Clinton lawyer says her email server was wiped clean

[webfact]

Clinton lawyer says her email server was wiped clean
By STEPHEN BRAUN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal lawyer has told a Senate committee that emails and all other data stored on her computer server were erased before the device was turned over to federal authorities.

In a letter sent last week to Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, attorney David Kendall said the server was transferred to the FBI on Aug. 12 by Platte River Networks, a Denver firm hired by Clinton to oversee the device. The Senate committee made Kendall's letter public on Wednesday. In exchanges with reporters earlier this week, Clinton said she was not aware if the data on her server was erased.

Confirmation that the server was wiped clean came amid mounting confusion over how sensitive some of the Clinton emails were and how much of their contents should have been released. Clinton aides said at least two emails that might have triggered the federal inquiry were not marked secret at the time. But a Republican senator said Wednesday that U.S. inspector generals for the State Department and the intelligence community were told by some of the agency's freedom of information specialists that department lawyers released some Clinton materials to the public over their objections.

Federal investigators, prompted by a request from the inspector general for the State Department, requested custody of the server to learn whether the data stored on it was secure. NBC News has reported that an FBI team is now examining the server. Forensics experts told The Associated Press this week that some emails and other data may still be extracted from servers even after they are supposedly expunged.

Separately, John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman, told reporters Wednesday in Columbia, South Carolina, that, to his knowledge, no other copy had been made of the server's contents other than those her lawyers turned over to the FBI.

As campaign officials answered questions, one of Clinton's rivals said the email issue has become a distraction for the Democratic Party.

"I think that it's a huge distraction from what we should be talking about as a party," former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley told reporters in Nevada.

Instead, he said more debates should be held among the candidates to address raising the minimum wage, repairing the country's infrastructure and other issues. "Until we do, our party's label is going to be the latest news du jour about emails and email servers and what Secretary Clinton knew and when she knew it."

O'Malley said some people in the Democratic National Committee are "circling the wagons."

Kendall, Clinton's long-time personal lawyer, said in his letter to the committee that both he and another lawyer at his firm were given security clearances by the State Department to handle a thumb drive that contained about 3,000 emails later turned over to the agency. Kendall said the thumb drive was stored in a safe provided in July by the State Department. Kendall did not say when he was given his clearance from State. The GOP-dominated Senate Judiciary Committee has asked Kendall if he had any access to Clinton's emails before he was given his security clearance.

Republican senators on both committees are pressing to see whether any emails sent or received by Clinton on the private server while she was secretary of state contained any secret information that should have been only exchanged on secured, encrypted government communications portals. An inspector general for the State Department said recently that several emails sent to Clinton did include such classified material — signaling that the transmission of those emails may have risked violating government guidelines for the handling of classified material.

Clinton campaign officials on Wednesday sought to show that the information contained in the emails that she received did not risk spillage of classified data at the time they were sent to her. During a conference call, campaign aides pointed to a Fox News report that at least two of the emails that prompted the inspector general's referral may have contained sensitive information but were not marked "classified" at the time they were sent to Clinton by aides.

Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon noted that the two emails were sent to Clinton from career diplomats, not political appointees, and that they "did not have information marked 'classified' or any classified documents attached to them."

Information in one of the documents, a 2012 email to Clinton about arrests in Libya, was later classified as secret by the FBI, but then released with redactions this year by the State Department, highlighting a dispute between the two agencies over whether the material should have been made public. A second email from 2011 was also released in full but reportedly contained classified military information.

"All this goes to show that when it comes to classified information, not all standards are black and white," Fallon said.

There are disputes even within the State Department, said Senate Judiciary Chairman Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa. In a letter sent Wednesday to Secretary of State John Kerry, Grassley said several State FOIA examiners told inspectors general that several lawyers from the State Department Office of the Legal Advisor fully cleared some Clinton emails for public release despite recommendations that several passages needed to be censored for national security reasons.

"This dispute may have already contributed to at least one classified email being inappropriately released to the public," Grassley said. He also questioned whether some State Department lawyers may have had potential conflicts of interest.

State Department spokesman Alec Gerlach said: "The law is what governs redactions and upgrades. We are making appropriate redactions — following the standards laid out under FOIA for redactions as well as the rules governing classification as defined" by presidential orders.
___

Associated Press Writer Meg Kinnard in Columbia contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-08-20

[DaddyWarbucks]

No surprise.

If she didn't wipe, it would have stunk to high heaven.

Edited August 20, 2015 by DaddyWarbucks

[Basil B]

Having worked for a Multi International company (another way of saying tax dodging american company), all our emails were deleted from the sever after 90 days, company policy.

Why...

[kamahele]

Lest we forget, the Bush White House "lost" 5 million emails never to be seen again... Seems like a trend

[Chicog]

Having worked for a Multi International company (another way of saying tax dodging american company), all our emails were deleted from the sever after 90 days, company policy.

Why...

Depending on what business you are in, there may be laws that mandate that you keep emails for a year or more.

However, in this instance since she claims to have turned over all the work emails, there is no legal requirement for her to keep the top secret ultraclassified ones personal ones she sent to her mates.

[SOTIRIOS]

...but still possibly retrievable.....

[Hayduke]

"I think that it's a huge distraction from what we should be talking about as a party," former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley told reporters in Nevada.

Huge distraction? Wrong, Mr. O'Malley. It's precisely the sort of thing your party needs to be talking about. But then again, there's always the ever popluar 'smoke and mirrors' option.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Hayduke

[PHP87]

Having worked for a Multi International company (another way of saying tax dodging american company), all our emails were deleted from the sever after 90 days, company policy.

Why...

Depending on what business you are in, there may be laws that mandate that you keep emails for a year or more.

However, in this instance since she claims to have turned over all the work emails, there is no legal requirement for her to keep the top secret ultraclassified ones personal ones she sent to her mates.

Since she wasn't supposed to use that account for personal email, she was required to turn over all emails per the subpoena, not just the one's she cherry picked.

If you can't see that, then you are either being obtuse, intellectually lazy or a blind partisan.

She's losing support among Dems and Indy's

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/19/politics/2016-poll-hillary-clinton-joe-biden-bernie-sanders/

Edited August 20, 2015 by PHP87

[wabothai]

sergeant Schulz ......

[rethaier]

Surely the NSA with its comprehensive data gathering should be able to shed some light on this. If they can't what good are they?

[pattayasnowman]

Shes a pathological liar (as is her husband) numerous times they have bared faced lied to the public. Yet here she is and could be the next President of the USA

Reminiscent of Nixon being forced to turn over his White House Tapes

[PHP87]

sergeant Schulz ......

[PHP87]

Surely the NSA with its comprehensive data gathering should be able to shed some light on this. If they can't what good are they?

I wonder if the Hard Drive on Clinton's server is gouged like the one on the IRS server that was subpoenaed and handed over by Lois Lerner?

[Neurath]

Can't they just ask Julian Assange to lend them his copies? Problem solved.

[oztaurus]

Amateurs - Australian politician Ros Kelly

"revealed that funding for sporting bodies was arranged on the basis of a group discussion around a "great big whiteboard" in her office"

At least she was made to resign over that.

[arjunadawn]

I feel dirty just being an observer to the degrading life of the Clintons. They take American discourse to the Jerry Springer level. They are figureheads of the modern repugnant public servant.

[PHP87]

Trump hit the nail on the head earlier when he said it was either intentional criminal action or gross incompetence. One or the other, but neither is acceptable for a Presidential candidate.

[Neurath]

Trump hit the nail on the head earlier when he said it was either intentional criminal action or gross incompetence. One or the other, but neither is acceptable for a Presidential candidate.

I suppose that rules Donald out then.

[Neurath]

I feel dirty just being an observer to the degrading life of the Clintons. They take American discourse to the Jerry Springer level. They are figureheads of the modern repugnant public servant.

I'd like to know what was going through her head in deciding to use the servers thusly, and the reason behind the Nixonesque wiping of the server. Anyway, doesn't make me feel any dirtier that I do already due to hanging around here.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Neurath

[arjunadawn]

I feel dirty just being an observer to the degrading life of the Clintons. They take American discourse to the Jerry Springer level. They are figureheads of the modern repugnant public servant.

I'd like to know what was going through her head in deciding to use the servers thusly, and the reason behind the Nixonesque wiping of the server. Anyway, doesn't make me feel any dirtier that I do already due to hanging around here.

May I take a crack at this? Well, I think the same mental mechanics that apply to little tingtong reasons we do sneaky things also apply to the global, monstrous things people do. The same rationalizations take place, and equally the same motivations. The Clintons are not stupid. Its hard to be arch criminals and not go to jail, so they clearly know how to avoid the law after decades of being one step ahead of it, or compromising it. So, what would make someone initially take actions to sterilize their entire presence in a job like this?

-Its argued they did not want to present latter fodder for congressional opponents. But this is not an excuse, its only evidence of mercenary motives and by definition proves the point of the imaginary would be opponents- she is crooked and would have something to hide. This defense proves the charge.

-She and her entire staff did not know the rules regarding classified information. Moreover, as one of few authorities she did not know steps for classification and that classification exists irrespective of a stamp, rather the source and content always define the classification. Furthermore, classification exists whether on US server, private, thumbdrive, print, cartoons, or in someone's head. That she and group did not know this is a lie. The State department has entire fleets of agents constantly reinforcing classification rules, every single time, every document, and virtually all forms of these digital communications must take place in shielded communications pallets (even in existing buildings), and no phones, thumbdrives, etc, are allowed near them. Anything on her system had to be intentionally transferred either out of a secure container or off a secure intranet.

-As all documents belonging to government were returned the devices could be wiped. Of course, wiping devices that may later be seized is evidence of a crime or intention to withhold or destroy information. The only reason this would ever be done is if the information wiped was far more damning. Drives are wiped not simply by formatting- data can be recovered- data is wiped by a few standards of writing over all sectors with 0s and 1s. One pass, multiple pass, or Gutmann method numerous passes to ensure nothing could ever be recreated from the shadows. Thus there are numerous decisions to be made in wiping a device, not just the choice to clean it. There is no ambiguity. Wiping the drives was an alternative to a worse outcome.

I am sure I join others who are confident there are two primary reasons for wiping the drives and even beginning a journey like this of hiding from the light- Benghazi and Hillary's rabid push to war as a sponsor of the Muslim Brotherhood and the graft relation of money for access regarding her SecState and foundation. The enormity of such acts clearly dwarfs any charges of subverting an investigation. One being guilty of negatives the other guilty of affirmative criminal acts. She approached her assignment as SecState with mercenary motives, acting them out willfully through subverting existing safeguards and ran a concurrent operation under the cover of SecState satisfying herself and special interests in the name of the United States of America. Hillary is a war criminal, among other things. She literally ran a war from the State department in contravention of the US military recommendations. If this is not motive enough I cant imagine justice will ever come about.

[PHP87]

Trump hit the nail on the head earlier when he said it was either intentional criminal action or gross incompetence. One or the other, but neither is acceptable for a Presidential candidate.

I suppose that rules Donald out then.

Explain?

[Neurath]

Trump hit the nail on the head earlier when he said it was either intentional criminal action or gross incompetence. One or the other, but neither is acceptable for a Presidential candidate.

I suppose that rules Donald out then.

Explain?

Certainly not.

[Jingthing]

She's not looking good, even to democrats.

It's like she's not the same person that ran eight years ago. I wish she had won then. Now I wish she would go away.

I don't know if she's guilty of a crime and I certainly don't want to see her do a Martha Stewart, but the way she's handled this situation is the opposite of impressive.

Edited August 20, 2015 by Jingthing

[Neurath]

I feel dirty just being an observer to the degrading life of the Clintons. They take American discourse to the Jerry Springer level. They are figureheads of the modern repugnant public servant.

I'd like to know what was going through her head in deciding to use the servers thusly, and the reason behind the Nixonesque wiping of the server. Anyway, doesn't make me feel any dirtier that I do already due to hanging around here.

-Its argued they did not want to present latter fodder for congressional opponents. But this is not an excuse, its only evidence of mercenary motives and by definition proves the point of the imaginary would be opponents- she is crooked and would have something to hide. This defense proves the charge.

I love it when the defense proves the charge! Saves me time.

[Neurath]

She's not looking good, even to democrats.

It's like she's not the same person that ran eight years ago. I wish she had won then. Now if wish she would go away.

I don't know if she's guilty of a crime and I certainly don't want to see her do a Martha Stewart, but the way she's handled this situation is the opposite of impressive.

Yep, someone needs to tell her:

Time to pack your swag digger, the circus has left town and the dogs are pissing on your boots.

[PHP87]

"The Clintons have always behaved as if the rules of the laws don't apply to them."

-Texas Senator Ted Cruz

[Neurath]

She's not looking good, even to democrats.

It's like she's not the same person that ran eight years ago. I wish she had won then. Now if wish she would go away.

I don't know if she's guilty of a crime and I certainly don't want to see her do a Martha Stewart, but the way she's handled this situation is the opposite of impressive.

The big worry is that it all so very Clintonesque, and in being so conjures up what was bad in the 90's sometimes through the Clinton's agency and sometimes not, but a foul odor anyway. Stink sure does seem to follow.

[arjunadawn]

She's not looking good, even to democrats.

It's like she's not the same person that ran eight years ago. I wish she had won then. Now if wish she would go away.

I don't know if she's guilty of a crime and I certainly don't want to see her do a Martha Stewart, but the way she's handled this situation is the opposite of impressive.

Yep, someone needs to tell her:

Time to pack your swag digger, the circus has left town and the dogs are pissing on your boots.

I think Jingthing is a better barometer than I ever could be. I have always been biased toward Hillary. When someone who is candid enough to say she has changed and he now has concerns this would seem a less biased opinion, for sure.

[Neurath]

"The Clintons have always behaved as if the rules of the laws don't apply to them."

-Texas Senator Ted Cruz

"If the President does it, it's not illegal." - R.M.Nixon.

[Neurath]

She's not looking good, even to democrats.

It's like she's not the same person that ran eight years ago. I wish she had won then. Now if wish she would go away.

I don't know if she's guilty of a crime and I certainly don't want to see her do a Martha Stewart, but the way she's handled this situation is the opposite of impressive.

Yep, someone needs to tell her:

Time to pack your swag digger, the circus has left town and the dogs are pissing on your boots.

I think Jingthing is a better barometer than I ever could be. I have always been biased toward Hillary. When someone who is candid enough to say she has changed and he now has concerns this would seem a less biased opinion, for sure.

You are correct as usu......nah, I just can't do it