Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Hillary: I have no idea if server wiped

Hillary: I have no idea if server wiped

“What, like with a cloth or something?”

https://twitter.com/Bridget_PJM/status/633759714334085120

This is bad.

Really bad.

While some are reporting this as Hillary refusing to say if she wiped the server clean, the language is pretty clear she is denying knowledge:

“Did you try to wipe the hard drive?”

“I have no idea… that’s why we turned it over …

“You were in charge of it, did you wipe the server?”

“What, with a cloth or something? …. No”

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Not A Member of Any Organized Political | August 18, 2015 at 6:33 pm

Hillary – not ready to serve on “Day Methuselah.”

mumzieistired | August 18, 2015 at 6:40 pm

She is either truly this ignorant or she is acting this ignorant to avoid answering the question. Either way, she has no business being president of the U.S.

Ms. Hillary needs to bow out gracefully while she still can.

Rush has a great parody from WAY back about Hellary’s testimony where she claim “I don’t recall” pushing 100 times.

“…my brain is jello…jello…jello.”

How true that was, we hardly knew.

OH MY GOD!!! Please, please for the love of God tell me that Hillary Clinton was stupid enough to have this routine:

“You were in charge of it, did you wipe the server?”

“What, with a cloth or something? …. No”

That, right there, will be the soundbite heard round the world. To even consider a person for president who is so technologically illiterate (or at least willing to feign so in public), after being IMMERSED in scandal about her e-mail communications for MONTHS, is tantamount to Democrat suicide at the ballot box.

It’s time for Alinsky Rule number 5:“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” Ridicule, ridicule RIDICULE her and laugh her right out of the Presidential race.

Well, I think a “Joe Wilson” quote is in order, Hillary:

“You Lie!”

She says she has no idea whether her server had been wiped clean today, but back in March her attorney David Kendall wrote a letter to Trey Gowdy saying that Clinton had had her server wiped clean: http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/clinton-won-t-hand-over-server-says-emails-are-gone-20150327

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to Mercyneal. | August 19, 2015 at 1:04 am

    It depends on what server you are talking about.

    She was not involved in any decisions made about the old server that was replaced in 2013 at the time the decision was made, so she says she has no idea if the hard drive was wiped. You won’t find any proof she knew anything.

    All this has undoubtably been gone over carefully with her lawyers, and thre probably nothinbg to show she has or had any knowledge of what happened to the old server – though of course she knows that now, or she wouldn’t have been so ready to turn it over. (although another reason was to avoid a broader subpoena)

    Her lawyers would have told her if they think data can be recovered from that server, but those conversations are privileged.

    Estragon in reply to Mercyneal. | August 19, 2015 at 1:32 am

    It’s a bigger problem if she didn’t know, because whoever helped her go through the emails needed the top security clearance too, as did anyone who handled it before “wiping” and those who physically performed it. As well as the back-up server.

    We know now she did have classified information in there. Whether or not it was “labeled” is irrelevant to the law. Thomas Drake went to prison for forwarding five unlabeled classified documents to a person who did have clearance, because he was not specifically authorized to share it.

      Sammy Finkelman in reply to Estragon. | August 19, 2015 at 11:50 am

      because whoever helped her go through the emails needed the top security clearance too,

      Not if nobody knew it was classified. Besides they were sworn to secrecy for an even more sacrosanct reason: lawyer-client confidentiality.

      Hillary says now the issue of classified documents would have occured even if she had used government e-mail, and that agencies disagree about classification all he time.

The server that was wiped, was in a bathroom.

A lot of wiping is done in a bathroom.

Henry Hawkins | August 18, 2015 at 7:19 pm

Remember Watergate? I suspect that, as bad as this is, it’s just the tip of the iceberg of Hillarious malfeasance.

    Estragon in reply to Henry Hawkins. | August 19, 2015 at 1:35 am

    Her long career of corruption and influence peddling goes back to Watergate, in fact, when she was fired for unethical behavior from the Democratic legal team investigating Nixon for the House Judiciary Committee.

    So far, through it all the worst penalty she’s suffered is having to surrender her law license to avoid it being suspended and her disbarred (as did Bill – and Barack and Michelle, for that matter, great folks).

    So far.

      Sammy Finkelman in reply to Estragon. | August 19, 2015 at 2:04 am

      She was not fired. More exactly, she was not re-hired.

      After the impeachment inquiry was over, Jerry Zeifman did not agree to let her stay on for a while, now to work for the Judiciary Committee as a whole, nor would he give her a letter of recomendation.

      She had been working for John Doar, who ran a separate special operation just for impeachment, but it terminated rather quickly and unexpectedly.

      The unethical behavior involved hiding the legal and political reasoning, if not the fact (which was impossible) behind the committee’s decision in 1970 to give Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas the right to have counsel appear before the committee in the impeachment inquiry involving him. It took place some time before, at the beginning of the inquiry, and was with the complete concurrence and knowledge of John Doar, and probably Peter Rodino. John Doar worked directltly for House Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, and not for the Democratic counsel, Jerry Zeifman, and he couldn’t fire her, or more accurately, not hire her, until this was over.

      Hillary Clinton took custody of all the documents involving Justice Douglas’ right to have counsel shortly after Jerry Zeifman brought it up in a conversation with her, saying it differed with her thesis.

      This meant that the minority council couldn’t see what it said. Although she had custody, shenever once acknowledged the existence of any arguments – never attempted to rebut the arguments then made for counsel or distinguish between the two impeachment inquiries.

      She was supposed to give an impartial opinion, as to the right to counsel, in Jerry Zeifman’s view, not a lawyer’s brief so they could be more unfair to Richard Nixon.

      And especially not hide the arguments on the other side, or the declarations made in 1970 by the committee, from the Republicans, so they couldn’t be cited.

        Sammy Finkelman in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | August 19, 2015 at 2:07 am

        Hillary Clinton also, I think, although she not listed as someone charged with doing so, made some transcripts of some Nixon tapes, and inserted the words “I want you all to stonewall it” in Richard Nixon’s mouth, which I doubt he ever said.

      Milhouse in reply to Estragon. | August 19, 2015 at 3:07 am

      Barack and Michelle did not surrender their law licenses. They merely went into inactive status, as any lawyer does if he’s not planning to practise for a while. In the unlikely event that they ever want to resume practise, all they will have to do is pay the difference between the inactive and active registration fees, and do some extra CLE courses over the following two years.

      There’s no reason to suppose either of them was ever under threat of suspension or disbarment.

        Milhouse, with respect to the law license of Michelle Robinson (Obama), I have viewed the Illinois State Bar Website and the verbiage is “voluntarily surrendered pursuant to Court Order.”

        Of course, the actual Court Order referred to is not to be found, but feel free to explain to me why an attorney needs a court order to “voluntarily” surrender her law license.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to Milhouse. | August 19, 2015 at 6:14 pm

        Actually, the last time I checked, Barack’s license was “retired”, and Michelle’s was “inactive”. Not a big difference – essentially, it is easier to move from inactive to active than from retired to active. And, this year, I no longer have to pay anything for my “retired” license.

Vince Foster is unavailable for comment..

I’m sure this is obvious but I am restating it anyway…because I’m mad as heck and I’m not going to take it any more![window open as I write this]

Anyone who contracts a low-key out-of-the way tech firm to set up a private email server w/backup knows exactly what they are doing-their motives are clear: covert communication.

We know that Hillary as Sec. of State was given a very high level of security clearance. This high level clearance rated info passed through the server and likely also through Bill’s hands.

Hillary purchased a private email server from an outside source without State Dept. approval to bypass the State Dept.’s record keeping.

The purchaser doesn’t have to know the tech details to know that data can be stored, erased, transferred, firewalled, etc.

To make this clandestine computer system possible the out-of-the way tech firm had to be a trustworthy entity. A referral was probably given.

BTW: It has been noted in the news that Sidney Blumenthal is a close confidant of Hillary.

The contracted tech knew who they were contracting with (via the email address; the IP address, etc.), the type of incoming line being connected to, the IP address of the server, the email address, the hard drive size, the backup memory size, the backup schedule, the malware protection software update schedule…they had to know the whole shebang to set it up…or no payment (was it a cash deal?)

Having said all this, there are many people who are complicit in this crime. The sooner they talk the better the deal they may get.

    Insufficiently Sensitive in reply to jennifer a johnson. | August 18, 2015 at 8:21 pm

    It has been noted in the news that Sidney Blumenthal is a close confidant of Hillary.

    Today’s ‘Daily Mail’ lays it out very clearly.

    “March 20, 2013 – Clinton’s private email address, [email protected], is made public when a Romanian hacker named ‘Guccifer’ (whose real name is Marcel Lazar Lehel) hacks into longtime Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal’s AOL email account and leaks images of his inbox – including emails from Clinton.”

Well, the only thing we know for certain is that Hillary did nothing wrong. Because she said so….

It’s too bad SNL hasn’t been funny in twenty years; they could have a field day with this interview. But all they do now is promote the party line, so the next show should be all Trump, all Republican debates, do everything to drag Hillary across the finish line.

Wiping and bathroom and Hillary Clinton in one sentence is not a pretty picture.

The orange pantsuit/jumpsuit is priceless.

This clip will dog her forever.

I hope the die hard fans of hillary understand just how stupid she really is. Can you imagine for one single progressive minute that GWB or Richard Nixon made light of a serious charge like this what would have happened? Nixon “Memorex never erases itself” or GWB “I thought WMD meant “Weapons Made of Dirt”. Ha Ha! hillary is sooooo funny!

Oh, that’s a joke! Hahahaha.

I’m sure it’s no laughing matter over at the CIA/NSA/NGA/NRO right now. She just alienated the whole security complex.

What’s infuriating is that nothing is happening. Anybody else, and observable action would take place. Now that she’s had the audacity to spit in the faces of the folks who spend their careers safeguarding information, somebody’s going to talk. We’ll find out who is giving the “stand down” order on Hill — probably before we find out who gave it on Sept 11, 2012.

“With a cloth?” takes disingenuousness to new heights.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to Juba Doobai!. | August 19, 2015 at 1:11 am

    That was in order to answer the question “no” since the reporter was not satisfied with “I have no idea.”

    And maybe it will confuse some people.

      Sammy Finkelman in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | August 19, 2015 at 11:55 am

      She pretended to be half stumped as to why the reporter didn’t accept her “I don’t know” answer. Maybe he meant wiped with a cloth?

      Then when he said she did know how things worked, she re-ieterated she doesn’t know how things work digitally.

Meanwhile, Carly Fiorina just reviewed the TSA on Yelp, and it’s perfect.

and just this bonus comment… Can she put her high heel through Hillary’s eye socket now? That would be so cool. (just kidding, I am not violent and she’s way too classy anyways 😉 )

The presser today illustrates another point that hasn’t been made well enough yet about Hilarity:

She’s really not that smart.

Oh, she’s cunning all right, ruthless, and with a certain aptitude for behind the scenes dealmaking.

But smart? Despite the Yale Law degree, no, not so smart. She doesn’t understand how things work. She doesn’t get underlying principles. She has a substantial knowledge deficit about the technology that’s basic to the early 21st century.

We wouldn’t ask her to be a nuclear physicist. If we wanted a neurosurgeon for president, after all, we have one of those! But it’s not too much to ask ANY presidential candidate to have a basic sense of how the world works in the 21st century. Technology. History. Communications. Basic sociology. Basic economics.

Hilarity doesn’t get any of those. She’s a dummy.

Sammy Finkelman | August 19, 2015 at 1:14 am

She showing she understood the question:

“Did you try to wipe the hard drive?”

….by not acting puzzled about the expression. although what she said didn’t make too much sense. She turned it over to find out if it was wiped??

Sammy Finkelman | August 19, 2015 at 1:41 am

It doesn’t matter if any data is recovered (if it is not too much.)

Kendall will say there can be errors when such a process is used, and may be able to find some – all he has to do is request that more tentative recoveries be included.

He will point to some text as obvious errors, even if they are not errors at all – there are always keyboarding errors or obscure references.

He will say the errors – and some errors or possible errors will be acknowledged – he will say the errors mean that none of this should be admissible in court, and shouldn’t be released to the public, and will argue it is not probable cause for any subpoenas.

And he will suggest amendments to the text. There’s a lot you can do to change the meaning of something sometimes even by changing a single letter.

It depends upon whether people want to put up with this kind of thing.

    Bruce Hayden in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | August 19, 2015 at 3:29 am

    If I were the one prosecuting her, I would just go with several hundred instances of classified information illegally being on her email server, and illegally being deleted. They have the printed emails, and they have the server. They really don’t need anything else. And with an aggressive prosecutor, Kindall would have his own problems, including the possession, possibly review, and deletion of classified information without a security clearance. If the statistics hold up, we can expect maybe 1,500 or so emails that were at some point, classified, with some being initially marked as containing classified information before ending up on her private email server.

    What I don’t think that many realize yet is the magnitude of their problem. Mrs Clinton spent 4 years as Sec of State. Much of what she did there involved sensitive or classified information. Probably more than almost anyone else below the level of the White House. Can’t remember the exact figure, but they admit to 50k pages of 30k work related emails. And that is obviously low, since there was maybe a two month gap in her emails concerning Libya right around the Benghazi attacks, and we can expect that the emails turned over were sanitized in other respects too. Plus, who finds credible that almost half of her emails were personal? Right now, it is looking like 5% of her emails were classified. This seems low. But of the remainder of her work related emails, most were probably at least Sensitive. Which means that none should have been sent to or stored on her own server, and doing so for the classified stufff, at a minimum, was a crime. Think of this – even if we stick to the 5% figure for classified information in her admitted work related emails, there could possibly be 1,500 illegal stores on her server, 1,500 illegal viewings of such while she was Sec of State, 1,500 illegal reviews for production or deletion, and 1,500 illegal deletions. And that doesn’t even consider the mishandling of emails containing Sensitive but not Classified information. Only a Clinton could expect to get away with a crime of this magnitude – potentially somewhere between 5,000 and 100,000 or so individual federal crimes, some/many of which are felonies.

Wondering who picked out the orange pantsuit for this occasion. Really bad choice. Perhaps it was the effect of thoughts and wishes of many ‘everyday people’.

2nd Ammendment Mother | August 19, 2015 at 1:33 pm

Would love to read the Prof’s hypothetical take on things if Hillary were his client…

“What, with a lightning strike or something? …. No”

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-33989384

The Friendly Grizzly | August 20, 2015 at 6:34 pm

“I did not have classified information with that server.”

“It depends on what your definition of wipe is.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend