back to article Hillary Clinton private email server probe winding up – reports

A former staffer to Hillary Clinton has reportedly been granted immunity from prosecution, to get answers about her private email server. The Washington Post has reported that the FBI has “secured the cooperation” of Bryan Pagliano, who set up the server in her home in New York in 2009. The Washington Post says the …

Silver badge

Re: Do not understand the issue

Forgot:

3/ She and her staff have allegedly repeatedly lied or misrepresented the facts about the existence and use of the private mail server, and about the content and classification of the emails sent, received and stored on the private email server.

9
0

Re: Do not understand the issue

There's three parts to it. First there's the fact she was running her own email server, which may or may not have been secure, which almost certainly handled correspondence which was classified. This isn't a major issue as previous Secretaries of State have done the same.

Second is that she, or people in her employ, seem to have used that email server to bypass the Freedom of Information Act by pretending it didn't exist and so the emails couldn't be produced. This is pretty questionable, and if it's the case and was discovered earlier would likely have resulted in serious fines for her department

Last part is that she apparently sent on documents which were classified to people without clearance and stored them on the server which may or may not have been secured. Really this is what the Department of Justice is interested in, because if it turns out the documents were classified before she got them then she may be facing criminal charges. It's all kind of complicated though because they may not have been classified yet when she got them and she may not have been notified of them being classified after the fact, so there's the question of whether she should have been able to anticipate whether the documents would have been classified or not and whether she can be held liable for publishing documents which she knew *would* be classified but haven't been rated as classified *yet*

Basically it's a clusterfuck of bad document management but is unlikely to result in criminal charges, whether because there was no crime committed or because it would be so difficult to prove, but might impact her as a presidential candidate if she gets the nomination for the Democrats regardless because it's a pretty easy bit of mud to sling

3
1
MJI
Silver badge

Re: Do not understand the issue

OK now I see

Not really that big an issue as she was only doing what other people have done before.

I suppose being at a home, it is a lot safer from hackers!

1
9

Re: Do not understand the issue

You still don't see. Others have had private servers for private emails, she had one for government business and sensitive information. People have got 20 years for far less.

6
0
Silver badge

@Alister Re: Do not understand the issue

You forgot 4.

4) Corruption. She was mixing Clinton Foundation business with State Department business which she told Obama she would not have any part in the Foundation. Do you remember US Aid to Haiti?

Bill Clinton was put in charge of managing the aid money. Under his management, those who received lucrative contracts somehow all were donors to the Clinton Foundation. A charity where less than 10% of monies raised actually went to anything which might resemble aid or a charitable act. (That is if your name is not Clinton.)

There's more. Even if you take what 'Clinton Cash' uncovers with a grain of salt, there is so much more that could be in the deleted emails that the Feds recovered.

5
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Do not understand the issue

Exactly Alister, you have it correctly. General Petraeus was caught in a very similar fashion because of the cavalier attitude he had regarding the handling of a few secret documents he kept in his locked bed stand. They tossed him out of the service for that and having an affair with Paula Broadwell. (If they threw everyone who had an affair in Washington DC it would be an empty city)

Shrillery is at least as guilty as he was and she did far, far worse than Petraeus or even Nixon did.

We will see obstruction of justice charges against her and/or everyone who touched the keyboards of the subject computers. These emails were "doctored" by someone at the State Department when they removed the "Classified" or "Top Secret" headers from the documents! They broke the law by modifying the email headers, by sending these emails to an illegal private server and by receiving secret documents on a private unsecured device. Then, Hillary tried to cover it up be deleting emails both public and private. All in an effort to leave no traceability for her illegal actions and avoid the "Freedom of Information" act.

Nixon only erased 18 minutes of tape by comparison.

4
4
MJI
Silver badge

Re: Do not understand the issue

But no deaths, no thefts, no injuries, it is a lot more trivial than say a nutter shooting up a school.

0
3
MJI
Silver badge

Re: IMG Do not understand the issue

OK I know nothing about Clinton Foundation

Nothing about US aid to Haiti

This is why I was asking what the issue was, they seemed to be going a bit postal over an email server.

This is the equivalent of a US person asking about the EU referendum.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: Do not understand the issue

@Alister

1/ By setting up and using a private email server, she effectively bypasses the Freedom Of Information Act (just the same as in Britain) because any requests for emails will only show those sent through the official mail system. She also bypassed the Federal Information Security Management Act and the federal and State Department regulations and instructions derived from that.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Do not understand the issue

@SolidSquid

1. No other Secretary of State operated, or used, a private email server.

2. The server was insecure: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/14/hillarys_sysadmin_next_to_the_pillory/

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Do not understand the issue

@ tom dial

She also bypassed the Federal Information Security Management Act and the federal and State Department regulations and instructions derived from that.

Yes, that's what my 2/ said.

0
0

@Alister

Those are the issues on which the media have focused.

As I've outlined above there are other laws that were also necessarily broken as a result, name the Hatch Act which prohibits using government accounts for electioneering and the Official Records Act. The ORA is similar too slightly different than FOIA. FOIA requires the government to release records to the public in certain circumstances. ORA requires you to send copies of all official records to the National Archives and defined what constitutes a record. So ORA is broader than FOIA.

0
1
Silver badge

Immunity

Implies that the person is going to self incriminate during any hearing/trial.

Sadly, it doesn't imply that the person is going to tell the truth

There must be a degree of duress here - we've go you on this charge but if you smear others we won't charge you.

Not unknown in "overheard in jail" testimony in various criminal cases.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Immunity

If you are not truthful in your testimony, you lose immunity and your statements can and will be used against you.

He's toast and he knew it. He also knew he wasn't in her inner circle and was going to be roadkill.

4
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Immunity

The US prosecution system is entirely based on duress.

3
1

Re: Immunity

It doesn't imply he's going to self-incriminate. He's going up against a woman who like her husband, doesn't know what the meaning of the word 'is' is and who has demonstrated a propensity to lie unless only the truth will do. Immunity means they don't get to dismiss the charges on account of perjury and then sue him for it if he changes a single word in his testimony between when the FBI makes notes and when he's on the witness stand.

You're worried about the wrong duress. Right now he's looking to the FBI to protect him so he doesn't get Vince Fostered.

0
1

so what

I used to run my own mail server at home to maintain a mailing list of 120 people. It's so much faster and the list is easier to keep up to date. It's not a stretch to think that a politician who sends out regular mailings would do the same. Just don't get the big deal.

1
10
Silver badge

Re: so what

You ran your own server, but probably were not using it to conduct your employer's business without consent. Some would think that a very different use case.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Anybody who thinks Hillary is going to face justice for her criminal activities is sadly deluded.

It's a foregone conclusion that she is going to be the next USA president.

1
4
Anonymous Coward

Not Likely!

Hillary has way too much baggage and this email server scandal is only the tip of the iceberg.

Clinton Foundation - Bribery and Extortion, possibly Larceny for "pay to play" agreements where people/companies who wanted State Department help, had to pay big bucks to Bill Clinton to speak at an event for them before Hillary would agree to help them with some ruling.

Email Scandal - Obstruction of Justice, Falsifying documents, directing others to break the law, Perjury (Under oath in a congressional hearing she lied multiple times).

Possible RICO actions because there was a conspiracy between Hillary and Huma Abedin and it took place across international borders.

Criminal Negligence & Manslaughter - What happened in Benghazi isn't a joke and 4 people died when she COULD have told CENTCOM to send them help. Instead, she did nothing and people died.

She will be in court BEFORE Election Day. One can only hope that the corrupt hag gets perp walked in handcuffs as well.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Let it go

Let it go

Hello,

Should she have had her own e-mail server, NO. All the key players knew she had it and definitely anyone who e-mailed her knew it was not dot.gov account. This only became an issue after she started running for president.

Let it go.

Joe

0
4
Silver badge

Re: Let it go

Won't happen. There's too many politicos and their constituents who won't compromise or negotiate much less see any rational points from the other side. Both parties are to blame for the current messes, but everyone points fingers and no one says "let's sit down and sort this out". We've gone all shouty closed our minds.

This country needs it's elected officials AND the constituents (voters) to actually be rational on everything and not just blindly follow the party line.

1
2
Silver badge

Re: Let it go

That's like condoning bank robberies because the banks are insured so depositors are ok.

1
0

The other shoe

Hillary needed a private email server to obfuscate quid pro quo for State Department access and approval. There are many articles about irregularities at the Clinton Foundation which was the clearing house or "fence" to hide payments for Hillary's services at the State Department. A good example of the outcome of Hillary's work is the Uranium One fiasco where the Clinton's were paid off through the Clinton Foundation so that all of the uranium mines in the US and Canada could be bundled up and sold to a Russian concern tied with Putin. Hillary was head of the State Department when it gave approval for the sale of uranium as a strategic resource.

3
0
Silver badge

@ E Coli Re: The other shoe

Yup.

Only none of this has been proven in the released information.

We know some from official documents and the allegations in 'Clinton Cash' as well as some of the Foundation's required filings.

There's the 30K or so emails that the FBI may have recovered from the server.

That could be used to show the corruption and the smart money is that the Feds found something.

Clinton is putting on the brave face and is lying to herself and others because she thinks the Fix is in

1
0
Holmes

Pardon?

What are the odds that as one of his last acts in office, Obama will hand Mrs Clinton a presidential pardon?

0
0

Re: Pardon?

"What are the odds that as one of his last acts in office, Obama will hand Mrs Clinton a presidential pardon?"

Too hot a potato for the Dems.

The way this ball is usually danced in the inner loop, the Rep that takes office will graciously make a "mending fences, building bridges" speech, and the whole thing will blow over... until the next election.

0
0

Re: Pardon?

50-50

$Hrillary and BJ have the goods on The Big 0. If he doesn't pardon them and it looks like they're headed to jail, they turn state's evidence on him. But that confirms the value of the information and they can use it again in the future. OTOH if he can do it and make those charges look like sour grapes, nothing happens to him.

Smart money has always been on this dies in the investigative stages. Trump has upset that calculation. Also at this point the FBI investigation has achieved a life of its own.

But don't make the mistake of thinking they're best buds. Both sides loathe each other and only make nice in public.

0
1

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018