Posted on 08/11/2015 7:15:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yesterday, Hillary Clinton submitted a sworn declaration under penalty of perjury in a case involving Judicial Watch and their FOIA request to the State Department. At issue was whether the former Secretary of State had provided all of the work product e-mails during her time at State to the archivists, a point under contention in Judge Emmet Sullivan’s federal court. Sullivan had wanted a much broader explanation from Hillary as well as Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin in his July 31st order, but all he got back was this:
I, Hillary Rodham Clinton, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct:
- While I do not know what information may be “responsive” for purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records to be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.
- As a result of my directive, approximately 55,000 pages of these emails were produced to the Department on December 5, 2014.
- Cheryl Mills did not have an account on clintonemail.com. Huma Abedin did have such an account which was used at times for government business.
Not only is this not fully responsive to Judge Sullivan’s order, it’s basically a tautology. She provided what she provided, and that’s all she will provide. All Hillary says is that she believes that everything that was on her server — after, it should be noted although not stated in the declaration, that more than 30,000 supposedly private e-mails were expunged — was handed over to State. It says nothing about whether Hillary has certified that nothing responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA demand was left out; Hillary dodges this by claiming not to know what is “responsive,” even though (a) the Judicial Watch FOIA demand and the court’s rulings are easily accessed, and (b) she’s supposedly a lawyer of some repute.
But is this the truth? Until a court seizes the server, we probably can’t know for sure. “We” refers to American citizens who are expected to choose the next leader of the free world. But perhaps there is another entity with more power to determine whether Hillary is hiding something.
Help us, Xi Jinping, you’re our only hope ….
China’s cyber spies have accessed the private emails of “many” top Obama administration officials, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official and a top secret document obtained by NBC News, and have been doing so since at least April 2010.
The email grab — first codenamed “Dancing Panda” by U.S. officials, and then “Legion Amethyst” — was detected in April 2010, according to a top secret NSA briefing from 2014. The intrusion into personal emails was still active at the time of the briefing and, according to the senior official, is still going on.
In 2011, Google disclosed that the private gmail accounts of some U.S. officials had been compromised, but the briefing shows that private email accounts from other providers were compromised as well.
The senior official says the private emails of “all top national security and trade officials” were targeted.
Did I say “only hope”? Naaaaaaah. China penetrated the White House and the Obama administration for five years, according to NBC News. Hillary Clinton’s e-mail system was so vulnerable that practically anyone could have penetrated it — and did. Gawker got e-mails between Hillary and Sidney Blumenthal from a separate, private hack that took place a couple of years ago, which is how Hillary’s personal back-channel intel operation got exposed in the first place.
With such a cavalier attitude at the highest levels of the Obama administration to data security, it’s no wonder that China has been so successful at gaining intel on our government. That puts all of these officials in highly tenuous positions, too. Undoubtedly, China’s intelligence services have catalogued any number of personal peccadilloes to use as leverage, either to cultivate human-intelligence sources — spies — or to blackmail US officials into favorable terms on US policies. They wouldn’t have waited five years to put those into effect, either.
This, added to the OPM hack, is a national catastrophe. It demonstrates incompetence on a staggering scale, and highlights once again the corrupt incompetence of Hillary Clinton in setting up an even less secure e-mail system as a means of avoiding legitimate Congressional oversight. That’s what made this pushback from Team Hillary flack Jennifer Palmieri so hilarious:
Ahem, @JebBush. Three Months Later, State Department Hasn’t Rooted Out Hackers – WSJ http://t.co/Oeb6XHs2Wc
— Jennifer Palmieri (@jmpalmieri) August 10, 2015
Golly, if only your boss had run the State Department, this all would have been fixed. Oh, wait … https://t.co/ya1AdWvgEQ
— Ed Morrissey (@EdMorrissey) August 10, 2015
The WSJ article notes that the intrusions are only into the unclassified system:
Three months after the State Department confirmed hackers breached its unclassified email system, the government still hasn’t been able to evict them from the department’s network, according to three people familiar with the investigation.
Government officials, assisted by outside contractors and the National Security Agency, have repeatedly scanned the network and taken some systems offline. But investigators still see signs of the hackers on State Department computers, the people familiar with the matter said. Each time investigators find a hacker tool and block it, these people said, the intruders tweak it slightly to attempt to sneak past defenses.
It isn’t clear how much data the hackers have taken, the people said. They reaffirmed what the State Department said in November: that the hackers appear to have access only to unclassified email. Still, unclassified material can contain sensitive intelligence.
What we know about the Clintonemail system is that classified material from intelligence agencies got transmitted through it — and that it had one confirmed hack already, one that seized sensitive material, at the very least. Not only that, but it had none of the safeguards and oversight that State Department systems had at the time. On top of all that, the NBC report shows that these hacks have been going on since Hillary’s second year as SecState, and yet she never took action to enhance security and bolster safeguards around these systems. Instead, she bypassed them for her own personal reasons.
That’s an indictment of Hillary’s leadership, not an excuse for it.
Why would China help destroy Hillary? To them she’s money in the bank.
China has more to gain by holding on to this and then using it against her during the Taiwan negotiations, which they will initiate upon her election.
;)
================================================
THIS JUST IN Judicial Watch announced that the State Department submitted to the court an August 8 a sworn declaration from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding federal records on her controversial homebrew email system.
HILLARY'S DECLARATION: I, Hillary Rodham Clinton, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct:
<><> 1.While I do not know what information may be “responsive” for purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records to be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.
<><> 2. As a result of my directive, approximately 55,000 pages of these emails were produced to the Department on December 5, 2014.
<><> 3. Cheryl Mills did not have an account on clintonemail.com. Huma Abedin did have such an account which was used at times for government business.
Signed........and Executed August 8, 2015
Is that not proof, right there, that Ms. Clinton is guilty of breaking the law? You cannot do government business on accounts set up on personal servers not housed or monitored by the government.
===============================================
Huma Abedin worked as a full-time staffer to Secy of State Hillary Clinton January 2009-June 2012; she was then given a "special government employee" designation and took on various roles (1) at the Clinton Foundation, (2) as a private consultant, and,(3) consulting Teneo Strategies---a company tightly connected to the Clintons.
Huma's job designation is designed to allow individuals who fill "an unmet government need for rare or unique expertise" to retain their private-sector positions while receiving compensation from the government.
UPDATE---Abedin is currently vice-chair of Hillary's presidential campaign committee.
====================================================
As far back as 7/26/13, US Sen Charles Grassley (R-Iowa)has been pressing the State Department to answer questions over Abedin's lucrative govt job arrangement. Grassley wrote in a June 13 letter:
“It appears that Teneo Strategies may have been compensating Ms. Abedin for gathering information from government sources for the purpose of informing investment decisions of her consulting clients - or in other words, political intelligence. This raises important questions about whether Abedin's dual role was adequately disclosed to government officials who may have provided her information without realizing that she was being paid by private investors to gather information.”
Sen Grassley's letter recounted:
<><> Abedin was among several key aides to Hillary Clinton that hosted email accounts on a private server on Hillary's Chappaqua homebrew server, in violation of federal records laws.
<><> Abedin allegedly sent or received more than 7,000 emails on her US government account that involved Teneo's Doug Band, a close confidante and travel companion of the globe-trotting Bill clinTon;
<><> In the investigation of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's activities at Orgy Island, L/E uncovered Bill Clinton and Doug Band listed w/ 21 phone nos and email addresses----L/E recognizes as the MO for tax evasion and money laundering schemes.
<><> one email exchange involved Teneo's Doug Band pressuring Abedin to encourage her State Department boss, Hillary Clinton, to facilitate a White House appointment for one of his clients. Judith Rodin, then-president of the Rockefeller Foundation, "donated hundreds of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation," Mr. Band allegedly noted in his email to Ms. Abedin.
<><> email evidence allegedly suggests that Ms. Abedin and another Hillary aide, Cheryl Mills, colluded to find a way to ensure taxpayers paid for Ms. Abedin's travel to and from New York."
<><> Abedin apparently falsified govt doctments to pocket $33,000 rax dollars from the State Department for leave she said hadn't used. <><> Yet, multiple allegations received by the Judiciary Committee indicated Abedin had actually taken leave during her time as a govt employee, casting doubt on whether Abedin should have received $33,000 tax dollars.
<><> allegations surfaced that the State Dept personnel rule was quietly bent to permit Abedin to collect her government paycheck while wielding her influence to the benefit of her other employers.
<><> Hillary Clinton jetted to Ireland with Abedin at her side for her last official trip before exiting the State Dept, during which Hillary attended an event hosted by a major Clinton Foundation donor that had been promoted by Teneo (for which Abedin then-served as a "consultant")
This was valuable information to Abedin's consulting clients who knew she was (1) a top advisor to Hillary, (2) a senior consultant to Teneo Strategies, and (3) performed other duties at the Clinton Foundation.
The possibility of Abedin using information about Hillary's travel schedule in discussions w/ her clients, could be a serious breach of US ntl security.......since the calendar and travel plans of the Secy of State is considered classified information.
“While I do not know what information may be “responsive” for purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records to be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.” HRC, under oath
If I were the judge, I think I might have to have Hillary front-and-center to explain the following:
“I do not know” (explain what you mean by this, please)
“for purposes of this law suit” (again, ... )
“all e-mails ... in my custody” (Explain what e-mails are not “in your custody”?)
“that were or potentially were” (Are you saying that you are not supplying anything you don’t believe to be relevant or material?)
Like her husband, getting a straight answer out of, or straight supply from this one is also like trying to nail a fart to the wall.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.