tl;dr.

8/30/2016 8:01:56 PM

for top of page

Quote :

"As part of a lawsuit by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, Hillary Clinton was given 25 questions today to answer within 30 days about her use of a private email server while Secretary of State, with the responses considered to be under oath. “These are simple questions about her email system that we hope will finally result in straight-forward answers, under oath, from Hillary Clinton,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a written statement. + Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational. + Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you. + When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision? + Identify all communications in which you participated concerning or relating to your decision to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and, for each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication. + In a 60 Minutes interview aired on July 24, 2016, you stated that it was “recommended” you use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business. What recommendations were you given about using or not using a personal email account to conduct official State Department business, who made any such recommendations, and when were any such recommendations made? + Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned, was it ever suggested, or did you ever participate in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws. For each instance in which you were so advised, cautioned or warned, in which such a suggestion was made, or in which such a discussion took place, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the advice, caution, warning, suggestion, or discussion. + Your campaign website states, “When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account as a matter of convenience.” What factors other than convenience did you consider in deciding to use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer whether you considered federal records management and preservation requirements and how email you used to conduct official State Department business would be searched in response to FOIA requests. + After President Obama nominated you to be Secretary of State and during your tenure as secretary, did you expect the State Department to receive FOIA requests for or concerning your email? + During your tenure as Secretary of State, did you understand that email you sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business was subject to FOIA? + During your tenure as Secretary of State, how did you manage and preserve emails in your clintonemail.com email account sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business, and what, if anything, did you do to make those emails available to the Department for conducting searches in response to FOIA requests? + During your tenure as Secretary of State, what, if any, effort did you make to inform the State Department’s records management personnel (e.g., Clarence Finney or the Executive Secretariat’s Office of Correspondence and Records) about your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? + During your tenure as Secretary of State, did State Department personnel ever request access to your clintonemail.com email account to search for email responsive to a FOIA request? If so, identify the date access to your account was requested, the person or persons requesting access, and whether access was granted or denied. + At the time you decided to use your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business, or at any time thereafter during your tenure as Secretary of State, did you consider how emails you sent to or received from persons who did not have State Department email accounts (i.e., “state.gov” accounts) would be maintained and preserved by the Department or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests? If so, what was your understanding about how such emails would be maintained, preserved, or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests? ."

8/30/2016 8:16:06 PM

Quote :

" On March 6, 2009, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Eric J. Boswell wrote in an Information Memo to your Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, that he “cannot stress too strongly, however, that any unclassified BlackBerry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving email, and exploiting calendars.” A March 11, 2009 email states that, in a management meeting with the assistant secretaries, you approached Assistant Secretary Boswell and mentioned that you had read the “IM” and that you “get it.” Did you review the March 6, 2009 Information Memo, and, if so, why did you continue using an unclassified BlackBerry to access your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Copies of the March 6, 2009 Information Memo and March 11, 2009 email are attached as Exhibit A for your review. + In a November 13, 2010 email exchange with Huma Abedin about problems with your clintonemail.com email account, you wrote to Ms. Abedin, in response to her suggestion that you use a State Department email account or release your email address to the Department, “Let’s get a separate address or device.” Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after agreeing on November 13, 2010 to “get a separate address or device?” Include in your answer whether by “address” you meant an official State Department email account (i.e., a “state.gov” account) and by “device” you meant a State Department-issued BlackBerry. A copy of the November 13, 2010 email exchange with Ms. Abedin is attached as Exhibit B for your review. + Email exchanges among your top aides and assistants in August 30, 2011 discuss providing you with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or State Department email address. In the course of these discussions, State Department Executive Secretary Stephen Mull wrote, “[W]e are working to provide the Secretary per her request a Department issued BlackBerry to replace her personal unit which is malfunctioning (possibly because of her personal email server is down). We will prepare two versions for her to use – one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her identity, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests).” Similarly, John Bentel, the Director of Information and Records Management in the Executive Secretariat, wrote, “You should be aware that any email would go through the Department’s infrastructure and [be] subject to FOIA searches.” Did you request a State Department issued Blackberry or a State Department email account in or around August 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your personal device and clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business instead of replacing your device and account with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email account? Include in your answer whether the fact that a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email address would be subject to FOIA affected your decision. Copies of the email exchanges are attached as Exhibit C for your review. + In February 2011, Assistant Secretary Boswell sent you an Information Memo noting “a dramatic increase since January 2011 in attempts . . . to compromise the private home email accounts of senior Department officials.” Assistant Secretary Boswell “urge[d] Department users to minimize the use of personal web-email for business.” Did you review Assistant Secretary Boswell’s Information Memo in or after February 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer any steps you took to minimize use of your clintonemail.com email account after reviewing the memo. A copy of Assistant Secretary Boswell’s February 2011 Information Memo is attached as Exhibit D for your review. + On June 28, 2011, you sent a message to all State Department personnel about securing personal email accounts. In the message, you noted “recent targeting of personal email accounts by online adversaries” and directed all personnel to “[a]void conducting official Department business from your personal email accounts.” Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after June 28, 2011, when you were advising all State Department Personnel to avoid doing so? A copy of the June 28, 2011 message is attached as Exhibit E for your review. + Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned about hacking or attempted hacking of your clintonemail.com email account or the server that hosted your clintonemail.com account and, if so, what did you do in response to the advice, caution, or warning? + When you were preparing to leave office, did you consider allowing the State Department access to your clintonemail.com email account to manage and preserve the official emails in your account and to search those emails in response to FOIA requests? If you considered allowing access to your email account, why did you decide against it? If you did not consider allowing access to your email account, why not? + After you left office, did you believe you could alter, destroy, disclose, or use email you sent or received concerning official State Department business as you saw fit? If not, why not? + In late 2014, the State Department asked that you make available to the Department copies of any federal records of which you were aware, “such as an email sent or received on a personal email account while serving as Secretary of State.” After you left office but before your attorneys reviewed the email in your clintonemail.com email account in response to the State Department’s request, did you alter, destroy, disclose, or use any of the email in the account or authorize or instruct that any email in the account be altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used? If so, describe any email that was altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used, when the alteration, destruction, disclosure, or use took place, and the circumstances under which the email was altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used? A copy of a November 12, 2014 letter from Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick F. Kennedy regarding the State Department’s request is attached as Exhibit F for your review. + After your lawyers completed their review of the emails in your clintonemail.com email account in late 2014, were the electronic versions of your emails preserved, deleted, or destroyed? If they were deleted or destroyed, what tool or software was used to delete or destroy them, who deleted or destroyed them, and was the deletion or destruction done at your direction? + During your October 22, 2015 appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails “were in the State’s system” and “if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so.” Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and, if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts. + Identify all communications between you and Brian Pagliano concerning or relating to the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of any emails in your clintonemail.com email account, including any instruction or direction to Mr. Pagliano about the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of emails in your account when transferring the clintonemail.com email system to any alternate or replacement server. For each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication."

[Edited on August 30, 2016 at 8:17 PM. Reason : source jamie dupree]

8/30/2016 8:16:39 PM

I'm SURE the partisan hacks at Judicial Watch have come up with some great questions the fucking FBI never thought of

8/31/2016 9:55:58 AM

beatsunc still beating his drum dumb, i see.

8/31/2016 10:02:20 AM

yeah because i am the one that carelessly broke many laws and then obstructed justice and destroyed the evidence

8/31/2016 10:08:39 AM

^do you not like Hilary Clinton?

8/31/2016 10:11:17 AM

To him she's the "Hildabeast" of the "Hilldog"

[Edited on August 31, 2016 at 10:13 AM. Reason : She could cure cancer and Beatsunc would still masterbate to the idea of spitting on her grave]

8/31/2016 10:12:05 AM

^^does anyone?

8/31/2016 10:12:42 AM

Quote :

"Shillary Hildebeest. Killary. Defender of child rapists Wealth Pirate Leader of the party of Death Hillary Rotten Clinton Hiel Hillary Klinton Crooked Hillary - Source: Donald J. Trump Wicked witch of the west wing Hilla the Hun Robbery Hillham Mr. President Mrs. Carpetbagger Saint Hillary"

[Edited on August 31, 2016 at 10:14 AM. Reason : oh, and cankles]

8/31/2016 10:13:47 AM

It's kinda dumb this is still "news" which email clinton used.

[Edited on September 2, 2016 at 2:50 PM. Reason : ]

9/2/2016 2:48:57 PM

lol no wonder Powell denied ever talking to Clinton about emails. He tried to instruct her on how to avoid FOIA and she was like "nope, I'm gonna follow the law instead".

9/2/2016 2:55:09 PM

^ yeah i was like at that part

I was a low level state employee during that time period, and was told work related communications on any medium (instant message, personal email, etc.) were subject to FOIA.

9/2/2016 2:58:45 PM

From a journalist at ars technica:

Quote :

"THE ENTIRETY OF THE STATE DEPARTMENT'S UNCLAS EMAIL SYSTEM WAS PWNED FOR OVER A YEAR. I'm sorry, did I type that in all-caps? Also, between Chelsea Manning/ Wikileaks and the repeated hacks of State, the White House, etc between 2009 and 2014, it is highly likely that everything short of the TS/SAP stuff (and even some of that) that Clinton touched was already breached. This does not excuse Clinton and her staff's—I'm looking at you, Jake Sullivan—for the extreme error of passing Top Secret/ Special Access Program classified data back and forth over Blackberries and a non-governmental e-mail system. I would expect that Sullivan, at a minimum, will have his clearance revoked and he will not be getting a job as a national security adviser if Clinton wins the election. Or at least, I think that's a reasonable expectation."

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/fbi-clintons-first-e-mail-server-was-a-power-mac-tower/?comments=1&post=31820223

There's no evidence clinton's server was hacked for reference.

9/2/2016 5:27:22 PM

That Colin Powell email, though..

https://medium.com/oversightdems/cummings-releases-full-powell-email-advising-clinton-on-personal-email-use-65904c1ccfa#.sn8k6c3ht

[Edited on September 7, 2016 at 8:08 PM. Reason : X]

9/7/2016 8:04:42 PM

Blame the black dude, oldest trick in the book.

9/7/2016 9:01:02 PM

So Hilldawg hacks, is she a criminal, or just that incompetent? It's got to be 1 of the 2.

What does (c) stand for?

vs

Break all my phones with hammers, use bleachbit on the wiped drives!

9/8/2016 2:21:42 PM

Bad judgment. Incompetent. Whatever you want to call it.

Still overwhelmingly a better choice than Trump, who basically argues with his own positions day to day.

9/8/2016 2:58:01 PM

^

9/8/2016 4:53:15 PM

I don't understand how minor "scandals" last years for Hillary while major bribery accusations for Trump are in and out of the news in a single cycle.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-pam-bondi-trump-university_us_57cf2c6ce4b0a48094a64854

9/8/2016 6:11:57 PM

That's Trump's evil genius super power: being so fucked up no one can keep track. His sidekick is a media that insists on pretending Trump and Clinton's positions are equally worthy of consideration.

9/9/2016 12:00:05 AM

^ while I agree, we haven't really seen a presidential election that's had this much dysfunction in one candidate (let alone one entire political party) versus another in a while- if ever. Typically the media attacks both sides and tries to treat candidates somewhat 'equally', so I can't blame the media for not knowing how exactly to handle Trump. Most people laughed him off a year ago and thought he was entertaining (or even refreshing, depending on who you asked) and look what has happened...

[Edited on September 9, 2016 at 12:25 AM. Reason : .]

9/9/2016 12:25:17 AM

Quote :

"we haven't really seen a presidential election that's had this much dysfunction in one candidate"

tbh, they're both pretty dysfunctional.

9/9/2016 1:21:24 AM

The levels of dysfunction aren't even close and you know it.

9/9/2016 1:49:38 AM

Damn, the emails were wiped after a conference call with 2 top Clinton aides after the subpoena and no one even gets a slap on the wrist

9/10/2016 9:02:42 AM

https://news.vice.com/article/fbi-director-james-comey-sick-of-talking-about-hillary-clinton-emails

Quote :

""Despite all the chest-beating by people no longer in government, there really wasn't a prosecutable case" against Clinton or her aides, Comey wrote. The hard part, he noted, was deciding whether the FBI should be transparent with the public about why the bureau reached its decision. "You may be sick of this, but let me leave you with a few words about how I have been describing the email investigation in private to our former employees as I meet them around the country," he wrote. "I explain to them that there are two aspects to this: (1) our judgment about the facts and prosecutive merit; and (2) how we decided to talk about that judgment. I tell them that the difficult decision was actually the second part, not the first. At the end of the day, the case itself was not a cliff-hanger.""

9/10/2016 10:29:19 AM

Bruh, they wiped that shit after a meeting with top aides after a preservation order

9/10/2016 8:26:27 PM

Repeating Trey Gowdy on Fox News now? This is desperate, even for the /r/s4p crowd.

9/10/2016 8:48:07 PM

Quote :

"I don't understand how minor "scandals" last years for Hillary while major bribery accusations for Trump are in and out of the news in a single cycle."

Someone posting a HuffPo link doesn't understand something? No way!

Because Clinton is a "public servant" and Trump isn't. Also you only think the email scandal is "minor" because you live in an echo-chamber. Clinton clearly had deliberately set up the server to hide info from the gov, and deliberately smashed cellphones with hammers, and used bleachbit on laptops to hide her cash for favors corrupt shit. That's house of cards shit

The hacks ITT probably still believe the 30k emails destroyed were just about "yoga" and "Chelsea's wedding". They also seem to think Hilary doesn't know what "(c)" means... and after claiming she is the most qualified candidate ever, the hacks sure are quick to accept the "derp derp what's a computer" stupidity excuse.

9/12/2016 1:06:52 PM

Quote :

"NBC News: FBI re-opening investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server"

We back

10/28/2016 1:06:10 PM

Obviously because the FBI is corrupt and is bowing to the demands of the Obama administration to get Killary off.

Oh wait.

10/28/2016 1:07:56 PM

Wonder what the related case where the emails came up was? Likely related to Podesta and emails that were hacked.

So many narratives on both sides just blown up.

10/28/2016 1:11:40 PM

they found more emails

no conclusions can be made

10/28/2016 1:17:36 PM

Doubt they can resolve it in a week and half and doubt it'll affect the election results that much, so even if she does get charged, we just get Acting President Kaine for 4 years

10/28/2016 1:20:32 PM

Hurray for more wasted taxpayer dollars on a giant nothing burger. Thanks Chaffetz, you worthless choad. If I buy another house in this shit hole state, it's going to be in his district so I can spam his office with daily emails about how much cock he sucks.

10/28/2016 1:20:55 PM

I, for one, think this is a "Christmas comes early" for trump. That letter is sufficiently ambiguous to make the GOP say what it wants about it without lying.

This is the biggest moment in the election so far and will significantly tighten the race (my hope is that it doesn't do so enough because of early voting)

10/28/2016 1:30:09 PM

This whole thing is such a nightmare. Whenever it seems like this election is going to be over with, it just keeps getting more and more absurd. Frankly, it's terrifying that any of this has happened, for both Trump and Hillary.

10/28/2016 1:30:10 PM

^^lol no, this is a dead horse for most voters, and is only setting the table 4-8 years of "investigations" by congressional GOPers.

Also, they aren't "reopening the investigation", as Choadetz tweeted, they are just taking a closer look at the newly discovered emails.

[Edited on October 28, 2016 at 1:37 PM. Reason : .]

10/28/2016 1:32:45 PM

Lol, investors are TERRIFIED of Trump. Market tanked on news.

10/28/2016 1:34:38 PM

^ it tanked yesterday, so let's not get crazy

10/28/2016 1:35:57 PM

My take? If wikileaks has anything to do with the FBI taking another look, then this gives a lot of credence to the wikileaks dumps, and I think that might be more damaging that whatever outcome of the investigation would be.

10/28/2016 1:43:07 PM

CNN
FOXNEWS
NBC
WAPO

it's all over (pun intended?)

10/28/2016 1:50:15 PM

lmao

10/28/2016 1:58:58 PM

Quote :

"@samsteinhp Pete Williams has sources saying not about Clinton world w/holding emails. Not about Podesta emails. Not emails from Clinton."

Quote :

"@samsteinhp Pete Williams sources also say it isn't going to be a game changer. But will take more than 11 days"

Quote :

"?@samsteinhp Pete Williams sources say in course of a separate investigation, FBI came across "a device." found emails there. but emails NOT from HRC"

Looks like Comey never stopped being a Republican. Puts out a vague statement as a parting shot against the person who's going to fire him in 3 months.

10/28/2016 2:18:14 PM

The FBI found a device which led to more emails in an unrelated probe.

Or so CNBC says. So interesting...

[Edited on October 28, 2016 at 2:22 PM. Reason : But not emails from Clinton. Wtf? Maybe about deletions?]

10/28/2016 2:19:56 PM

^^ but I thought the FBI was rigged and in cahoots with Clinton all along?

10/28/2016 2:22:50 PM

^Hah. Literally the most explosive thing to come out of the entire email investigation were the words "extremely careless" spoken by Comey during that impromptu presser. There was never anything else.

10/28/2016 2:24:48 PM

Quote :

"NEW: NBC's Pete Williams reports that the e-mails Comey announced today were NOT originally withheld by Clinton or campaign."

What is going on here??

10/28/2016 2:25:38 PM

I think it's way too early to make judgements in either direction. Enjoy the ride

10/28/2016 2:29:21 PM

Quote :

"@mmurraypolitics More @PeteWilliamsNBC: Comey letter was sent to Hill "out of an abundance of caution" to be extra thorough 2/"

Honestly Comey should just step down at this point. Putting out a statement like that, 11 days before an election, is in his own words "extremely careless" and obviously motivated by partisanship. He's disgracing the office of FBI Director.

10/28/2016 2:31:48 PM