Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy?

[Wilikon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Prls6Iz3B3E

[Pentax]

Support for this crazy bitch is a sign of brain damage.  She's such an obvious sham I cannot believe a single person buys her crap.

Blech.

A-Fucking-Men

The whole last 8+ years has been a whitewash to sell this crazy whore.

She's a sniper fire dodging, e-mail hiding lying sack of shit that has done whatever she can to convince the American people she is something other than what she is, which is a political whore of the worst ilk. 

Power hungry to the point of exhaustion, willing to sacrifice her pride, the best interests of country and whatever else to serve her goals.

She is as warped and insane as it gets, and that's saying something in DC.

[Racey]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Prls6Iz3B3E

If she was doing that much yoga, she wouldn't need to wear pantsuits.

Fat ass bitch.

[Wilikon]

Poll: Majority Of Americans Support Criminal Investigation Into Hillary’s Private Email Server…

A majority of American voters supports a criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s personal email account.

Though roughly half of voters (51 percent) believes Clinton’s private email use during her time as secretary of state was mainly a matter of convenience, 52 percent also say her emails should be subject to a criminal investigation into the potential release of classified material, according to a new Monmouth University poll released Wednesday.

Thirty-eight percent of those voters believe Clinton has something to hide, with 68 percent of Republicans being more likely to believe this notion than 80 percent of Democrats who believe it was a matter of convenience.


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poll-shows-support-for-criminal-probe-into-clintons-email-use/article/2570052

[Wilikon]

Hillary Clinton email probe turns to Huma
Clinton's top aide is likely to face more questions, not least from congressional investigators, about her access to Clinton’s system.

Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s most trusted confidante, is increasingly becoming a central figure in the email scandal that’s haunting her boss on the campaign trail, as Republicans and federal judges seek information about Clinton’s communications while she was running the State Department.

The 2016 Democratic front-runner on Monday told a federal judge that Abedin — long considered her boss’s keeper and even dubbed her “shadow” — had her own email account on Clinton’s now infamous home-brewed server, “which was used at times for government business,” Clinton acknowledged. That’s an unusual arrangement, even for top brass at the State Department.

Abedin has hired a team of lawyers, one of whom is a former Clinton aide, who are responding to information requests from the courts and State. They’ve denied any wrongdoing on the part of their client and said Abedin is cooperating with requests for official emails in her possession, aiming to turn over all her correspondence by the end of August.

But her lawyers — Karen Dunn and Miguel Rodriguez — didn’t respond to questions about emails on Clinton’s separate server. Dunn is a partner at Boies, Schiller & Flexner, and she served as a senior advisor to Clinton when she was in the Senate.

After an inspector general found that Clinton had at least two “top secret” emails stored on her unsecured computer network, Abedin is likely to face more questions from congressional investigators, and perhaps others, about her access to Clinton’s system.

Abedin had been granted “special government employee” status, allowing her to work both for Clinton and the private sector — and it’s unclear if she continued using the server that appears to have held classified information following her departure from her full-time State gig.

On Wednesday, Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill waved off questions about how the two issues — the email server and Abedin’s unusual work arrangement — may or may not have overlapped, accusing the right of playing politics with this line of inquiry.

“It’s election season, and congressional Republicans are running the same series of plays, just on a different field,” Merrill said in an email, later adding that Abedin maintained her security clearance while she worked as a State contractor.

But Steven Aftergood, who directs the Federation of American Scientists’ project on government secrecy, said Abedin’s potential access to secret materials could be a problem.

“What happens if [a former government employee] still retains access through a prior server, to information that was justified by a previous position? That’s not supposed to happen — and that’s one of the anomalies that are created by the private server,” Aftergood said.

Classified materials with national security implications are supposed to be stored in a place where no one can gain access to them unless they have special clearance.

The FBI is currently probing Clinton’s email arrangement, whereby the former secretary of state used her own technology based out of her New York home instead of an official government address that is required by transparency rules. A State inspector general, who is also looking at the matter, said top Clinton aides would likely also be questioned, though he wouldn’t say who exactly.

At the same time, powerful congressional Republicans are probing Abedin’s “special government employee status,” while suggesting that she may have had a “conflict of interest.” The Senate Judiciary Committee claims to have a well-informed but unnamed tipster who says Abedin is or has been investigated for criminal misconduct by the State Department inspector general regarding this very issue.

The government watchdog wouldn’t comment on the accusations. And Abedin’s legal team — which is separate from Clinton’s — says it knows of no investigative reports that suggest such misconduct.

“We are aware only of an IG report focused on her maternity leave and vacation and we responded with a letter disputing the report’s conclusions, which we gave to members of the media who requested it,” her lawyers said in a statement. “Obviously, if the report covered other things, our letter would have as well. The IG will have to respond as to his investigations.”

The latest revelations come just as Abedin, the vice chairwoman of Hillary for America, is projected to be taking on more responsibilities for the campaign, heading up fundraisers and speaking to donors on Clinton’s behalf.

Beyond allegations of conflict of interest, Senate Republicans in recent weeks leaked findings by the State Department inspector general that Abedin was overpaid nearly $10,000 for “unused” time off that she actually took but did not record while working at State — a finding her lawyers are currently challenging.

Abedin, who’s been with Clinton for about two decades, started working for Clinton as a 19-year-old intern in the former first lady’s office.

At State and during the 2008 campaign she was considered Clinton’s “body woman,” never far from Clinton’s side and often seen watching her boss intently, ready to scramble to her aid at any minute. Top politicians, and even Bill Clinton, would phone her to reach Hillary, and emails released in recent months showed she enjoyed access to Clinton at her private home, too, dropping items off on her counter and instructing her how to dress and keeping her schedule.

In 2013, news broke that Abedin had been given a special government employee status, allowing her to be simultaneously on the payroll for the philanthropic Clinton Foundation and Teneo, a consulting firm founded by former Clinton White House adviser Doug Band. She previously had not disclosed the dual employment.

Abedin has said she stepped back from government work and became a contractor so she could be with her family and her newborn son. But since then, critics have questioned her about whether she had a conflict of interest while working at State and alongside close friends of the Clinton family.

For two years now, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, a bullish Iowa Republican who’s very active in a number of mundane executive branch oversight issues, has been asking for more details about her employment situation but has received little in the way of answers.

He’s recently escalated his demands for more information after a source told the panel that the State Department inspector general had probed Abedin not only for overpayment issues but also over a potential conflict of interest. The source was able to specify that Abedin and Band were on more than 7,000 emails together while she worked at State and detailed an apparent October 2013 letter to the FBI that clarified that the watchdog’s probe was looking at potential criminal misconduct.

Grassley has asked the FBI, State inspector general and State Department for more information about this probe — including whether it even exists.

He has also asked Abedin’s lawyers about the matter but has not heard back.

“Much of the information sought by Senator Grassley’s letter will need to be produced by the State Department and we have been in touch with State,” Dunn said in an email.

Clinton on Monday declared under penalty of perjury that she handed over all her work emails to the State Department for record-keeping purposes; Abedin declined a judge’s request to do the same.

Dunn said Abedin, who was among 10 State Department officials asked by their former agency to hand over any work-related messages on personal emails, expects to turn over all her official correspondence to the State Department by Aug. 28. On Wednesday, Dunn declined to say whether Abedin will then do the same as Clinton and swear under penalty of perjury that she has handed over all official records.

It is unclear whether all her official emails on Clinton’s server were saved.


http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-email-probe-turns-to-huma-121314.html

[Wilikon]

Clinton aides vow not to destroy emails


Two top aides to Hillary Clinton gave assurances to a federal judge Wednesday that they will not delete any emails or other records related to their work at the State Department during Clinton's tenure as America's top diplomat.

Lawyers for former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin told the State Department they would abide by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan's request that they not erase any copies of federal records in their possession.

In addition, Clinton lawyer David Kendall confirmed that a Colorado technology firm on Wednesday turned over to the Justice Department the private server which housed Clinton's emails while she served as secretary of state. He also said he'd produced three thumb drives with Clinton's digital copies of emails she gave State in paper form last December.

"We have voluntarily provided to the Department of Justice on August 6, 2015, the .pst file containing electronic copies of the 55,000 pages of emails on a thumb drive (along with two copies), which had been securely stored in my possession, after receiving from the Department of Justice  an assurance that it would maintain this file in an appropriately secure manner and the Department's opinion that such maintenance would satisfy any preservation obligations I am under," Kendall wrote Wednesday to Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy.

"Similarly, Platte River Networks is today providing to the Department of Justice the server and related equipment on which emails to and from Secretary Clinton's clintonemail.com were stored from 2009-2013 and which PRN took possession of in 2013," Kendall added. "This is following the Department of Justice's assurances to us and to counsel for PRN that it would maintain this equipment in an appropriately secure manner."

Mills's attorney Wilkinson seemed to have triggered Sullivan's preservation-related order last week when she said in a letter filed with the court that Mills planned to delete her digital copies on Monday. Wilkinson stressed in a new letter to Kennedy Wednesday that the only reason Mills had planned to erase her electronic copies was because the State Department had asked her to do so.

"We ask you to clarify with Judge Sullivan that it was the State Department that asked for the return of all copies of potential federal records in Ms. Mills' possession and going forward it will be the State Department's responsibility to secure permission from Judge Sullivan to remove any copies of such emails from Ms. Mills account," Wilkinson wrote. She also seemed eager to underscore that the records Mills had planned to erase were copies of emails already given to the State Department and suggested there was no danger of any records being lost as a result.

A lawyer for Abedin responded to the court's request with an email briefly confirming that she would not be erasing or disposing of any work-related records.

"We want to confirm for the Department that in accordance with your request, Ms. Abedin will not delete any potential federal records in her possession," attorney Miguel Rodriguez wrote.

The correspondence filed with Sullivan Wednesday night (and posted here) came in connection with a lawsuit the conservative group Judicial Watch filed two years ago seeking records related to Abedin's employment arrangements at State. The case was closed last year but Sullivan agreed to reopen it after it became evident that Clinton's email account had not been searched in response to Judicial Watch's Freedom of Information Act request.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2015/08/clinton-lawyer-details-server-surrender-as-aides-vow-212291.html

[OBAViJEST]

No politician is trustworthy - when has this ever been the case? 

[Wilikon]

Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company


The chairman of the Senate’s homeland security committee has asked a small, 13-year-old Denver technology company that managed tens of thousands of emails for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to describe what measures it took to safeguard national security information.

The FBI, which has embarked on its own scrutiny of Clinton’s private server, also has shown interest in the company, Platte River Networks, which began managing Clinton’s emails in 2013, according to published reports.

Her use of a private, non-governmental server to conduct official State Department business is causing increased turbulence for Clinton as she pursues what many thought would be a relatively smooth ride to the Democratic presidential nomination.

Clinton said late Tuesday that she would turn over to the Justice Department her private server as part of a widening security investigation into her use of private emails to conduct official business. McClatchy reported Tuesday that two emails found on Clinton’s server were classified as “Top Secret,” heightening concerns that Clinton may have improperly shared classified information or stored them on vulnerable Internet equipment that might be open to hacking.

“Given that the server was used to conduct official State Department business, questions have been raised regarding whether classified information was stored on the private server,” Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin wrote Platte’s president in a letter Tuesday. He said he also wants to know “if that data was secure, who had access to that material and whether all official documents were appropriately preserved.”

Clinton has said that after she turned over all of her official emails to the State Department last December, she wiped clean her server which contained over 61,000 emails. Clinton said she permanently deleted about half because they were personal and turned over the rest because they were related to State Department business. Senior Republicans in Congress now want to know whether Platte River has a backup file containing the deleted emails.

In the letter obtained by McClatchy, Chairman Johnson asked company President Treve Suazo to respond to detailed questions within two weeks.

He requested all communications referring to the server “between or among employees or contractors of Platte River” and between company employees and the family’s global charity, the Clinton Foundation. Johnson also sought an explanation of whether the company is “authorized to maintain or access classified information.”

Suazo and other company officials did not respond to phone requests seeking comment.

Platte River’s role grew more crucial Tuesday when the inspector general for the U.S. Intelligence Community advised Congress that two emails contained information it deemed “Top Secret.” The emails were not marked as classified when they were written, and Clinton has repeatedly denied ever sending or receiving classified information.

WAS PLATTE RIVER NETWORKS EVER MADE AWARE THAT THE INFORMATION ON SECRETARY CLINTON’S PRIVATE SERVER MAY CONTAIN CLASSIFIED OR SENSITIVE SECURITY DATA?
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin

At a State Department briefing Wednesday, Mark Toner, a spokesman, said the two emails designated as Top Secret “weren’t sent by her.”

The declaration by Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III, however, ramped up the stakes, because security officials had been less concerned about the arrangement if information was classified no higher than “Secret.”

Platte River’s services were sought in early 2013 to improve security of the server, which was installed for former President Bill Clinton at the couple’s home in New York state years earlier, The Washington Post reported recently.

The Colorado firm’s hiring coincided with the discovery that an email account for Clinton’s longtime confidant, private consultant Sidney Blumenthal, had been hacked by a Romanian national Marcel Lazar Lehel, known as Guccifer.

Brian Reid, a cybersecurity expert with Internet Systems Consortium, said Clinton’s use of a reputable company to manage her server means it was less likely to be vulnerable to hackers.

Reid and a second security expert said that if Platte River used a backup server for extra security, it’s likely that some data Clinton had deleted could be retrieved.

Darren Hayes, a cybersecurity professor at Pace University’s Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems, said it’s very common “in this day and age” for a company working with a client to back up their materials.

Nonetheless, it’s unclear what investigators might find on the server.

Hayes said what might be found will be determined by how the deletions were done.

“It depends on what kind of tools they used,” Hayes said.

Reid, a cybersecurity expert with Internet Systems Consortium, said there are two types of back-ups.

One is a physical security back-up, which protects against the loss of data during a computer crash. That type of back-up is short-term.

“Every company in the managed IT business will do physical security back-ups,” he said. “It’s similar to the concept of security video from the cops shows. If a cop subpoenas it, there are only very recent backups. A physical security backup can be overwritten in a matter of weeks.”

Another type archives data farther back in time and is intended to be a record of what the data was at certain times in the past, Reid said. Companies dedicated to archival backups store the data in high-security warehouses.

“Archival back-ups can be subpoenaed. They are evidence,” he said. “They’re extremely hard to wipe clean.”

If Clinton had a backup, the type likely would be specified in her contract with the company that provided the server, Reid said.

Clinton’s campaign did not respond to questions Wednesday.

But her communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, sent a lengthy email to supporters to dispel “misinformation,” explaining why she used a private email account, what emails she turned over and assuring that there is no criminal inquiry into Clinton’s conduct.

“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.



http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article30964044.html

[Pentax]

Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company




“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.

This kind of nonsense comes with the Clintons, because they are lying pieces of shit.

Get real, if she was doing this for a legitimate purpose it never crossed her mind to ask if it was acceptable?  Of course it did.  She knew otherwise and figured she'd get away with it and, if busted, they could do exactly what they're doing now in pointing at people asking legitimate questions and attempt to paint them as kooks.  Her base loves it and sucks it up like candy.

The vast right wing conspiracy at work.  And people buy that shit in the face of activity like this, which was premeditated, went on for years and is clearly wrong for anyone at any level of government, much less the fucking Secretary of State.

If some file clerk was doing this, they'd be shitcanned in a .1 second.  Why?  Because it's utterly insane to think that any employee of the state department can simply store their electronic records however and wherever they decide.  End of story.

[Wilikon]

Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company




“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.

This kind of nonsense comes with the Clintons, because they are lying pieces of shit.

Get real, if she was doing this for a legitimate purpose it never crossed her mind to ask if it was acceptable?  Of course it did.  She knew otherwise and figured she'd get away with it and, if busted, they could do exactly what they're doing now in pointing at people asking legitimate questions and attempt to paint them as kooks.  Her base loves it and sucks it up like candy.

The vast right wing conspiracy at work.  And people buy that shit in the face of activity like this, which was premeditated, went on for years and is clearly wrong for anyone at any level of government, much less the fucking Secretary of State.

If some file clerk was doing this, they'd be shitcanned in a .1 second.  Why?  Because it's utterly insane to think that any employee of the state department can simply store their electronic records however and wherever they decide.  End of story.

A famous liberal asks (finally?) a simple question:


Todd: Why not just turn over a blank server six months ago?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK1KojnvsTU

[Pentax]

Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company




“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.

This kind of nonsense comes with the Clintons, because they are lying pieces of shit.

Get real, if she was doing this for a legitimate purpose it never crossed her mind to ask if it was acceptable?  Of course it did.  She knew otherwise and figured she'd get away with it and, if busted, they could do exactly what they're doing now in pointing at people asking legitimate questions and attempt to paint them as kooks.  Her base loves it and sucks it up like candy.

The vast right wing conspiracy at work.  And people buy that shit in the face of activity like this, which was premeditated, went on for years and is clearly wrong for anyone at any level of government, much less the fucking Secretary of State.

If some file clerk was doing this, they'd be shitcanned in a .1 second.  Why?  Because it's utterly insane to think that any employee of the state department can simply store their electronic records however and wherever they decide.  End of story.

A famous liberal asks (finally?) a simple question:


Todd: Why not just turn over a blank server six months ago?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK1KojnvsTU

That is a real simple question isn't it?

At least it would seem that if she had nothing to hide, as she claims, this would have been a no-brainer.

She's as dirty as a bag of Depends coming out the back door of a hospice.

[Wilikon]

Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company




“Look, this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for president ... and we expect it to continue from now until Election Day,” she said.

This kind of nonsense comes with the Clintons, because they are lying pieces of shit.

Get real, if she was doing this for a legitimate purpose it never crossed her mind to ask if it was acceptable?  Of course it did.  She knew otherwise and figured she'd get away with it and, if busted, they could do exactly what they're doing now in pointing at people asking legitimate questions and attempt to paint them as kooks.  Her base loves it and sucks it up like candy.

The vast right wing conspiracy at work.  And people buy that shit in the face of activity like this, which was premeditated, went on for years and is clearly wrong for anyone at any level of government, much less the fucking Secretary of State.

If some file clerk was doing this, they'd be shitcanned in a .1 second.  Why?  Because it's utterly insane to think that any employee of the state department can simply store their electronic records however and wherever they decide.  End of story.

A famous liberal asks (finally?) a simple question:


Todd: Why not just turn over a blank server six months ago?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK1KojnvsTU

That is a real simple question isn't it?

At least it would seem that if she had nothing to hide, as she claims, this would have been a no-brainer.

She's as dirty as a bag of Depends coming out the back door of a hospice.

... Hospice next door to sewage treatment, sewage treatment next door that massive explosion in China...

[Wilikon]

Tips on Deleting Emails From Email Book Hillary Clinton Wanted to Read


The last batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department included one from Clinton asking to borrow a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe.

Clinton has not said why she requested the book, but it includes some advice that is particularly interesting in light of the controversy over her unconventional email arrangement at the State Department and her decision to delete tens of thousands of emails she deemed to be purely personal.

The copy that ABC downloaded for $9.99 had some interesting revelations.

Take, for example, Chapter Six: “The Email That Can Land You In Jail.” The chapter includes a section entitled “How to Delete Something So It Stays Deleted.”

“Some people are hoarders, some are checkers,” the authors write. “The main thing to consider is that once you do decide to delete, it’s like taking the garbage from your kitchen and putting it in your hallway. It’s still there.”

The chapter advised that to truly delete emails may require a special rewriting program “to make sure that it’s not just elsewhere on the drive but has in fact been written over sixteen or twenty times and rendered undefinable.”

But Shipley and Schwalbe warn that deleting emails could lead to future legal troubles.

On page 215, the authors list “Stupid (and Real) Email Phrases That Wound Up in Court.” Number one on the list? “DELETE THIS EMAIL!’ Later, on page 226, the writers warn, “If you’re issued a subpoena, your deletion binge will only make you look guilty.”

The FBI is investigating the handling of classified information in Clinton’s emails, while she maintains she has done nothing illegal or improper.

Instead of deleting, the authors suggest never putting sensitive information in an email, quoting disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer: “'Never talk when you can nod. And never write when you can talk. My only addendum is never put it in an email.' (We know…we know. Spitzer resigned. And before that, his short-lived administration was embroiled in a controversy where the smoking guns were on email. But it’s still really good advice.)”


http://abcnews.go.com/beta/Politics/tips-deleting-emails-email-book-hillary-clinton-wanted/story?id=33046042

[jayce]

No politician is trustworthy - when has this ever been the case? 

Well you have to choose one of them to be your president for your country, even you don't trust them. We don't have any choice for that, and don't get any advantage at all.

[Racey]

No politician is trustworthy - when has this ever been the case? 

Well you have to choose one of them to be your president for your country, even you don't trust them. We don't have any choice for that, and don't get any advantage at all.

Well I know about that, when I get pi**ed with politicians, and the time it comes to vote, I put a big X though the paper.
Shows my dissatisfaction.

[Wilikon]

No politician is trustworthy - when has this ever been the case? 

Well you have to choose one of them to be your president for your country, even you don't trust them. We don't have any choice for that, and don't get any advantage at all.

Well I know about that, when I get pi**ed with politicians, and the time it comes to vote, I put a big X though the paper.
Shows my dissatisfaction.

You know where that big X of yours ends up, do you?

[Racey]

No politician is trustworthy - when has this ever been the case? 

Well you have to choose one of them to be your president for your country, even you don't trust them. We don't have any choice for that, and don't get any advantage at all.

Well I know about that, when I get pi**ed with politicians, and the time it comes to vote, I put a big X though the paper.
Shows my dissatisfaction.

You know where that big X of yours ends up, do you?

lol do you really think that Joe blow, has a say in government policies.
Has any one ever changed this.. its not the man on the bottom rung that wins.
Any ideas how we/you can change this corrupt world.

[Wilikon]

The Countless Crimes of Hillary Clinton: Special Prosecutor Needed Now Hillary finally hands over her server—after it's been professionally wiped clean

After years of holding herself above the law, telling lie after lie, and months of flat-out obstruction, HIllary Clinton has finally produced to the FBI her server and three thumb drives. Apparently, the server has been professionally wiped clean of any useable information, and the thumb drives contain only what she selectively culled. Myriad criminal offenses apply to this conduct. Anyone with knowledge of government workings has known from inception that Hillary’s communications necessarily would contain classified and national security related information. Thanks to the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community, it is now beyond dispute that she had ultra-Top Secret information and more that should never have left the State Department. Equal to Ms. Clinton’s outrageous misconduct is that of the entire federal law enforcement community. It has long chosen to be deliberately blind to these flagrant infractions of laws designed to protect national security—laws for which other people, even reporters, have endured atrocious investigations, prosecutions, and some served years in prison for comparatively minor infractions.



http://observer.com/2015/08/the-countless-crimes-of-hillary-clinton-special-prosecutor-needed-now/

-------------------------
"Too big to jail..."

[Wilikon]

Tech company which maintained Hillary's secret server was sued for 'illegally accessing' database and 'stealing White House military advisers' phone numbers'


Platte River Networks was used by Clinton to maintain 'homebrew' server in her New York State house which held her State Department emails
She handed over the server and a thumb drive this week to FBI after emails were found to contain 'above top secret' material
Her White House campaign is said to be in 'panic' over the growing scandal which comes out of probe into US diplomats' deaths in Benghazi
Daily Mail Online can reveal Denver, Colorado, based firm was sued for illegally accessing master database of US phone numbers
It was also accused of causing chaos to White House military advisers when their numbers stopped working as it took their numbers
Case raises questions over how Platte River Networks' ability to secure server which would have been major target for foreign spy hackers


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3197093/Tech-company-maintained-Hillary-s-secret-server-sued-illegally-accessing-databases-creating-chaos-stealing-White-House-phone-numbers.html

[Wilikon]

 Bernie Sanders is leading in New Hampshire. That cheers me — though not because he's my ideal candidate, and certainly not because I think he could win in the general election. I'm convinced he would almost certainly lose against all but the loopiest or scariest Republican opponent.

Then why am I — someone almost certain to vote for a Democrat, and hoping to vote for a woman, in 2016 — so pleased by Sanders' ascent? Because it helps to puncture the aura of inevitability around Hillary Clinton. Yes, she continues to lead in every national poll by a large margin, which is why few formidable opponents have shown an interest in challenging her for the Democratic nomination. That has always been foolish, given the mountain of baggage she and her husband carry around with them everywhere they go. But now it's become downright irresponsible.

The Democrats desperately need more serious, viable candidates in the race, or at least poised to jump in at a moment's notice. (And it sure would be great if they were more appealing than Al Gore.) The point wouldn't be to catch up to her in a mad dash. The point would be to serve as a strong back-up for when the nearly inevitable happens.

What's the nearly inevitable? The scandal that, sooner or later, is bound to sink Hillary Clinton's campaign.

This isn't paranoia, right-wing spin, or baseless panic. It's a sober assessment of the situation.

At the moment, the ongoing email imbroglio is the time bomb that seems to pose the greatest risk to the campaign. It's hard to know which is most alarming: the way the candidate and her team have handled the scandal since it broke in March; the latest swirl of half-truths, denials, reversals, and revelations; or what new explosive information might come to light a month, six months, or a year from now.

For the past five months, those of us old enough to have lived through the 1990s have been enduring a deeply unpleasant bout of déjà vu-inspired dread. First the news breaks, inspiring the unavoidable thought, "How could [insert member of the Clinton family here] possibly have failed to realize that this would be a problem?" Then the barrage of counter-attacks from the Clinton machine against the story, poking holes, impugning motives, kicking up just enough dust to convince fair-minded observers that maybe, just maybe, there's less to the story than it originally seemed. And finally, because journalists make mistakes and actually care about being able to stand behind the truth of what they publish, even those who ran the original story begin to backtrack, express uncertainties, and air self-doubts.

And then: Ka-Blam! The story is back and bigger than ever. Oh, that server we wouldn't give to you? You can have it now, cleaned up all nice and tidy. There certainly weren't any classified documents on there. Oh, there were? Oops, well, only those two — oh, I mean four — and don't worry about how that's just a "limited sample" of 40 emails out of tens of thousands; the inspector general of the Justice Department just got lucky. And hey, we deleted them, so who cares? (Freedom of information is for suckers.) Yes, of course, my "shadow" had access to that server and those classified emails, too. Why is that a problem? What, are you a member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy?

Tick, tick, boom.

Maybe you think this is just one of those inside-the-Beltway scandals that only engages journalists and pundits and so will leave the candidate unscathed. But what about the multimillion-dollar slush fund run by her husband, with some of the world's richest people and most corrupt governments potentially trading massive monetary donations for access to and influence with a former president and sitting secretary of state? Did it happen? To what extent? Keeping all of those emails off of government servers and then deleting them has made answering those questions much more difficult than it otherwise would have been. But mark my word, an enterprising reporter somewhere is going to find out. Once again, it's just a matter of when.

Tick, tick, boom.

Moving further down the ladder of corruption into pure sleaze, we have, as always, Bill Clinton's insatiable sexual appetite. We haven't heard much about this in the mainstream press since the days of "bimbo eruptions" and Monica Lewinsky. And that's fair, right? Bill is out of office, his days of public service behind him. Why is it anyone's business what the ex-president does in his free time?

The only problem is that his wife is running for president, and if the effort is successful, Bill and his libido will be back in the White House. Should that be a problem? Maybe not — though it sure could be a humiliating embarrassment and distraction for the first female commander-in-chief.

But what concerns me far more is a specific story — one about Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire investor with a taste for sex with underage prostitutes. Lots of them. Perhaps as many as "34 confirmed minors." (Epstein pled guilty to state charges in 2008. He was sentenced to 18 months and released after serving 13.)

Flight logs from Epstein's private jet — nicknamed the "Lolita Express" — show at least 10 trips by Bill Clinton, including several on which he flew (according to Gawker) with "a woman who federal prosecutors believe procured underage girls to sexually service Epstein and his friends and acted as a 'potential co-conspirator' in his crimes."

Tick, boom.

The only question is when one of these time bombs explode: before the primaries or after the primaries, before the convention or after the convention, before the debates or after the debates, before Election Day or after Election Day.

The Democrats need a viable Plan B now.

http://theweek.com/articles/571567/hillary-clinton-democratic-partys-ticking-time-bomb