Image 01 Image 03

Hillary goes full Clintonian with midnight tweet

Hillary goes full Clintonian with midnight tweet

The worst attributes of the Clintons on full display.

The Hillary Clinton email scandal is growing worse by the day. We now know that she not only used a private email account in her time at the State Department but she even hosted it on a private server in her New York residence.

In classic Clintonian doublespeak, Hillary tweeted just before midnight last night that she really, truly, wanted everyone to see her emails, so she told the State Department to release them.

But the issue is not what she turned over to State, but what she didn’t. Hillary’s team selected what was turned over to the State Department, so her tweet is a complete distraction that doesn’t address the problem:

Hillary Tweet See Emails

Other issues involve why she set up a home-based email server for official business, which gave her complete control over access in violation of public records laws.

Many conservatives are so beaten down by the liberal media bias we’ve witnessed over the years that they believe this will be glossed over and ignored but the story has teeth. The New York Times, the Washington Post and even Politico are filing daily reports.

Last night on The Kelly File, Megyn Kelly – who is a lawyer – even raised the question of whether or not Hillary committed a felony. Judge Andrew Napolitano said if that’s the case, she would be legally barred from further public service.

Watch the segment below via the Common Cents blog:

Young voters look at Hillary Clinton and see a woman who ran against Obama and ultimately ended up serving in his administration but scandals like this are par for the course with the Clintons.

As Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist recently pointed out, everything old is new again:

1996 Called, Wants Its Clinton Fundraising And Document Scandals Back

I know that some of you were too young to remember the 1990s, but this was basically what happened with the Clintons all the time. That revelation of a discovery of law firm billing documents that had been subpoenaed by federal investigators two years prior (the Clintons claimed they didn’t have them) came not 24 hours after another revelation of a missing document.

That document was a 2-year-old memo that admitted Hillary Clinton had, according to the Times, “played a far greater role in the dismissal of employees of the White House travel office than the Administration has acknowledged.”

On a final note, I’d just like to point out that Hillary accused the Bush administration of using “secret email accounts” in 2007.

Because it’s different when they do it.

UPDATE (WAJ): Hillary’s “look, squirrel” routine seems to be working, look at the headlines:

Hillary Emails Release Twitter Headlines

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I thought of one occurrence and one reason that might give some insight into this. When, very early in her term as SoS, a huge amount of emails were leaked and damaged both her and the State Department’s relationships to other nations and leaders around the world. That is the occurrence. The ongoing reason might be self defense from the nasty habits of Obama and his toadies.

    Lady Penguin in reply to betty. | March 5, 2015 at 8:32 am

    Yes, but she set up the private email and server the week of her confirmation hearing. So it was a preemptive move on her part. I don’t hold out any hope for prosecution, the Democrat party is so far Left, and there isn’t anyone in the Republican party willing to do anything.

    As long as the media controls the messaging in this country, which constantly denigrates all those not of the Left, we are marginalized. There isn’t even any irony anymore – the fact that the members of the Democrat party – including its voters – have entirely lost their moral compass. That’s what a socialist/welfare state of being brings you.

    tarheelkate in reply to betty. | March 5, 2015 at 9:12 am

    That “self defense” would be mutual, since neither Clinton nor Obama is trustworthy in any respect. Further, how do we know that any email leaks didn’t come from hackers getting into the less-than-secure Clinton server? She did this in order to be able to control what becomes pubic, and in order to be able to permanently delete incriminating materials. To intentionally evade public records laws as a federal official is criminal no matter what the content.

    this mail server was setup before she was confirmed so that excuse cannot apply here.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to betty. | March 5, 2015 at 12:21 pm

    The leak (by Bradley -> Chelsea Manning) was not of e-mails sent only to a few people.

    They were U.S. diplomatic cables from embassies and consulates and the like and archived by the State Department. They were mostly either not classified – but still not intended for immediate public release! – or classified confidential and some secret (although nothing there was top secret.)

    They had been part of a vast trove of data made accessible to many intelligence analysts on a worldwide basis.

    Including some people who worked for the Pentagon, not the State Department.

    There was no attempt to divide it into parts or time periods and give limited access to it. It was all or nothing. Nobody was supposed to look at anything they didn’t have a reason to, of course, but it was not sub-divided in any way.

    It must have been assumed somebody might always leak a few cables, or the gist of some cables, connected with work they were doing, but the damage would be minor, and that couldn’t absolutely be prevented if you wanted people to study or use them.

    The big precautions that had been taken were against copying any data. All the computers the intelligence analysts used had no floppy drives and no USB ports. No peripherals.


    They were equipped with CD-ROM drives, and with time, they became CD-ROM Read-Write drives.

    So Bradley Manning took CD-ROMs into the room with him, and pretended to be listening to music, all the while copying files to a drive and disc that nobody there realized files could be copied to.

    He got virtually everything that was available on that network as of about February, 2010, going back in one case to the end of December 1966.

    Vascaino in reply to betty. | March 5, 2015 at 1:14 pm

    ” …very early in her term as SoS,…

    I wouldn’t have used SoS for Secretary of State because it has another connotation. 🙂

I don’t care whether she has asked the State Department to release her emails or not. She broke the law in using a personal email system for official business. She has disqualified herself as a Presidential contender.

    DaveGinOly in reply to vman92. | March 5, 2015 at 2:54 pm

    Even if what she did didn’t break any law, the security ramifications of directing all your e-mail to a private server are huge. (Some articles have questioned whether or not her private server handled classified data. If it was her only e-mail server as SOS, how could it have not?) Any person who is so cavalier about security disqualifies themselves from any high, national office.

Umm… hello ? She means ‘the ones they never had to begin with, because I hired a geek to set up my own email server, that does not go through State’

WTF ????

“Character doesn’t count”.

“Everybody lies about sex…er…the conduct of U.S. policy”.

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 5, 2015 at 10:08 am

    “Cable” being essentially a classified email. Which, of course, no ambassador could send to Hillary. Harf admitted that Ol’ Walleyes didn’t use her State Dept. email accounts.

    Read it and weep.

      legacyrepublican in reply to Ragspierre. | March 5, 2015 at 10:49 am

      Uh oh, I seem to be channeling some evil dyed her hair blonde demon … stop me please … oh nooooo …………

      “What difference does it make?” “The people are tired of liars and the people who pretend to be something they are not.”

      “I do not criticize for the sake of criticism.” “If I want to knock a story of the front page, I just change my hairstyle.”

      “Life is too short to dwell on what might have been.” “As I speak to you today, government censors somewhere are working furiously to erase my words from the record of history. But history has already condemned those tactics.”

      “God bless the America we are trying to create.” “I have a million ideas. The country can’t afford them all.”

      ……….. oh, good, I finally got my brain back in control of my typing. Sorry for the brief bimbo eruption there. I just don’t know what came over me.

“Judicial Watch submitted its original FOIA request on August 27, 2014. The State Department was required by law to respond by September 26, 2014 at the latest to Judicial Watch’s request for:

Any and all records of communication between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Nagla Mahmoud, wife of ousted Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi, from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013; and
Any and all records of communication between former State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013.
To date, the State Department has not responded.”

Somewhere, Michelle Bachmann is laughing.

    Vascaino in reply to clafoutis. | March 5, 2015 at 1:33 pm

    ” Any and all records of communication between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Nagla Mahmoud, wife of ousted Egyptian president Muhammad Morsi, from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013; and
    Any and all records of communication between former State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud from January 21, 2009 to January 31, 2013.’ ”

    So they could have connived with the Muslim Brotherhood in this fashion.
    The State Department ignoring the Constitution?

It’d be rich if Hillary went to jail over this (I know…fat chance) and Bill continued to live out his perverse existence in total freedom.

I still wonder at all the Foreign Secretaries and Heads of State around the world who had to communicate with her through that “” server. Did none of them balk or have any questions about doing their sensitive business with her through a non-government server?

    Owego in reply to ss396. | March 5, 2015 at 12:04 pm

    Of course they did; but our “friends” knew better than to cross the administration and the Clintons … and our enemies didn’t want to spoil a good thing.

Bitterlyclinging | March 5, 2015 at 9:27 am

May I suggest Sandy Burglar and his socks and underwear transport of one of a kind, eyes only, not to be removed or copied, National Archive documents discreetly to his domicile and the nearest convenient shredder as background for Ms Clinton’s actions.
Or that mysterious Sunday after Thanksgiving fire in the State Department building in the room directly overhead Ms Clinton’s office, which conveniently occurred after one high ranking State Department official stumbled onto a clandestine party led by Cheryl Mills and a few other Clinton insiders gathering to peruse which State Department documents to turn over to the ARB.

A Clinton committing a felony? That’s just considered a resume enhancement.

Bitterlyclinging | March 5, 2015 at 9:30 am

As powerline noted today, “Laws are only for peons like Petraeus” and the rest of us.
“Nothing to see here, move along now”

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | March 5, 2015 at 10:33 am

Do not underestimate the Clinton machine’s ability to turn this whole thing into a positive for her.

When she was running for Senate, the Clinton machine quite masterfully turned the act of Rick Lazio walking across the stage during a debate and handing her a piece of paper into an act of hyper-aggressive male misogyny, turning poor Hillary into a sympathetic victim.

They are geniuses at what they do.

    I think Lazio is undeserving of our excuses all these years later. Let’s say his opponent was a shorter man and he pulled that to emphasize the height difference on camera. It would have been the act of a jerk in that case as well. He was a grown man; he made his own choice and it backfired. I very much doubt this was the work of “the machine”, but rather peeved women of New York state who would resent being treated the same way. If she was that much of a political genius she’d be in her 2nd term instead of some nobody who made a nice speech a decade ago.

      Owego in reply to JBourque. | March 5, 2015 at 12:00 pm

      Yes, but the real handicap was and remains the New York GOP. It is quite simply a spineless, terrible organization. This latest election is the prime example. The GOP ticket was not horrible, the existing state government was (and remains) corrupt beyond description-both parties, both legislative houses-and the NYGOP did absolutely nothing; they put up no fight whatsoever. They stayed home in Manhattan sipping wine.

      Heck, Professor Jacobson did more to get Tom Reed elected to congress than they did. Kristin Gillibrand is one of the weakest legislators in all Washington; they sit back and do nothing. Everyone in New York state, Democrat and Republican, is worse off because there is no political opposition here.

      Owego in reply to JBourque. | March 5, 2015 at 12:10 pm

      The senate seat was never anything more than a holding place until someone came for her. It was a gift wrapped walk-on never intended to be anything more than that.

Empress Trudy | March 5, 2015 at 10:43 am

That was actually a threat. Hillary has damning evidence on Obama she will use to blackmail him.

    I don’t see how. Obama has less than 2 years left to his term. He is not going to be impeached (regardless of if there are legally sufficient reasons to do so) and even if by some miraculous confluence of events he was, the Senate would never convict.

    There is only one other office that Obama might be interested in post-presidency: appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court. Precedent: see William Howard Taft.

    Other than that, he will happily go into private life, write another couple of books which will be paid multi-million advances, give speeches with hundred-thousand dollar price tags, and largely live off of his own fame while laughing at the American People for tolerating his lawlessness, and being a hypocrite when the next Republican president does less than what Obama did and Obama calls it “lawless.”

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Chuck Skinner. | March 5, 2015 at 11:45 am

      What does the constitution say about Bill Clinton running again? Does it give him a ‘do-over’?

      I ask, because the media is already speculating on the Dem nom race if Clinton were to drop out due to scandal, talking about Warren, O’Malley, even Al Gore. I had a nightmare while sleeping at my desk earlier where Hillary dropped out and the Dems drafted Bill to run again. (((shudder))).

      Could he? Is it legal?

        Sammy Finkelman in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 5, 2015 at 12:34 pm

        Bill Clinton cannot be elected U.S. President again. The 22nd Amendment forbids election more than twice (or more than once if someone served more than 2 years of someone else’s term. President Gerald Ford could only have been elected for one term.)

        Another provision forbids the election of anyone as vice president who is ineligible for president.

        It’s not like Russia which forbids a consecutive third term, or like California, where you only start counting from the date term limits goes into effect.

      J Motes in reply to Chuck Skinner. | March 5, 2015 at 12:27 pm

      Chuck wrote: “There is only one other office that Obama might be interested in post-presidency: appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court.”

      Well, he might like the title, but he wouldn’t like the workload, or having to show up everyday, or having only a few law clerks to push around, or most of all, being shackled to the court for the rest of his life. The role of a justice is just not expansive enough for his chosen lifestyle, work habits, lavish spending, and craving to be a celebrity. While he would probably like to continue remaking America via the courts, I think he would prefer having a role that would not require actual work (say “work” in the same shocked tone as Maynard G. Krebs and you will have captured Obama’s attitude). Your third paragraph is the realistic description of his future.

      As I’ve said before, though, Obama’s real dream job would be caliph. That would be just right for him for all kinds of reasons. Only one example: he bragged about being real good at killing, and being caliph would let him go hog wild without any rule of law stuff to cramp his style (excuse the bacon-related term).

More predictable Clintonian ethical and criminal pathologies which they have arrogantly demonstrated with impunity throughout their public life…..Was it not the estimable MS Senator Trent Lott who prevented the Senate from impeaching Clinton and ending the sad era of the Imperial Presidency which Obama has carried to even greater levels of abuse…absent the Blue Dress at yet at this point….

It would be nice if someone, anyone, really believed pressure would be brought to bear and there would be consequences for anyone involved in this: Clinton; the person/people in the state department who approved it; the people who set it up in her house (it seems to have been functional, the Geek Squad from the local Best Buy?); the people who physically took it down; the people who are in physical possession of the hardware at this moment.

Except for Hillary’s potential loss of the Grand Prize (POTUS) now that the media seems to be bailing, there will be no consequences. No one in jail. No one fired. No one fined. The list of crooked do-nothing bonus recipients, miscreants, criminals, felons, and incompetent office holders who should be on the street out of work, defendants in criminal proceedings, or in jail is now so long you can’t keep track of them. They openly thumb their noses at congress, if they even bother to appear when summoned. The POTUS and the AGOTUS openly mock our laws, our legal system, and our system of government. And why not? There appears nothing more threatening than an occasional gavel banger or letter writer among the entire sorry lot of “Gentlemen,” “Gentle Ladies,” and bureaucrats walking the halls.


Count me as one of “many conservatives are so beaten down by the liberal media bias.” This too shall pass. As I recall,in the first few days of the Lewinsky affair, the NYT called for Bubba to resign. Within a couple of weeks, they were pushing the “private matter” spin. Did the Lois Lehner email scandal go anywhere? The examples of Clinton corruption dissipation are too numerous to list!

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to jacksonjay. | March 5, 2015 at 11:54 am

    Re: Lois Lerner. I think it should be clear that Lois Lerner is closer to Hillary Clinton than Barack Obama, and the Obama White House is not the place to look for the reason for the IRS targeting of conservative groups..

      jacksonjay in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | March 5, 2015 at 12:06 pm

      For all we know POTUS Pen and Phone could have his own server in Axelrod’s basement. We do know that he got a Blackberry against the advise of all the experts.

Sammy Finkelman | March 5, 2015 at 11:52 am

The e-mails she turned over to the State Department are either not dangerous to her, and/or she couldn’t prevent them from being subpoenaed once there.

She loses nothing, and actually gains from her request, because the result could be a document dump in which clues to something very bad would be buried. And she knows very well this will not speed up the process of release, but could slow the de-classification review process down if they are looking at everything, and not just, let’s say, documents turned over to a House Committee.

Phillep Harding | March 5, 2015 at 12:21 pm

To the best of my knowledge, the only crime that disqualifies someone from the office of Pres, is treason.

Considering the bare knuckle (and swinging cane, and 10 paces at dawn) politics of the founding era, I’m surprised that treason is a disqualifier.

Speaking of, did anyone ever get an original copy of Kerry’s first DD214?

Henry Hawkins | March 5, 2015 at 12:25 pm

Could the email scandal get any worse for Hillary? Why, YES! Yes it could!

From The Federalist:

“SCOOP: Hillary’s State Dept. Forced The Resignation Of An Ambassador For Using Private E-Mail”

“Although Hillary Clinton and her allies may be claiming that her private e-mail system is no big deal, Hillary’s State Department actually forced the 2012 resignation of the U.S. ambassador to Kenya in part for setting up an unsanctioned private e-mail system. According to a 2012 report from the State Deptartment’s inspector general, former U.S. ambassador to Kenya Scott Gration set up a private e-mail system for his office in 2011.”

legacyrepublican | March 5, 2015 at 12:30 pm

Is the sequel to her last book going to be called “Hard Drive Choices?”

Sammy Finkelman | March 5, 2015 at 1:33 pm

The bottom update to the post ends with :

To summarize: according to, the domain has been hosted by Confluence Networks since 12/22/2011, more than three years. Confluence Networks, based out of the British Virgin Islands, has only existed as a domain ( since April 2011, appears to be closely related to a Dubai-based media advertising firm, and has always had its domain name managed by, a registration privacy firm that lists addresses out of Luxembourg and Australia, but gives a phone number apparently out of Denmark, and that shows up repeatedly in connection with fraud, scam, and spam-related domains.

Sammy Finkelman | March 5, 2015 at 3:01 pm

The New York Times story doesn’t mention the spelling “mistake” but just says flatly that the server was registered in the name of Eric P. Hothem like as if that wasn’t an attempt to hide things or at least an obstacle in finding a Clinton connection (but with some deniability that a pseudonym was used.)

And the spelling “mistake” is extremely serious, because most searches are done by computer. They probably checked it – and no spelling checker realized Hoteham could be Hothem.

Sammy Finkelman | March 5, 2015 at 3:03 pm

A caller to Rush Limbaugh says the reason this might be being taken more seriously is that the way Hillary Clinton did this showed premeditation.

Walker Evans | March 5, 2015 at 4:55 pm

Clitler asking State to release email she knows don’t exist is a great ploy, calculated to make her look at least cooperative, if not innocent, to the Dem’s low-information base. “All hail Clitler, Queen of Obfuscation!”