Image 01 Image 03

Cover up: Hillary wipes hard drive clean

Cover up: Hillary wipes hard drive clean

Get the server, it’s now evidence of a potential crime.

I may not be able to read Russian anymore, but I can read people. And I can smell rats.

When Hillary Clinton held her tightly-controlled press conference at the U.N. regarding the email server scandal, I read right through her, and smelled a rat.

I wrote that her performance reflected Hillary’s consciousness of guilt:

When I first watched Hillary’s press conference, something jumped out at me that has been bothering me since….

Hillary did something that was a dead giveaway, reflecting a consciousness of guilt.

Hillary volunteered a piece of information about which she had not yet been asked and which was not critical to her explanation of why she would not turn over the server.

Apparently reading from a prepared statement, Hillary volunteered that she deleted “personal” emails…

Why volunteer that she deleted personal emails, and drag the red herring across the trail to lead the discussion towards Chelsea, her mother and yoga?

Remember, Hillary said she would not turn over the server because it had personal emails on it, but then inconsistently said the personal emails were not on the server because she chose “not to keep” them.

Hillary gave away the game at that point to me.

Hillary showed a consciousness of guilt and deliberate misdirection.

Get the server.

Trey Gowdy then tried to get the server, and was informed the server had been wiped clean. Fox News reports:

Hillary Clinton wiped her email server “clean,” permanently deleting all emails from it, the leader of the House committee investigating the 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi said Friday.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., said the former secretary of state has failed to produce a single new document in recent weeks and has refused to relinquish her server to a third party for an independent review, as Gowdy has requested.

“While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the secretary to return her public record to the Department,” Gowdy said in a statement. “Not only was the secretary the sole arbiter of what was a public record, she also summarily decided to delete all emails from her server ensuring no one could check behind her analysis in the public interest.”

Politico further points out that the emails were under subpoena at the time:

Clinton was under a subpoena order from the panel for all documents related to the 2012 attacks on the American compound there. But David Kendall, an attorney for Clinton, said the 900 pages of emails previously provided to the panel cover its request.

Kendall also informed the committee that Clinton’s emails from her time at the State Department have been permanently erased.

Who does such a thing?

The records that were subpoenaed were electronic. That Clinton’s legal team printed them out does not remove the fact that the electronic records were still subject to the subpoena. Those electronic records would have had metadata, routing, server and other electronic information not visible once printed.

There needs to be a full and serious criminal investigation as to whether Hillary Clinton obstructed justice or committed some other crime when she not only deleted the emails, but wiped the server hard drive clean to prevent recovery of the emails.

Hillary is hiding something. We need to know what.

We need to know if a potential president is a crook.

Get the server, even if she claims it’s wiped clean. It is now evidence of a potential crime.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


She is so damned corrupt it almost defies belief. And yet her handmaidens in the media will continue to cover for her and make excuses for her.

    MarkS in reply to Observer. | March 28, 2015 at 8:23 am

    It isn’t her hans maidens in the media that are the problem, it is her hand maidens in the so-called Justice Dept that have the power to enforce and prosecute the law.

Letters of mark.

Or perhaps more aptly, “Letters of Marx”.

It isn’t at all far-fetched to call the Clintons oligarchs.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Ragspierre. | March 28, 2015 at 10:22 am

    good article.

    “Oligarch” doesn’t convey enough of the malice and treason involved in Billary activities. This is pay to play, but they not only sell access, they sell secrets to enemies, and endowment donations coincide with misdirection of American policy, as I see it.

    Chinagate revealed not just China money, but Chinese milling about in secret areas, walking off with laptops full of who knows what. Throw in Bill’s female victim list and jetting to orgy island with the pedophile, and we need a new word.

    “Satanic” is perhaps more fitting, if the religious overtones are removed … sex, guile, power, graft. Mercilessly “raping” (slander, lawfare, or worse) innocent victims and whistle blowers, in front of the chanting mob of sycophants.

    Considering the praise the Clintons and Obama receive despite their open lies and corruption, there certainly seems to be a “Demonic” element, as Coulter’s book describes the Democrat Mob.

      Ragspierre in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 28, 2015 at 11:38 am

      How ’bout “demon-ogarch”…?

      I’m easy…


      They DO kinda deserve their own, special term, because we’ve really never seen anything like them in American history.

      Sammy Finkelman in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 29, 2015 at 2:49 am

      I think the worst example of Chinese influence was Bill Clinton attempting to prevent any action being taken by anybody to limit or stop the Rwandan genocide in 1994, because the hatchets were manufactured in China.

        Sammy Finkelman in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | March 29, 2015 at 2:52 am

        And that was no accident.

        I think China wanted it to take place,

        It was the next best thing to somebody exploding a nuclear bomb somewhere and nothing being done about it.

She probably either put a new hard disk in and physically destroyed the old one, or did a DOD multi-pass wipe on it. Those emails are gone baby gone.


Deleted emails were part of the findings. The allegations of academic misconduct and impermissible benefits were the focus of the NCAA’s investigation.

According to the termination letter, Tyndall acknowledged on March 16 that he deleted the emails that “could have been relevant to the NCAA’s investigation of Southern Miss and/or compliance with the NCAA rules,” and “at minimum, the deletion of those e-mails created an appearance of significant impropriety.”

“The University believes that it’s highly likely that the Committee on Infractions will find that violated NCAA bylaw 19.1.1 identifies ‘failure to cooperate in an NCAA enforcement investigation,’” the termination letter stated.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Miller. | March 28, 2015 at 11:10 am

    Tyndall acknowledged on March 16 that he deleted the emails that “could have been relevant”

    Not the same, clever Hillary had staff deliver all relevant emails, and would never acknowledge otherwise. She said “trust me”, Tyndall confessed.

      VetHusbandFather in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 28, 2015 at 5:24 pm

      I think the investigating committee needs to take a closer look through other e-mail accounts from the State Dept. For every Benghazi related e-mail that was sent TO her at her private account, they need to make sure that she ‘turned over’ a corresponding e-mail. If they find just a few than we have proof that she destroyed evidence under subpoena.

Xoрошо сделано, профессор!

There is no question. To truly “wipe” a drive clean of emails requires a high level of security clearance. Hillary claims her people reviewed over 60,000 emails in three weeks and determined half were “personal,” and then she had them securely deleted.

Rosemary Woods had a more believable story.

    pjm in reply to Estragon. | March 28, 2015 at 1:37 pm

    Wrong. It requires a freeware ‘wiping’ program. Available to all, 24/7. Just Google it, there are several. All do DOD wipes from 1 to 7 passes, user choice.

    There is also the ‘disk format’ command, you already own it.

      Estragon in reply to pjm. | March 28, 2015 at 5:23 pm

      I have a freeware system that offers “NSA level wiping” by writing over the space 23 times. Takes a while. But they put a note that “NSA-level” doesn’t mean it’s not recoverable.

      Reformatting would do it, but that wipes out everything on the drive, including the OS, doesn’t it? Bill would lose all those dating site profiles . . .

      – –

      I doubt they took such levels of precautions because they assumed they would take a little flack for deleting and then the story pass over. The team was taken aback by the reaction.

      If they wiped it AFTER they announced the deletion and during the public outcry, that’s a whole ‘nother can o’ worms.

        VetHusbandFather in reply to Estragon. | March 28, 2015 at 5:27 pm

        Either they didn’t use a ‘wiping’ program and we should be able to recover a good chunk of data, or they did use a wiping program and her story starts to unravel further. I mean if you were just deleting old data why use a wiping program?

The “cankled one” had best forget about running for president … she is toast.

    MarkS in reply to walls. | March 28, 2015 at 8:29 am

    Au contraire! W/o a constant media harp, all will be forgotten and when mentioned the standard Clintonesque dismissal of it “being an old charge” will be sufficient to alter the topic of conversation.

Bitterlyclinging | March 28, 2015 at 8:17 am

Remember the one hour tete a tete she had with Obama within the last week? “Barry we’re going to get back to the Special Committee this week telling them everything is gone. I just want to make sure you, Eric and Loretta, whenever she gets confirmed will back me up”

joethefatman | March 28, 2015 at 8:28 am

Please tell me that nobody is surprised by this. I wasn’t. The professor wasn’t. Why was this surprising to anyone that lived through the 90’s and the various scandals…

It’s Hillary Clinton.

It’s what Clinton’s DO.

Here’s a question for Barracula from now on…

“Will you pledge not to pardon Hillary Clinton?”

Trey Gowdy has met the tarbaby.

All she had to do was set her email signature to say something “personal” and every email she sent could qualify as personal, no matter how government related it was.

Sort of like going for a two hour lunch with friends and then “discussing” business for 30 seconds so you can write it off as a business lunch.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to rokiloki. | March 28, 2015 at 10:45 am

    Yeah, it’s not like Clintons don’t know about coverup. A little forethought would tag each sensitive email with any tie to corruption, with “private” or other innocuous code words.

    Her first excuse was she had searched her emails for certain words to select the ones she printed out, that would be relevant to the FOIA. Later she claimed they were all gone through by staff with eyes one each one.

    But it makes more sense to just select out all the ones with “private” or the code words, and delete those 60,000. Then yeah, a new hard drive.

    But it seems other servers are involved, as well as the NSA. Plus the ones that were hacked, and all the recipients. And surely Blumenthal will have to testify about their arrangements and connections, while Hillary was SOS.

email is now (dns records show it) using a hosted exchange server. oddly same version and build numbers.suspect that was done to make the store swap easier.
betting the org server was spli into components and each unit sold separately.

Remember Republicans, your job here is to remain silent! The MSM and outraged Democrats will bring her down! We will win this if we don’t say something stupid!

Oh wait! Democrats still adore her (86%) and MSM’s are giving her a standing ovation for mocking the whole thing and refusing questions!

Here’s some more advice for the GOP. Hispanics will vote for you if you let them in and give them stuff!

Although nothing would tingle my spine more than the sight of Hillary Rotten Clinton in a government-issued orange pantsuit, I have to ask: What makes you conclude that Hillary wiped her server clean *after* it was subpoenaed by the House committee?

The reason I ask is that the Politico article cited here only says that Hillary wiped her server clean after the *State Department* requested its return on October 28, 2014. Nowhere does the article state when the *House committee subpoena* was issued.

Does anyone know?

    JPL17 in reply to JPL17. | March 28, 2015 at 10:38 am

    Further to my post above, the following Wall Street Journal article suggests that as late as March 11, 2015, no subpoena had yet been issued for Clinton’s server by the House committee:

    If this implication is correct, then we really *don’t* know whether Clinton’s server was under subpoena when she wiped it clean. For all we know, she could have done it at any time between October 28, 2014 and March 11, 2015 — i.e., before the House committee issued its subpoena.

      Midwest Rhino in reply to JPL17. | March 28, 2015 at 11:06 am

      that sounds right, but even though owned by Bill, it was used for storage of state documents, so she had no authority to delete those emails without an archivist oversight. And no authority to not return all the other emails to state when she quit her job, even if she did not sign the form agreeing to that.

      It is only marginally better if the server itself was not under subpoena, if the metadata and other intel on them belonged to state and was wiped. as I see it. And they still need the server, to see if she actually went to the effort of physically destroying it, more evidence those emails were not private.

      JPL17 in reply to JPL17. | March 28, 2015 at 12:10 pm

      OK, it looks like the House Select Committee on Benghazi didn’t send Hillary Clinton a subpoena for all her emails related to Libya until March 4, 2015.

      Therefore, the only way Clinton could be in violation of the subpoena would be if she wiped her hard drive clean after March 4, 2015.

        Midwest Rhino in reply to JPL17. | March 28, 2015 at 2:30 pm

        I’m thinkin there were FOIA requests that returned nothing, because she had hidden all her emails. Not sure how much less weight that carries than subpoena. Obviously when people go to state dept and FOIA her emails, they expect state to have them, especially after she left work. All they got was state saying “we looked, nothing more here”. And now she wipes them.

If Hillary did nothing wrong why not turn over the server and then play the victim card–especially the female victim card–to her political advantage? She is such a political opportunist that the benefits of proving her victimhood would supersede divulging her supposed emails about yoga, her mother’s funeral and Chelsea’s wedding.

5 minutes times 60,000 = 300,000 minutes = 5,000 hours = 2.5 man years. It would have been impossible for her crew to filter the emails to delete without a huge number of people for this task.

    pjm in reply to ConradCA. | March 28, 2015 at 1:47 pm

    Say what ? Try ‘5 seconds per’, not ‘5 minutes’.

    IF you actually look at each one. Search ‘Cousin Mike’ and delete all those at once, etc – no time at all, hardly.

    DOD wipe – a few minutes to a couple of hours, unattended. Free.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | March 28, 2015 at 11:41 am

Hillary conspired from day one to circumvent the law. That was the purpose of the private server. Now she takes it a step further and destroys evidence relevant to a legal Congressional investigation. She’s a private citizen obstructing a Congressional investigation. She should be wearing orange jumpsuits, not a pantsuits. It’s the “go ahead, try and stop me” approach to governing that is a hallmark of Obama’s Democrat Party. Harry Reid lied repeatedly while destroying the Senate – everything from lying about the Koch’s to Mitt Romney’s taxes. Obama lets his minions in the bureaucracy abuse their power and lie about it. James Clapper lied under oath to Congress about the NSA. He still has his job. The CIA spied on the Senate and stole documents from it, nothing happens. The head of the IRS lied to Congress about Lois Lerner’s emails being unavailable. He still has his job. Eric Holder’s Justice Department lied to a judge to get a warrant to spy on James Rosen’s communications. I could go on, and on, and on. It’s just one lie after another.

Now look at how they (and/or the media) have lied to pursue liberal goals:

RACIAL “EQUALITY” – The Obama administration and the media actively promoted the “hands up don’t shoot” lie that literally destroyed a small Missouri town. Darren Wilson was hardly the only victim. Housing values have declined 50%. Businesses have closed. Citizens of Ferguson now have to travel to neighboring towns to get some of the goods and services they need that are no longer available to them in Ferguson. Race relations have been set back decades.

RADICAL FEMINISM – Liberals promoted a false gang rape hoax that destroyed a fraternity at UVA. The frat was forced to close. Frat members are looked at with suspicion as being sexual predators and potential rapists.

ECONOMIC REDISTRIBUTION – Democrats passed Obamacare on a one party vote. As Gruber pointed out, Obamacare was passed on a stack of lies a mile high, earning Obama the “lie of the year” by fact checkers.

ENVIRONMENTALISM – They have so grossly over-exaggerated the risks of man made global warming that it is effectively a lie.

Virtually everything the Democrat Party pursues is built on a destructive lie. It is effectively a criminal enterprise. In that regard Hillary Clinton is the perfect standard bearer for the party. It is maddening that half the country want to be governed by a corrupt criminal enterprise.

Please watch and pass on this Bill Whittle “Firewall” video.
I would also appreciate Professor Jacobson’s comment about this.
I really think she needs to be fitted with an ORANGE pantsuit !

Let the house subpoena her and have her give them the names of the 40 plus people it took to review her emails. Then subpoena them to testify about the emails they reviewed.

They should throw her in the House jail for a couple of years if she refused or commits perjury. They are happy to see Tyrant Obama the Liar violated our civil rights and violate the constitution. And Hillary violated her duty as an employee of the State Dept. They should see that their are consequences, that we would play nice.

There are a few judges who could do the same because she failed to provide her emails in response to subpoenas.

    pjm in reply to ConradCA. | March 28, 2015 at 1:51 pm

    Did she have 40 chairs for them in her basement, or did they stand ? All around one computer ???

    Come on already….

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to ConradCA. | March 29, 2015 at 3:06 am

    Re: the people who reviewed her e-mails.

    Let the house subpoena her and have her give them the names of the 40 plus people it took to review her emails. Then subpoena them to testify about the emails they reviewed.

    Not so simple.

    They all have attorney client privilege. (even non-attorneys working for attorneys)

    They should request that any attorney-client privilege be waived and the lawyers testify about this. And if she doesn’t waive attorney client privilege, some Republicans can make a point about this, and they shouldn’t stop. If she makes a counter-claim that some Republican, like Scott walker, or Chris Christie, should waive attorney client privilege, distinguish the cases, and otherwise ignore it, and keep on pressing the issue.

    What we’re dealing with here is an attempt to conceal records.

    The lawyers and their employees could be asked some very interesting questions, and probably the answers would give rise to more questions..

    unlikely to get around to subpoenaeing the right things in time.

    They could subpoena all communication between the State Department and Hillary or her lawyers about these emails. I think there can be no legitimate attorney-client privilege here because we’re not talking about communications between the lawyers and Hillary but between the lawyers and the State Department..

    It’s for the follow-up questions that attorney-client privilege should be waived. Was there any reverse engineering of question, for instance? Was mail forwarded anywhere (that would not have been picked up either by a correspondent search or by a text search, because text searches don;’t go into attachments.)

    Is there some kind of simple, big secret here? (there probably is)

I’ve always said this woman was Lady Macbeth!

“Out! Out, damned email!”

Back up drives ????? Get her to testify under oath about any back up drives, then Subpoena her “expert” administrators about normal and usual practice of backing up data…

You don’t have to be smart or even well informed to know that Hillary is a crook; its common knowledge.

In late summer and November 2015 voters will be asked to choose. If these people elect Hillary in both of those elections, its a statement about America. More specifically its a statement about the end of America if after 7 years of Obama, voters want more of this.

They say a fish rots from the head. A democracy rots at the base.

I am so sad. Why do we have laws and rules and guidelines if the political elite can just ignore them and go unpunished? What is the point? Do we just descend into anarchy?

Trey could subpoena NSA, they seem to collect about every email in the universe. Undoubtedly it has it’s own file on all her emails already categorized.
Or maybe Israel could anonymously release what they have as a Thank You to obama for releasing their nuclear abilities instead of keeping it top secret.
You know every country in the world with any capability was trying to break into her email just like Guccifer did to Blumenthal. I’m sure many did.

Sammy Finkelman | March 29, 2015 at 3:13 am

Regarding “Guccifer”

I think the Blumenthal e-mails are probably just Russian forgeries.

The Blumenthal e-mails are much too un-opinionated to be real, and every source cited is anonymous, which doesn’t sound like something Sidney Blumenthal would write, or even forward without comment in what, after all, are supposed to be secret e-mail messages, and every thing that could prove the messages real was hidden.

While apparently the very real [email protected] address, where I think it supposedly was sent, is cited somewhere in the material published about Blumenthal
the FSB could have gotten that very real email address from a hundred different sources since this was also used for her Clinton Foundation business. It doesn’t mean the messages are real or the hacking was real. It just makes the forgery look better.

It might have been used or mentioned because the address was known to some people, and not actualy secret.

There also exist forgeries of imaginary excerpts from Hillary Clinton’s real book “Hard Choices” and further excerpts from an totally imaginary book she didn’t write. I figure Hillary Clinton is a favorite target of Russian forgers.

And the KGB was known for forgeries, so this would be more of the same thing.

Lets not forget that that server contained the work emails of at least 2 other State Department employees and I’ve not heard that any of those emails have been produced in any form … a clear case of destruction of government records …

American Human | March 30, 2015 at 9:16 am

If Her Majesty HRC used The Royal Server, according to gubmint rules it should be securely backed up every day, right? Where, then, are the backups? If Her Royal Highness used her own Royal Server for State Department bidness, why are there no backups? Wouldn’t that be enough for transgression of the law?
Come to think of it, what prosecutor in their right mind would ever want to bring charges against Hillary Clinton. It would mean high-level negative press coverage, impugning of character, not to mention years of hearing James Carville’s verbal flatulence without cease. The prosecutor should be paid at least $10M just so they can retire to peace and solitude in the Virgin Islands somewhere afterwards. Really, who would want to put up with that?

We should ask the Chinese for a copy of her emails.