at reconstructing things. There are folks in the past who have thought that they have deleted or wiped things clean, and the forensic computer experts are able to reconstruct it. I find it interesting, however, that it was 20 months after she separated from the State Department when she decided to wipe the server clean or delete. So, for 20 months those emails were neither too burdensome, nor too cumbersome. It was only when our committee began to ask the State Department for her emails that she said, ‘You know what, it’s been 20 months, gosh, I really need to get rid of this stuff.’ I just don’t think that passes the laugh test, but I haven’t had a chance to ask her about it either.”
Earlier Gowdy said, “you and I probably both delete emails all the time, but we don’t go through the extra steps of wiping something clean. Deleting it because you just find it too cumbersome, or burdensome to carry it in your inbox is one thing. Taking affirmative steps to actually wipe a server, clean denotes, or can denote, a desire, or a willingness, or an intention to conceal far beyond simply just deleting something.”
[h=1]Hillary Clinton email probe turns to Huma[/h]
Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s most trusted confidante, is increasingly becoming a central figure in the email scandal that’s haunting her boss on the campaign trail, as Republicans and federal judges seek information about Clinton’s communications while she was running the State Department.
The 2016 Democratic front-runner on Monday told a federal judge that Abedin — long considered her boss’s keeper and even dubbed her “shadow” — had her own email account on Clinton’s now infamous home-brewed server, “which was used at times for government business,” Clinton acknowledged. That’s an unusual arrangement, even for top brass at the State Department.
===
Someone will squeal on Hillary. That is what this is all about.
Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s most trusted confidante, is increasingly becoming a central figure in the email scandal that’s haunting her boss on the campaign trail, as Republicans and federal judges seek information about Clinton’s communications while she was running the State Department.
The 2016 Democratic front-runner on Monday told a federal judge that Abedin — long considered her boss’s keeper and even dubbed her “shadow” — had her own email account on Clinton’s now infamous home-brewed server, “which was used at times for government business,” Clinton acknowledged. That’s an unusual arrangement, even for top brass at the State Department.
===
Someone will squeal on Hillary. That is what this is all about.
Joe Biden 2016!!!
[h=1]Dems near Clinton panic mode[/h]
I’m not sure they completely understand the credibility they are losing, by the second,” said one Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “At some point this goes from being something you can rationalize away to something that becomes political cancer. And we are getting pretty close to the cancer stage, because this is starting to get ridiculous.”
[h=1]Dems near Clinton panic mode[/h]
I’m not sure they completely understand the credibility they are losing, by the second,” said one Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “At some point this goes from being something you can rationalize away to something that becomes political cancer. And we are getting pretty close to the cancer stage, because this is starting to get ridiculous.”
Hillary Clinton requested book with tips on ‘how to delete something so it stays deleted’
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presi...eleted/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
You can't make this shit up!
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presi...eleted/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
You can't make this shit up!
Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company
The tech question: Were emails backed up and can they be retrieved?
The FBI also interested in firm that managed Clinton’s server
Email flap roils Clinton campaign yet again
The tech question: Were emails backed up and can they be retrieved?
The FBI also interested in firm that managed Clinton’s server
Email flap roils Clinton campaign yet again
On April 12, 2015 former senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced her run for President of the United States. Find out where the democratic candidate stands on immigration, ISIS, the minimum wage and gay marriage. Video by Natalie Fertig
BY GREG GORDON, MARISA TAYLOR AND ANITA KUMAR
McClatchy Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON The chairman of the Senate’s homeland security committee has asked a small, 13-year-old Denver technology company that managed tens of thousands of emails for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to describe what measures it took to safeguard national security information.
The FBI, which has embarked on its own scrutiny of Clinton’s private server, also has shown interest in the company, Platte River Networks, which began managing Clinton’s emails in 2013, according to published reports.
Her use of a private, non-governmental server to conduct official State Department business is causing increased turbulence for Clinton as she pursues what many thought would be a relatively smooth ride to the Democratic presidential nomination.
Clinton said late Tuesday that she would turn over to the Justice Department her private server as part of a widening security investigation into her use of private emails to conduct official business. McClatchy reported Tuesday that two emails found on Clinton’s server were classified as “Top Secret,” heightening concerns that Clinton may have improperly shared classified information or stored them on vulnerable Internet equipment that might be open to hacking.
“Given that the server was used to conduct official State Department business, questions have been raised regarding whether classified information was stored on the private server,” Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin wrote Platte’s president in a letter Tuesday. He said he also wants to know “if that data was secure, who had access to that material and whether all official documents were appropriately preserved.”
Clinton has said that after she turned over all of her official emails to the State Department last December, she wiped clean her server which contained over 61,000 emails. Clinton said she permanently deleted about half because they were personal and turned over the rest because they were related to State Department business. Senior Republicans in Congress now want to know whether Platte River has a backup file containing the deleted emails.
In the letter obtained by McClatchy, Chairman Johnson asked company President Treve Suazo to respond to detailed questions within two weeks.
He requested all communications referring to the server “between or among employees or contractors of Platte River” and between company employees and the family’s global charity, the Clinton Foundation. Johnson also sought an explanation of whether the company is “authorized to maintain or access classified information.”
Suazo and other company officials did not respond to phone requests seeking comment.
Platte River’s role grew more crucial Tuesday when the inspector general for the U.S. Intelligence Community advised Congress that two emails contained information it deemed “Top Secret.” The emails were not marked as classified when they were written, and Clinton has repeatedly denied ever sending or receiving classified information.
The declaration by Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III, however, ramped up the stakes, because security officials had been less concerned about the arrangement if information was classified no higher than “Secret.”
Platte River’s services were sought in early 2013 to improve security of the server, which was installed for former President Bill Clinton at the couple’s home in New York state years earlier, The Washington Post reported recently.
The Colorado firm’s hiring coincided with the discovery that an email account for Clinton’s longtime confidant, private consultant Sidney Blumenthal, had been hacked by a Romanian national Marcel Lazar Lehel, known as Guccifer.
Brian Reid, a cybersecurity expert with Internet Systems Consortium, said Clinton’s use of a reputable company to manage her server means it was less likely to be vulnerable to hackers.
Reid and a second security expert said that if Platte River used a backup server for extra security, it’s likely that some data Clinton had deleted could be retrieved.
Darren Hayes, a cybersecurity professor at Pace University’s Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems, said it’s very common “in this day and age” for a company working with a client to back up their materials.
Nonetheless, it’s unclear what investigators might find on the server.
Hayes said what might be found will be determined by how the deletions were done.
“It depends on what kind of tools they used,” Hayes said.
One is a physical security back-up, which protects against the loss of data during a computer crash. That type of back-up is short-term.
“Every company in the managed IT business will do physical security back-ups,” he said. “It’s similar to the concept of security video from the cops shows. If a cop subpoenas it, there are only very recent backups. A physical security backup can be overwritten in a matter of weeks.”
Another type archives data farther back in time and is intended to be a record of what the data was at certain times in the past, Reid said. Companies dedicated to archival backups store the data in high-security warehouses.
“Archival back-ups can be subpoenaed. They are evidence,” he said. “They’re extremely hard to wipe clean.”
If Clinton had a backup, the type likely would be specified in her contract with the company that provided the server, Reid said.
Clinton’s campaign did not respond to questions Wednesday.
But her communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, sent a lengthy email to supporters to dispel “misinformation,” explaining why she used a private email account, what emails she turned over and assuring that there is no criminal inquiry into Clinton’s conduct.
“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.
McClatchy Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON The chairman of the Senate’s homeland security committee has asked a small, 13-year-old Denver technology company that managed tens of thousands of emails for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to describe what measures it took to safeguard national security information.
The FBI, which has embarked on its own scrutiny of Clinton’s private server, also has shown interest in the company, Platte River Networks, which began managing Clinton’s emails in 2013, according to published reports.
Her use of a private, non-governmental server to conduct official State Department business is causing increased turbulence for Clinton as she pursues what many thought would be a relatively smooth ride to the Democratic presidential nomination.
Clinton said late Tuesday that she would turn over to the Justice Department her private server as part of a widening security investigation into her use of private emails to conduct official business. McClatchy reported Tuesday that two emails found on Clinton’s server were classified as “Top Secret,” heightening concerns that Clinton may have improperly shared classified information or stored them on vulnerable Internet equipment that might be open to hacking.
“Given that the server was used to conduct official State Department business, questions have been raised regarding whether classified information was stored on the private server,” Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin wrote Platte’s president in a letter Tuesday. He said he also wants to know “if that data was secure, who had access to that material and whether all official documents were appropriately preserved.”
Clinton has said that after she turned over all of her official emails to the State Department last December, she wiped clean her server which contained over 61,000 emails. Clinton said she permanently deleted about half because they were personal and turned over the rest because they were related to State Department business. Senior Republicans in Congress now want to know whether Platte River has a backup file containing the deleted emails.
In the letter obtained by McClatchy, Chairman Johnson asked company President Treve Suazo to respond to detailed questions within two weeks.
He requested all communications referring to the server “between or among employees or contractors of Platte River” and between company employees and the family’s global charity, the Clinton Foundation. Johnson also sought an explanation of whether the company is “authorized to maintain or access classified information.”
Suazo and other company officials did not respond to phone requests seeking comment.
Platte River’s role grew more crucial Tuesday when the inspector general for the U.S. Intelligence Community advised Congress that two emails contained information it deemed “Top Secret.” The emails were not marked as classified when they were written, and Clinton has repeatedly denied ever sending or receiving classified information.
WAS PLATTE RIVER NETWORKS EVER MADE AWARE THAT THE INFORMATION ON SECRETARY CLINTON’S PRIVATE SERVER MAY CONTAIN CLASSIFIED OR SENSITIVE SECURITY DATA?Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin
At a State Department briefing Wednesday, Mark Toner, a spokesman, said the two emails designated as Top Secret “weren’t sent by her.”
The declaration by Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III, however, ramped up the stakes, because security officials had been less concerned about the arrangement if information was classified no higher than “Secret.”
Platte River’s services were sought in early 2013 to improve security of the server, which was installed for former President Bill Clinton at the couple’s home in New York state years earlier, The Washington Post reported recently.
The Colorado firm’s hiring coincided with the discovery that an email account for Clinton’s longtime confidant, private consultant Sidney Blumenthal, had been hacked by a Romanian national Marcel Lazar Lehel, known as Guccifer.
Brian Reid, a cybersecurity expert with Internet Systems Consortium, said Clinton’s use of a reputable company to manage her server means it was less likely to be vulnerable to hackers.
Reid and a second security expert said that if Platte River used a backup server for extra security, it’s likely that some data Clinton had deleted could be retrieved.
Darren Hayes, a cybersecurity professor at Pace University’s Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems, said it’s very common “in this day and age” for a company working with a client to back up their materials.
Nonetheless, it’s unclear what investigators might find on the server.
Hayes said what might be found will be determined by how the deletions were done.
“It depends on what kind of tools they used,” Hayes said.
WE HAVE THE FACTS, OUR PRINCIPLES, AND YOU ON OUR SIDE. AND IT'S VITAL THAT YOU READ AND ABSORB THE REAL STORY SO THAT YOU KNOW WHAT TO SAY THE NEXT TIME YOU HEAR ABOUT THIS AROUND THE DINNER TABLE OR THE WATER COOLER.Campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri to Clinton supporters
Reid, a cybersecurity expert with Internet Systems Consortium, said there are two types of back-ups.
One is a physical security back-up, which protects against the loss of data during a computer crash. That type of back-up is short-term.
“Every company in the managed IT business will do physical security back-ups,” he said. “It’s similar to the concept of security video from the cops shows. If a cop subpoenas it, there are only very recent backups. A physical security backup can be overwritten in a matter of weeks.”
Another type archives data farther back in time and is intended to be a record of what the data was at certain times in the past, Reid said. Companies dedicated to archival backups store the data in high-security warehouses.
“Archival back-ups can be subpoenaed. They are evidence,” he said. “They’re extremely hard to wipe clean.”
If Clinton had a backup, the type likely would be specified in her contract with the company that provided the server, Reid said.
Clinton’s campaign did not respond to questions Wednesday.
But her communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, sent a lengthy email to supporters to dispel “misinformation,” explaining why she used a private email account, what emails she turned over and assuring that there is no criminal inquiry into Clinton’s conduct.
“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.
[h=1]HILLARY CLINTON REQUESTED BOOK WITH TIPS ON ‘HOW TO DELETE SOMETHING SO IT STAYS DELETED’[/h]
AP Photo/David Becker
by JOHN NOLTE13 Aug 20151,570
According to ABC News, the latest dump of Hillary Clinton’s emails released by the State Department reveals that the Democrat presidential frontrunner asked to borrow a book that contained tips on how to permanently delete your emails:
The FBI is now in control of the server.
by JOHN NOLTE13 Aug 20151,570
According to ABC News, the latest dump of Hillary Clinton’s emails released by the State Department reveals that the Democrat presidential frontrunner asked to borrow a book that contained tips on how to permanently delete your emails:
The last batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department included one from Clinton asking to borrow a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe. …
Take, for example, Chapter Six: “The Email That Can Land You In Jail.” The chapter includes a section entitled “How to Delete Something So It Stays Deleted.”
“Some people are hoarders, some are checkers,” the authors write. “The main thing to consider is that once you do decide to delete, it’s like taking the garbage from your kitchen and putting it in your hallway. It’s still there.”
While Secretary of State, Clinton violated government regulations by not only using a private email account for all of her government work, she also used a secret server stored in her New York home. Clinton then deleted more than 30,000 emails claiming they were all personal.Take, for example, Chapter Six: “The Email That Can Land You In Jail.” The chapter includes a section entitled “How to Delete Something So It Stays Deleted.”
“Some people are hoarders, some are checkers,” the authors write. “The main thing to consider is that once you do decide to delete, it’s like taking the garbage from your kitchen and putting it in your hallway. It’s still there.”
The FBI is now in control of the server.
[h=1]JOHN KERRY WRITES EMAILS ASSUMING SPIES ARE READING THEM[/h]
REUTERS/EDUARDO MUNOZ
by JOHN HAYWARD12 Aug 201555
[h=2]The current Secretary of State, John Kerry, is probably trying to do his predecessor Hillary Clinton a favor by assuring Americans that in this sad-sack era of reduced Obama Administration expectations, it’s probably best to assume Russian and Chinese spies are reading every single email written by top American officials.[/h]Many an Obama and Clinton staffer must be hissing Stop helping, John! between clenched teeth.
Kerry went as far as telling Scott Pelley of CBS Evening News that he writes all of his emails on the assumption that hackers will be reading them.
“It is very likely. It is not … outside the realm of possibility and we know they have attacked a number of American interests over the course of the last few days,” Kerry mused. “It’s very possible … and I certainly write things with that awareness.”
CBS assumes this was meant primarily as damage control over the Administration’s allowing Chinese hackers to loot the U.S. government of employee data, news that China has also penetrated the email accounts of some high-placed Obama Administration officials, and the revelation that Russia appears to have hacked the Pentagon’s email system. It’s likely that Kerry taped this interview before the Clinton top-secret email revelations broke big, but maybe he got a heads-up and thought it would be a good idea to downplay the security value of the email system Clinton was supposed to be using.
Kerry’s idea for addressing the hacking crisis is to have President Obama discuss it with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a September meeting: “We have agreed to begin to have a working group dig into this more directly because it is an enormous concern.”
That’s not a surprising sentiment coming from one of the principle actors in Obama’s disastrous “nuclear deal” with Iran. China, of course, loudly maintains that it has nothing to do with hacking, and hates hackers more than anyone, just as Iran insists it’s a peaceful nation of beatniks that only wants nuclear power because it’s tired of pumping all that gas out of the ground. China will be only too happy to participate in working groups about data security. With any luck, they’ll restrain themselves and avoid hacking Obama’s cell phone while he’s chatting with his Chinese counterpart.
Is everyone tired of this dreary age of failure yet? The Obama crew’s transcendent belief in the power and wisdom of government, which they think should be micro-managing every American business and personal life, is matched only by the staggering incompetence of the hugely expensive government they administer. There’s no sum of our money these people aren’t eager to spend, but all we get in return for it is dismal failure and lame excuses – websites that blow up on the launch pad, waste and fraud rising to historic levels, an EPA that poisons our rivers, foreign policy so inept that a tidal wave of people is fleeing across Europe and piling up on the shores of France, and security so lax that everything is ripe for hacker pickings.
Now we get this preposterous Secretary of State glibly assuring us that he writes his mail on the assumption that it will all be stolen as soon as he clicks Send. Not even the Carter years ended with expectations lowered so much.
by JOHN HAYWARD12 Aug 201555
[h=2]The current Secretary of State, John Kerry, is probably trying to do his predecessor Hillary Clinton a favor by assuring Americans that in this sad-sack era of reduced Obama Administration expectations, it’s probably best to assume Russian and Chinese spies are reading every single email written by top American officials.[/h]Many an Obama and Clinton staffer must be hissing Stop helping, John! between clenched teeth.
Kerry went as far as telling Scott Pelley of CBS Evening News that he writes all of his emails on the assumption that hackers will be reading them.
“It is very likely. It is not … outside the realm of possibility and we know they have attacked a number of American interests over the course of the last few days,” Kerry mused. “It’s very possible … and I certainly write things with that awareness.”
CBS assumes this was meant primarily as damage control over the Administration’s allowing Chinese hackers to loot the U.S. government of employee data, news that China has also penetrated the email accounts of some high-placed Obama Administration officials, and the revelation that Russia appears to have hacked the Pentagon’s email system. It’s likely that Kerry taped this interview before the Clinton top-secret email revelations broke big, but maybe he got a heads-up and thought it would be a good idea to downplay the security value of the email system Clinton was supposed to be using.
Kerry’s idea for addressing the hacking crisis is to have President Obama discuss it with Chinese President Xi Jinping during a September meeting: “We have agreed to begin to have a working group dig into this more directly because it is an enormous concern.”
That’s not a surprising sentiment coming from one of the principle actors in Obama’s disastrous “nuclear deal” with Iran. China, of course, loudly maintains that it has nothing to do with hacking, and hates hackers more than anyone, just as Iran insists it’s a peaceful nation of beatniks that only wants nuclear power because it’s tired of pumping all that gas out of the ground. China will be only too happy to participate in working groups about data security. With any luck, they’ll restrain themselves and avoid hacking Obama’s cell phone while he’s chatting with his Chinese counterpart.
Is everyone tired of this dreary age of failure yet? The Obama crew’s transcendent belief in the power and wisdom of government, which they think should be micro-managing every American business and personal life, is matched only by the staggering incompetence of the hugely expensive government they administer. There’s no sum of our money these people aren’t eager to spend, but all we get in return for it is dismal failure and lame excuses – websites that blow up on the launch pad, waste and fraud rising to historic levels, an EPA that poisons our rivers, foreign policy so inept that a tidal wave of people is fleeing across Europe and piling up on the shores of France, and security so lax that everything is ripe for hacker pickings.
Now we get this preposterous Secretary of State glibly assuring us that he writes his mail on the assumption that it will all be stolen as soon as he clicks Send. Not even the Carter years ended with expectations lowered so much.
