Judge Blasts State Dept on Hillary Email Production, then this!

Judge blasts State Dept for slow-walking Hillary emails

WashingtonTimes: A federal judge blasted the Obama administration for slow-walking the release of some of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails, saying in court Monday that the government appears to be withholding information from voters ahead of the election.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon said the State Department in not “being all that cooperative,” and told the Justice Department lawyers to get the State Department to shape up and do its duty.

“Get with the program, so to speak, so that the people of this country can have the information they need,” he ordered. “The State Department needs to start cooperating to the fullest extent possible. They are not perceived to be doing that.”

Judge Leon, who has earned a reputation as a funny but caustic jurist, particularly when he finds government bungling, said the Justice Department, by not forcing the State Department to cooperate better, is risking its own storied reputation.

He specifically called out the federal programs branch that acts as the lawyer for the rest of the government, and the head of that division, Marcia Berman. Ms. Berman wasn’t in the courtroom Monday, but has been a frequent figure at the courthouse over the last year as the administration has had to defend its handling of Mrs. Clinton’s emails.

Mondays’s case, filed by the Daily Caller News Foundation, concerned documents detailing Mrs. Clinton’s access to top secret programs. The State Department said it has found more than 1,000 documents dealing with the subject, but said it would take nearly a month to process 450 unclassified documents, and couldn’t say how long it would take to process the classified ones.

The case is one of dozens pending where the department has been accused of slow-walking, keeping information out of public view for far longer than is allowed under the Freedom of Information Act.

The State Department says it is overwhelmed by the requests and its own limited budget and manpower. Officials also say the Clinton emails are complicated because they involved classified information that requires a stricter, more time consuming process to clear for the public.

But the government has also been reluctant to divulge important details. At one point on Monday the government lawyer on the case, Jason Lee, said he didn’t know how many pages were in the documents, sparking the judge’s ire.

Judge Leon ordered a faster production of the 450, and when Mr. Lee said they would do their best, Judge Leon pounced.

“Do better than your best. Do it,” he ordered, then proceeded to scold the government for its bungling, and said it was something other judges at the courthouse had noticed.

“You have a client that, to say the least, is not impressing the judges on is court … at being all that cooperative,” he said. “This way of doing business needs to stop.”

He said this was the first open-records case he’d seen where time was so much of the essence, given Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy for the White House, and said the administration needed to realize that.

SMOKING GUN: “BleachBit” Paul Combetta ASKED TO STRIP OR REPLACE VIP’s EMAIL ADDRESS!

The electronic exchange as noted here.

[–]GateheaD 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Add the VIPs email to a generic contact and hide it in plain sight.

[–]exproject 0 points1 point  (5 children)

To my knowledge, there’s no way to edit existing messages, that’s a possibility for a discovery nightmare.

To strip/rename on outbound/inbound you could rewrite it with a transport rule.

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

[–]exproject 0 points1 point  (3 children)

No, a transport rule would only affect future messages.

[–]borismkv 0 points1 point  (2 children)

And it requires an Edge Transport server. Address Rewrite isn’t available on any other role.

[–]exproject 0 points1 point  (1 child)

True. I’ve seen people roll their own Transport Agents for hubs that can do rewrites, but that always looked a bit overkill.

Expanding on what /u/GateheaD said, you could give the VIP a “relay” mailbox. i.e. [email protected] forwards to [email protected]. All your users would mail VIP and Exchange would pass it in the backend so that the forwarding email address was not exposed. Meeting Forward Notifications might give it away though, I’ve never had the requirement of the sender can’t know who the end recipient is so I never actually quantified that behavior.

[–]borismkv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Relay mailbox thing is a good solution, but you just know the VIP is going to respond to emails that get forwarded to his personal email by using his personal email, which would of course result in the personal email getting added. I’d just give him a regular mailbox and ask him to use that if he wants his private address to be private. Ultimately, the privacy of the VIP’s personal email address is something the VIP should be responsible for, not the people that person emails.

[–]odoprasm 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Is there no way to access and edb manually?

[–]brkdncr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you need to control who gets to email the vip, just set up stringent spam filtering where only whitelisted people or people the vip has emailed are allowed.

[–]borismkv 0 points1 point  (2 children)

There is no supported way to do what you’re asking. You can only delete emails after they’re stored in the database. You can’t change them. If there was a feature in Exchange that allowed this, it could result in major legal issues. There may be ways to hack a solution, but I am not aware of any.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

[–]borismkv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a PST file, probably not. MSG files maybe, but you would need a utility to do it, and it would be a one off kind of thing where you’d have to manually modify each email.

Moving forward, though, I would recommend that you create a mailbox for the VIP if they communicate with your environment on a regular basis. That way they aren’t using their personal email and you don’t have to worry about hiding it on future emails. There might not be much you can do about the past ones besides deleting them from all the mailboxes in your environment, which is possible.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

[–]exproject 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just because you have the messages available in multiple formats and locations doesn’t change that it’s an attribute of the envelope not meant to be rewritten. The functionality is just not built into any tool I know of. Having that functionality would create the ability to screw with discovery (I mean, there could be mitigation with versioning, but that would need other configuration)

While it may not be a read-only part of the envelope(I’m not actually sure), the only tool that MIGHT be able to do what you want is MFCMapi, and I don’t think you want to play with that for this job. The chance of getting it wrong would be pretty high I think and it is not a particularly friendly tool. I’m not sure it could be scripted with it either.

My recommendation would be what /u/borismkv said. Making a mailbox for VIP and telling them to use that. Forwarding to VIPs mailbox would be ripe for them to just respond directly instead of responding through his relay mailbox.

As for your existing messages, if the current users absolutely cannot see the existing messages, you’ll need to do a search and export and just forcibly remove the messages from their mailboxes. It’s not clean and not advised by me, but if they don’t want VIPs address out there it will need to be removed. I would do a search with his email address as the query with -LogOnly -LogLevel Full and see what kind of results you get.

Due to Date Lines, Lies and Immunity Proven on Hillary’s Server

It is looking much worse for how the FBI led this investigation while Director Comey has moved on, sorta:

Asked whether he knew if Clinton’s attorneys saw classified information, Comey said he did not know the answer.

Chaffetz was more certain. “It has to be yes, director,” he said. “You came across 110 and they said they went through all of them.”

Comey referred Chaffetz to his statement Tuesday in which he said Clinton’s attorneys sorted the emails for classified information using headers and search terms.

“Did Hillary Clinton give non-cleared people access to classified information?” Chaffetz asked.

“Yes,” Comey said, repeating, “Yes.”

Chaffetz asked, “What do you think her intent was?”

“I think that was to get good legal representation and to make the production to the State Department,” Comey responded. “I think it would be a very tall order in that circumstance, if I don’t see the evidence to make a case that she was acting with criminal intent in her engagement with her lawyers.”  More here from Politico. 

Judicial Watch: New State Department Documents Reveal Top Agency Officials Raised Questions about Clinton Emails in Early August 2013

‘Finally, John, you mentioned yesterday requests for Secretary Clinton’s emails; may I get copies.’ – Margaret Grafeld, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Global Information Services to John Hackett, Deputy Director, Office of Information Programs and Services, August 7, 2013

 Documents Reveal that in Early August 2013, State had 17 Freedom of Information Requests relating to requests for Clinton correspondence

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released 113 pages of new State Department documents, revealing that in early August 2013, top State Department officials raised questions about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails and the number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests seeking information about them.

According to the newly obtained emails, in August 2013, State Department officials were aware of 17 FOIA requests relating to requests for Clinton correspondence, including four that “specifically mention Emails or Email accounts.” Despite the large number of FOIA requests and growing concern among top agency officials, the State Department did not formally request that the former secretary of state produce the emails on the clintonemail.com server until October 2014.

Included among the 17 FOIA requests was a Judicial Watch lawsuit seeking records pertaining to possible conflicts of interest between the actions taken by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Bill Clinton’s activities. The lawsuit produced 276 pages of internal State Department records revealing that within two days of the deadly terrorist attack on Benghazi, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, the president of Libya’s National Congress, asked to participate in a Clinton Global Initiative function and “meet President Clinton.”  The records also show Hillary Clinton’s staff coordinated with the Clinton Foundation’s staff to have her thank Clinton Global Initiative project sponsors for their “commitments” during a Foundation speech on September 25, 2009.  The lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dept. of State (No. 1:13-cv-00772)) was filed on May 28, 2013.

In a 2014 joint expose with the Washington Examiner Judicial Watch’s Chief Investigative Reporter Micah Morrison reported:

[F]ormer President Clinton gave 215 speeches and earned $48 million while his wife presided over U.S. foreign policy, raising questions about whether the Clintons fulfilled ethics agreements related to the Clinton Foundation during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.

According to documents obtained by Judicial Watch and released … in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act case, State Department officials charged with reviewing Bill Clinton’s proposed speeches did not object to a single one.

The new State Department documents records were obtained by Judicial Watch under court order in a March 2016, FOIA lawsuit against the agency for all records “about the processing of a December 2012 FOIA request filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington [CREW]” (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:16-cv-00574)).In December 2012, CREW filed a FOIA request with the Department of State for “records sufficient to show the number of email accounts of or associated with Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton.” In May 2013, the agency responded that “no records responsive to your request were located.”  Earlier this year, the State Department Office of Inspector General concluded that the “no records response” sent in response to this request was “inaccurate and incomplete.”

According to the newly obtained records, by early August 2013, top State Department officials raised questions about FOIA requests seeking information related to the Clinton emails:

From: Grafeld, Margaret P

Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 10:47 AM

To: Walter, Sheryl; Hackett, John

Subject: Fw: IPS significant FOIA Report

… Finally, John, you mentioned yesterday requests for Secretary Clinton’s emails; may I get copies, pls and thx.

[Margaret Grafeld was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Global Information Services. Sheryl Walter was the State Department Director, Office of Information Programs and Services/Global Information Services. John Hackett was the Deputy Director, Office of Information Programs and Services.]

From: Walter, Sheryl L

Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 10:51 AM

To: Hermesman, Geoffrey F [and others]

Subject: FW: IPS Significant FOIA Report

… Geoff, can you get a copy of all requests related to Clinton’s emails?

[Geoffrey Hermesman was a State Department program analyst.]

From: Hermesman, Geoffrey F

Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013  12:54 PM

To: Sheryl Walter [and others]

Subject: RE: IPS significant FOIA Report

A search of the F2 database identified 17 FOIA cases that contain Clinton in the subject line and can be further construed as requests for correspondence between the Secretary and other individuals and/or organizations. Of these, four specifically mention Emails or Email accounts.

From: Finnegan, Karen M

Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 4:10 PM

To: Walter, Sheryl L [and others]

Subject: RE: IPS Significant FOIA Report

Sheryl: To follow-up on my early response, Cristina is handling the Judicial Watch case, CA No. 2013-772 (DDC) (J. Kollar-Kotelly), that seeks access to all communications (including e-mail) between the Department and President Clinton and/or his foundation regarding clearing his speeches [Redacted]

[Karen Finnegan was division chief of the State Department’s freedom of information program.]

Last month, Judicial Watch released 10 pages of Department records that included an email sent by State Department spokesman Brock Johnson alerting Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s then Chief of Staff, that a “significant” Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request had been made for records showing the number of email accounts used by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“These new emails suggest that the Obama State Department knew about the Clinton email problem at least three years but covered it up,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “Any criminal investigation of the Clinton email scandal must include officials in the Obama administration.”

###

 

LawNewz: The New York Times first reported on Combetta’s immunity deal in an article published late Thursday evening.  The article states Combetta’s actions with respect to his work on the Clinton email server were referenced in the FBI investigation summary released on September 2 — but his name was redacted.

According to the FBI investigation summary, Combetta appears to be the individual who deleted Clinton’s email archives from the PRN systems in late March 2015.  The FBI also uncovered evidence of a work ticket referencing a conference call between PRN and Clinton’s attorneys on March 31, 2015, but Combetta was advised by PRN lawyers not to answer questions about the conference call, citing attorney-client privilege.

During his second interview with the FBI in May 2016, Combetta told investigators that he deleted the emails in late March 2015 after recalling an order from Clinton’s team in December 2014 to delete all of the emails that may still exist.  He referred to this recollection as an “oh shit” moment and decided to delete the emails, all the while knowing the preservation order existed.  Combetta also told investigators he used the BleachBit program tool, ensuring the emails could not be recovered by investigators or anyone else.

However, during his previous interview in February 2016, he told investigators that the December 2014 deletion order played no role in his decision to delete the emails.

Despite lying to investigators, Combetta reportedly received immunity from prosecution.

Before Combetta’s identity or immunity deal was reported, the Denver Post published an editorial calling the circumstances surrounding the deletion of the emails a “hard-to-believe shocker that ought to give reasonable people pause.”  PRN is a Colorado based company.

The timing of the deletion is important because it was done after Congress requested Clinton retain all of the emails that still existed.  On Tuesday, Congressman Jason Chaffetz asked the Department of Justice to conduct an obstruction of justice investigation into the deletion of the emails.

However, if reports of the immunity deal are true, it seems unlikely that any sort of obstruction of justice investigation case can go forward.  Combetta would seemingly be protected from prosecution.

That seems to be the conclusion of the Clinton campaign, at least according to what spokesman Brian Fallon told the newspaper.  Fallon said all of this had already been “thoroughly examined by the F.B.I. prior to its decision to close out this case.”

He added, “As the F.B.I.’s report notes, neither Hillary Clinton nor her attorneys had knowledge of the Platte River Network employee’s actions. It appears he acted on his own and against guidance given by both Clinton’s and Platte River’s attorneys to retain all data in compliance with a congressional preservation request.”

Check Out Guccifer 2.0 New DNC Docs and List, Sheesh

The new DNC Chair, Donna Brazile is fretting over this document dump:

Raising an alarm over virus threats to computer systems, Interim Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile cautioned users of documents, which were released in the latest DNC hack, according to PJ Media.

Brazile alleged that the hack was carried out by the infamous Russian hacker Guccifer and warned there could be “potential malware risk” while downloading the documents.

“The DNC is the victim of a crime — an illegal cyberattack by Russian state-sponsored agents who seek to harm the Democratic Party and progressive groups in an effort to influence the presidential election,” Brazile declared in a statement Tuesday, USA Today reported.

“We have been anticipating that an additional batch of documents stolen by Russian agents would be released. Our legal team is now in the process of reviewing these private documents, and attempting to confirm their authenticity, as it is common for Russian hackers to forge documents. According to Reuters, a link to the documents was posted on WikiLeaks’ Twitter account and attributed to alleged hacker Guccifer 2.0, Politico reported.

The documents were released during a presentation on Tuesday from a person speaking on behalf of Guccifer 2.0 at a London cyber security conference, the report said. More from NewsMax here.

New Guccifer 2.0 Leaks – Pay for Play – Top DNC Donors Were Awarded Federal Posts Following Donations

On Tuesday night Guccifer 2.0 dropped 600MB worth of new “DNC Documents.” From Reddit:

 

Julius Genachowski pays DNC $3,494,919, ’09-13 Chairman of the FCC

Richard M. Lobo’s Wife, Caren Lobo, Donated $716,000 To DNC. Obama Then Nominated Richard Lobo For Director Of The International Broadcasting Bureau.

Robert A. Mandell pays DNC $1,121,250, June 2011, President Obama named Mandell the Ambassador to Luxembourg

Katherine Gehl $1,025,000: Board of Director of OPIC (Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), the U.S. Government’s development finance institution) nominated by Obama, confirmed by Senate in 2011

Tony West. 1.059 million for the deputy attorney general position

Alexa Wesner raised $483.100 for the DNC in 2008, then became Ambassador to Austria in 2013

Bruce J. Oreck pays DNC $1,136,613, US ambassador to Finland 2009 to 2015

Crystal Nix-Hines Donated $600,000 To The DNC And Then Was Nominated By President Obama To The Position Of United States Permanent Representative To The United Nations Educational, Scientific And Cultural Organization With The Rank Of Ambassador.

Jane Hartley Donated $605,000 To DNC And Then Was Nominated By Obama To Serve Concurrently As The U.S. Ambassador To The French Republic And The Principality of Monaco.

2 Ambassadors had maxed out contributions of $28,500 1 year+ they received appointments. Eileen Donahoe (UN) and Bill Kennard (EU).

John Roos term as ambassador to Japan concluded in August 2013,In April of 2014 John Roos forms The Roos Group LLC. The Roos Group is focused on strengthening ties between Silicon Valley and Japan in areas that include cross-border investment, venture capital, corporate growth, and the promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship. John Roos donated 2 million, and he’s now running a company that sounds like its making a lot more then 2 million with what its doing

Effective Merger Between the DNC and Obama’s Organizing for America
https://i.sli.mg/I5Z0k6.jpg
OFA is an internet research firm. If the PACs and DNC are colluding and preventing competition for other Internet research firms by providing direct access, wow. Obama showing a lot of corruption here. OFA and DNC systems hosted on same account. Possible campaign finance law violation
https://i.sli.mg/4Oi85w.jpg
More evidence of possibly illegal collusion between DNC and OFA via Blue State Digital
https://i.sli.mg/EasQ4C.jpg
ACORN was shut down because of the kind of collusion that OFC and DNC are engaging in https://i.sli.mg/ZWBPBC.jpg
Freddie/Fannie were used by ACORN to target Red districts 4 Sub prime loans to turn them Blue prompting the housing crash
http://dailysignal.com/2008/10/29/the-acorn-fanniefreddie-connection/
Memo to Tim Kaine when he was DNC chair/Virginia Governor. Shows more OFA/DNC collusion
https://i.sli.mg/bDC1Ft.jpg
More collusion between Kaine/DNC and OFA. Involvement in New Jersey 2009 gubernatorial race
https://i.sli.mg/aDdwhQ.jpg

List of donors
https://i.sli.mg/wZrcZq.jpg

If this isn’t pay for play, I don’t know what is

Starting to see the pattern?

1 Matthew Berzun … Ambassador to UK
2 Julius Genachowski … Former chairman to FCC
3 Frank Sanchez…. Under secretary of commerce
8 Kirk Wagner… Ambassador to Singapore
9 Alan Solomont … Ambassador to Spain
11 John Roos… Ambassador to Japan
12 Nicole Avant… Ambassador to Bahamas
13 Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe … Ambassador to the UN
16 Steve Westly – CFO of California
17 Don Beyer – Ambassador to Switzerland
21 Don Gips – Ambassador to South Africa
22 Howard Gutman – Ambassador to Belgium
24 Cynthia Stroum – Ambassador to Luxembourg
27 Mark Gilbert – Ambassador to New Zealand
31 Norm Eisen – Ambassador to Czech Republic
37 Bruce Oreck – Ambassador to Finland
43 Tony West – deputy Attorney General
45 Bill Kennard – Ambassador to EU

DNC plan to destroy the GOP House majority through nonstop litigation.
https://i.sli.mg/vHJiK3.jpg

The DNC was planning to overturn the GOP House majority by using Latinos as a wedge.
https://i.sli.mg/g5uFiB.jpg

The Democrats have secret links to companies that produce legislative redistricting software
https://i.sli.mg/j0chwp.jpg

DNC plot to steal GOP House seats in Texas. https://i.sli.mg/fXNrsd.jpg

DNC planned for anti-white ethnicity based gerrymandering prior to 2010 elections
https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/775832131897622528
If the GOP hadn’t won in 2010, the Dems would have gerrymandered a permanent majority for the next 2 election cycles https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/775832529354055680

Leaks contained donor credit card info. DNC did not protect. This is illegal.

Memo to Obama deputy CTO Mike Conlow from 2010 shows plan for manipulating information online
https://i.sli.mg/Jh4dkf.jpg

Early voting is designed to skew elections in Dems’ favor. North Carolina used as laboratory
https://i.sli.mg/ZOP2Bf.jpg

DNC starting a National Person Database https://i.sli.mg/Z63sVL.jpg

Collusion with CNBC/Wall Street? There’s a folder named “CNBC” in the DNCleak with info on stocks https://i.sli.mg/Kb43or.jpg

It appears that they were trading stocks on earnings days in 2011 which is quite alarming. These are days that stock prices move the most. If based on insider trading information, this is HUGE!

In the earnings excel file. Bill Clinton just happened to give a speech to one of the companies – Jeffries Group https://i.sli.mg/Uze60F.png
Clinton speeches should be cross referenced with the rest
OK so some of these companies in the earnings play spreadsheet seem to be up to some reeeeaaallly shady stuff regarding lobbying. There could really be something highly illegal here https://i.sli.mg/ke0KeH.png

The DNC may have been invested in Smith and Wessons earnings for Q3 2011. Coincidentally Obama brought in new gun control laws that July.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/07/11/obama-s-new-gun-control-regulations-exclusive.html

Koss was also listed. They settled a class action lawsuit right after earnings were reported in Oct 2011

Ok this is getting really illegal now.
Pike Electric recieved a contract from Clinton chaired MCC for 17.9 million dollars in 2011
https://i.sli.mg/NTDytN.png

The earnings file has dates and ER(earnings) of companies in 2011, before they are released to the public – credit to fellow trader /u/Simon_Inaki and /u/MuricaFirst for their help
FDX: 9/22/11 Confirmed Q112 $1.46

FDX had $1.46

The earnings file on the right is companies listed in a spreadsheet contained in the leaks. The DNC was getting pre-release earnings numbers from these companies so they could trade on insider information. The file is from 2011 and deals with the upcoming earnings released by those companies to the public. Pike was awarded a contract by Clinton for almost 18 million, who then supply the dnc with pre release earnings numbers they can trade on prior to the public release. This is insider trading and makes the DNC members who trade based on this spreadsheet a shit load of money. The Stock Act wasn’t implimented until 2012…after these trades would have been made.

HUGE!
One document specifies how the state swap program is run. Basically, this allows a DNC API to exchange and update data between states’ voter rolls twice a year!

This is how purges happen, this is how voters are targeted and registrations switched, or voters made invalid due to any number of changes by this automated system. This is how Bernie Sanders voters got removed from voter rolls and party affiliations switched. Excerpt from the document:

Swap Summary
After this agreement is negotiated with the ASDC, it is a contract between the DNC and individual states. The DNC is not bound by it in any state that does not sign.
Definitions
• Public Data- Data from government agencies and all other data included in the voter file that does not constitute Proprietary Data.
• DNC Proprietary Data- Data appended or acquired by the DNC, including appended enhancements such as consumer information, political IDs, and models.
• State Party Proprietary Data- Data appended to the public record by the state party or campaigns and organizations in the state.

Data being swapped
State Party Provides:
• State Party Voter File
• Any State Party Proprietary Data collected.
DNC Provides:
• Phone and NCOA matches;
• DNC Proprietary Data relating to registered voters in that state;
• Modeling created or attained by the DNC for that State and appended to records of voters in that state, accompanied by an explanation of the purpose and effectiveness of the model;
• Training of State Party personnel in the use of the above information;
• All information collected or obtained by the DNC concerning partisan or Democratic candidate ID’s in State Party’s state, including information on all persons who have moved into State Party’s state.
• The DNC will maintain and give the State Party access to VoteBuilder, the national Voter Activation Network online platform
Frequency of Swap
This exchange shall take place 2 times each year, and will include this information for an additional new registrant update each year.

Basically, the DNC voting software is not just a database, it is a hydra of servers that update voter information and can pass updated information at the state level with a short explanation (such as voter moved, re-registered, etc.) even when those events didn’t really happen

House Re-Starts Hillary Email Hearings with New Witnesses

Congress demands answers after surprise Clinton investigation immunity

WashingtonExaminer: Many observers were surprised to learn, in a New York Times report, that the contractor who destroyed Hillary Clinton’s emails while they were under a congressional subpoena received immunity from the Justice Department — and then still refused to answer some questions from the FBI. The surprised included the top two Clinton email investigators in Congress, Reps. Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz, who have both pored over the Clinton materials the FBI handed over to lawmakers.

It was news to them. Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, had no idea until the Times learned it. Same for Gowdy, head of the Benghazi committee.

“If there is a reason to withhold the immunity agreement from Congress — and by extension, the people we represent — I cannot think of what it would be,” Gowdy said in a statement. “I look forward to asking the Bureau about any witnesses who were granted immunity or claimed a privilege preventing them from answering questions.”

Chaffetz will start asking those questions tonight — in a rare Monday evening hearing before the Oversight Committee. Among the witnesses called are top officials who deal with Congress for the FBI and the Justice Department.

Perhaps the key question Chaffetz and his fellow Republicans — Democrats won’t be interested — will pose is: What more have you not told us? Committee members appreciated the FBI handing over Clinton email investigative materials, but they have since learned that the FBI was selective in what it gave to Congress. There are documents that weren’t handed over, and there are significant blackouts in the documents that were given to lawmakers.

The most fundamental questions concern the extent of the classified information that Clinton mishandled. In his July 5 public statement, FBI Director James Comey revealed that 110 of Clinton’s emails had material that was classified at the time they were sent, and more than 2,000 additional emails had material that was later determined to be classified. But what was the classified information that Clinton mishandled? Of course the FBI cannot release it, but it could give Congress, and by extension the American people, a more precise characterization of the secrets Clinton handled in what Comey called an “extremely careless” way.

And then there is the process of the FBI’s investigation itself. It’s not just the fact of the email deleter’s immunity that Congress didn’t know. Anyone who has had a chance to look over the only two documents that have been released to the public — a heavily-redacted copy of the FBI’s summary report plus the so-called “302” writeup of the agents’ interview with Clinton — has come away with some very important questions unanswered.

Like: Who actually gave the order to delete Clinton’s emails? And: Did that order come after — not before — that material was under a subpoena from Congress? And: Who decided to give the deleter immunity? And: What questions did the deleter refuse to answer? And: What does immunity mean if the witness granted immunity still refuses to answer questions? And more.

That’s what the Oversight Committee’s second hearing, to be held Tuesday morning, will address. Called to testify — actually subpoenaed to testify — will be Paul Combetta, the technician for Platte River Networks, the Colorado contractor hired by Clinton to handle her email system. Combetta is the man who had the infamous “oh s—t” moment described in the FBI report in which he allegedly realized he had forgotten to carry out a December 2014 order to destroy emails and instead carried it out sometime in March 2015, after the material was under congressional subpoena.

Combetta is also the one who was given immunity and then, according to the FBI, refused to answer questions about a conference call he had around the time of the deletions with Clinton lawyer David Kendall and top Clinton operative Cheryl Mills.

Republican investigators have a lot of questions for Combetta. The first is whether he will show up. Right now, that’s not clear.

Also called to testify is Bryan Pagliano, the former State Department tech worker who set up Clinton’s private email system — and who has also received immunity from the Justice Department. Along with them will be another worker for Platte River Networks and a longtime employee of former President Bill Clinton.

Pagliano’s immunity has been known for a while. But the revelation of immunity given to Combetta, who the FBI report says destroyed Clinton’s emails and backups after the subpoena, deeply troubles Gowdy, a former prosecutor.

“They gave immunity to the trigger man,” Gowdy told Fox News on Friday. “I mean, that’s why those of us who used to do it for a living didn’t like to give immunity … They immunized the one person you most want to prosecute for the destruction of government records.”

*****

DailyCaller: The Denver-based tech firm that worked on Hillary Clinton’s email server billed the candidate $250 an hour for interviews its employee gave to the FBI.

According to an invoice that the tech company, Platte River Networks (PRN), submitted last September to Clinton’s accounting firm, Marcum LLC., the payment was sought for interviews that PRN employee Paul Combetta gave to the FBI.

Politico reported last November that federal investigators interviewed PRN employees in September. The employees were not identified in the article.

One item on the invoice, which was obtained by the website Complete Colorado last year, is a $3,000 charge for 12 hours worth of work for Combetta, who is identified by name and by his initials on the invoice.

The charges were for “federal interviews” and “travel back east.”

Other charges on the invoice suggest that PRN — which charged an hourly rate of $250 — billed Clinton for seven hours of Combetta’s interviews. The date of the entry is Sept. 15. Three other entries on the invoice add up to $1,750 in charges for seven hours of work. One entry is a $1,250 charge for Combetta’s five hour flight to Denver.

Combetta entered the ongoing Clinton email scandal last week after The New York Times reported that he was granted immunity by the Justice Department in exchange for his cooperation with the federal investigation into Clinton’s email server. The report angered South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy, who noted that the FBI’s recent report on the Clinton email investigation showed that Combetta lied to investigators about his decision to delete backups of Clinton’s emails.

Combetta used a software program called BleachBit to delete the backups. The decision came after a conference call with Clinton staffers. Clinton’s campaign said that nobody affiliated with the candidate knew about Combetta’s actions.

It is still unclear whether Clinton paid the PRN invoice which lists Combetta, but the fact that the firm billed for the interview is raising questions about whether it and Combetta were in effect working for Clinton during the investigation.

According to Complete Colorado, the site that published the PRN invoice:

If the Clintons were paying for Mr. Combetta’s time and travel, and especially if they were paying for any legal assistance he received through his employer, Denver-based Platte River Networks, it raises the question of how independent Mr. Combetta’s cooperation with the FBI was. Alternately, it could show he remained tethered, and therefore loyal to some degree, to Hillary Clinton and her team.

Platte River’s spokesman, Andy Boian, did not respond to a request for comment. Combetta did not answer phone calls and a voice mail seeking comment.

 

 

Does Hillary Really Want to be Preezy in the First Place?

Several months before Hillary declared her candidacy, I was of the notion she was not going to run at all given how long it took for her to announce. There was thought that Hillary did not want the White House at all, she just wanted the pomp and circumstance and the money that comes with it. After she made her official announcement, I thought my conclusion was wrong and dismissed my conspiracy.

After this weekend, where Hillary had a serious health ‘episode’, the declaration that she was diagnosed last Friday with pneumonia and has been forced to cancel early campaign stops this week, my conspiracy is back on the table. Does she really want this or is her candidacy a ploy for the Foundation and her health condition is her ticket out?

Hillary and Bill have made several global secretive promises and pledges. They are hardly in any position to fulfill them, especially when under countless investigations, much less when Julian Assange of WikiLeaks is soon to publish his trove of documents.

For comprehensive information on the Foundation and facts to the Clinton’s money system, go here.

And new facts has also surfaced and that is yet another immunity condition for the person who did have a conference call with Hillary’s lawyers to delete her emails. This is coupled with the fact that the FBI did not turn over all the documents as previously promised to the Oversight Committee.

There are some clues as noted by Breitbart:

Cokie Roberts: Dems ‘Nervously Beginning to Whisper’ About Hillary Replacement; Floats Biden as Possibility

Monday on NPR’s “Morning Edition,” ABC political commentator Cokie Roberts offered her thoughts on the apparent health issues regarding Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and the how the party could be looking to handle things if a replacement is needed for Clinton.

See the video here.

According to Roberts, there was already conversation within the party about such a possibility.

“The fact that it comes now when the polls are tightening and Democrats are already saying that Hillary was the only candidate who could not beat Trump and it is taking her off of the campaign trail, canceling her trip to California – it has them very nervously beginning to whisper about having her step aside and finding another candidate.”

When asked if that really could happen, Roberts called it “unlikely to be a real thing,” but floated the name of Vice President Joe Biden as a possible replacement.

“I think it is unlikely to be a real thing,” she added. “And I’m sure it is an overreaction of an already skittish party. But you know, they have looked at what happens in that circumstance. The Democratic National Committee chair convenes the committee and they vote. Now ironically, the candidate who everybody looks at is Joe Biden, who is older than Hillary Clinton. But then again, so is Donald Trump and by the way we know nothing about his health.”

(h/t Mediaite)

More from the AmericanMirror:

tweets-on-hillary-_1

 

****