Michael Ramirez
Posted on 03/07/2015 7:43:38 PM PST by smoothsailing
MAR 16, 2015, VOL. 20, NO. 26
BY MARK HEMINGWAY
Upon learning that Hillary Clinton used a private email account to conduct all official business during her tenure as secretary of state, CNN’s Dan Merica remarked, “GOP aides on the Benghazi committee have long said they were going to find something others hadn’t. And they did.” The New York Times broke the news, though its own report reveals the story was essentially gift-wrapped: “The existence of Mrs. Clinton’s personal email account was discovered by a House committee investigating the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi.”
Michael Ramirez
Clinton’s suspicious email habits are in direct violation of Obama administration directives and perhaps a number of federal laws. News organizations and watchdog groups are contemplating suing the State Department for dodging their Freedom of Information Act requests. Naturally, there’s plenty of chatter about how this affects Clinton’s presidential ambitions. But the email scandal also can and should breathe new life into the Benghazi investigation.
The media have tried to say from the start that Republican partisanship has driven questions about the Obama administration’s conduct surrounding the September 11, 2012, attack in Libya that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Their attempts to dismiss Benghazi as a scandal didn’t stop even when the House Intelligence Committee released its report last November confirming that the murders were part of a planned terror attack, exploding the myth perpetuated by the administration and an influential New York Times report that found “no evidence that al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault.”
The media downplayed the key revelation—which suggests there was a political coverup—and spun the report as “debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies,” in the words of the Associated Press. (The AP, ironically, is now complaining “the State Department has failed to turn over government documents covering Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state” for years.)
There are certainly questions to be raised about the competence and tenor of the GOP-led investigations, but the claim that it’s clear there was nothing for Republicans to investigate is now impossible to make. With investigators unable to examine Clinton’s emails, any Benghazi inquiry to date is obviously incomplete.
In this regard, there’s another shocking disclosure in the New York Times report: “It was only two months ago, in response to a new State Department effort to comply with federal record-keeping practices, that Mrs. Clinton’s advisers reviewed tens of thousands of pages of her personal emails and decided which ones to turn over to the State Department.”
In other words, Clinton was allowed to decide which emails she would turn over. Congressional investigators were given, last month, copies of just 300 of the 50,000 emails she provided to State. It seems very unlikely any of those emails happens to provide evidence of incriminating behavior—assuming any incriminating emails still exist.
Given Hillary Clinton’s legal troubles in the 1990s Whitewater investigation over record-keeping for her work at the Rose Law Firm, it’s utterly implausible she was unaware she might be doing something wrong. ABC News footage from 2000 has her on camera saying, “As much as I’ve been investigated and all of that . . . why would I ever want to do email?” We’ve subsequently learned that Clinton’s email account was hosted on a server in her house, set up a few weeks before she was sworn in as secretary of state.
That the State Department was only recently given any of her emails casts even more doubt on the department’s internal investigation into Benghazi. In her recent book Hard Choices, Clinton makes the conclusions of the State Department’s Accountability Review Board (ARB) central to her defense of how she handled events. However, it’s not clear the ARB had access to her emails.
As The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes has reported in detail, the ARB was laughable in terms of transparency and accountability. Clinton associates were given advance copies of the findings. Interviews conducted were not recorded in any fashion. In at least one case, the language of the report was softened at the behest of Clinton advisers. Hillary and her key aides were never interviewed.
The need for a thorough accounting of the events of September 11, 2012, is greater than ever. Four Americans are dead. Two and a half years and several stonewalled investigations later, we still don’t know basic facts that would help explain how it happened. We can, however, say for certain that Hillary Clinton has deliberately and brazenly erected roadblocks that have so far prevented us from learning the truth.
PLEa bargain will not be an option but selection of a jury would be impossible No one in this country without an opinion
I suppose she could have housed this server in Bill's bedroom since he was never in Chapaqua and she may have been sharing hers with Huma.
It worked in Ferguson.
DK
Ummm...we did win by a landslide. The Congress is ours. Pelosi and Reid are still running the table... hadn’t you noticed.
A landslide won’t stop the party (there’s only one apparently) from doing what they want.
Sorry to be a pessimist.
K.
<><> the REAL crimes are what Bill was doing w/ the info
<><> and what the Clintons did w/ the foreign money that landed in the foundation bank account.
Hers is a life of damnable dishonesty at least from the Watergate Committee forward to this day. She has no redeeming qualities whatsoever
I contend she was drunk during Benghazi events as it was Friday happy hour there in DC.
She is reptilian and repugnant.
“GOP aides on the Benghazi committee have long said they were going to find something others hadn’t. And they did.”
Bully for the GOP, it sure do make a difference!
We’re the contributions to the foundation just their share of a part of money laundering?
You are correct Bill had/has time on his hand. And I’ll wager the farm he knows her access codes
Schneiderman’s Charities Bureau asked Epstein lawyer Darren Indyke to explain why Epstein’s foundation, which is incorporated in the US Virgin Islands, should be considered exempt from New York law. EXCERPT
http://pagesix.com/2015/03/06/ny-attorney-generals-office-eyes-epstein-foundation/?_ga=1.216503775.853495231.1367328433
---------------------------------------------------
The financial hanky panky that can be conducted between two foundations is enormous----cited by the IRS as the locus classicus for money laundering an tax evasion.
=================================================
The Buckraking Clintons sucking up foreign donations is morally reprehensible----but the real problem is what exactly they are doing with the foreign monies once its in their Foundation's tax-exempt coffers. It's becoming clearer why Bill Clinton used a shocking 21 phone nos and email addresses----because L/E knows multiple phone no's and emails is an indication of possible money-laundering and tax evasion.
REFERENCE: Court documents in Clinton pal, Jeffrey Epstein's underage sex investigation, show that Epstein had 21 private e-mail addresses and phone numbers listed for Clinton and Clinton factotum, Doug Band.
Epstein kept Bill Clinton on speed dial as reports surfaced about Clinton attending sex parties at Epstein's "Orgy Island." Lawyers perusing documents stumbled upon e-mail addresses and 21 phone numbers for the fun-loving ex-president and his personal aide, Doug Band, stashed away in Jeffrey Epstein’s electronic directory, according to court documents.
================================================
REMINDER An earlier two-year federal investigation revealed an elaborate web to carry out multiple frauds. The frauds used a sophisticated system of multiple telephone voice-mail accounts and post office boxes to avoid detection.
The only reason to set up her accounts was pre-knowledge that she intended to become involved in illegal and immoral schemes.
Sorry, but I'm not seeing any results from 2014 and I refuse to kid myself.
The lawlessness and Amnesty support from the GOP to Obama is still alive and kicking.
This article is right and you should read it.
To be Blunt, my post was referring to the Presidency.
——That domain name has been traced to a private Internet server ——
Does that mean there was no internet service provider? That is, she owned the domain and paid a monthly fee to the ISP that provided an account with multiple e mail addresses?
Does that mean there was a computer running Apache or what ever that makes the internet connection and the computer was connected directly to the internet, say by a T 1 line?
You and I are preaching to the choir. My point was that I’m disappointed that we worked so hard to get conservatives elected last cycle, and they won. Now where are they? I’m looking for backbones and not seeing much when it comes to stopping the commies.
We have Congress, and they won’t do anything to stop the pretender and his mistress, Valerie J. The Persian Princess.
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.