Fired State Department IG Sent Confidential Info to His Personal Email Accounts

The State Department inspector general whose recent dismissal ignited a political firestorm sent copies detailing a sensitive investigation to his personal email account, according to a probe into his conduct run by the Defense Department's inspector general.

The inquiry report, dated March 17, confirms that fired State Department inspector general Steve Linick was the subject of a broad investigation related to the leaks of politically charged materials to journalists, specifically a draft evaluation report into Brian Hook, the State Department’s top Iran official. The report, which was provided to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, concluded that while Linick was permitted to send information to his personal email account to facilitate access while traveling, he was the only official in that office to have done so. The disclosure is likely to raise new questions about Linick’s suspected role in leaking sensitive information to the press.

Linick’s firing generated harsh criticism from Democrats and many in the media, with opponents of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo alleging the former IG was canned for his efforts to investigate allegations of impropriety related to Pompeo and his staff. The Trump administration, however, has maintained that Linick’s firing was justified.

Details of the highly sensitive investigation into Hook—involving unsubstantiated allegations that Hook fired officials he saw as insufficiently hawkish on Iran—were leaked to the media without authorization, according to the DOD investigation.

The DOD investigation into Linick found that between March 2019 and September 2019 Linick sent 23 emails containing confidential work products from inside the State Department email system to his personal Gmail account. Eight of the emails Linick sent to himself, which were forwarded over a six-day period, contained copies of the incomplete probe into Hook. Linick was the only State Department employee from the IG’s office to email drafts of the evaluation

2015----THE WAYBACK MACHINE---- Hillary Clinton, coin-operated policymaker
Washington Examiner ^ | 2/26/2015 | Timothy P. Carner / FR Posted by HomerBohn

The latest tales of State Department ethics violations, foreign money, and special access would be surprising if they were about anyone but Hillary Clinton. Throughout her political career Clinton has always blended cash and policy. She’s not merely corporatist by disposition, like, say Tim Geithner or Lindsey Graham. She’s not simply sloppy on ethics, like Bob McDonnell or John Kitzhaber. Hillary is blatantly transactional in her fundraising and policymaking. And she wants to be president.

Here’s the background on the latest Clinton story: During her tenure as Secretary of State, Clinton openly had an unsavory relatnotifying ethics officers at the State Department. The Algerian government could have given $500,000 to Haiti relief efforts through more direct channels. Funneling through the Clinton Foundation looks like an effort to gain access. And it looks like it worked. The Post reported: ionship with foreign money. Her family’s Clinton Foundation, now named the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, raised hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign governments while she led our diplomatic efforts and steered our foreign policy. The Obama White House allowed this, on condition that these donations were recurring donations — more or less annual gifts that began while she was a Senator.

But even those weak constraints were too much for the Clintons, Rosalind Helderman and Tom Hamburger reported in the Washington Post. Specifically, the Clinton Foundation took $500,000 from Algeria’s government in 2010.

“[T]here was an increase in 2010 in State Department meetings held with lobbyists representing the country — with 12 visits to department officials that year, including some visits with top political appointees. In the years before and after, only a handful of State Department visits were recorded by Algeria lobbyists.” Innocent explanations are possible here. But when Hillary Clinton is involved, less innocent explanations are more likely true. Her history is full of donations coinciding with access or favorable policies.

There was her relationship with Corning Inc. in Upstate New York. “The Clinton-Corning partnership is very rewarding for both of us,” Corning CFO James Flaws said when she was in the Senate. Flaws was correct. Through her Senate career,

Hillary brought in $240,000 in donations from Corning employees, including Flaws and the company’s Washington lobbyists. Corning’s political action committee gave $33,000 to Hillary and her leadership PAC.

Hillary in return showered Corning with earmarks, mandates, and regulations that forced or paid businesses to use Corning products, such as specialty tailpipe filters and catalysts. The New York Times covered this dynamic in a 2006 article headlined “Company Finds Clinton Useful, and Vice Versa.” The Times reporters wrote: “In April 2003, a month after Corning's political action committee gave $10,000 to her re-election campaign, Mrs. Clinton announced legislation that would provide hundreds of millions in federal aid to reduce diesel pollution, using, among other things, technology pioneered by Corning.”

Most conspicuously, Corning executives switched from backing her Republican opponent Rick Lazio in October 2000 to flooding her campaign with donations. A few weeks later, her husband’s administration issued an emissions rule that a local reporter called “a big Christmas present [dropped] in the lap of Corning Inc.”

Clinton’s contribution-policy overlap applied in the drug industry, too. In 2006, Barr Laboratories CEO Bruce Downey made his first contribution to Clinton’s reelection. Within a month, Hillary announced she would block a George W. Bush Food and Drug Administration nominee until the agency made Barr’s “Plan B” morning-after contraceptive available over the counter. In those same days, she introduced legislation to subsidize Plan B. In 2008, Barr Executive Vice President Frederick J. Killion donated $1,000 to her campaign one day after Clinton introduced another bill to prop up Plan B. In all corners of the economy, Clinton has these symbiotic relationships. The Washington Post reported in 2014 that Clinton has "functioned as a powerful ally for Boeing’s business interests at home and abroad," while Boeing "invested resources in causes beneficial to Clinton’s public and political image."

Hillary and her husband have been collecting six-figure checks for speeches to corporations and foreign governments. With most politicians, you could take their word that the money paid for the speech and nothing else. But with Hillary Clinton, whenever anyone pays up, you have to wonder what policy they're seeking in return. Johnny Chung, a Taiwan-born businessman donated $366,000 to Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election, and in return got to visit the White House more than 40 times. He described aptly how things work with the Clintons: "The White House is like a subway: You have to put in coins to open the gates."

===========================================

Protesters Gathered at Clinton Foundation to Complain of 'Missing State Dept US foreign aid Money' for Haiti Recovery

Protesters gathered outside the Clinton Foundation in Harlem to complain about "missing money" from the US State Dept's recovery effort for the 2010 Haitian earthquake: "New Yorkers with roots in Haiti protested, saying the picture [of the Haiti recovery] isn't so rosy," said the NY1-TV anchor. "People raised their voices to call attention to the missing money.

They protested outside the offices of the Clinton Foundation, which helped lead the reconstruction fund."

The protesters claimed that the US State Dept's $10 billion meant to help rebuild Haiti did little to help the country after the devastating 2010 quake. And that much of the money went to non-Haitian companies. Said one protester, “The Haitian people are still living in very difficult conditions, still living under tents, while Bill Clinton and his cronies--they waste this money." As secretary of state under the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton devoted much of her time in 2010 to the Haiti recovery.

2015 THE WAYBACK MACHINE

The Hillary-era State Dept may also be facing charges of misleading a court WRT the court's request for documents...and tampering w/ evidence. There have been reports of her State Dept deputies using her server......including Huma Abedin.... part of a select group with knowledge of the private clintonemail.com address....... Read on.

===================================================

Red Statements ^ | March 19, 2015 | BY Steven Ahle / FR posted (hat tip to QT3.14)

Sen Chuck Grassley has written two letters to the State Dept. concerning a special arrangement for Huma Abedin, Hillary’s closest adviser. At the same time Abedin worked for the State Dept, she also worked for a company called Teneo. For those of you who don’t know it, Teneo bills itself as an expert in helping your company get government contracts. Can you see the obvious conflict of interest here? The Senate is trying to find out if Teneo’s clients received government grants and if they did, was Abedin and or Hillary involved? Abedin also had a private email account that ran off Hillary’s server.

Here are the highlights of that letter: “I am writing to follow up on inquiries I have been making since June 13, 2013 and August 15, 2013 regarding the State Department’s use of Special Government Employee (SGE) designations, and in particular, what steps the Department took to ensure that Ms. Huma Abedin’s outside employment with a political intelligence and corporate advisory firm did not conflict with her simultaneous employment at the State Department. I thank the Department for its responses to my inquiries made June 13, 2013 and August 15, 2013. However, to date, the Department’s answers have been largely unresponsive.”

By way of example, I have still not received the records relating to communications between the State Department and Ms. Abedin’s other employer, Teneo. Nor has the Department provided records of communications between the State Department and any clients or entities represented by Teneo. The Department has also failed to provide any email communications between Ms. Abedin and Teneo or Teneo’s clients.

The State Department’s November 14, 2014 response to my inquiries, stated, “Based on an internal review, the Department has never had any contracts with Teneo.” But that is not responsive to my request, and it does not mean that communications between full-time Department employees, or SGEs, and Teneo, or clients of Teneo, do not exist.

Here is a list of 20 pieces of evidence Grassley is asking for:

1. What steps has the State Department taken to comply with my June 13, 2013 request?

2. Please provide the names of all current or former State Department employees within the Secretary’s office who used, or continue to use, private e-mail addresses to conduct State Department business.

3. Please provide the names of all current or former State Department employees who used, or continue to use, private e- mail addresses on Secretary Clinton’s non-government email server.

4. How will the State Department ensure that all of the individuals referenced in the answers to questions 2 and 3 above provide all their contacts with Teneo or with clients of Teneo? Please provide the detailed steps that the State Department will take to ensure compliance.

5. Ms. Abedin’s simultaneous employment with Teneo, a private company, and the State Department raises serious ethics and conflicts concerns. Did Ms. Abedin conduct Teneo business through her non-government e-mail account reportedly on Secretary Clinton’s personal server?

6. The State Department’s July 17, 2013 response states that Ms. Abedin required a security clearance for her work. Can the Department verify that she did not send or receive any classified information via the non-government e-mail account she reportedly used on Secretary Clinton’s personal server? If so, please explain how.

7. In Ms. Abedin’s July 5, 2013 letter she stated that she was specifically tasked with supervising the “Secretary’s schedule and travel.” Was planning Secretary Clinton’s travel performed on a non-government email account?

8. Did Secretary Clinton prepare an inventory of unclassified papers and nonrecord materials to the State Department prior to departure? Did Ms. Abedin do the same?

9. Did Secretary Clinton prepare an inventory of classified papers and materials to the State Department prior to departure? Did Ms. Abedin do the same?

10. Did Secretary Clinton request a review of any materials proposed for removal? Did Ms. Abedin do the same?

11. Did a State Department official review the entirety of Secretary Clinton’s email server prior to Secretary Clinton deleting any emails?

12. Did Ms. Abedin delete any work-related emails from Secretary Clinton’s server?

13. Did a State Department official notify Secretary Clinton regarding her obligations to preserve written and typed material? Was such a notice provided to Ms. Abedin?

14. Were the unclassified documents authorized to be removed from Secretary Clinton’s personal server by the State Department? If so, please provide the authorizing document and name of authorizing official(s).

15. State Department spokesperson Jennifer Psaki was recently asked whether Secretary Clinton signed a separation statement acknowledging proper surrender of classified and unclassified material to State Department officials as required by the State Department Records Management manual to which she stated, “We are fairly certain that she didn’t [sign the form] or we would have record of it,” and Ms. Psaki also noted that recent secretaries of state have not signed the form either. Can you confirm that Secretary Clinton, and previous secretaries of state, did not sign a separation statement? If so, why have they not been required to do so? Did Ms. Abedin sign such a statement? If so, please provide a copy. If not, why was she not required to do so?

16. Please provide records of all communications by State Department SGEs who have used private e-mail addresses from 2005 to the present.

17. Did the Department consider any other candidates besides Ms. Abedin for the expert position requiring expert knowledge on policy, administrative, and other matters? If so, please provide the supporting documentation. If not, why not?

18. Please provide any other instances in which a State Department employee converted from a regular, full-time position to an SGE, and subsequently became employed by a private company.

19. Please provide the work papers, background documents, and/or emails that concluded that Ms. Abedin’s employment as an SGE did not present any ethical concerns or conflicts of interest with her multiple private sector jobs.

20. Was Ms. Abedin reminded before her departure from government employment about her obligations in preserving her email communications and records? If so, please identify the persons who did so and the supporting documentation.

(Excerpt) Read more at redstatements.co ...http://redstatements.co/now-huma-abedin-is-being-scrutinized-for-possible-corruption/

=======================================

Huma Abedin, reportedly had private email addresses on the Clintons' private email server system.

(BTW, did Huma sign separation forms when she left the State Department, certifying, under penalty, that she had no classified into in her possession when she left state?)

Did the DOJ's Computer Forensics Division AND the FBI's Electronic Fraud Unit
look into Hillary's State Dept server? If not, why not?

======================================

REFERENCE Computer Crime, E-Crime, Hi-Tech Crime or Electronic Crime is a crime in which a computer plays an essential part. Computer crime is a felony violation of section 1030 of the United States Code. Computer crime also violates copyright laws and property rights in some cases.

This type of crime is the illegal exploitation of computer technologies, usually to support crimes such as fraud, identity theft, sharing of information, and embezzlement. A link to the U.S. Department of Justice's website about e-crime and the DOJ's computer forensics activities is at their web site.

Examples of computer crime are:

<><> * Fraud achieved by the manipulation of computer records.

<><>* Spamming wherever outlawed completely or where regulations controlling it are violated.

<><> * Deliberate circumvention of computer security systems.

<><>>* Unauthorised access to or modification of programs (see software cracking and hacking).

<><>* Intellectual property theft, including software piracy.

<><* Industrial espionage by means of access to or theft of computer materials.

<><>* Identity theft where this is accomplished by use of fraudulent computer transactions.

<><>>* Writing or spreading computer viruses or worms. <>* "Salami slicing" is the practice of stealing money repeatedly in extremely small quantities

<><>* Denial-of-service attack, where company websites are flooded with service requests and their website is overloaded and either slowed or crashes completely

<><>* Making and digitally distributing child pornography

==================================================

•United States Code, Title 17 - Copyrights,January 1, 1998,

1.Chapter 1 - Subject Matter And Scope Of Copyright

2.Chapter 2 - Copyright Ownership And Transfer

3.Chapter 3 - Duration Of Copyright

4.Chapter 4 - Copyright Notice, Deposit, And Registration

5.Chapter 5 - Copyright Infringement And Remedies

6.Chapter 6 - Manufacturing Requirements And Importation

7.Chapter 7 - Copyright Office

8.Chapter 8 - Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels

9.Chapter 9 - Protection Of Semiconductor Chip Products

10.Chapter 10 - Digital Audio Recording Devices And Media

11.Chapter 11 - Sound Recordings And Music Videos

==============================================

•United States Code, Title 18 - Crimes And Criminal Procedure (Part I - Crimes),January 1, 1998, Chapter 25 - Counterfeiting And Forgery

•Alabama Computer Crime Act, Computer Crime Statutes, May 1, 1995, Chapter 25 - Counterfeiting And Forgery

•Federal Guidelines For Searching And Seizing Computers

•Communications Privacy Act Of 1986, Chapter 119. Wire And Electronic Communications Interception And Interception Of Oral Communications

•Electronic Communications Privacy Act Of 1986, Chapter 121--Stored Wire And Electronic Communications And Transactional Records Access

•Research Needs For Computer Crime

•Privacy Protection Act Of 1980, Chapter 21a - Privacy Protection Subchapter I--First Amendment Privacy Protection

•Preparation Of Search Warrants For Computer-Related Evidence

•Excerpts From Computer Search Warrants

•Code Of Virginia, Title 18.2, Chap. 5 Crimes Against Property, Article 7.1. Computer Crimes

•2004 CSI/FBI Computer Crime And Security Survey

•2005 CSI/FBI Computer Crime And Security Survey

Computer Crime Research Center
http://www.crime-research.org/news/26.11.2005/1661/

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.