KorbenDallas Posted March 8, 2016 Share Posted March 8, 2016 Clinton: Nothing I sent or received was marked classified Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com ---------- Her use of language, "nothing I sent was marked classified, or received was marked classified" is bogus. She is trained to identify what is or isn't classified and is trusted to handle that information accordingly. What worries me is she keeps repeating the line, and this indicates her defense is being built around it. It's going to get dodgy with words; I'm hearing an echo of Bill saying, "it depends on what the meaning of the word is is." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 9, 2016 Author Share Posted March 9, 2016 This kind of Administration attack is a "red flag;" Quote A decision by the FBI to charge Clinton or her top aides for mishandling classified information would be a shock to the political system. In these cases and more, Comey — a Republican who donated in 2012 to Mitt Romney — has proved he is “not attached to the strings of the White House,” said Ron Hosko, the former head of the FBI’s criminal investigative division and a critic of Obama’s law enforcement strategies. Publicly, administration officials have not betrayed any worry about the Clinton probe. They have also downplayed any differences of opinion on Apple. But former officials say the FBI’s moves are clearly ruffling feathers within the administration. Leaks have a purpose... Quote The aggressive posture of the FBI under Director James Comey is becoming a political problem for the White House. The FBI’s demand that Apple help unlock an iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino killers has outraged Silicon Valley, a significant source of political support for President Obama and Democrats. Comey, meanwhile, has stirred tensions by linking rising violent crime rates to the Black Lives Matter movement’s focus on police violence and by warning about “gaps” in the screening process for Syrian refugees. Apparently, these issues are just the start of the political "problem" that Comey has with the Administration, you know, the Administration that Evita has sworn allegiance to: Quote With regards to the Apple standoff, “It’s just not clear [Comey] is speaking for the administration,” said Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterrorism and cybersecurity chief. “We know there have been administration meetings on this for months. The proposal that Comey had made on encryption was rejected by the administration.” Comey has a reputation for speaking truth to power, dating back to a dramatic confrontation in 2004 when he rushed to a hospital to stop the Bush White House from renewing a warrantless wiretapping program while Attorney General John Ashcroft was gravely ill. Comey was Ashcroft’s deputy at the time. That showdown won Comey plaudits from both sides of the aisle and made him an attractive pick to lead the FBI. But now that he’s in charge of the agency, the president might be getting more than he bargained for. I remember that and I am surprised that this column did not mention that Ashcroft was also a Republican, from Missouri, if I remember correctly. http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/272290-comeys-fbi-makes-waves A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 12, 2016 Author Share Posted March 12, 2016 Click - One tumbler in place...looks like Evita left a trail of electronic bread crumbs... Quote Former Hillary Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano, a key witness in the email probe who struck an immunity deal with the Justice Department, has told the FBI a range of details about how her personal email system was set up, according to an intelligence source close to the case who called him a “devastating witness.” The source said Pagliano told the FBI who had access to the former secretary of state’s system – as well as when – and what devices were used, amounting to a roadmap for investigators. "Bryan Pagliano is a devastating witness and, as the webmaster, knows exactly who had access to [Clinton's] computer and devices at specific times. His importance to this case cannot be over-emphasized," the intelligence source said. The source, who is not authorized to speak on the record due to the sensitivity of the ongoing investigation, said Pagliano has provided information allowing investigators to knit together the emails with other evidence, including images of Clinton on the road as secretary of state. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/11/source-clinton-it-specialist-revealing-server-details-to-fbi-devastating-witness.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turkeyfoot Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 On 2/16/2016 at 6:19 PM, Selene said: Valerie Jarret will make the call on indicting Evita. Obama has thrown his support behind the presumptive dem nominee. Telegraphing what he isnt willing to do. If and when the DOJ indicts HC and the resignations begin the sordid tale will be out. Another reason to believe that Trump may have this thing sewn up as long as justice prevails. I had been following Monica Crowleys thesis since last summer over Obamas and the Clintons bad blood (just a few years ago that man would have been getting our coffee). Looks like it didnt pan out. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/us/politics/obama-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0 "In unusually candid remarks, President Obama privately told a group of Democratic donors last Friday that Senator Bernie Sanders is nearing the point where his campaign against Hillary Clinton will come to an end, and that the party must soon come together to back her." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 18, 2016 Author Share Posted March 18, 2016 7 hours ago, turkeyfoot said: Obama has thrown his support behind the presumptive dem nominee. Telegraphing what he isnt willing to do. If and when the DOJ indicts HC and the resignations begin the sordid tale will be out. Another reason to believe that Trump may have this thing sewn up as long as justice prevails. I had been following Monica Crowleys thesis since last summer over Obamas and the Clintons bad blood (just a few years ago that man would have been getting our coffee). Looks like it didnt pan out. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/18/us/politics/obama-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0 "In unusually candid remarks, President Obama privately told a group of Democratic donors last Friday that Senator Bernie Sanders is nearing the point where his campaign against Hillary Clinton will come to an end, and that the party must soon come together to back her." And President "Benito" O'bama would never lie, or, act politically. Like I said, Valerie Jarret will make the determination on Evita. Anyone seen Elizabeth "Sacajawea" Warren? A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turkeyfoot Posted March 26, 2016 Share Posted March 26, 2016 Theres another scenario. DOJ indicts HC. O (Jarret, whoever), rather than choose not to indict HC, because of (Saturday Night Massacre reservations)potential mass resignations from DOJ, his hail mary is giving her a presidential pardon. She is dumped from the contest and the incoming Republican reverses that decision. She sits in prison until she rots. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/16/685030/- "It also appears that a pardon may be revoked at any time prior to acceptance or delivery. In In re De Puy, the District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed a situation where a pardon issued by President Johnson on March 3, 1869 was revoked on March 6th, 1869 by incoming President Grant. The court held that the pardon had been properly withdrawn, as it had not yet been delivered to the grantee, a person on his behalf, or to the official with exclusive custody and control over him." If thats not enough of a circus act, wait for Trump and Melania. (Centerfolds from the Queens sitting room in the WH) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share Posted March 26, 2016 28 minutes ago, turkeyfoot said: Theres another scenario. DOJ indicts HC. O (Jarret, whoever), rather than choose not to indict HC, because of (Saturday Night Massacre reservations)potential mass resignations from DOJ, his hail mary is giving her a presidential pardon. She is dumped from the contest and the incoming Republican reverses that decision. She sits in prison until she rots. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/16/685030/- "It also appears that a pardon may be revoked at any time prior to acceptance or delivery. In In re De Puy, the District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed a situation where a pardon issued by President Johnson on March 3, 1869 was revoked on March 6th, 1869 by incoming President Grant. The court held that the pardon had been properly withdrawn, as it had not yet been delivered to the grantee, a person on his behalf, or to the official with exclusive custody and control over him." If thats not enough of a circus act, wait for Trump and Melania. (Centerfolds from the Queens sitting room in the WH) Thanks Geoff! Nice work. I was not aware of that De Puy decision and it does make procedural sense. I think the "mass walkout" and resignation letters are supposed to come from the FBI, not DOJ. Very interesting political "gaming" discussion are being held about these possible scenarios. For the record, I do not see her ever serving any actual "time" in confinement. However, as far as Evita being permitted to serve in any elected, or, appointed governmental position, that should be eliminated in the plea bargain. Good stuff, A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 28, 2016 Author Share Posted March 28, 2016 Now this next stage will be extremely important. One of her underlings when confronted with some hard evidence and or statements sworn under a plea deal will bring strong pressure on their very personal issues, like no jail, possibly a light misdemeanor plea and an ability to stay in government loops as a consultant will have serious weight. Quote Federal prosecutors investigating the possible mishandling of classified materials on Hillary Clinton’s private email server have begun the process of setting up formal interviews with some of her longtime and closest aides, according to two people familiar with the probe, an indication that the inquiry is moving into its final phases. Those interviews and the final review of the case, however, could still take many weeks, all but guaranteeing that the investigation will continue to dog Clinton’s presidential campaign through most, if not all, of the remaining presidential primaries. No dates have been set for questioning the advisors, but a federal prosecutor in recent weeks has called their lawyers to alert them that he would soon be doing so, the sources said. Prosecutors also are expected to seek an interview with Clinton herself, though the timing remains unclear. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-clinton-email-probe-20160327-story.html Down the road, Evita will be called and by then, it may all be academic because she will be toast by the time her "interview" occurs. Quote The interviews by FBI agents and prosecutors will play a significant role in helping them better understand whether Clinton or her aides knowingly or negligently discussed classified government secrets over a non-secure email system when she served as secretary of State. The meetings also are an indication that much of the investigators' background work – recovering deleted emails, understanding how the server operated and determining whether it was breached – is nearing completion. “The interviews are critical to understand the volume of information they have accumulated,” said James McJunkin, former head of the FBI's Washington field office. “They are likely nearing the end of the investigation and the agents need to interview these people to put the information in context. They will then spend time aligning these statements with other information, emails, classified documents, etc., to determine whether there is a prosecutable case." Many legal experts believe that Clinton faces little risk of being prosecuted for using the private email system to conduct official business when she served as secretary of State, though that decision has raised questions among some about her judgment. They noted that using a private email system was not banned at the time, and others in government had used personal email to transact official business. The bigger question is whether she or her aides distributed classified material in email systems that fell outside of the department’s secure classified system. But even if prosecutors determine that she did, chances she will be found criminally liable are low. U.S. law makes it a crime for someone to knowingly or willfully retain classified information, handle it in a grossly negligent manner or to pass it to someone not entitled to see it. Clinton has denied using the email account to send or receive materials marked classified. Though some emails have since been deemed to be too sensitive to release publicly, Clinton's campaign has attributed that to overzealous intelligence officials and "over-classification run amok." Legally it doesn’t matter if the emails were marked as classified or not, since government officials are obligated to recognize sensitive material and guard against its release. But legal experts noted that such labels would be helpful to prosecutors seeking to prove she knew the information was classified, a key element of the law. “The facts of the case do not fit the law,” said Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at American University. “Reasonable folks may think that federal law ought to prohibit what Hillary did, but it’s just not clear to me that it currently does.” Even so, her use of the private server, which was based at her home in New York, has become fodder for Clinton’s political foes as she campaigns to secure the Democratic nomination for president. Though Sen. Bernie Sanders has largely declined to use the email scandal against her in the Democratic primary, Republicans have repeatedly said she should be indicted or disqualified from running for the nation's top office. At a recent Democratic debate, Clinton grew exasperated when asked what she would do if indicted. “That’s not going to happen,” she said. Her attorney, David Kendall, declined to comment. Her campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, said in an email that Clinton is ready to work with investigators to conclude the investigation. “She first offered last August to meet and answer any questions they might have,” Fallon wrote. “She would welcome the opportunity to help them complete their work.” Lawyers for her closest aides – Huma Abedin, Jake Sullivan, Cheryl Mills and Philippe Renes – either did not respond to messages or declined to comment. The Justice Department and FBI began their investigation after receiving what is known as a security referral in July from the inspector general for U.S. intelligence agencies, which at the time were in the midst of reviewing paper copies of nearly 30,500 emails Clinton turned over in 2014 that she said were work-related. The State Department has since released all 3,871 pages of Clinton’s emails in its possession and has determined that 22 of her emails contained "top secret" information, though they were not marked as such as the time. Hundreds of others contained material that was either secret or confidential, two lower levels of classification. After stepping down as secretary of State, Clinton, who has said she used her personal email to conduct personal and official business as a matter of convenience, told her staff to delete 31,830 emails on the server that she felt were non-work-related. In August, the FBI obtained the server and has since recovered most, if not all, of the deleted correspondence, said a person familiar with the investigation. FBI agents have finished their review of the server and the correspondence turned over by Clinton to the State Department. They have interviewed a number of former aides so they could better understand how the system was used and why Clinton chose to use it, the person said. Federal prosecutors granted immunity to one of those aides, Bryan Pagliano, who helped set up the server in Clinton’s home. He has cooperated with the federal investigation and provided security logs that revealed no evidence of foreign hacking, according to a law enforcement official. His lawyer, Mark MacDougall, did not respond to messages seeking comment. The probe is being closely watched and supervised by the Justice Department’s top officials and prosecutors. FBI Director James B. Comey has said he has been regularly briefed on the investigation, which is being overseen by prosecutors in the Justice Department’s national security division. The decision on whether to prosecute could be difficult. Vladeck, the law professor noted the differences between Clinton’s email issue and two previous cases involving the mishandling of classified material that resulted in prosecutions and guilty pleas. In 2005, Sandy Berger, a former national security advisor, pleaded guilty to the unlawful removal and retention of national security information after being caught trying to smuggle classified documents out of the National Archives. In another case, Gen. David Petraeus, a former CIA director, was investigated for knowingly allowing a mistress to read classified material as she researched a book about him. Petraeus eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified material and was spared prison time. Legal experts said Petraeus’ actions were far more serious than anything Clinton is accused of doing. Clinton’s emails, even those later deemed classified, were sent to aides cleared to read them, for example, and not private citizens, they said. Several of the lawyers involved in Clinton’s case are familiar with the differences. Petraeus’ defense lawyer was Kendall, who also represents Clinton. And a prosecutor helping oversee the Clinton email investigation was part of the team that obtained Petraeus’ guilty plea. .... "This is clearly disruptive to the campaign,” said Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster. “It will take her off message and coverage about important aides being questioned is not coverage you'd like to have. However, this issue is largely dismissed by Democratic primary voters and baked into the cake for the general electorate.” A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backlighting Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Adam said "Down the road, Evita will be called and by then, it may all be academic because she will be toast by the time her "interview" occurs". One can only hope. -J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2016 Author Share Posted March 31, 2016 On 3/28/2016 at 9:14 PM, Backlighting said: Adam said "Down the road, Evita will be called and by then, it may all be academic because she will be toast by the time her "interview" occurs". One can only hope. -J Apparently, it was a shorter road than I thought.... Quote Comey, has now finished examining Clinton’s private emails and home server. And the sources add that Comey’s FBI team has been joined by the Justice Department prosecutors. Together, they are now examining the evidence, analyzing relevant laws, and attempting to arrange interviews with key figures in the investigation. Those interviews, according to attorneys, will include former State Department aides Philippe Reines, Former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, and Clinton herself. Soon after those interviews — in the next few days and weeks — officials expect Director Comey to make hi recommendation to Attorney General Loretta Lynch about potential criminal charges. Still does not mean an indictment. Lot's of political capital is being marshaled on both sides. Wouldn't an interesting for the "media" to ask Evita, "What were the names of the 500+ FBI files you and Bill had in the White House? http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/01/14/hillary/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_FBI_files_controversy All I want are the names. A... http://www.mediaite.com/online/ajams-shuster-exclusive-hillary-clinton-to-be-interviewed-by-fbi-director-comey-in-mere-days/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 31, 2016 Author Share Posted March 31, 2016 The path may be getting shorter by the week... Monica Crowley's column, which is considered to be well sourced by many, although she has a "conservative" lens, makes perfect sense to me. Quote Something has happened, which has led Mr. Clinton to openly slam Mr. Obama: ” If you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us ” he said recently. A few days later, Chelsea Clinton launched a broadside on Obamacare’s costs. A classic Clintonian one-two punch, coming just days before a report that the FBI is seeking interviews with Mrs. Clinton’s top aides, and likely Mrs. Clinton herself. Most investigations interview the target last. What’s going on? No one knows for sure, but we have a clue. Anyone remember the name " Alexander Butterfield?" Pagliano could create the "Butterfield effect" on Evita. Why? Quote Former Hillary Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano, a key witness in the investigation into her use of a private server, struck an immunity deal with the Justice Department and apparently has been singing. An intelligence source told Fox News that he has told the FBI a range of details about how her personal email system was set up and maintained. The source described him as a “devastating witness.” Mr. Pagliano is a pivotal — perhaps the pivotal — key to Mrs. Clinton’s server and what was being done on and through it — and by whom. Mr. Pagliano was in charge of server(s) since the 2008 campaign. He was paid $5,000 for “computer services” by the Clintons before he joined the State Department staff. After he started working there in May 2009, Mr. Pagliano continued to receive payments from the Clintons to maintain the server. Mr. Pagliano can name all those who had access to the Clinton server and devices and when, and reportedly is doing so, allowing investigators to piece together an evidentiary timeline. It was emphasized to Fox News that Mrs. Clinton’s deliberate “creation” and “control” of the private server used for her official government business is the subject of “intense scrutiny.” Mr. Pagliano can also testify to the security of the server and what was told to whom about it. Again, the server has the documents, including the at least 22 top secret and above top secret ones deemed too damaging to national security to publicly release under any circumstances. That is a matter of some risk for Mrs. Clinton. There's more. Monica has a sharp legal mind. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/monica-crowley-the-clintons-sense-a-breakdown/ A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 1, 2016 Author Share Posted April 1, 2016 OK ... An Evita cartoon always works... And what children's rhyme comes to mind? Well done! A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 18, 2016 Author Share Posted April 18, 2016 The Clinton Standard is quite high for them!! Quote Among them are Gabrielle Fialkoff, finance director for Hillary Clinton’s first campaign for the U.S. Senate; Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate who has traveled the globe with Bill Clinton; the Chagoury family, which pledged $1 billion in projects to the Clinton Global Initiative; and Chinese billionaire Ng Lap Seng, who was at the center of a Democratic fund-raising scandal when Bill Clinton was president. Also using the Panamanian law firm was the company founded by the late billionaire investor Marc Rich, an international fugitive when Bill Clinton pardoned him in the final hours of his presidency. Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article72215012.html#storylink=cpy http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article72215012.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Evita has made a lot of progress. She has transitioned from being accused of killing Vince Foster to being accused of mismanaging here e-mail. Way to go, Evita! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Romanian hacker Guccifer: I breached Clinton server, 'it was easy' http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/04/romanian-hacker-guccifer-breached-clinton-server-it-was-easy.html?intcmp=hpbt1 Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com Quote "For me, it was easy ... easy for me, for everybody," Marcel Lehel Lazar, who goes by the moniker "Guccifer," told Fox News from a Virginia jail where he is being held. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 FBI Director Comey: I don't know what a 'security inquiry' means Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 11, 2016 Share Posted May 11, 2016 Here's some common Venn diagram ground (I got it from here): Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 The Perfect Storm Circling Hillary Clinton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 She's not got the nomination yet--not by a long shot. --Brant Bernie's an idiot, but that's not holding him back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 If Hillary's not elected President she's going to jail unless she gets a presidential pardon. Are a lifetime of lies and outright criminality finally catching up to Hillary and Bill? The outright stupidity and arrogance in using a private and unsecured server astounds me. WTF was she trying to gain? Never mind the morality; this is sheer incompetence. When she was Secretary of State her incompetence mixed it up with her evil. It's not the deals Trump might make--if his don't work he'll replace them with new ones--it's the evil deals she might make with the Russians, like destroying the US oil fracking industry. And the whole US government might as well have nothing but unsecured servers. If she's officially taken down--indicted, conviction not necessary but she would be convicted--the government will button up. That would have it's own kind of good and bad. --Brant she's trying to avoid being sprayed with water I don't understand the new upgrade--what's a "simpler interface"? What "big buttons"? "Navigation"? It sounds administrative and for me it might as well be ("I don't know tech stuff") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 3 hours ago, Brant Gaede said: I don't understand the new upgrade--what's a "simpler interface"? What "big buttons"? "Navigation"? It sounds administrative and for me it might as well be ("I don't know tech stuff") Brant, Big buttons: These: Navigation: This merely means how you move around the website with your mouse and keyboard. Simpler interface: I'll leave that dangling for the mystery element. Michael EDIT: btw - I just put this screenshot in the formal announcement near the top of the site. You can see it there now, but later, this announcement will be replaced so this EDIT comment will no longer be valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 Scary buttons. Let you know when I find them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Big buttons: These: Navigation: This merely means how you move around the website with your mouse and keyboard. Simpler interface: I'll leave that dangling for the mystery element. Some of us see nothing new. Do you mean that these three symbols, when clicked, take us somewhere new? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 14, 2016 Share Posted May 14, 2016 William, I screwed up. When I wrote that, I was using a zoomed-in view and my menus disappeared. Since this happened right after an upgrade, I presumed it was due to the upgrade. Those three buttons are up on the top right (and it is worth it to fiddle with them), but there are menus, also. In the zoomed-in view, the menus disappear. I included this in the announcement. I left my original comments in the announcement because I suspect the forum looks like the zoomed-in view on a smartphone or tablet. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted May 15, 2016 Share Posted May 15, 2016 What a neat feature. The site code auto-adjusts to small-screen/smart-phone visits whenever the screen real-estate falls under a certain dimension -- by loading up the buttons with functions otherwise spread over larger real-estate, simplifying navigation. I imagine Brant's screen is the size of small truck, so he may never see the magical button transforms. So ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now