Hillary refusal to turn over server for months may have led people off the trail

Hillary refusal to turn over server for months may have led people off the trail

The Hillary email scandal gets curiouser and curiouser with the revelation that among the emails already identified were at least two emails containing top secret satellite and signals intelligence.

The Daily Beast reported yesterday, The Spy Satellite Secrets in Hillary’s Emails:

… There is no doubt that she, or someone on her State Department staff, violated federal law by putting TOP SECRET//SI information on an unclassified system. That it was Hillary’s private, offsite server makes the case even worse from a security viewpoint. Claims that they “didn’t know” such information was highly classified do not hold water and are irrelevant. It strains belief that anybody with clearances didn’t recognize that NSA information, which is loaded with classification markings, was signals intelligence, or SIGINT. It’s possible that the classified information found in Clinton’s email trove wasn’t marked as such. But if that classification notice was omitted, it wasn’t the U.S. intelligence community that took such markings away. Moreover, anybody holding security clearances has already assumed the responsibility for handling it properly.

Now it’s reported that Hillary’s original private server used to handle the classified information, which was turned over to a Colorado company in 2013, was in storage in New Jersey but contains no data, via WaPo:

The e-mail server used by Hillary Rodham Clinton when she served as secretary of state was turned over to the FBI late Wednesday afternoon from a private data center in New Jersey, according to an attorney familiar with the transfer….

Before it was taken to the data center in New Jersey, the server had been in the basement of the Clintons’ private home in Chappaqua, N.Y., during the time she was secretary of state, according to people familiar with the Clintons’ e-mail network.

After she left government service in early 2013, the Clintons decided to upgrade the system, hiring Platte River as the new manager of a privately managed e-mail network. The old server was removed from the Clinton home by Platte River and stored in a third party data center, which are set up to provide security from threats of hacking and natural disaster, Wells said.

Platte River Networks has retained control of the old server since it took over management of the Clintons’ e-mail system. She said that the old server “was blank,” and no longer contained useful data.

None of this makes sense.

Why would Hillary hide from the feds and refuse for months to turn over a server that was blank?

I noted at the time of Hillary’s UN press conference in March 2015 that Hillary’s email explanation is self-contradictory – here’s how:

The problem with Hillary Clinton’s explanation for her use of a personal email server and account for government business goes beyond the demonstrable falsehoods and suspicious nature of setting up such an arrangement.

Hillary explained that she turned over all work-related emails to the State Department, and “chose not to keep” (i.e., deleted) the personal emails on the server….

Thus, according to Hillary, the server now only has work related emails.

But Hillary says that she will not turn over the server to a neutral person for review, because the server has her personal emails on it.

But she already said the personal emails are not on it anymore.

Hillary’s explanation is self-contradictory.

Perhaps Hillary is worried that deleted personal emails could be recovered. That’s unlikely — Hillary’s technical advisers almost certainly used a safe delete (write-over) mechanism. In any event, that can be controlled for by having a neutral person, perhaps a retired judge, supervise the review process. But Hillary would not agree to that when asked at the press conference.

So Hillary says there are no personal emails on the server but she will not turn it over because there are personal emails on it.

Uh huh.

Now the server she was protecting from scrutiny is completely blank and has been so for almost two years?

As I mentioned in March, Hillary’s consciousness of guilt, Hillary has a pattern of volunteering information that seems designed to throw people off the trail of something.

If Hillary’s personal Yoga and family emails were deleted, it wasn’t from that original blank server, it was from someplace else, because the original server data was transferred in 2013.

Also, why would the Colorado company keep a server that was blank? And physically in New Jersey?

Why not destroy it completely? And why would Hillary refuse to turn over a blank server?

There must be a second server to which the data was transferred, possibly part of the Colorado company’s internal network.

This entire sequence of events raises serious questions as to possible illegal conduct, Official: Clinton ‘inner circle’ may have stripped email classification markings:

Hillary is hiding something. From day one I said that the Bigger Question was: Did Hillary use unsecured email for Classified Info?.

@NoahCRothman Some1 sends top secret info 2 her private email. Knows shouldn't. But no other way to email her. So doesn't mark it. She knows

— Legal Insurrection (@LegInsurrection) August 13, 2015

We know she did. Now we need to find out how extensive it was, and who at the State Department helped facilitate it. The answer may lie in Colorado, not in the blank server.

Has Hillary’s refusal for months to turn over the server served as a red herring?

A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important issue….

The origin of the expression is not known. Conventional wisdom has long supposed it to be the use of a kipper (a strong-smelling smoked fish) to train hounds to follow a scent, or to divert them from the correct route when hunting; however, modern linguistic research suggests that the term was probably invented in 1807 by English polemicist William Cobbett, referring to one occasion on which he had supposedly used a kipper to divert hounds from chasing a hare, and was never an actual practice of hunters. The phrase was later borrowed to provide a formal name for the logical fallacy and literary device.

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.