Breaking: Hillary 'Wiped Clean' Server, Emails Permanently Deleted

I think it is interesting to note the reappearance of a new trend in mind-wiping;

Hillary Clinton confirms she wiped her email server
source

Once again we see the miraculous "facts...."

Clinton's attorney has confirmed to a House committee on Benghazi that, after handing over work-related email to the State Department, the politician both "chose not to keep" personal messages and set a 60-day limit on what the server retains.

Note the reappearance of the "60 day" thing.... I found this cross-relates to this directly:

email "retention" meme

Where we were 'educated' by the media about the matter of fact State Department announcement on March 13, 2015 that ...

The State Department said Friday it was unable to automatically archive the emails of most of its senior officials until last month, which could mean potential problems for historical record-keeping amid criticism of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's use of a private email server while in office.

Of course at that time Hillary was not known to have been eliminating the contents of "her" personal server.... back then it was over this ....

The fact that all but Kerry's emails were not being automatically archived until February may fuel the controversy over Clinton's use of a private account and server.

But here we are babbling about the topic as if this were NOT the "other shoe dropping" from the original notion that despite the alleged sainthood, and obvious god-like qualities of the 'players' on the stage the truth is we are perpetually being set up to have to 'accept' their doings and saying as they care to recall them... records be damned...

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xcathdra

All I get from you is legal propaganda with no arrest or warrants. We should re visit this thread later in the week perhaps Gowdy will have presented evidence to the DOJ by then.

Please research how investigations work before you try telling me how to do my job.

how about you show me how the laws in question don't apply.
Why would he need to go to the DOJ?

You work for the DOJ? And are familiar with all the applicable laws? Are you an attorney? With inside knowledge of this?

a reply to: jimmyx

and the other 30k emails she deleted is part of where the problem is. Its not her decision to make. That is reserved to the federal archivist as the law clearly spells out.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I don't know which laws are broken. You have me thoroughly confused. You seem to know everything about it so why not spell it out so I can understand. Be kind. At this point, I need to distinguish the vitriol from the facts before I burn Hilary at the stake.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: ~Lucidity

No what you said -

No one. NO ONE is agreeing or even saying that laws were actually broken. No media. No attorneys. No one.

There is no room for interpretation as it is straight forward. It turns out people are discussing this and the legal ramifications. You are the one attacking people for having a different opinion.

As for proof you apparently over looked the post I made about Clintons attorney being involved in the destruction of the emails. So yes, there is proof.

I'm attacking? Sure. I'm attacking the FACT that no indictments have been handed down and that there is no agreement over time, what the law was when she left her post, and what the facts of the matter are as opposed to the authority with which some here are assuming laws were broken without knowing all the facts.

Tell me when the emails were wiped?

Most people here assume this just happened. But that's not clear either.

I don’t think this is a great sin. Even though my op a few weeks ago was the first to get on HC over this, in the grand scheme of things this isn’t a great sin.


It’s not as bad as her helping murder Khadafy or George Bush’ Iraq war lies

a reply to: MOMof3

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Secondly if you don't know which laws then how do you justify this comment -

originally posted by: MOMof3

All I get from you is legal propaganda with no arrest or warrants. We should re visit this thread later in the week perhaps Gowdy will have presented evidence to the DOJ by then.

Legal propaganda and you don't even know which laws are impacted.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

No I am in law enforcement at the state level. I told you that several pages back when you told me your IT background made you a better investigator than me. That's when I said I will see your IT and raise you my law enforcement background.

Again feel free to show me why FOIA and the Records act don't apply in this case.

What I find intriguing about all of this is apparently it would not even be an issue if it wasn't allegedly leaked from the Obama administration.

If true, why has the wrath of almighty obama been brought in to destroy Hillary?

What did she do to piss them off?... Better yet, what does she have on them?

a reply to: Xcathdra

The evidence for me that laws have been broken is when warrants or arrests are made. I thought that was the way our legal system worked.

a reply to: ~Lucidity


Rep. Gowdy: Hillary Clinton wiped email server clean, deleted all emails

Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, chairman of the House committee investigating the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, said Clinton’s lawyer informed him of the news.

“Secretary Clinton unilaterally decided to wipe her server clean and permanently delete all emails from her personal server,” Gowdy said in a statement.

Gowdy had also asked that Clinton turn over her server to the State Department inspector general for an independent review.

Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, said no.

In his letter to Gowdy, Kendall said the former secretary of state “chose not to keep her non-record personal emails.”

“Thus, there are no … e-mails from Secretary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state on the server for any review, even if such review were appropriate or legally authorized,” he wrote.

When?

Gowdy said it wasn’t clear when Clinton erased the server, but it appears to have been wiped after October 2014, when the State Department asked Clinton to return her official emails to the department.

But in his letter, Kendall said the federal law governing record retention requires that each federal employee individually decide what emails must be preserved.

“The manner in which Secretary Clinton assisted the State Department in fulfilling its responsibilities under the act is consistent with the obligations of every federal employee,” Kendall wrote.

The law he cited requires the archivist to make determinations, not Hillary nor her lawyer.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xcathdra

The evidence for me that laws have been broken is when warrants or arrests are made. I thought that was the way our legal system worked.

Step 1 - If a crime occurs / is reported its investigated. The purpose of that investigation is to narrow it down to the suspects while at the same time clearing individuals not involved / no law violation.

Step 2 - Once completed and if a suspect is located the question becomes what laws did the actions violate. While law enforcement can arrest and submit a report to the PA, the ultimate decision on what charges are used, or if the person is charged at all, is the sole discretion of the prosecuting attorney.

That's law enforcement.

Congress on the other hand has their own unique authority in this area via hearings / congressional committees / subpoena authority all rolled into one. If the DOJ refuses to act Congress can bypass and establish a special prosecutor.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Xcathdra

The evidence for me that laws have been broken is when warrants or arrests are made. I thought that was the way our legal system worked.

At these levels the legal system is entirely political, and subject to the will and/or agendas of partisan powers that control it. Justice is irrelevant.

a reply to: ausername

The legal system is political at all levels. The smallest county in the US has some elected official that has influence, whether a sheriff, DA or judge.

ISN'T HILLARY JUST DARLING? GO HILLARY!!!

Yes, justice is so relevant that no one thought of grabbing her emails when Benghazi happened. Or when she left office. Or when it was investigated in 2012. Mmmhmm. Justice. When it's convenient.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Grabbing them?
She was required by law to turn them over when she separated from the State Department.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: jimmyx

and the other 30k emails she deleted is part of where the problem is. Its not her decision to make. That is reserved to the federal archivist as the law clearly spells out.

she resigned on feb. 1st 2013...please show where....for all white house cabinet members, all communications, personal and governmental, on all devices, personal or governmental, shall by law be archived by the government with no exceptions......that's my idea of "clearly spelled out".....if that was an accurate paraphrased version of the Law, then she should, by all means, be arrested and put on trial.

I wonder just how much the Council on Foreign relations has to hide when all of it's key operatives within the US political system are hiding everything they did over a specific period of time... and it regrettably becomes apparent...

All of you who are the 'who cares?' flavor need not respond.

Those of you who feel this is all "political nonsense" good on you... the reporting is, your versions of history are, in fact, the sum of your existence as a citizen will be defined by someone else... Someone who will never know you, someone who will never really have anything in common with you.. kind of like royalty. Good luck with that.

For those of you seeing that this is far beyond the scope bull# theatrics, I welcome a discussion as to why it is so crucial for our public servants to be so completely concealed from any oversight? Why are they all eventually proven to be liars, and immune to inquiry? And why are they all collectively found to be precisely NOT trustworthy? Is it all part of the production of a directorial process best suited to a "stage." If so, from what are we being distracted?

I reject most any argument that includes partisan frippery, or demonstrates loyalty to a party, or to a person who is part of the never-ending farce where oligarchs and elites pretend they actually "do" something which entitles them to be deserving of less scrutiny than any other person claiming "public" trust.

a reply to: Maxmars

The sweet, short, simple response is..

It really does not matter one way or the other, what we, THE people think about all of this.

Whatever comes of it or not, we have no say in. But it is a somewhat entertaining distraction...

They do what they do because they can, and most often get away with high crimes and treason. Can there be any doubt now that our government is completely corrupt?

The only real choice you have is to participate in their games and public partisan debates, or not.