About Hillary's deleted emails -- lies and more lies

By Paul Ackerman | Oct 06, 2016

The phrase, “You just could not make this stuff up, no one would believe it possible...” comes to mind while reading through the FBI’s recent Hillary Clinton email scandal document dump of Friday, Sept. 23.

Despite the  blocks of redacted text —  presumably to  protect “secret” stuff that, because Hillary’s server was unsecure, has almost certainly been digested long ago by hostile intelligence agencies -- one learns a lot about how vigorous the FBI was in its investigation of those responsible for establishing and maintaining the secret email system.

Recalling the Watergate scandal of my youth, we waited with bated breath for each edition of the Washington Post to see what either Jack Anderson or Woodward and Bernstein would reveal from their inside sources. In those days, journalists did their job to serve the public, mostly. Also, there were people in government unwilling to subordinate their integrity to their political ideology, and who believed in the separation of powers within government.

That seems naïve, as today so much of the media withholds and spins what they report to prevent the people from knowing how corrupt and dishonest this administration has been.

To wit, according to a report of an interview with CBS News correspondent Bill Plante posted on FactCheck.org March 10, 2015, the president made the following statement March 7, 2015.

“Plante, March 7: Mr. President, when did you first learn that Hillary Clinton used an email system outside the U.S. government for official business while she was secretary of state?

Obama: The same time everybody else learned it through news reports.”

A few days later his press secretary tortuously walked this back sideways, saying essentially, well of course they traded emails, and he knew her email address, as if this were nothing more than trading comments on the weather.

Well, no, it turns out this was quite a bit more of a conflict of security interests than the FBI was able to handle.

As reported by Politico Sept. 24: ”President Barack Obama used a pseudonym in email communications with Hillary Clinton and others, according to FBI records made public Friday.

"The disclosure came as the FBI released its second batch of documents from its investigation into Clinton’s private email server during her tenure as secretary of state. ...

"In an April 5, 2016, interview with the FBI, Abedin was shown an email exchange between Clinton and Obama, but the longtime Clinton aide did not recognize the name of the sender.

"Once informed that the sender's name is believed to be a pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed: 'How is this not classified?' the report says. "Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president's use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email."

Obviously President Obama was communicating with Hillary Clinton about government business, and Huma [Abedin] would have clearly known that this system was unauthorized and unsecure. It does not seem anyone is suggesting that President Obama is less tech-savvy than Huma, but that is the sort of brick wall that the FBI must have run into.

Consider this fanciful discussion in FBI headquarters about all this.

"Yeah … well … We can’t go after Hillary or her staff (to keep it all quiet, we gave most of them immunity from prosecution anyway), because the president was also using her email address, and apparently had his own private one, too. That is a can of worms we do not want to open.

"They’re telling us we need to make this go away before the election.

"Stall on releasing anything. Get State to do the same. Oh, we better get Hillary’s former chief of staff at State, Cheryl Mills, you know -- the one who is now also Hillary’s “attorney” -- into the loop too — bring her in for an interview, and give her criminal immunity. Cover her laptop too — so those SOB’s that keep FOIA’ing everything cannot get hold of those documents, either."

The problem with the above scenario? It is what the facts suggest happened and puts the FBI at risk of entirely losing its credibility as an independent investigatory agency, and  of becoming just another politicized bureaucracy to those of us who care about the truth and equal justice.

Where is a present-day Mark Felt when you really need one? Mark Felt was the anonymous source, “Deep Throat,” for Woodward and Bernstein’s Watergate-era columns.Felt was the number-two man in the FBI at the time.

As William McGurn said in an opinion piece Sept. 27 in the Wall Street Journal, Cheryl Mills was,..”also a witness, as well as a potential target, in the same FBI investigation into her boss’s emails. The laptop the bureau wanted was one Ms. Mills used in 2014 to sort Clinton emails before deciding which would be turned over to State.”

A side note here; Mills should not have  been allowed to review these emails, they were required to be reviewed by State Department authorities and it was not Mills’ or Clinton’s choice as to which were to be turned over to State. That  decision should rest with the classifying authority, not private attorneys or former State employees.

That Cheryl Mills was granted  criminal immunity and subsequently also allowed to be present, as Hillary Clinton’s attorney (along with others), at her FBI interview , even though she was involved in the email server setup and use, is something that screams conflict of interest or worse.

Nevertheless, FBI Director James Comey has determined ,"there’s nothing to see here folks, move along ,we got an election coming up … we couldn’t find anything worth prosecuting."

Stay tuned, you just can’t make this stuff up.

Comments (6)
Posted by: Ronald Horvath | Oct 10, 2016 12:46

"As an editor I've launched investigations into her business dealings, her fundraising, her foundation, and her marriage.  As a reporter my stories stretch back to White water.  I'm not a favorite in Hillaryland.  That makes what want to say next surprising.  Hillary Clinton is fundamentally honest and trustworthy."  -Jill Abramson

Posted by: Seth Hall | Oct 10, 2016 10:02

The really amazing thing about this piece is that Ackerman doesn't seem to be aware that HRC's email server was actually located in a basement in Benghazi, and was run by Muammar Gadaffi's former head of IT!

As Ackerman himself says "Stay tuned, you just can’t make this stuff up", and then he proceeds to do just that. Maybe there's a job waiting for Ackerman as Trump's  White House Communications Director.:-)

Posted by: James M Thomas | Oct 10, 2016 09:56

Deplorably, Mr. Ackerman is yet another citizen living in an alternate reality.

The irony, to me as I understand it, is that although Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell both used private email to do state business and Powell's email was hacked, there is no evidence whatsoever that HRC's private email was hacked.  Apparently she had a more secure system than her predecessors and most of the government.

Posted by: Harold Bryson Mosher | Oct 10, 2016 05:55

You're right, Jan, Rove's not running for president.  Is there anything you can find wrong with Donald Trump or is he just what we need to "make America great again?"  Get a life?  I'm not the one beating a dead horse.

Posted by: JUNE DOLCATER | Oct 09, 2016 11:42

Is Rove running for President?  Get a life!

Jan Dolcater

Posted by: Harold Bryson Mosher | Oct 09, 2016 05:47

...nothing about Karl Rove's 22 million deleted e-mails?

If you wish to comment, please login.