Good luck with your “impartial” witchhunt.
If you were searching someone’s home for a building code violation and discovered a body, would a valid defence be, “Hey! You’re moving the goalposts!”?
Discovering truly disturbing facts during an unrelated investigation can often lead to the investigation taking a different turn. Watergate, for example.
In the end, it doesn’t matter how the investigators got there, so long as they acted within the law. The fact is, disturbing information about Hillary’s E-mail practices was uncovered, and a new investigation started about that by the FBI while the Benghazi hearings continued along another track.
However, the E-mail issue wasn’t discovered by the Benghazi investigation. It was discovered when a hacker in Serbia who had gained access to Sid Blumenthal’s E-mail discovered the Clintonemail.com messages and made some of them public.
According to the Wikipedia page on this:
Amateur hour describes it best. Also, the fact that Clinton kept using Sid Blumenthal despite Obama’s specific direction that she shouldn’t do so could be one of her motivations for controlling her own E-mails. BUt the main reason I think she did is because Hillary has always been secretive and paranoid. Anyone remember the ‘lost’ records about her activities at the Rose Law firm, that were mysteriously found in her private quarters in the White House by a maid? She skated punishment on that as well, but it’s clear that she intentionally hid those records to avoid complying with a subpoena.
My guess is that she wanted control over her E-mail and what would be turned over in a FOIA request simply because she thought the right-wing conspiracy was out to get her, and there was just no way she was going to hand over anything that might be used as a weapon against her. Transparency and good practices be damned.
I’m not going to address a lot of your post because I don’t have the experience or knowledge to back up/deny your assertions.
But, when it comes to a search warrant (and I’m sure Bricker will correct me if I’m wrong on this), I believe that the LEO who are getting the warrant have to specify “we’re looking for x, and we believe it’s located y.” The warrant doesn’t give the LEO carte blanche to, say, show up at the location as often as they’d like to, and examine things not listed in the warrant. Not without having the warrant amended to a new one issued. If the LEO finds something incriminating over the course of their search, it can sometimes be deemed inadmissible in court if it was discovered outside of the areas specified in the warrant.
Your example above, regarding building code violations, is, I think, different than a warrant to search to search the premises.
I’m not trying to dispute what you’re saying, but I’m not sure it’s the best example to use.
Honest question: if something is asked for in a FOIA request, under what situations can that request be denied?
You guys just won’t quit will ya? You can’t see the forest for the trees. It’s no holds barred when it comes to a private email server operating outside the purview of the DSS with classified material on it. The machine is confiscated and by definition becomes illegally operated evidence in an investigation targeting anyone who may have had a hand in it. And don’t kid yourselves into thinking the FBI is the only one with a hand in the investigation.
Don’t know who this this “Bricker” guy is, but I’m sure he’ll come up with some further obfuscation.
Being a network administrator who wears an Exchange Admin hat, I understand the tech end well.
What wasn’t clear to me was the servers. If it is true that she just re purposed her old email server, that is even more worrying to me from a security aspect. If someone pwned the machine earlier and they reused that machine for her SecState email…
And I still cannot find answers about security audits on her server. I suspect the answer the server was tossed in a closet and forgotten.
This whole thing reeks of amateur hour. Were I tasked with getting SecState a private email server I’d damned well document the shit out of it. New hardware. New firewall. A documented and followed security plan. A documented patch procedure. Etc.
Slee
If you were tasked with getting a high ranking government employee a private server wouldn’t your priority be verifying it with the appropriate authorities?
So all their crying about Benghazi was just a ruse to find something or anything they could find to derail Hillary’s chances at being the next President of the US. Good luck at that one.
Say, is this a scandal yet?
Not to the ignorant masses.
Why would you suspect that? We are talking about Hillary FREAKING Clinton! The one pol we all know is completely obsessed with keeping her shit as SECRET AS POSSIBLE!
You are assuming that the team HRC hired to set up her personal server had to ask themselves at one point, “Hmmm, do you think HRC would care if we skipped a security updates? Eh, prolly not”
It reminds me of the GOP simultaneous refrains that Obama is the least competent politician of all time, as well as an evil expert in political strategy.
Nobody, including the FBI, NSA, GOP, or ISR communities cares about updates or patches.
Hillary’s had 24 years of the GOP using every trick in the book to smear her. That would make anyone secretive as hell.
Which is not to say I consider her trustworthy and aboveboard - I don’t - but as they say, just because you’re paranoid it doesn’t mean everyone isn’t out to get you.
Ah yes, the great right wing conspiracy. Everybody was lying about Bill until the blue dress surfaced.
You’d think someone who was part of the Nixon tapes investigation and supposedly a prestigious lawyer would know better than to hide government documents but no, after 24 years she chose to use a non-government, unsecured server and then delete the emails in defiance of FOIA laws.
You do remember what the original Whitewater investigation was about, right? Hint: not blowjobs.
You’re offering up better evidence for “the great right wing conspiracy” than I did.
You are helping make the point. The blue dress came out of a witch hunt-style investigation that had nothing to do with Bill’s zipper.
And that was more or less tangentially about Hillary.
Even ignoring whackadoodle stuff like the whole “Vince Foster was murdered” thing, there’s more than enough evidence. For a large example, we’ve had eight (or however many) inquiries into Benghazi which have done nothing but waste taxpayer money and, frankly, improve Hillary’s chances in the primary. The GOP and RW media are not exactly subtle about this sort of thing.
Ah yes, Whitewater. The real estate failure involving money moving back and forth to avoid investigation. Documents disappearing after Foster died only to resurface later at the White House. Hiding documents has a familiar ring to it.
It had his DNA on it so I don’t know what you want to call it. He was spot on accurate with his drive by shooting. Give that man a cigar.
the investigations show hundreds of requests for security upgrades that never made it to her desk.
Oh look - a goalpost move. How unsurprising.
But if snide insinuations are where you want to go, perhaps she should have followed the precedent of Dick Cheney and kept everything in a “man-sized safe” in her office, invented her own security classifications, ignored Congressional subpoenas and destroyed everything upon leaving office. That’s what real patriotic Americans do, right?