ANOTHER Official Email Discovered that Hillary Deleted

http://www.bigstory.ap.org/article/aeb50a252e754647bc0c5a18c15c2502/clinton-failed-hand-over-key-email-state-department

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclearwhat other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

The email was included within messages exchanged Nov. 13, 2010, between Clinton and one of her closest aides, Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin. At the time, emails sent from Clinton's BlackBerry device and routed through her private clintonemail.com server in the basementof her New York home were being blocked by the State Department's spam filter. A suggested remedy was for Clinton to obtain a state.gov email account.

"Let's get separate address or device but I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible," Clinton responded to Abedin.

Clinton never used a government account that was set up for her, instead continuing to rely on her private server until leaving office.

The email was not among the tens of thousands of emails Clinton turned over to the agency in response to public records lawsuits seeking copies of her official correspondence. Abedin, who also used a private account on Clinton's server, provided a copy from her own inbox after the State Department asked her to return any work-related emails. That copy of the email was publicly cited last month in a blistering audit by the State Department's inspector general that concluded Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup violated federal standards and could have left sensitive material vulnerable to hackers.

"While this exchange was not part of the approximately 55,000 pages provided to the State Department by former Secretary Clinton, the exchange was included within the set of documents Ms. Abedin provided the department in response to ourMarch2015 request," State Department spokesman John Kirby told The Associated Press on Thursday.

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said she provided "all potentially work-related emails" that were still in her possession when she received the 2014 request from the State Department.

"Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have," Fallon said.

Fallon declined to say whether Clinton deleted any work-related emails before they were reviewed by her legal team. Clinton's lead lawyer, David Kendall, did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.

The November 2010 email was among documents released under court order Wednesday to the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch, which has sued the State Department over access to public records related to the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee's service as the nation's top diplomat between 2009 and 2013.

Before turning over her emails to the department for review and potential public release, Clinton and her lawyers withheld thousands of additional emails she said were clearly personal, such as those involving what she described as "planning Chelsea's wedding or my mother's funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends as well as yoga routines, family vacations."

Clinton has never outlined in detail what criteria she and her lawyers used to determine which emails to release and which to delete, but her 2010 email with Abedin appears clearly work-related under the State Department's own criteria for agency records under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

Dozens of the emails sent or received by Clinton through her private server were later determined to contain classified material. The FBI has been investigating for months whether Clinton's use of the private email server imperiled government secrets. Agents recently interviewed several of Clinton's top aides, including Abedin.

As part of the probe, Clinton turned over the hard drive from her email server to the FBI. It had been wiped clean, and Clinton has said she did not keep copies of the emails she choose to withhold.

On Wednesday, lawyers from Judicial Watch, a conservative legal organization, questioned under oath Bryan Pagliano, the computer technician who set up Clinton's private server. A transcript released Thursday shows Pagliano repeatedly responded to detailed questions by invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, as he did last year before a congressional committee.

Dozens of questions Pagiliano declined to answer included who paid for the system, whether there was technical help to support its users and who else at the State Department used email accounts on it. Pagliano also would not answer whether he discussed setting up a home server with Clinton prior to her tenure as secretary of state, according to the transcript.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said the November 2010 email cited in the inspector general audit was one of more than a dozen work-related emails that his group identified that Clinton sentor received but later failed to turn over the State Department.

"Contrary to her statement under oath suggesting otherwise, Mrs. Clinton did not return all her government emails to the State Department," Fitton said. "Our goal is to find out what other emails Mrs. Clinton and the State Department are hiding."

Nothing......"homebrewed", you would have to pretty simple not to see this hatchet job as being desperate.......nobody cares, and when there is no indictment, and when the fellow took the fifth.....poor babies......"homebrewed" when the server was tight and professionally set up, but stupid cannot be fixed.

There is no neutral ground. If you are against Hillary, you are for Trump. To deny the same assumes we all are turnips which just fell off the truck. There is only ONE evil in this election, and to not be able to discern the truth is quite the tell.

Failure to turn over all her emails is a violation of the law.

This specific one points out that she wants to keep her "personal" emails personal.

Of course to the Clinton cabal, personal would include her solicitation of funds for the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Slush Fund in return for favored treatment from the State Department.

More... gawd she's a train wreck. Nice choice comrades.

http://www.trunews.com/clinton-camp-admits-hiding-cryptic-email-sent-to-huma-abedin/

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign is acknowledging that the former secretary of state failed to turn over a cryptic work-related email that she sent to her aide Huma Abedin while she was in office.

“Secretary Clinton had some emails with Huma that Huma did not have, and Huma had some emails with Secretary Clinton that Secretary Clinton did not have,” Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon told the Associated Press.

One such email is from a Nov. 13, 2010 exchange in which Abedin asked Clinton if she wanted to begin using a State.gov email account. Clinton, who used only a personal account, indicated she was open to the idea, but said “I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

The email was cited by the State Department’s office of the inspector general in a scathing report on Clinton’s email practices.

It is still unclear what Clinton meant by the statement in the email. But the document’s absence from the 55,000-plus pages of work-related records that Clinton gave the State Department in December 2014 suggests that she may have sought to hide the exchange.

Fallon told the AP that Clinton gave the State Department “all potentially work-related emails” that she had in her possession when she received the State Department’s request for her work records in October 2014.

The flack did not clarify why Clinton failed to turn over the email. He declined to tell the AP whether Clinton deleted any work-related emails prior to handing her records over to the State Department.

Clinton and her team have rarely — if ever — been pressed on whether she deleted any work-related emails. The former first lady employed a team of lawyers to determine which of her emails were personal and which were work-related.

She has also insisted that she handed over all work-related emails. But she often qualifies the statement by saying that she provided those that were in her possession. That leaves open the possibility that she was unable to turn over some work-related emails that she sent and received because they had been deleted.

During testimony in front of the House Select Committee on Benghazi in October, Clinton was asked about 15 emails she exchanged with her longtime friend Sidney Blumenthal that she also failed to give the State Department.

“They were from a personal friend, not any official government official, and they were, I determined on the basis of looking at them, what I thought was work-related and what wasn’t and some I did not have time to the read,” Clinton testified.

Clinton’s failure to turn over the email with Abedin was acknowledged by the State Department acknowledged last month after the publication of the IG report on her email practices.

“There are instances, and they’re identified in the OIG report, where people are aware of emails that involved her that she did not turn over,” a State Department official said during a background briefing at the time.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said in a public briefing that same day that the agency does not have an estimate of how many work-related emails Clinton failed to turn over.

“I don’t think it’s a large number. I just think that there are stray examples such as this,” Toner said.

“While this exchange was not part of the approximately 55,000 pages provided to the State Department by former Secretary Clinton, the exchange was included within the set of documents Ms. Abedin provided the department in response to our March 2015 request,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told the AP.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

(a)Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b)Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

(CNN) — Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has told a federal judge that she has turned over all of her work-related emails to the State Department after a judge requested she do so, a state department spokesman confirmed to CNN on Sunday.

Clinton signed a declaration obtained by CNN, which said "While I do not know what information may be 'responsive' fr purposes of this law suit, I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done."

This follows U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ordering the State Department to have Clinton as well as two former top department aides to state under penalty of perjury they have produced all government records in their possession.

Your lack of knowledge on how discovery is conducted in a court of law is mind numbing. If the judge, or the petitioner believed that Clinton, the State Department, or any aides were in direct contempt of a court order, there is a notice which is required to be sent out, and then something called a rule to show cause, where the judge issues the same and a hearing is held to determine if the discovery order has been violated.....you do realize none of this has happened, and that you have made idiotic claims not backed up by any conduct which would be deemed in violation of the court order......what utter ignorance. more mindless innuendo without a scintilla of fact.

Colin Powell used an AOL account and deleted all his emails. Bush and Cheney deleted 22 million emails and allowed (instructed) the CIA to dispose of all the "torture tapes". And you want to quibble over Hillary's private server, which was probably more secure than any government server...yes, I know, there have been a lot of articles insinuating that Hillary's email was compromised by Russian hackers, but I haven't seen any proof...just hyped-up innuendo. There will be no charges against Hillary Clinton, because she did not, in fact, break any laws. There will be a continuing effort to extend this "scandal" until November.

Let's compare:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/us/27justice.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Reveals More Missing E-Mail Files

By ERIC LICHTBLAU FEB. 26, 2010

WASHINGTON — Large batches of e-mail records from the Justice Department lawyers who worked on the 2002 legal opinions justifying the Bush administration’s brutal interrogation techniques are missing, and the Justice Department told lawmakers Friday that it would try to trace the disappearance.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who leads the panel, angrily demanded to know what had happened to the e-mail files, and he noted that the destruction of government records, including official e-mail messages, was a criminal offense. He said the records gap called into question the completeness of the department’s internal reviews of the work done by the lawyers in the Bush years.

The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which spent more than four years investigating the handling of the legal opinions about interrogation policies after the Sept. 11 attacks, pushed to get access to a range of e-mail records and other internal documents from the Justice Department to aid in its investigation.

But it discovered that many e-mail messages to and from John C. Yoo, who wrote the bulk of the legal opinions for the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, were missing. The office disclosed the missing messages in a footnote to its final report, which was released last week.

“We were told that most of Yoo’s e-mail records had been deleted and were not recoverable,” officials from the Office of Professional Responsibility said in the footnote.

Also deleted were a month’s worth of e-mail files from the summer of 2002 for Patrick Philbin, another Justice Department lawyer who worked on the interrogation opinions. Those missing e-mail messages came during a period when two of the critical interrogation memos were being prepared.

Mr. Yoo’s lawyer, Miguel Estrada, said Mr. Yoo had left the Justice Department by the time the Office of Professional Responsibility had begun its review and “has no basis for knowing whether e-mails are gone or why.” In pursuing the matter, Mr. Leahy is “simply chasing his tail and feeding far-left conspiracy theories,” Mr. Estrada said.

Mr. Philbin did not respond to requests for comment Friday.

Mr. Leahy said the disappearance of the e-mail messages raised “serious concerns about government transparency and whether the Office of Professional Responsibility had access to all the information relevant to the inquiries.”

The original interrogation memos “were intended to provide a golden shield to commit torture and get away with it,” Mr. Leahy argued, but he said questions about how the memos were developed and what role the White House played may go unanswered.

Mr. Leahy also noted that 22 million missing e-mail messages from the Bush White House were recovered just two months ago, including batches of communications that had been sought by the judiciary committee as part of its oversight work into the 2007 firings of United States attorneys and other matters.

Gary Grindler, the acting deputy attorney general who represented the Justice Department at Friday’s hearing, said he did not think there was “anything nefarious” about the deletion of the e-mail messages, but he could not explain what happened to them.

He said he had directed administrative personnel at the Justice Department to review the situation and determine whether there were problems in the department’s system for automatically archiving internal documents. He said the review would also seek to recover the missing e-mail messages if possible.

In its final report, the Office for Professional Responsibility concluded that Mr. Yoo and his former boss, Jay S. Bybee, demonstrated professional misconduct in preparing the legal opinions that justified waterboarding and other interrogation tactics on Al Qaeda suspects in American custody.

The office’s findings were overruled, however, in another report released the same day by David Margolis, the associate deputy attorney general, who said Mr. Yoo and Mr. Bybee demonstrated flawed reasoning but not misconduct. Mr. Margolis rejected the Office of Professional Responsibility’s attempt to refer Mr. Yoo, now a law professor at Berkeley, and Mr. Bybee, a federal appellate judge, to state bar officials for possible disciplinary action.

Republicans on the Judiciary Committee appeared unconcerned about the missing e-mail messages and said that if the Justice Department were to continue investigating anything involving the interrogation memos, it should be whether officials at the Office of Professional Responsibility or elsewhere at the Justice Department improperly leaked details of the ethics inquiry to the news media over the last year.

Senator Jon Cornyn, Republican of Texas, said Mr. Yoo and Mr. Bybee deserved “the thanks of a grateful nation for their service,” not accusations, and that the leaks had done “irreparable damage” to their reputations.

**********

I want full disclosure, accountability, and transparency from the entire govt at all levels and all parties... no exceptions.

See how that works?