New Name Surfaces In Clinton's Email Scandal

[think]

New Name Surfaces In Clinton's Email Scandal

By Steve Morgan - MAR 5, 2016 @ 09:13 AM

A new name has surfaced in connection to Hillary Clinton’s private email server – Ronald S. Posner, Chairman and CEO at eChinaCash.

Michael Scheidell was previously Founder at SECNAP from December 2001 to August 2012. The SECNAP CloudJacket security device was purchased and installed by Hillary Clinton’s technology consultants in late 2013 — coincidentally right after Scheidell left the company he started up and ran for eleven years.

SECNAP named Victor Nappe to its advisory board in 2010. Nappe succeeded Schiedell as CEO and remains in that position today. Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee wrote a letter to Victor Nappe, requesting documents relating to the company’s work on Mrs. Clinton’s server and the nature of the cyberintrusions detected, according to an October 2015 article in The Wall Street Journal. Johnson’s committee was investigating Mrs. Clinton’s email arrangement.

The Wall Street Journal article stated that a February 2014 email from SECNAP reported that malicious software based in China “was found running an attack against” Mrs. Clinton’s server.

~Snip~

Did Posner ask Norton for an introduction to Clinton? Did Clinton know that Posner was on the board at SECNAP – and CEO at eChinaCash – when she did business with them? What role, if any, did Posner have in connection with Clinton’s private email server? Did Posner provide anyone in China with access to SECNAP’s technology – which could have led to the cyber attacks on Clinton’s server? Did Posner or anyone else in China have access to some or all of Hillary Clinton’s emails?..

Full article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevemorgan/2016/03/05/new-name-surfaces-in-clintons-email-scandal/#14ae2d391116

[grasswire]

1. holy hell

No wonder she wants Bernie to hurry up and concede.

[panader0]

2. Wow--this sentence sticks out:

"The Wall Street Journal article stated that a February 2014 email from SECNAP reported
that malicious software based in China "was found running an attack against" Mrs. Clinton's server."

Think about that for a minute. How much info did China pull off her server?
This crap won't go away, it'll just get worse.

[WhiteTara]

3. I thought that no one got in. nt

[panader0]

7. I'm sure she told them to "cut it out".

[tomm2thumbs]

30. but she used Google Translate to do it

just so they would get the point

[Motown_Johnny]

79. Maybe she used a finger wagging gif.

[Art_from_Ark]

95. The lady in the top gif

looks like the flight attendant in the Delta safety video

[magical thyme]

10. since a Roumanian hacker got in, we know that "nobody got in" is a falsehood being promulgated

by Hillary's protectors. (The hacker was just extradited to the US within the last week or so for questioning.)

The fact is that we do NOT know whether or not anybody other than the Roumanian got in; that is part of what the FBI investigation is about. Part of the reason they wanted to interview Pagliano was to get detailed info on what security was or wasn't on the system and network.

[WhiteTara]

11. The hacker got into Blumenthal's computer

not Clinton's.

[magical thyme]

15. oops, you're right. I forgot that...

however, there is no proof that her system wasn't hacked.

[WhiteTara]

20. I know you didn't personally

find the proof, but, it wasn't.

[magical thyme]

23. sorry, but there is no proof that it wasn't. the FBI is continuing to look for evidence of hacking

because, to paraphrase the Times, sophisticated hackers don't leave log entries.

In the meantime, more than one high level official, including Kerry, have said outright that they assume their email is hacked by the Russians, Chinese, and who knows who else.

[magical thyme]

76. I wrote that about 15 minutes ago

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1444555

[saidsimplesimon]

37. I love the ponies magical thyme.

You are correct. The FBI investigations may have many tentacles. None should be used to create a political advantage for any political party or candidate. imo

[panader0]

26. Weren't there emails from HRC on Blumenthal's computer?

[sabrina 1]

105. Was Blumenthal communicating with Hillary by email?

[Gwhittey]

32. Well to be fair.

It said running attacks. That not proof they got in.

[Kelvin Mace]

40. It's OK, she wiped the server with a cloth

[8 track mind]

69. and sprayed it with Lysol to get rid of the viruses n/t

[jeff47]

45. That story is part of their deliberate obfuscation campaign.

The story said "the logs show no one got in".

The intended take-away is "no one got in".

The reality is the first thing any attack does is compromise the logs and logging system in order to leave no trace of the attack. The logs not showing an attack is meaningless. But the story does its job in leaving the desired impression.

It's exactly the same as the longstanding efforts to confuse marking information as classified with information being classified.

[6chars]

5. it has been proven her server wasn't hacked

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSMTZSAPEC33HF0X9N

nice try

[Autumn]

8. Do they leave logs when they hack a computer?

[magical thyme]

16. not if they're good at it, lol. no "proof" has been provided. nt

[Autumn]

22. Then Hillary's guy would have no clue if it was hacked or not.

Good to know.

[magical thyme]

24. he might have seen it if an ammy got in and left signs. but him saying he saw no sign of it does not

mean that nobody got in.

The unfortunate fact is it is impossible to prove a negative. But in the case of hacking, quality hackers can get in and not leave much or any trace.

Hopefully we'll never know for sure, because the only positive proof would be if an email turned up where it didn't have any way of turning up...

[VulgarPoet]

27. One of the first things they teach you during a Certified Ethical Hacker course

Cleaning up after yourself after the infiltration. Dependent on what the anti-intrusion measures are, editing the logs can range from pathetically easy, to a little bit challenging-- but it's doable.

[magical thyme]

13. um, no. "No sign of hacking" does not equal "not hacked."

And because Pagliano says he didn't see any sign of it does not in any way, shape or form prove it wasn't hacked.

"The security logs show who accessed the server and when, though they may not capture more sophisticated hacking, the Times said."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSMTZSAPEC33HF0X9N

[cherokeeprogressive]

47. Yeah. There's no such thing as "Secretary of States".

Secretary of State's maybe? Since we're in the business of correcting people?

Logic and critical thinking indeed.

[magical thyme]

75. time for you to repeat reading comprehension class. I'm aware there is no way to prove a negative

nor am I trying to prove a negative. I responded to the poster who claimed that it has been proven that Hillary's server was not hacked.

I said no such thing has been proven, that the article they are claiming proved it did NOT prove it. Just because logs don't show suspicious entry does not mean the system was not hacked.



You may want to go read what I posted at 1:07, when I wrote that we'll never know for sure because there is no way to prove a negative. Oh, about 15 minutes before you informed me of what I already wrote.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1444555

[magical thyme]

90. huh?

the thread started at 12:40

[magical thyme]

92. different time markers. We're off by 3 hours.

In any event, I responded directly the the poster claiming that "it had been proven" that their citation did not prove anything.

I had already, in an earlier reply (#24 at 1:07 my time), posted that we'll likely never know for sure if it was hacked because you can't prove a negative.

[Kalidurga]

101. There is no proof that the Secretary of States computer wasn't hacked.

Yes, I agree that is one way to say it correctly.

[Kalidurga]

103. I think Trump likes pizza too.

And he is probably a sports fan. But, I am sure you had some point beyond our commonalities.

[B2G]

17. Nothing has been 'proven'

A good hacker knows how to not leave fingerprints.

Especially when they intend to come back.

[NWCorona]

18. Sorry to break it to you but the logs that Brian turned over

Doesn't cover this time frame. Regardless, the logs aren't the end all in hack detection.

[shawn703]

19. I think you need to read it again

There is no proof the server was not hacked.

[Gwhittey]

33. To be fair

Even I could hack into a server and remove logs. And I am just a Computer Programmer that is a 1/2 decent server admin.

[Maedhros]

34. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Modern state-sponsored hacking is very sophisticated and very hard to detect, even by trained professionals.

China was able to steal the plans for the F-35 from Lockheed Martin without being detected until after China built their own prototype.

[HubertHeaver]

54. Did their prototype work?

If it did, it wasn't ours.

[Maedhros]

55. It was an exact copy of ours.[n/t]

[HubertHeaver]

57. But, did it fly?

[Maedhros]

60. Perhaps, perhaps not.

That is irrelevant to a discussion of unauthorized electronic intrusion and data theft.

[bvar22]

83. LOL. I got it.

The F-35 is a massively expensive failure.

[Kelvin Mace]

41. Not quite, sorry...

"The security logs show who accessed the server and when, though they may not capture more sophisticated hacking, the Times said."

[PoliticAverse]

42. I'm sorry to be the one to have to tell you this, but you can't prove a computer wasn't hacked.

At best you can do an extensive analysis (and how extensive depends on what logs and backups are available) and
conclude that there wasn't any evidence of a hack.

[leveymg]

67. Nothing of the kind has been "proven." That's just what Pagliano claims from his traffic logs.

As the article states, he would not have been able to detect more sophicated hacking. Try again.

[Lizzie Poppet]

25. That leapt out at me, too.

Anyone want a great illustration of why screwing up in a way that makes info vulnerable to hacks is a huge deal? Here:

http://map.norsecorp.com/#/

[Aerows]

85. Who in the hell

leaves port 23 exposed?

That's a red carpet greeting.

[Lizzie Poppet]

88. Amateur hour... (nm)

[AlbertCat]

36. Well.....

.... we now know she doesn't do very well with firewalls on servers...

[840high]

64. WOW

[Punkingal]

4. This whole thing is just a nightmare.

[Duval]

66. Yes, it is.

[Katashi_itto]

6. K&R

[Gamecock Lefty]

9. Yawn . . .

[AlbertCat]

38. Yawn . . .

Yeah..... apparently this Hillary's attitude toward classified info too.

[PoliticAverse]

43. Did someone wake from your hibernation from reality? n/t

[AzDar]

12. K & R

[salinsky]

14. What email scandal?

[99Forever]

21. This isn't going away.

Hopefully this ticking bomb goes off before the primaries end.

[6chars]

58. Nope. Republicans will keep inventing investigations.

But neither is Hillary going away. She's a tough kid.

[99Forever]

65. If she had half as much interest ...

...in doing right for We the People as she does in her own self promotion, she would go away. I don't give two shits about her "proving" how "tough" she is while the nation continues circling the bowl while rhe corrupt play power games.

[VulgarPoet]

28. Holy Fastjack an a 28.8kbps datajack.

This... Is gonna be big.

[restorefreedom]

98. can you flesh that out a bit

for a techo idiot? what does this mean and what makes it big?

[VulgarPoet]

100. This means foreign entities with a VERY strong interest in cyber-espionage

have likely gotten in and out of that server so many times, that it could basically be a digital slice of Swiss cheese, what with the possibility of Cloudjacket's capabilities being leaked to Chinese state-sponsored actors. Which not only would be another massive lie in Clinton's cap, but would run the risk that the Chinese could have gained American state secrets.

[restorefreedom]

106. yikes. sounds quite bad.

and as many have said, i don't imagine professional hackers leave digital traces behind that say "hey everyone! we were here!"

thanks for the explanation!

[VulgarPoet]

109. Oh yeah, it's bad if that's the case. nt

[SoapBox]

29. More sleaze...

Clinton baggage...MORE baggage...I'm tired of 30+ years of Clinton baggage.

No More Clintons Ever!

[SamKnause]

56. I am as sick of the Clinton family, as I am of the Bush family.

The destruction these 2 families have caused America and the world

is incalculable.

[jalan48]

35. So if Hillary somehow manages to finagle the nomination what will she await?

Years of Republican investigation and probable impeachment hearings. Is this what we want to drag the country through? There will be little time to focus on the real issues facing the country while Hillary and her foes battle it out in Clinton II. Blaming the Republicans doesn't deal with the bigger problem of why Democrats would elect someone with so much obvious baggage to represent them. I guess the whole villain/victim thing is just too much to pass up for many.

[Kelvin Mace]

46. Oh, she will be impeached if the GOP controls the House

that is a given. And without a substantial majority in the Senate, she will be convicted. Then they'll go after the the VP so they can install Ryan, or whoever winds up as the GOP Speaker.

[jalan48]

49. Interesting-you make a good point.

And while the country is distracted like a viewer at a carnival act the folks on Wall Street will continue with business as usual.

[Kelvin Mace]

50. People keep underestimating how much the Right hates her

Whether justified or not, the hatred is white hot, visceral, and on-going.

[glinda]

99. Most likely.

[senz]

61. Do you realize she won't even care about that?

She just wants to be president.

[jalan48]

63. I'm sure she will care. Who wants to be drug through the mud again?

It will be a huge spectacle of distraction but then maybe that is the real point of it all.

[zentrum]

44. I thought her experience

…was supposed to make her super-competent.

[CrispyQ]

53. DUzy!

And spot on, too!

[Motown_Johnny]

78. Don't worry. She can evolve on security later.

This is Hillary. She gets, yet another, pass.

[zentrum]

80. Yes, she'll have to

….."look into" being more competent. She'll get back to us on it.

[Motown_Johnny]

81. She can release her security breaches, after every other country does.... n/t

[leveymg]

48. Note these dates: Server set up & operated while HRC SOS 1/2009-2/2013. Virus detected "late 2013"

Last edited Tue Mar 8, 2016, 03:43 PM - Edit history (2)

The original server was first "wiped clean" by a company in New Jersey at the time that maintenance of Hillary's email was taken over by an IT firm, Platte River Networks, in June, 2013 after the hacker "Guccifer" released part of her email exchanges with Sidney Blumenthal, according to the timeline below. Clinton apparently continued to use the original server as host for Cintonemail.com for four months after she left the State Department.

Platte River was a small "mom & pop" company operated from a loft in Colorado. The email hosting company was not certified to maintain classified communications systems. Nevertheless, Hillary continued to use that email server, or possibly a different server unit, on which a virus was detected in late 2013. It is not clear when the virus was first introduced, but it seems unlikely that it survived the server's clean and reinstall. However, as a backup copy of the data was made at the time, it seems that the FBI might be able to determine the date the server was penetrated by the Chinese-made program.

In addition to the SECNAP CloudJacket security device identified in the story above, Platte River also installed a second device to speed up the pace of data backups, overwriting existing data. As CNN has reported: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/07/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-platte-river-networks/

Datto, Inc, the makers of Clinton's server back-up system, for information on how her emails were preserved and protected. The FBI has also sought information from the company, according to sources.

(A) "Clinton family company," Clinton Executive Service Corp., paid for the back-up services, operated through a device called the Datto SIRIS S2000, and that the purchase was made by Platte River Networks when the server was moved from her private residence to a New Jersey-based data center in 2013.

(E)mails sent by and to employees at Platte River Networks, which indicate there was discussion about how the duration of data backups could be reduced, apparently at the direction of the Clinton Executive Service Corp.

Here's a timeline 2008 through August 2015:

http://www.unbiasedamerica.com/hillary-clinton-email-controversy-timeline/
2008: Hillary Clinton acquires an email server for her 2008 presidential run and has in installed in her house in Chappaqua, New York.

January 13, 2009: On the day of Hillary’s Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of State, someone named Eric Hoteham registered three email domains for Clinton at her Chappaqua address. These become the sole emails used by Clinton during her time at the State Department.

January 21, 2009: Clinton is confirmed as Secretary of State.

Oct. 2, 2009: The U.S. Code of federal regulations on handling electronic records is updated: “Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.”

June 29, 2011: A State Department cable is issued under Clinton’s signature that orders all employees to “Avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts” because its been discovered that hackers are targeting the personal emails of government employees.

August, 2012: The State Department criticizes U.S. Ambassador to Kenya Scott Gration in part because he used a private e-mail account to handle “sensitive but unclassified” material. Gration is forced to resign.

Feb. 1, 2013: Clinton tenure as secretary of state ends.

March 15, 2013: Clinton’s private e-mail account is first exposed after a hacker named “Guccifer” accessed the account of former aide Sidney Blumenthal, and published a screenshot of the Clinton and Blumenthal discussing sensitive foreign policy issues via [e-mail] during her time as Secretary of State.

June, 2013: Shortly after the hacking incident, Clinton hired the Colorado-based Platte River Networks to maintain her email. The original Chappaqua server was disconnected and shipped from its location at the Chappaqua residence to a data center in New Jersey to be professionally wiped clean of all data.

Summer, 2014: State Department lawyers working to respond to a request from the House committee investigating Benghazi noticed that there were no emails to or from a government account for Mrs. Clinton.

August 11, 2014: Following a congressional subpoena and more than a year of delays, the State Department hands over a small number of Clinton’s private emails, 10 in all, to a House committee investigating Benghazi. The committee asks for more.

October, 2014: The State Department asks Clinton to turn over any emails from her time in office.

December 5, 2014: 50,000 pages of printed emails from Mrs. Clinton’s personal account are delivered to the State Department. They contain 30,490 emails that Clinton deems to be work-related. But she later says that she deleted another 31,830 emails that were personal and private.

February 13, 2015: The State Department sends the Benghazi committee another 850 pages of Clinton’s emails, including some from two different accounts on the private ‘clintonemail.com’ server.

February 27, 2015: State Department staffers tell Benghazi committee aides that Clinton had used her private addresses exclusively during her tenure, and that they don’t have any of her emails other than those she provided voluntarily.

March 2, 2015: A New York Times article reveals that Clinton used a private email server.

March 4, 2015: The Associated Press reports that it has traced Clinton’s private email address back to a private server at her Chappaqua, New York home, and that the server was registered under a fake name.

March 10, 2015: Clinton makes her first comment on the issue in a contentious press conference. She insists that ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email; there is no classified material’. She says she had used a private email for convenience, because she didn’t want to carry two devices. However, it later emerged that she in fact used four devices: an iPad, a mini iPad, an iPhone, and a BlackBerry.

March 11, 2015: The Associated Press sues the State Department to force the release of Clinton’s emails and other documents that the agency has failed to turn over following a Freedom Of Information Act request.

March 17, 2015: It comes to light that Hillary Clinton should have turned over all official documents, including emails, upon leaving the State Department, or face possible felony charges, fines, and imprisonment. She did not, and in fact kept official government records for two years after departing. Also, State Department spokeswoman claims they cannot find Clinton’s form OF-109 swearing that she turned over all official records before leaving, and that perhaps she never signed it, despite rules requiring all departing employees to.

April 12, 2015: Hillary Clinton launches her presidential campaign.

April 23, 2015: As part of a plea agreement, a federal judge sentenced former CIA director and general David Petraeus to two years prohibition and a $100,000 fine for giving his lover, Paula Broadwell, who was writing a biography about him, notebooks classified information about official meetings, war strategy and intelligence capabilities. The F.B.I. had been seeking jail time.

May 19, 2015: A court orders the State Department to release Clinton’s 30,000 emails to the public in small batches. The State Department says it will do so by January, 2016.

May 22, 2015: The first 300 of Clinton’s emails are made public by the State Department, revealing a close relationship with Blumenthal in the weeks following the Benghazi terror attack; one of them has been retroactively classified by the FBI as ‘secret’

May 27, 2015: A federal judge orders the State Department to begin releasing all of Clinton’s emails in installments every 30 days, setting monthly targets for the agency so the work is completed by January 29, 2016 Some related to Benghazi, but most were mundane. Several were heavily redacted.

June 22, 2015: The Select Committee on Benghazi reveals it uncovered emails between Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal related to Libyan policy that should have been provided by Clinton to the Committee but weren’t. Three days later the State Department announced Clinton didn’t provide them with the Blumenthal emails either, and that they are no longer certain she complied with their order to turn over all work emails.

July 7, 2015: During an interview on CNN, Hillary commented on the email controversy: “Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation. There was nothing that did not give me the full authority to decide how I was going to communicate. Previous secretaries of state have said they did the same thing…. Everything I did was permitted by law and regulation. I had one device. When I mailed anybody in the government, it would go into the government system.” Two days later, the Washington Post gave her statement 3 out of 4 pinnocchios, saying her actions subverted the intent of the rules, and she had outright ignored the requirement to turn over her business-related e-mails before she left government service.

July 23, 2015: The New York Times reveals that the inspector general for the intelligence community, I. Charles McCullough III, told the F.B.I., Justice Department, and members of Congress that Mrs. Clinton had “top secret” information — the highest classification of government intelligence — in two emails among the 40 from the private account that the State Department had allowed him to review. Additionally, two other emails contained “secret” level information. The State Department refused to give McCullough access to the entire trove of roughly 30,000 emails that Mrs. Clinton handed over to the department last year. But State Dept. official Patrick F. Kennedy, admitted that it was likely that the entire body of emails contained hundreds of instances of classified information.

July 24, 2015: Responding to news that several top secret documents were found among Clinton’s emails, her campaign says that any government secrets found on the server had been classified after the fact. But the inspectors general of the State Department and the nation’s intelligence agencies said the information they found WAS classified when it was sent and remains so now.

July 25, 2015: During a campaign appearance in Iowa, Clinton tells reporters that ‘I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received’, a shift from previous statements that denied having any classified material at all.

July 31, 2015 – The second State Department release of Clinton’s emails, more than 1,300 in all, includes 41 that were retroactively marked ‘classified’.

August 4, 2015: Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill says in a statement that the Clinton ‘did not send nor receive any emails that were marked classified at the time’.

August 10, 2015: Responding to a judge’s order, the State Department instructs Mrs. Clinton and aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills to save all “federal documents, electronic or otherwise, in her possession or control,” and to assure the government that none of them will be deleted.

August 11, 2015: After months of refusing to hand her server over, Hillary Clinton finally agrees to allow the Justice Department to investigate it, as well as the thumb drives housing her work emails. Additionally, it comes to light that the top secret emails discovered by inspectors general contained highly sensitive information from signal intercepts and keyhole satellite data.

August 12, 2015: The FBI picks up the server that Clinton used during her time as Secretary of State. The server, which was in a New Jersey data center, had been wiped clean. A lawyer for Platte River Networks, the company that managed the server, said “To my knowledge the data on the old server is not available now on any servers or devices in Platte River Network’s control.” Investigators also took the thumb drives containing copies of Clinton’s e-mails.

August 13, 2015: Lawmakers contacted Platte River Networks, the company that has hosted Mrs. Clinton’s email and data since 2013. Sen. Ron Johnson asked the company to certify “if that data was secure, who had access to that material and whether all official documents were appropriately preserved” and also whether the company was “authorized to maintain or access classified information.” Platt River has two weeks to respond.

August 15, 2015: Former CIA operative and CNN national security analyst Bob Baer, who is not known for being a political partisan, said that the sensitivity of the information found on Clinton’s private server was likely more secret than what Edward Snowden pilfered. He also said this was a “deal breaker” for Clinton’s presidential candidacy.

August 16, 2015: The State Department announced that the number of emails containing classified material has grown to 60. Officials are slowly sorting through the emails in order to release them in compliance with a Freedom of Information ruling.

August 17, 2015: Platte River Networks, the IT firm hired by Hillary Clinton to oversee her private server, now says it is “highly likely” a backup copy of the server was made, meaning any emails Clinton deleted before she handed the server over to investigators may still be accessible. The company is cooperating with the F.B.I.

SOURCES:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/03/10/first-take-hillary-clinton-emails/24705871/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/us/hillary-clinton-emails-take-long-path-to-controversy.html
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2015/07/07/cnn-exclusive-hillary-clintons-first-national-interview-of-2016-race/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-asks-state-dept-to-review-emails-for-public-release.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/10/hillary-clintons-emails-a-timeline-of-actions-and-regulations/
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/17/state-dept-spox-fairly-certain-hillary-clinton-did-not-sign-separation-statement-video/
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/89251.pdf
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/hrc-e-mails?page=3
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-e-mail-server-turned-over-to-fbi/2015/08/12/aba5feea-4160-11e5-8ab4-c73967a143d3_story.html
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/11/6-huge-problems-with-hillarys-there-is-no-classified-material-dodge/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/25/us/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-information-inspector-general-intelligence-community.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/13/judge-orders-hillary-clinton-preserve-all-records/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3197093/Tech-company-maintained-Hillary-s-secret-server-sued-illegally-accessing-databases-creating-chaos-stealing-White-House-phone-numbers.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/12/us/politics/hillary-clinton-directs-aides-to-give-email-server-and-thumb-drive-to-the-justice-department.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/criminal-probe-sought-into-clinton-private-e-mails-for-suspected-sensitive-content/2015/07/24/b90bf598-31f8-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_story.html
http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/15/cnn-national-security-analyst-unloads-on-hillary-over-email-scandal-i-wonder-whether-she-is-capable-of-being-president-video/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/16/number-of-hillary-clintons-emails-flagged-for-clas/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-sentenced-in-leak-investigation.html
controversyemailHillary ClintonState Department

[think]

59. Thank you for the recap and in depth information. I didn't take much notice of the emails

in the beginning but it sure seems to have mushroomed.

[grasswire]

70. did you compile this, leveymg?

It should be an OP. It is excellent work.

This stuck out at me:

March 17, 2015: It comes to light that Hillary Clinton should have turned over all official documents, including emails, upon leaving the State Department, or face possible felony charges, fines, and imprisonment. She did not, and in fact kept official government records for two years after departing. Also, State Department spokeswoman claims they cannot find Clinton’s form OF-109 swearing that she turned over all official records before leaving, and that perhaps she never signed it, despite rules requiring all departing employees to.

April 12, 2015: Hillary Clinton launches her presidential campaign.

[leveymg]

71. No. I linked the source of the timeline.

I notice a small mistake in the section above. There would be no felony attached to simple failure to turn in the records and to fail to sign the Form OF-109. It would be a potential felony to attest on that form that all records were turned in but to knowingly not do so.

That explains why they can't find her signed OF-109. Certainly indicates mens rea (Bad intent) an element that might come into play under some (but not all) potential felony charges stemming from her mishandling of classified materials.

[grasswire]

72. reminds me of the problem finding George W's record of service.

G O N E

[leveymg]

73. And the evidence left behind is just tainted enough so as to trap the unwary.

Many of the BushCo minions and the Clintonites have black ops and disinformation skills that they put to work. No wonder that between the two of them they've been running this country for so long.

[grasswire]

74. yep. I posted a query in the Bernie group for some research..

..and included your link to that timeline. That was VERY useful to me. Thanks.

[leveymg]

82. See if someone can ID the server type and model from the 12-digit serial no OCC47A14C332

Why would anyone hold onto a 2008 server, I wonder, unless it was under the advise of counsel? Or is this a second (or third) server? What happened to all of them?

[Oilwellian]

84. Bookmarking OP for your timeline entry

That is fantastic work and should be it's own OP.

[mmonk]

110. +1

[PeoViejo]

51. Roll it...

[No Vested Interest]

52. I object to the word "Scandal" in the heading.

I realize that "scandal" was used in the Forbes title, by Steve Morgan, author, but I would not have used it on a Democratic site.

[Joe the Revelator]

62. Your objection is noted and overruled by the facts.

[Motown_Johnny]

77. I agree. ClusterFuck would be more accurate. Disaster or Catastrophe if you want to be nice.

Scandal does not do it justice.

[PoliticAverse]

87. I would go with enigma. n/t

[philosslayer]

107. That was my first impression also

Reading through the responses, I thought I had stumbled onto Free Republic accidentally. I was almost ready to take a shower!

[Jarqui]

89. "CloudJacket security device was purchased and installed ... in late 2013"

... and for the previous five years what did they do ?

From the person who wrote this:
In casually disregarding basic security, Secretary Clinton harmed our country and helped our adversaries

comes this:
NY Times Report Debunks Severity of Emailgate With Classic Clintonian Wordsmithing

He basically lays out why the logs provide little assurance Hillary's server wasn't compromised and helps to better explain some things I have been saying:

There is wordsmithing of a classic Clintonian kind going on here that requires a bit of unpacking. In the first place, the use of the term “hacking” obscures as much as it explains. It’s not a word normally used by intelligence services, since it conjures images of unwashed teenagers in basements. Spy agencies which practice advanced signals intelligence or SIGINT instead use terms like “active SIGINT” to describe their sophisticated, multilayered efforts to break into protected or encrypted information systems.

At the National Security Agency—where I used to work as a senior intelligence analyst, including as the technical director of NSA’s largest operational division—what outsiders call hacking is handled by a shadowy group called Tailored Access Operations that gets at the hard targets requiring actual cyber-break-ins. TAO are probably the best hackers on earth, but Russia and China are no slouches either, as demonstrated by their repeated infiltrations into protected U.S. Government computer networks in recent years.

However, unencrypted IT systems don’t need “hacking”—normal SIGINT interception will suffice. Ms. Clinton’s “private” email, which was wholly unencrypted for a time, was incredibly vulnerable to interception, since it was traveling unprotected on normal commercial networks, which is where SIGINT operators lurk, searching for nuggets of gold.

They hunt for data with search terms called “selectors”—a specific phone number, a chatroom handle, an email address: here Ms. Clinton’s use of the “clintonmail.com” server was the SIGINT equivalent of waving a huge “I’m right here” flag at hostile intelligence services. Since the number of spy agencies worldwide capable of advanced SIGINT operations numbers in the many dozens, with Russia and China in the top five, that Ms. Clinton’s emails wound up in the wrong hands is a very safe bet, as any experienced spy will attest.

There's more in the article.

Part of what disturbed me were the 18 emails between Hillary and President Obama because these spies could snag one and camp out on the White House data pipeline doing the very thing the author describes above. The header of Hillary's emails would give them a data road map of where to go all around the world.

[Fairgo]

94. Things have to be getting pretty stressful in the home office

Fired all guns at Sanders in Michigan to no avail, server negligence narrative starts to slide towards a breach of trust, everybody asking for transcripts of skyped speeches? Yep. Getting pretty grumpy I swan.

[eridani]

96. I've always been inclined to go with Bernie on htis

"No one cares bout your damned emails"

Now looking like he and I might be wrong.

[think]

97. I use to think it was pretty much a non issue as well. But now I'm not so sure.

Kind of watching to see where everything leads.

[Faux pas]

104. K N R-ed

[noamnety]

108. What is this Clinton Executive Service Corp?

I remember seeing that name under the operating expenses of her campaign funding report.