Friday, August 28, 2015
Saturday, August 22, 2015
Déjà Vu: When Bill Clinton Pardoned His Former CIA Director over Classified Documents on His Home Computer
Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton insists she did nothing wrong by running all of her government communications, including classified material, through her unsecured, home-brewed computer server. Perhaps she’s forgotten one of her husband’s final acts in the Oval Office: issuing a presidential pardon to former CIA director John Deutch. Deutch’s offense? Keeping classified material on unsecured home computers.
The pardon came just as Deutch was reportedly going to cop a plea with the Justice Department. Deutch headed the CIA from May 1995 to December 1996. Several days after he left the agency, classified material was discovered on a government-owned computer at his house in Bethesda, Md. Additionally, unsecured classified magnetic media were found in the study. According to the CIA inspector general’s report, the computer had been “designated for unclassified use only.
” Unlike the current administration’s six-month delay in obtaining Clinton’s computer, the feds moved almost immediately in the Deutch case. Within ten days of discovering the errant material, they retrieved the hard drive from Deutch’s computer. A formal security investigation was opened within a month.
that the government didn’t let Deutch’s lawyer pick and choose which e-mail communications to turn over. Rather, a “technical exploitation team, consisting of personnel expert in data recovery, retrieved the data from Deutch’s unclassified magnetic media and computers.”
As the investigation progressed, the IG discovered that Deutch had “continuously processed classified information on government-owned desktop computers configured for unclassified use during his tenure as DCI [director, CIA] [and that] . . . these unclassified computers were located in [his] Bethesda, Maryland and Belmont, Massachusetts residences, his offices in the Old Executive Office Building, and at CIA Headquarters.”
Notice that the government didn’t let Deutch’s lawyer pick and choose which e-mail communications to turn over.
The computers, as configured and used, were “vulnerable to attacks by unauthorized persons.” The report stressed that “all [computers] were connected to or contained modems that allowed external connectivity to computer networks such as the Internet.” The information the security team retrieved from these computers included “Top Secret communications intelligence” as well as information on the “National Reconnaissance Program.”
The IG criticized senior CIA officials for not taking appropriate action against Deutch when they were apprised of the results of the security investigation. That was one of the reasons the IG “initiated an independent investigation.”
Thursday, August 20, 2015
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WHAS 11) -- Kentucky's only Democratic representative in Congress is expressing concern about Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's e-mail controversy, calling it "very confusing," and potentially a disqualifying scandal for her candidacy.
"I just never feel I have a grasp of what the facts are," US Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky. Third District) told WHAS11 on Wednesday. "Clearly, she has handled it poorly from the first day. And, there's the appearance of dishonesty, if it's not dishonest."
Clinton has been dogged by questions about her use of a private e-mail server while she served as U.S. Secretary of State, denying that the unsecure server was ever used to send or receive classified information.
"We have turned over the server," Clinton said to reporters on Tuesday. "They can do whatever they want to, with the server to figure out what's there or what's not there."
"But we turned over everything that was work-related. Every single thing," Clinton said.
Yarmuth said the controversy is happening early enough in the campaign, that as long as Clinton is being truthful and did not use her personal e-mail server for classified materials, the issue can "boil over."
"But, I still think there is a chance this could upend her campaign," Yarmuth cautioned.
In her Tuesday news conference, Clinton said the only people talking about the e-mail controversy are the media -- which is not letting up.
"I think if she intentionally misled or lied to the American people and did something that was clearly against rules, and knowingly did it against rules, if that is the ultimate conclusion, then I think she has disqualified herself," Yarmuth said.
The five-term Democratic congressman from Louisville said he expects Clinton to be the Democratic nominee, but has not yet endorsed her.
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Hillary Clinton is in trouble. Or more accurately put, she should be in trouble — very big trouble, in fact. The latest from the Department of Justice is that, yes, they have seized Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server and an accompanying thumb drive. The FBI has reportedly confiscated copies of the same e-mails from Hillary’s lawyer because it deemed the information contained in them too sensitive for him to keep.
While attempting to defend the indefensible, a Clinton spokesman said that this merely shows that the former secretary of state is cooperating with a “security inquiry.” That pathetic spin was meant to prevent the American people from recognizing there is not just smoke but fire to the Hillary e-mail scandal. Too late. Already, the flames are visible. The most damning revelation about Hillary’s e-mails from the last 24 hours is not the details of the investigation into her homebrew server. What’s making headlines across the political spectrum is that some of the material she sent via her personal server was so sensitive that it was designated “Top Secret.” This is a jaw-slaps-the-table moment.
Even for those of us who hold a very low opinion of Mrs. Clinton’s character, integrity, and judgment, this is a graver offense than many had contemplated. Merely the storage of “Top Secret” e-mails – never mind their dissemination over open channels to some individuals likely not cleared to read them — is a federal felony. On top of that, it is unthinkable that Hillary could have sent such sensitive information and not known at the time that it was sensitive. RELATED: Hillary’s E-mails Contained Classified Information — Hold Her Accountable She knew what she was doing, and she knew what was at stake. When you are dealing with classified material, information security — “InfoSec” — is not a game. There are good reasons for the laws that protect the data. “Top Secret” is a term we are all familiar with from the pop-culture spy world, but it has very specific implications.
A “TS” designation means that “exceptionally grave injury” could be expected to befall the United States should that information be disclosed to unauthorized personnel.
Hillary had a sacred duty to exercise proper caution and protect classified material in her possession by keeping it within proper channels. Keep in mind that Hillary Clinton’s obligation as a U.S. government official with classified access went far beyond the need to avoid intentional disclosure to foreign powers (which is espionage). We are talking about a Cabinet-level appointee — one with almost total access to sensitive national-security information and who is responsible for the safety and security of thousands of State Department employees all over the world. She must set an example for other government employees. I’ve seen CIA interns with more security sense than Madame Secretary had.
Hillary had a sacred duty to exercise proper caution and protect classified material in her possession by keeping it within proper channels. Lives were quite literally at stake. Instead, she created her own little digital-information clearinghouse — for herself and even for some employees – and, at a minimum, exposed critical national-security information to foreign penetration.
Friday, July 31, 2015
Hillary Clinton’s presidential prospects are evaporating as more details emerge on her abuse of classified information and her lies about it. A McClatchy story published yesterday must have Democratic Party elders and the Obama White House, especially Valerie Jarrett, plotting the most effective way to dump her before she takes down the party in the 2016 election.
Using already-published texts of one email and leaks apparently from a congressional staffer, McClatchy Washington Bureau reporters Marisa Taylor, Greg Gordon And Anita Kumar write:
The classified emails stored on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private server contained information from five U.S. intelligence agencies and included material related to the fatal 2012 Benghazi attacks, McClatchy has learned.
Of the five classified emails, the one known to be connected to Benghazi was among 296 emails made public in May by the State Department. Intelligence community officials have determined it was improperly released. (snip)
McClatchy also has determined some details of the five emails that the intelligence community’s inspector general has described as classified and improperly handled.Intelligence officials who reviewed the five classified emails determined that they included information from five separate intelligence agencies, said a congressional official with knowledge of the matter.
“Even if Secretary Clinton or her aides didn’t run afoul of any criminal provisions, the fact that classified information was identified within the emails is exactly why use of private emails . . . is not supposed to be allowed,” said Bradley Moss, a Washington attorney who specializes in national security matters. “Both she and her team made a serious management mistake that no one should ever repeat.”
The 30,000 emails that she has turned over to the State Department also exist, completely outside of any security protection, on a thumb drive she turned over to her lawyer, David Kendall. This means that any mugger, burglar, or intelligence agency conceivably could get ahold of this US government confidential information:
On June 25, McCullough notified members of Congress that he understood that Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, possessed the more than 30,000 Clinton emails on a computer thumb drive.
In a July 24 letter to FBI Director James Comey, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa expressed concern about “a compromise of national security information” because of Kendall’s possession of the thumb drive. He called on Comey to explain what steps the FBI had taken to secure the information
“This raises very serious questions and concerns if a private citizen is somehow retaining classified information,” wrote Grassley, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee.Kendall did not respond to phone and email messages. The FBI and the Justice Department declined to say whether security officials had recovered the device or had arranged for its secure storage.
Friday, July 24, 2015
Thursday, July 23, 2015
Expect a Nobel Peace Prize for Secretary of State John Kerry now, followed by Chamberlain-like infamy later.
The now-concluded Iran nuclear negotiations predictably reflect ancient truths of
While members of the Obama administration are high-fiving each other over a deal with the Iranian theocracy, they should remember unchanging laws that will surely haunt the United States later on.
First, appeasement always brings short-term jubilation at the expense of long-term security. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was a beloved peacemaker after the Munich Agreement of 1938 with Adolf Hitler but derided as a conceited fool and naif by May 1940.
A few years from now – after Iran has used its negotiated breathing space to rearm, ratchet up its terrorist operations, and eventually gain a bomb to blackmail its neighbors – the current deal will be deeply regretted. Expect a Nobel Peace Prize for Secretary of State John Kerry now, followed by Chamberlain-like infamy later.
Second, the appeasement of autocrats always pulls the rug out from under domestic reformers and idealists. After the Western capitulation at Munich, no dissenter in Germany dared to question the ascendant dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.
RELATED: Is the Iran Deal the Worst Political Blunder of All Time? Until last week, Iranian dissidents and reformers had blamed the theocracy for earning Iran pariah status abroad and economic ruin at home. Not now. The haughty ayatollahs are bragging that they faced down the West and will restore the economy – as they wink to applauding crowds that Iran will soon be nuclear and dictate its terms to the Middle East.
Third, appeasers always wrongly insist that the only alternative to their foolish concessions is war. Just the opposite is true.
Tuesday, July 21, 2015
Monday, July 13, 2015
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Saturday, June 20, 2015
Judicial Watch Statement in Response to Federal Court Reopening Lawsuit Seeking Information on Top Clinton Aide Huma Abedin
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding today’s decision by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to reopen a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that sought records about Huma Abedin, the former Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).
Hillary Clinton’s massive email cover-up is unraveling. We welcome Judge Sullivan’s decision to reopen this lawsuit. Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration concealed records and lied to obstruct federal courts and Judicial Watch from finding out about the secret emails.
The court battle to get to the truth about Huma Abedin’s “special government employee” (SGE) privileges at State is underway. The reopening of this case brings Judicial Watch one step closer to forcing the State Department to ensure that the government records in Hillary Clinton’s “secret” email system are properly preserved, protected and recovered as federal law requires. Ms. Abedin is part of the Clinton cash raising operation and was even involved in the Benghazi scandal, so this lawsuit could not be more timely.
This is the second Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit that has been reopened because of Hillary Clinton’s hidden email records. Judicial Watch is aware of no prior instances of Freedom of Information lawsuits being reopened by federal courts.
Judge Sullivan ruled that the “changed circumstances” of the discovery that Hillary Clinton and members of her State Department staff used secret email accounts to conduct government business warranted “reopening” the lawsuit.
In asking Judge Sullivan to reopen the lawsuit, Judicial Watch cited a federal court rule (Rule 60(b)(3)) that allows a party to reopen a case due to “fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party:”
The State Department had an obligation under the Federal Records Act to properly preserve, maintain, and make available for retrieval records of its official functions. In fact, it is the obligation of the head of every federal agency to do so. Secretary Clinton plainly violated her own legal obligations. Doing so was misconduct.
The State Department originally agreed with Judicial Watch’s request but later changed its mind and asked the Court to reopen the lawsuit because of “newly discovered evidence.” In today’s ruling, Judge Sullivan simply reopened the case, rather than “spilling ink” on whether Hillary Clinton and the State Department committed fraud, misrepresentation or misconduct.
Huma Abedin left the State Department in February 2013, and in May 2013, Politico reported that, since June 2012, she had been double-dipping, working as a consultant to outside clients while continuing as a top adviser at State. Abedin’s outside clients included Teneo, a strategic consulting firm co-founded by former Bill Clinton counselor Doug Band. According to Fox News, Abedin earned $355,000 as a consultant to Teneo, in addition to her $135,000 SGE compensation.
Teneo describes its activities as providing “the leaders of the world’s most respected companies, nonprofit institutions and governments with a full suite of advisory solutions.” [Emphasis added] Outside of the U.S., it maintains offices in Dubai, London, Dublin, Hong Kong, Brussels, Washington, and Beijing. Teneo was also the subject of various investigative reports, including by the New York Times, which raise questions about its relationship with the Clinton Foundation.
In February 2014, the State Department assured Judicial Watch that it had searched the Office of the Executive Secretary, which would have included the offices of the Secretary of State and top staff. Relying upon the State Department’s misrepresentation that the agency conducted a reasonable search, Judicial Watch agreed to dismiss its lawsuit on March 14, 2014.
Via: Judicial Watch
It was called a city of magic, and many believed the best was yet to come. For a week in July 1951, Detroit put down its tools to refle...
THE VIRTUE OF MANDATORY VACCINATION: Celebrities are not medical experts, not even Jim Carrey Almighty.On Tuesday, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a law that makes California the third state to eliminate “personal belief” exemptions...
The NFL may have spiked the White House’s request for Obamacare PR help — but the Super Bowl champion Baltimore Ravens just called an audib...
The Obama administration is a case study in mismanagement. Republican presidential candidates should remind voters that management matte...
NEW YORK (MYFOXNY) - Some are describing this as "America's anger epidemic." And there are a few reasons: uncertainty in the ...
The conventional wisdom is wrong. The mainstream media — and their parrots in the Republican establishment — are claiming that President Ob...
The City of Los Angeles is a sprawling enterprise with 32,000 employees and an annual budget of $8.6 billion. But according to Rick Cole...
A panel of eight County Medical Services Program (CMSP) board members appointed largely by unelected, government administrative official...
Americans Storm The Barrycades At The Lincoln Memorial This will send a stir through your heart. Adults, elderly, young people, chi...
Government delays cost control measure in latest of series of Obamacare hiccups The decision to delay a provision that was meant to limit...