^^^ That second one? Now that oughtta be a sticker on every lamp post in every major city in the country.

new emails released show the Clinton team rigged the Benghazi hearing questions

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...aring-questions.html

to help you thru this, CDM = Cheryl Mills

Diane Reynolds on clintonemail.com = Chelsea Clinton

to protect the guilty

Newly released emails suggest a senior Hillary Clinton aide stage-managed her first hearing on the Benghazi terrorist attack by feeding specific topics Clinton wanted to address to Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, who at the time was acting chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

"We wired it that Menendez would provide an opportunity to address two topics we needed to debunk (her actions/whereabouts on 9/11, and these email from Chris Stevens about moving locations,)" Clinton media gatekeeper Philippe Reines wrote to Chelsea Clinton the morning of the Jan. 23, 2013 hearing.

Right out of the gate, the first hearing question from Menendez that day covered both topics referenced by Reines.

Menendez asked for Clinton’s “insights on the decision-making process regarding the location of the Mission.” The senator added, “can you also in your response, you touched upon it in your opening statement, but what actions were you and your staff taking the night of September 11 and into September 12?"

video at link

Clintons to star in 2016 Remake of The Menagerie by DNC



Part of the original Star Trek series, The Menagerie tells the story of a Star Fleet captain whom a cunning alien race tricks into living with a hideous woman by creating an illusionary reality, in which they are both healthy, beautiful, and romantic.

The 2016 remake of this story by DNC Studios premiered at the Democratic Convention, with an updated plot, in which the same illusion expands to the entire audience: the viewers see the hideous woman, played by Hillary Clinton, as healthy, beautiful, and romantic, while her partner, played by Bill Clinton, has always seen her for what she really is but continues to play along out of habit and for the sake of convenience.

One of her supporters on the news posited that Donald Trump wouldn't know what a "C" in the margin meant, either. Probably, but he hadn't been instructed in how to handle and protect Classified information, either--which Hillary supposedly had been. (And if he had been, he'd definitely remember it!)

flashguy

This message has been edited. Last edited by: flashguy,

I just watched half of her interview with David Muir before I had to leave the room in disgust. He let her off the hook by not addressing the elephant in the room which is "By your position as Secretary of State and having Original Classifying Authority, didn't you recognize the fact that you were receiving and sending unmarked classified information?"

The follow-up question should have been "Since you didn't understand or recognize classified information, can you explain to the American public how you are fit to be president?"

The same old excuse that the emails weren't marked with headers either incoming or outgoing was used. This is absolutely disgusting to those of us with enough integrity to hold an actual security clearance.

When asked by Sean Hannity whether or not it was difficult to hack these documents, Assange took the opportunity to go on the offensive, stating that it was “absolutely incredible” for Clinton to lie regarding not knowing that the bracketed (C) stood for a classified document. He repeated emphatically that “She is lying”.

Assange proceeded to hold up a document on air showing which showed Hillary herself sent a document with such a classification marking, stating that it was only one of thousands of examples.

Julian Assange: I just want to say one thing, in the FBI report released Friday I agree with your analysis. It is very strange that it was released Friday afternoon on a Labor weekend. I do think it brings up questions to what sort of game the FBI is trying to play. But Hillary Clinton says she can’t remember what a “c” in brackets stands for. Everyone in positions of government and in Wikileaks knows it stands for ‘classified confidential.’

And in fact we have already released thousands of cables by Hillary Clinton. Here she is “Clinton” see, that’s her signature. With a “c” in brackets right there. We have thousands of examples where she, herself has used this “c” in brackets and signed it off. And more than 22,000 times that she has received cables from others with this “c” in brackets.



http://www.foxnews.com/politic...ly-as-next-week.html

quote:

Originally posted by TMats:

Silly Muppets. (C) = Confidential. Not Classified. But Confidential is a classification level.

quote:

"She's on her game!"

"The moment so far was her choking up."

Yes. Oscar worthy performances to be sure.

Comey sends a memo to FBI employees

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2...ges/09/07/comey2.pdf

To all:
Because it is generating a lot of interest, I thought I should update you on where we are with our commitment to transparency in the wake of the Clinton email investigation. As I promised in July, we have leaned very far forward in providing transparency on a couple of fronts:

Congress. In order to afford Congress ample opportunity to discharge its oversight responsibilities, we took the unusual step of sending relevant 302s, our case summary Letter Head Memorandum, and the classified emails we recovered during the investigation to the House and Senate security offices. That permitted them to be reviewed by a number of committees with jurisdiction, instead of requiring that committee staff come to FBI headquarters to review the documents as we would normally require.

There have been a variety of complaints because we redacted personal information and, at the request of the originating agency, restricted certain classified portions only to the Intelligence Committees, but our production has been unprecedented. I will be up on Capital Hill the last week of September to testify before the House Judiciary Committee. This is our regular annual oversight hearing, so I’m hoping to cover many aspects of the Bureau’s great work. Of course, I’m guessing folks will want to ask about the email investigation.

Through public statements, testimony (4 hours and 40 minutes without stopping, but who’s counting), and prompt document productions, we have offered unprecedented transparency of the high-quality work your colleagues did in the case. Now I would like to talk about our other work, of which we have plenty.

FOIA. As you might imagine, we have also received many requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and lots of your colleagues have been working very hard to process materials under the statute, get the necessary sign-off from other agencies with interests in the information, and get it out to the public. We finished that process Friday morning with respect to the 302 of Secretary Clinton’s interview and our Letter Head Memorandum summarizing the investigation.

I almost ordered the material held until Tuesday because I knew we would take all kinds of grief for releasing it before a holiday weekend, but my judgment was that we had promised transparency and it would be game-playing to withhold it from the public just to avoid folks saying stuff about us. We don’t play games. So we released it Friday. We are continuing to process more material and will release batches of documents as they are ready, no matter the day of the week.

You may be sick of this, but let me leave you with a few words about how I have been describing the email investigation in private to our former employees as I meet them around the country. I explain to them that there are two aspects to this: (1) our judgment about the facts and prosecutive merit; and (2) how we decided to talk about that judgment. I tell them that the difficult decision was actually the second part, not the first. At the end of the day, the case itself was not a cliff-hanger; despite all the chest-beating by people no longer in government, there really wasn’t a prosecutable case.

The hard part was whether to offer unprecedented transparency about our thinking. I explain to our alumni that I struggled with that part, but decided the best way to protect the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the American people’s sense of justice was to announce it in the way we did – with extraordinary transparency and without any kind of coordination.

I explain to our alums that I’m okay if folks have a different view of the investigation (although I struggle to see how they actually could, especially when they didn’t do the investigation), or about the wisdom of announcing it as we did (although even with hindsight I think that was the best course), but I have no patience for suggestions that we conducted ourselves as anything but what we are – honest, competent, and independent. Those suggesting that we are “political” or part of some “fix” either don’t know us, or they are full of baloney (and maybe some of both).

I will try not to bother you with this any longer.

Jim Comey

**************************

I tried to get thru the report that Comey put out on the Clinton interview. I never got thru it. But I will try again.

It is so painfully obvious that the FBI did a shitty job of this investigation. Clinton and her cronies said the most outrageous lies and nonsense. The FBI response seemed to have been, "okay" in every case.

This really stinks to high heaven. I have ZERO confidence in Jim Comey.

quote:

I explain to our alums that I’m okay if folks have a different view of the investigation (although I struggle to see how they actually could, especially when they didn’t do the investigation)...

No sir, they didn't do the investigation. But they, like us, can read the evidence of released emails and clearly see that classified information was being sent over an unprotected, unclassified server. Based on that alone, how is the investigation going to determine how all the classified information in those emails jumped the air gap from classified to unclassified systems?

So "there really wasn't a prosecutable case" to be found against anyone? Certainly you jest, sir.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
When I was in the service, if I released top secret or secret info i would have been locked up.

Period.

Absolutely! And the law does not contain any provision for "intent"--it matters not whether the release was on purpose or by accident/inattention. It also does not matter if anyone unauthorized actually got access to it--the mere fact the document/information was not properly secured is enough to put one in Jail.

flashguy

So when did the FBI take over the role of a prosecutor? The evidence should have been handed over to the Justice Department and a decision made there.The FBI has forever been tarnished.

how convenient.

Justice Dept. Granted Immunity to Specialist Who Deleted Hillary Clinton’s Emails

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09...s-investigation.html

A computer specialist who deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails despite orders from Congress to preserve them was given immunity by the Justice Department during its investigation into her personal email account, according to a law enforcement official and others briefed on the investigation.

Republicans have called for the department to investigate the deletions, but the immunity deal with the specialist, Paul Combetta, makes it unlikely that the request will go far.

The F.B.I. described the deletions by Mr. Combetta in a summary of its investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s account that was released last Friday. The documents blacked out the specialist’s name, but the law enforcement official and others familiar with the case identified the employee as Mr. Combetta.

Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said that the deletions by the specialist, who worked for a Colorado company called Platte River Networks, had already been “thoroughly examined by the F.B.I. prior to its decision to close out this case.”

“As the F.B.I.’s report notes,” Mr. Fallon said, “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.”

A lawyer for Mr. Combetta and a spokesman for the Justice Department declined to comment.

The House oversight committee has asked officials from Platte River Networks, Mr. Combetta and others to appear at a hearing before his committee on Tuesday about how the email account was set up and how the messages were deleted.

According to the F.B.I. documents, Mr. Combetta told the bureau in February that he did not recall deleting the emails. But in May, he told a different story.

In the days after Mrs. Clinton’s staffers called Platte River Networks in March 2015, Mr. Combetta said realized that he had not followed a December 2014 order from Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers to have the emails deleted. Mr. Combetta then used a program called BleachBit to delete the messages, the bureau said.

In Mr. Combetta’s first interview with the F.B.I. in February, he said he did not recall seeing the preservation order from the Benghazi committee, which Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer, Cheryl D. Mills, had sent to Platte River. But in his May interview, he said that at the time he made the deletions “he was aware of the existence of the preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton’s email data” on the Platte River server.

*****************

FBI looks worse and worse. I am as sad as I am angry that even the FBI is now corrupt. Pretty scary.

wanted to add to the above post.

Think back to when the story was first breaking.

Platte River Networks was claiming they were so innocent.

Now we know it was a Platte River employee who bleachbit the emails after he knew the emails had been subpoenaed.

But all the actors in this criminal activity and cover up get to walk away clean.


from a year ago :

http://completecolorado.com/pa...ements-from-clinton/

A Platte River invoice to the Clinton accountant for legal expenses

The invoice also shows that Platte River Networks flew in one of their top IT experts from the east coast, Paul Combetta, specifically to deal with issues related to the Clinton Server flap. According to a previous company bio, Combetta is PRN’s only employee not based in Colorado.


Marcum LLP = Clinton Accountant

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

Alright, forget the personal server and sending/receiving classified material--for the moment. Where is the obstruction of justice charge?

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Justice Dept. Granted Immunity to Specialist Who Deleted Hillary Clinton's Emails

Welcome to the Klinton Krime Klan, Paul. Just act incredibly clueless and we will shovel some money your way. Don't worry Congress and the FBI won't touch you. Cross us and you will be Fostered.

quote:

Originally posted by 2012BOSS302:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Justice Dept. Granted Immunity to Specialist Who Deleted Hillary Clinton's Emails

Welcome to the Klinton Krime Klan, Paul. Just act incredibly clueless and we will shovel some money your way. Don't worry Congress and the FBI won't touch you. Cross us and you will be Fostered.

You realize immunity is often offered to low level suspects in order to get them to talk, give information about higher ups. With immunity, there is no 5th Amendment right to remain silent. The grants are not gifts, usually.

What's all this about an earpiece in HRCs ear at the forum the other night?