State Department suspends review into 'top secret" Clinton emails

The reason they are suspending their investigation is not what Progressives are hoping was the reason. Must be that great right wing conspiracy.

EXECUTIVE
State Dept suspends review into 'top secret' Clinton emails
Published April 02, 2016 Associated Press

The State Department has suspended its internal review into whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or her top aides mishandled emails containing information now deemed `top secret."

Spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau said Friday the department had paused the review to avoid interfering with an ongoing FBI investigation into Clinton's use of a private server while she was America's top diplomat. She said the decision was made after the department sought the FBI's advice on how to proceed with the review and received word that it should follow its standard practice. Trudeau said the department's standard practice is to place internal reviews "on hold while there is an ongoing law enforcement investigation underway."

[...]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/02/state-dept-suspends-review-into-top-secret-clinton-emails.html?intcmp=hpbt3

The reason they are suspending their investigation is not what Progressives are hoping was the reason. Must be that great right wing conspiracy.


Tell us oh great soothsayer....what were Progressives thinking?

2seaoat wrote:The reason they are suspending their investigation is not what Progressives are hoping was the reason. Must be that great right wing conspiracy.


Tell us oh great soothsayer....what were Progressives thinking?

SHUT DOWN THESE FREAKIN' INVESTIGATIONS! There is entirely too much truth coming out about the queen. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!

Markle wrote:SHUT DOWN THESE FREAKIN' INVESTIGATIONS!  There is entirely too much truth coming out about the queen.  GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!

You and PeeDog (yes, he's back!) are going to be fun to watch after she is elected in November.......

It's going to get harder and harder to remain ignorant and dismiss her obvious attempt to evade accountability.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/hillary-email-probe-could_b_9579826.html

The Hillary Clinton email probe is getting very close to becoming another full-blown Clinton scandal. David Shuster of Al Jazeera reported on March 30th that the FBI is arranging interviews with former State Department aides Philippe Reines,Former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills,and Clinton herself. Shuster also scooped that Justice Department prosecutors are joining the FBI team of investigators.

Here are some things that need to be understood regarding this email probe based on what has been reported. The LA Times recently reported that interviews are being arranged for the FBI to speak to HRC associates. This infers that all the preliminary investigation into this matter has been done.

The fact that subpoenas for interviews have been submitted and that one of HRC’s aides has been granted immunity means a grand jury exists to approve of the immunity and interviews.

Weeks ago it was revealed that Bryan Pagliano,the person granted immunity failed to inform his employers at the State Deptartment that while in their employ he was also employed by HRC to manage her private email server. Persons who have been US prosecutors with knowledge of the laws regarding the Clinton server have stated that it was unlawful of Pagliano to not inform his government employers he was also privately working for Secretary Clinton.

That he knew he was in violation because of this would be a strong motivation to cooperate with the FBI investigation. The cruxof the case against HRC according to knowledgeable people of these laws have stated that the very existence of her private email server was a violation of law regarding national security.

We know Clinton never used the .gov email account that was created for her. It is very important to understand that HRC as Secretary of State was one of ten members of the government that had the authority to make a document classified. Like all government employees at this level,HRC signed a document that clearly states she is responsible and accountable for information that is classified regardless of when it is given the status of classified. This cuts through the smokescreen of the defense that documents that went through HRC’s private server were later identified as classified and that is all she had done. She was expected by way of law to know which material by its inherent nature was deemed worthy of this classification. We know that at least 22 of her emails were not only classified but identified as SAP. Special Access Programs (SAP) are considered “highly classified” documents. It appears quite likely she broke national security laws during her time as Secretary of State.

The big question is why did HRC not use a .gov email address and why did she only use her private server for ALL of her email correspondence. Her stated reason of “convenience” seems incomplete at best in terms of an answer when it is handling matters of national security.

Yes,it was inconvenient for her to read all of her classified email from a secure laptop in a special room which disabled her blackberry,but how does that justify anything when it comes to national security. HRC was rebuffed when she requested of the NSA a secure blackberry similar to the one they made for President Obama that could not be hacked. A big reason why HRC could not bring her blackberry into the secure room is that hackers can take over a blackberry and turn it into a listening device. Her Secretary of State offices were located in such a room so that yes,this was inconvenient. It was deemed by the NSA too costly and time-consuming to create a second blackberry. It has been noted by the NSA that this was typical of the Clintons to believe they warranted special treatment above and beyond everyone else.

An obvious reason for HRC to want to control all of her email by private server became readily apparent when after her time as Secretary of State individuals and organizations put in FOIA requests regarding her emails. The State Department ultimately came back with the response to these requests that there were no documents to be found. The State Department mislead the requesters by not informing them that they could not be found because they were not on a government server but a private server. This would indicate the possibility that some of her old employees were trying to protect her. These would probably be the same employees who did not think to question why their Secretary of State did not use a .gov email. Apparently HRC is such an intimidating figure that no one in government thought to question this matter of national security.

In regards to access of her emails if she would have used a .gov email then not only FOIA requests were a concern for HRC but also the fact that thousands of individuals could have access to her emails. Given the Clintons penchant for scandals and their subsequent secrets it does not take any imagination to conclude why HRC only used a private server. She expected to have something to hide. The only reasonable conclusion to be made by all of this is that HRC prioritized her ability to keep secrets over the needs of national security. There is one particular area of interest that is being speculated she wanted to hide and might have been included in the 30K emails she destroyed. This is the matter of money donated to the Clinton Foundation by the same countries who got approved by Hillary’s State Department to buy U.S. arms.

Saying nothing over and over does not by repetition make it valid. I am still awaiting for this big indictment......too funny......just like the Benghazi conclusions.....nothing......we have to endure repetition and bone chilling stupid innuendo and guessing.....yes guessing.....

2seaoat wrote:Saying nothing over and over does not by repetition make it valid. I am still awaiting for this big indictment......too funny......just like the Benghazi conclusions.....nothing......we have to endure repetition and bone chilling stupid innuendo and guessing.....yes guessing.....

You obviously didn't read the article... even when it comes from a left leaning source. I'll try to make it easier for you.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/hillary-email-probe-could_b_9579826.html

The fact that subpoenas for interviews have been submitted and that one of HRC’s aides has been granted immunity means a grand jury exists to approve of the immunity and interviews.

Persons who have been US prosecutors with knowledge of the laws regarding the Clinton server have stated that it was unlawful of Pagliano to not inform his government employers he was also privately working for Secretary Clinton.

It is very important to understand that HRC as Secretary of State was one of ten members of the government that had the authority to make a document classified. Like all government employees at this level, HRC signed a document that clearly states she is responsible and accountable for information that is classified regardless of when it is given the status of classified.

She was expected by way of law to know which material by its inherent nature was deemed worthy of this classification. We know that at least 22 of her emails were not only classified but identified as SAP. Special Access Programs (SAP) are considered “highly classified” documents.

HRC was rebuffed when she requested of the NSA a secure blackberry.

An obvious reason for HRC to want to control all of her email by private server became readily apparent when after her time as Secretary of State individuals and organizations put in FOIA requests regarding her emails. The State Department ultimately came back with the response to these requests that there were no documents to be found. The State Department mislead the requesters by not informing them that they could not be found because they were not on a government server but a private server.

The only reasonable conclusion to be made by all of this is that HRC prioritized her ability to keep secrets over the needs of national security. There is one particular area of interest that is being speculated she wanted to hide and might have been included in the 30K emails she destroyed. This is the matter of money donated to the Clinton Foundation by the same countries who got approved by Hillary’s State Department to buy U.S. arms.

You mean an investigaton they actually issue subpoenas in a timely way.....Benghazi the folks forgot to issue them.....so I guess that folks that do not know how an investigation works would be impressed.....nothing....absolutely nothing.

It means that the former minions of Clinton who have protected her are not going to be allowed to do so any longer. There better be more than the four mentioned in the news this week who have lawyered up. This goes deeper than just one level of staffers.

2seaoat wrote:Saying nothing over and over does not by repetition make it valid.   I am still awaiting for this big indictment......too funny......just like the Benghazi conclusions.....nothing......we have to endure repetition and bone chilling stupid innuendo and guessing.....yes guessing.....

I partially agree. It is doubtful Hillary will be indicted since she has been groveling to Lame Duck President Obama. On the other hand, Huma Abidine and Cheryl Mills no doubt get thrown under the bus.

Clinton has not had one allegation against her which is criminal. Now if she or her staff tried to hide something or lie to the FBI, that would be a problem. However, she was authorized to receive information. If a person sent classified information to an unsecured server, it is not her problem....period. If some of her staff used that classified information by conveying it to third parties....yes they could be in trouble. The idea of the FBI doing a comprehensive investigation is by definition necessary when a candidate is in a campaign because there will always be an accusation of a white wash or a witch hunt, both politicize the FBI which is not their mission. There is absolutely nothing on Clinton other than fabricated out of thin air innuendo and pretend experts who create propaganda. The problem is that propaganda is just a waste of time. No indictment and an opponent like Donald Trump will be the coronation of President Clinton the first woman President.

She originated over 100 of the deemed classified emails despite being obligated both by job description and signed agreement to recognize and determine their significance and sensitivity. Which was she... either incompetent or deceitful?

2seaoat wrote:Saying nothing over and over does not by repetition make it valid. I am still awaiting for this big indictment......too funny......just like the Benghazi conclusions.....nothing......we have to endure repetition and bone chilling stupid innuendo and guessing.....yes guessing.....

Say nothing?

Cute try. As you well know...the HuffingtonPost is one of the Progressives very favorite, far left sites. Yet you are saying it is nothing....

Yeah, riiiiight.

The Benghazi investigations continue. Due entirely to the MOST TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION stonewalling, delaying tactics and denials.

Her emails were only turned over after two years of repeated requests and stonewalling from the dos.

But you know that... and apparently find that an acceptable tactic. One that sadly is a new precedent.

Congratulations comrade. Fucking up the country one appeasement at a time for your dear leaders.

PkrBum wrote:Her emails were only turned over after two years of repeated requests and stonewalling from the dos.

But you know that... and apparently find that an acceptable tactic. One that sadly is a new precedent.

Congratulations comrade. Fucking up the country one appeasement at a time for your dear leaders.

There you go again...confusing ZVUGKTUBM with facts and reality. You KNOW how Progressives get when faced with such trivial details. They get dizzy, staggr around sometimes falling down in the street. Just embarrassing.

2seaoat wrote: Clinton has not had one allegation against her which is criminal.  Now if she or her staff tried to hide something or lie to the FBI, that would be a problem.  However, she was authorized to receive information.  If a person sent classified information to an unsecured server, it is not her problem....period.   If some of her staff used that classified information by conveying it to third parties....yes they could be in trouble.   The idea of the FBI doing a comprehensive investigation is by definition necessary when a candidate is in a campaign because there will always be an accusation of a white wash or a witch hunt, both politicize the FBI which is not their mission.   There is absolutely nothing on Clinton other than fabricated out of thin air innuendo and pretend experts who create propaganda.   The problem is that propaganda is just a waste of time.  No indictment and an opponent like Donald Trump will be the coronation of President Clinton the first woman President.

What else does the FBI investigate? They do NOT make security checks. they do NOT investigate misdemeanors.

Your apathy when the transgressions are from the left is a major reason that we won't have accountability from govt.

That means that all of your teeth gnashing and lamenting that there is no social justice or fairness is a waste of time.

Hillary in particular will say and do literally anything to snatch power... and she will have no more obligation to you than an alligator would in a swamp. She is beholden to wall st and corps and banks and special interest. Deceit is her main tool.

Wordslinger wrote:

Markle wrote:

2seaoat wrote: Clinton has not had one allegation against her which is criminal.  Now if she or her staff tried to hide something or lie to the FBI, that would be a problem.  However, she was authorized to receive information.  If a person sent classified information to an unsecured server, it is not her problem....period.   If some of her staff used that classified information by conveying it to third parties....yes they could be in trouble.   The idea of the FBI doing a comprehensive investigation is by definition necessary when a candidate is in a campaign because there will always be an accusation of a white wash or a witch hunt, both politicize the FBI which is not their mission.   There is absolutely nothing on Clinton other than fabricated out of thin air innuendo and pretend experts who create propaganda.   The problem is that propaganda is just a waste of time.  No indictment and an opponent like Donald Trump will be the coronation of President Clinton the first woman President.

What else does the FBI investigate?  They do NOT make security checks.  they do NOT investigate misdemeanors.

Take a deep breath, nitwit.  An investigation isn't a crime until charges have been filed and a crime has been proven.  

Please try reading the quote I have highlighted in red. That might help you.

Wordslinger wrote:It is my sincere pleasure to announce to you right wing knuckle draggers that your joy over Hillary's problems may lead you to the last place you republicans really want to go:  Trump vs. Sanders.  

And because I honor, respect and admire your intellect, wit, sense of humor, and courage so much, I can't wait for the real war to begin!

Whoever vs Biden

VP Joe Biden will promise not to run for re-election.

The rumor mill is that the state dept was set to release a report vindicating hillary's version of events... big surprise. I think the real reason they didn't is because they'd have been made to look like the partisan hacks they are by the fbi investigation.