Extradition of 'Guccifer', who 1st uncovered HRCs' private server, raises indictment probability

[amborin]

Extradition Of Hacker ‘Guccifer,’ Who First Uncovered Clinton’s Email Server, Increases Likelihood Of Indictment For Clinton


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2977577/hillary-clinton-fbi-investigation-extradition-of-hacker-guccifer-who-first-uncovered-clintons-email-server-increases-likelihood-of-indictment-for-clinton/#oWkvi48qP4OdE3pm.99

Hillary Clinton’s FBI investigation may have just moved one step closer to an indictment for the Democratic front-runner, with experts saying the extradition of a Romanian hacker who revealed her unsecured email server could spell deep trouble for Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Last week, U.S. officials moved to extradite the hacker known as “Guccifer,’ who is accused of accessing the email of Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal. It was that hack which brought to light Clinton’s use of a personal email during her time as secretary of state, reports claim.

The hacker, whose real name is Marcel Lehel Lazar, will now be able to make the case that Hillary Clinton’s email server was unsecure and could have spilled secrets to America’s enemies, Fox News experts Catherine Herridge and Pamela K. Browne wrote.

“Because of the proximity to Sidney Blumenthal and the activity involving Hillary’s emails, [the timing] seems to be something beyond curious,” the report quoted Ron Hosko, former assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division.

Lazar was brought to the United States near the end of March and appeared at a Virginia federal court this week to face hacking charges, the report noted.

The report added that the timing of his extradition is curious given the ongoing investigations of Clinton’s alleged use of a private, unsecured email during her time as secretary of state, and noted that Guccifer’s testimony could be a major blow to Clinton.

In early 2013, news outlets including Russia Today and The Smoking Gun published memos from Guccifer, with excerpts of exchanges between Blumenthal and Hillary Clinton about Libya including details following the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack.

“In a 2015 prison interview from Romania with reporter Matei Rosca for Pando.com, Lazar told Rosca that, “I used to read [Clinton’s] memos for six or seven hours… and then do the gardening.”

For her part, Hillary Clinton has waved off concerns of a potential FBI indictment for her email server. In an interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer that aired on Friday, Clinton dismissed claims that she is under investigation, instead calling the FBI probe a “security review.”

“Oh my goodness,” Clinton said (via Politico). “Well, Matt, I know that they live in that world of fantasy and hope because they’ve got a mess on their hands on the Republican side. That is not gonna happen. There is not even the remotest chance that it’s going to happen.”

snip

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2977577/hillary-clinton-fbi-investigation-extradition-of-hacker-guccifer-who-first-uncovered-clintons-email-server-increases-likelihood-of-indictment-for-clinton/#oWkvi48qP4OdE3pm.99

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. still all speculation. we should focus on the provable stuff for now. there is no shortage of those.

[merrily]

2. Not to worry. They'll punish the whistleblower and she'll be fine.

[pdsimdars]

21. Seems to be how the Obama administration rolls.

Remember how Reagan had the FBI investigate thousands of banksters after the S&L scandal and put hundreds of the in prison.
Obama put NO ONE in prison after the big crash, except ONE person and he was a whistle blower.

[haikugal]

33. That's about it.

[Divernan]

3. The link sourcesource, Inquisitr looks to be an interesting one for international news.

This OP got alerted on within minutes with the trashing of the link, and of course, no serious challenge to the content of the article, which included comments/response from Hillary Clinton.

Here's what Wikipedia says about Inquisitr:

The current website owner, Daniel Treisman, purchased the website for $330,000 and invested into growing the company. In the past, Treisman has been invited to speak at events like the NOAH 2015 London Conference, which describes itself as the "preeminent European event where over 2,000 Internet CEOs, executives and investors gain insights into the latest proven concepts, network and establish new business relationships."[8]

Growth
The website states that it reaches over 40 million readers a month.[9] Daniel Treisman says the majority of its traffic, about 55 percent, comes from mobile web users, while the rest are desktop users.

The website ranking system Alexa lists Inquisitr as one of the top 1,000 websites in the United States based upon traffic. Around 91 percent of the audience is located within Anglophone countries like the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom.

[Fawke Em]

4. In other words, it sounds like they know what they're talking about in relation

to technology news.

[Divernan]

5. And the jury says, 6 to 1 to LEAVE IT!

Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sun Apr 10, 2016, 10:14 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Extradition of 'Guccifer', who 1st uncovered HRCs' private server, raises indictment probability
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511698512

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Inquisitr? Why don't we just give up the pretense of being an informed discussion site dedicated to liberal and progressive discussion and just start using nothing but tabloid propaganda. Shouldn't take long to reach Idiocracy. Or how about we stop dumping all the tabloid propaganda one can find in hopes of destroying a Democratic candidate. If an indictment happens or is going to happen, we will hear it from a reputable source soon. It is against the TOS and Community Standards to try to undermine our candidates. Thank for your service as a juror.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Apr 10, 2016, 10:29 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't believe sources should be censored here just because someone whines about it. MSM is just as full of bs as random internet sites and blogs; the reader should be allowed to discern as to whether a source is relevant to them or not. Alerter, if you don't like the site then trash it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What the H E double toothpicks is this alerter talking about? This is an actual news item. Just because you don't like the news source, they're a tabloid propaganda? Jeez... I wonder if they alert on an interview on Fox News, or the Wall Street Journal? I'd take the propaganda of RT over WSJ any day. Waste more of our time on these silly alerts, why don't you?... Not.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This OP is excellent, and balanced, in that it includes Hillary Clinton's POV on the story. The website is also just fine - described by Wikipedia as: The current website owner, Daniel Treisman, purchased the website for $330,000 and invested into growing the company. In the past, Treisman has been invited to speak at events like the NOAH 2015 London Conference, which describes itself as the "preeminent European event where over 2,000 Internet CEOs, executives and investors gain insights into the latest proven concepts, network and establish new business relationships."
Growth

The website states that it reaches over 40 million readers a month. Daniel Treisman says the majority of its traffic, about 55 percent, comes from mobile web users, while the rest are desktop users.

The website ranking system Alexa lists Inquisitr as one of the top 1,000 websites in the United States based upon traffic. Around 91 percent of the audience is located within Anglophone countries like the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Fawke Em]

7. Some one alerted on a straight-news article?

[NWCorona]

10. It's sad

[Fawke Em]

11. Apparently, Guccifer has been known to give interviews to reporters.

I'm sure Jeff Bezos' WaPo will be all over it!

LOL... who am I kidding?

[Bob41213]

65. He's a bit of a whack job (Guccifer)

There were some interviews from some Romanians. I'm not sure how much of what he says to believe.

[Lizzie Poppet]

12. And, sadly, there was one numpty on the jury.

Because that alert deserves a 24hr time-out...

[Fawke Em]

13. What's sad is that the only non-alternative news site reporting on this if Fox "News."

You'd think the news media would WANT us to know what we might be voting for, but, nooooo.... that would be too much like news.

[amborin]

48. the alerter is concered with "tabloid propaganda" how about the NYDN? it's always been a tabloid

and moreover it's owned by a huge HRC donor

talk about biased tabloid propaganda, that's the main example

in contrast, this website reports legitimate news

[Fawke Em]

6. Hmmmm... looks like I have been correct in my assertions.

According to Hot Air:

The actual extradition took place nine days ago, around the same time the FBI asserted its dominance in the investigation. Why might Marcel “Guccifer” Lazar be important to the case? If he cracked Hillary’s server rather than Blumenthal’s (or both), then it makes prosecution under 18 USC 793 easier under subsection (f)

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/04/08/not-a-coincidence-us-extradites-romanian-hacker-linked-to-hillary-e-mail-scandal/

I've been saying all along that I believed the FBI was looking to see if her server was hacked (and its my educated guess that it was).

Will this be in the Wa-Po or the NY Times tomorrow? This is the most important public movement in this investigation in awhile.

[magical thyme]

28. Guccifer claimed in an interview to have read Clinton's emails for 6-7 hours/day

and then gone out to garden.

He's not a tech hacker; he used social networking to gain access. Once he gained access to Blumenthal's, he would have seen the emails to Clinton and from the address and content, known who she was.

From there, he would research publicly available info, where she was born, family names and dates of birth, etc. and methodically guessed at passwords and any security questions. He described one instance where he got through the security question "name the street you were born on" by looking up the person's city of birth, getting a map and trying every street in that city until he got a hit.

So on the one hand, in his claim he could have been just adding to his notoriety. But otoh, it's entirely possible that he got into her system and read her emails.

And of course, if he could do it, certainly the pros could far more easily.

[snagglepuss]

54. I wonder if this is what prompted Obama's appearance on Fox and his comments. nt

[leftynyc]

62. "Hot Air"???

Are there no depths into the right wing sewers the Bernie supporters wont swim in? How much do you know about that site? That you think a reputable paper like the Times or the Post would post using them as a source is adorable.

[dinkytron]

8. Talk about a...

[Fawke Em]

9. Not gonna let this sink...

In early 2013, news outlets including Russia Today and The Smoking Gun published memos from Guccifer, with excerpts of exchanges between Blumenthal and Hillary Clinton about Libya including details following the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack.

“In a 2015 prison interview from Romania with reporter Matei Rosca for Pando.com, Lazar told Rosca that, “I used to read [Clinton’s] memos for six or seven hours… and then do the gardening.”

[nc4bo]

14. Hold on one minute! I thought word was her server was NEVER hacked?

Even on DU we have a bunch of people saying this never happened? Ever.

So what is this I'm reading that it did indeed happen not once but with great frequency?



So what's the real, truth here?!

Damn.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

15. It wasn't.

Sidney Blumenthal's AOL account was hacked.

[nc4bo]

16. This is all getting quite cray cray and difficult to follow.

This is a serious mess.

Eta: I'm hoping by watching this video, it'll help clarify where, when, how and who did what.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511697722#post7

[Fawke Em]

18. You don't know that and neither do I.

However, having worked in cyber security for nearly 10 years, my professional opinion is that she probably was hacked and Guccifer seems to allude that he did, indeed, hack her.

“I had memos Hillary Clinton got as a State Secretary, with CIA briefings. These were being read by her, two other people from the US Government, and Guccifer. I used to read her memos for six-seven hours and then I’d get up and do the gardening in the yard,” he says.

https://pando.com/2015/03/20/exclusive-interview-jailed-hacker-guccifer-boasts-i-used-to-read-hillarys-memos-for-six-seven-hours-and-then-do-the-gardening/

This raises two either/or questions:

Either he only hacked Blumenthal - person who wasn't a State Department employee and had no security clearance - and Clinton broke the law by forwarding CIA briefings to him or Guccifer also hacked Clinton and read the briefings directly from her unsecure email account.

[amborin]

20. evidence of potential hacking, at least:

Clinton server faced hacking from China, South Korea and Germany

By Josh Gerstein and Rachael Bade

10/08/15 07:17 AM EDT
Share on Facebook


Hillary Clinton's private email server containing tens of thousands of messages from her tenure as secretary of state — including more than 400 now considered classified — was the subject of hacking attempts from China, South Korea and Germany after she stepped down in 2013, according to Congressional investigators.

The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee has found evidence of attempted intrusions into Clinton's server in 2013 and 2014, according to a letter Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) sent Monday to a Florida-based security firm tasked with protecting the hardware.

The contractor, SECNAP Network Security, identified the attacks, but according to internal emails cited and briefly quoted in the Johnson letter, Clinton's sever may have lacked a threat-detection program for three months, Johnson says.

The Associated Press first reported the news.

The attempted security breaches and apparent gaps in protection raise further questions about the level of security Clinton used to prevent malicious intrusions from breaching her network. The FBI is currently probing whether her rare email arrangement at State — exclusively using her own personal server rather than a State.gov account — ever put national security at risk. The State Department has now classified more than 400 Clinton emails that were stored on that hardware, though Clinton's team notes they were not marked classified at the time.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/hillary-clinton-email-server-hacked-china-south-korea-germany-214546#ixzz45SJR1Ogf
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

[nashville_brook]

24. any time I see "Florida-based security firm"

i'm interested.

[PyaarRevolution]

44. I heard for the first few months.

She didn't even encrypt the e-mails!

[Fawke Em]

58. Yep. That is true.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/235493-clinton-email-lacked-encryption-certificate-for-three-months

Basic security was just blatantly ignored.

[Bob41213]

67. Real question to me at least, is did she encrypt logins?

I'm not up on Windows server security for that era, but it would be even more disastrous IMO if the passwords were out there in plaintext.

[snagglepuss]

56. I find it very strange that some guy in Romania ever heard of of Sidney.

It wasn't like Sid was working publically for Clinton. I have to wonder whether he learnt of Sidney after first hacking Clinton as he definitely would have know who Clinton was.

[Fawke Em]

60. Nah... he knew who he was because that's what he liked to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guccifer

[magical thyme]

30. "there is no evidence it was hacked" is not proof it was never hacked.

All that means is that security logs (assuming there were any) didn't show unusual activity.

The fact is that it takes entire teams months to find out that large corporate systems have been hacked, even with high security and constant monitoring.

Somebody moonlighting at a tech job isn't going to know whether a system has been hacked unless it's really obvious and he gets lucky.

[Bob41213]

64. People need to read the words in these articles very carefully

(nc4bo, not meant as a slam at you AT ALL).

The Hillary not hacked story said something like "there was no evidence of hacking in the logs."

Obviously my emphasis. The other thing is, there are many things that wouldn't show up in the logs, or if a hacker was good, he'd delete log entries afterwards. For instance, that previously mentioned lack of a secure certificate installed would not show any evidence whatsoever if anyone was using it to read emails--absolutely none. A lot of other things wouldn't show in the logs.

[Yurovsky]

17. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of cyber security ...

would know HRC's basement server was totally vulnerable and most definitely targeted. The analogy i use is STDs, and how you basically assume the risk of every sexual partner from previous unprotected sex. Email works like that... If any of the hundreds, or in her case THOUSANDS of email recipients to her emails or forwards of said emails to various 3rd parties were accessed, it just opens up all concerned to attempts at hacking. There are thousands of hackers working 24/7/365 at finding vulnerabilities, and foreign governments like China, Russia, and N. Korea have dedicated military units who exist to steal secrets, be they economic, political, military, etc.

If this guy got accessed her server, I'm sure that hostile governments probably have more accurate and complete files of her records then the FBI does. that alone should disqualify her from obtaining a security clearance and ever serving in elected or appointed office ever again.

[Fawke Em]

19. Bingo.

[nashville_brook]

22. damn, when you put it that way...

"If this guy got accessed her server, I'm sure that hostile governments probably have more accurate and complete files of her records then the FBI does. that alone should disqualify her from obtaining a security clearance and ever serving in elected or appointed office ever again."

i've not been terribly interested in the email case as a security risk. i'm more interested in the State Dept/Clinton Foundation angle. but this really illustrates the problem for me.

any "regular person" exposing the US to such risk, would never be trusted with security clearance.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

43. She did a set-it-and-forget-it server. Even if she was fully patched at that time,

that means less than nothing when it comes to zero-day exploits. You have to live with the server. You have to scan it for new vulnerabilities/CVE's at least weekly, if not monthly. Patches and updates need to be applied on a continual basis, both for the MS OS, and for other installed applications. I worked in a financial institution that was under a heavy regulatory burden, as is appropriate. I would have been fired six ways from Sunday for setting up an offsite production server.

[Ferd Berfel]

23. The only question seems to bee - When will they drop the shoe?

My guess is - after it's too late for the Dems to recover.

Keep Clinton is just another in a long list of loosing DNC strategies.

[nashville_brook]

25. and they'll say, "no one could have imagined..."

they'd use this in an attack during the GE.

i mean, who'da thunk it?

[Ferd Berfel]

27. and regardless of how she looses

they will blame Bernie and his supporters.

[magical thyme]

31. they're investigating 4 aides this month. presumably

Abedin and Clinton next month.

They work their way from the bottom to the targets at the top so when they go into the last interviews they are fully prepared.

Oh, and something else I learned the other day that I had no idea of, the depositions from the FOIA suit will be sent directly to them, so they'll be looking for inconsistencies there too.

[Ferd Berfel]

34. yea but the Timing...the timing

the timing................

That's the question.

[magical thyme]

37. do you want it fast or do you want it right?

She slipped through Comey's fingers once before. He doesn't want to lose her a 2nd time.

[Ferd Berfel]

39. agree

I'm not suggesting to get it done in any particular time frame.

I'm only questioning the timing of releasing the results: Before the Convention or After or (if she's the Nom) long about October, when it's to late to do anything but loose.

[PyaarRevolution]

45. Jeez before please.

If this ends up blowing up I'd rather see it happen before they try to forego Bernie.

Then with Bernie as the nom. the Democrats will look like they're completely cleaning house because there's no way Bernie will hire SCUM like Ben Bernanke and others.

[magical thyme]

46. the timing will be based on when they're done

They will need to compare the various stories from depositions with FBI, depositions with FOIA suits, what they learn from Guccifer, and timeline/story told by 60,000 emails.

And they will need to tie it together and determine what, if any, charges have a very high probability of sticking.

I don't know that events such as the convention will impact when the FBI makes any recommendations. I think they'll do it as soon as they're done.

My gut tells me Comey was blowing smoke when he said he wasn't in any hurry. I think they want to wrap it up before the convention to either clear the air or give the establishment a chance to bring in a substitute. And I think he just wanted to shut the press up and get them out of his face for a while.

Personally, I wish it would happen yesterday. But it will happen when it does. And another thing my gut tells me is that it will most likely happen when nobody is looking.

[Ferd Berfel]

47. I don't beleive that this will be released

without serious consideration to the political fallout, regardless of when they 'declare' they are done.

[winter is coming]

51. I think Obama's trying to get in front of this mess, so the shit may be hitting the fan

sooner rather than later. Perhaps even this week.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, amborin.

[speaktruthtopower]

29. Whether there..

is an indictment or not, is there any question that foreign governments could have hacked this server if Gucifer did?

Did Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan blow up worse than it would have because foreign countr(ies) knew our plans and thought in advance?

[Fawke Em]

36. The three governments who hire the most hackers are the U.S., Russia and China.

Israel is way up there, too.

Would Russia, China or Israel want Syria, Libya, Iraq and/or Afghanistan to blow up worse? A least two of them would want that to happen. China just wants our trade secrets.

[Politicalboi]

32. This is getting GOOD!!!!!

I hope this brings her back to Benghazi. I hope she is exposed for the criminal she is. Hillary Coattails.

[paulthompson]

35. A couple of things

First off, Guccifer is/was not a hacker in the usual sense. He doesn't know a thing about coding. What his trick was that he'd read up on the lives of his targets then guess at security questions and/or passwords. Sometimes he'd get them right and get into their in boxes.

So he got into Sid Blumenthal's inbox and read the emails between him and Hillary. There's no evidence whatsoever he got into Hillary's inbox, and breaking into Sid's didn't help him whatsoever with doing that. When he talks about reading her memos for hours, what he means is the 1000 or so e-mails between Sid and Hillary. And ALL of those have been released to the public, with a few exceptions. One exception is that she ended her time as secretary of state on February 1, 2013, and Guccifer broke into Sid's in box on March 15, 2013, and that month and a half is past the time of the public e-mail releases. There's an e-mail in there where Sid talks about Saudi Arabians funding the Benghazi attack.

Now, it also could be that some of the e-mails from 2009 to 2013 sent to Sid were part of the 30,000 "personal" e-mails that Clinton deleted. So far, we don't know that. Guccifer posted a screenshot of a list of e-mails from Hillary to Sid, but it only listed a couple dozen, and it was from January to February 2013, half of which is after the public release. None of the overlapping emails appear to be missing, despite what some people say on the web. (I double checked the email titles myself).

We know already know that Clinton was not honest, and she deleted some work e-mails. But Sid apparently didn't want to get into trouble so in late 2015 he handed over 15 work e-mails from Clinton that Clinton hadn't turned over. Those haven't been made public, but the FBI definitely has them. Sid knew that the FBI had to have those e-mails due to the Guccifer leak, so he really had no choice but to officially hand them over anyway.

But also, those 15 related to Libya in some way. (They had been requested by the House Benghazi Committee.) There could be more that Guccifer uncovered that were deleted and are not related related to Libya.

Another important point is that Guccifer ALREADY was freely talking to US investigators before being extradited to the US. I came across a New York Times article where a NYT reporter went to visit Guccifer in a Romanian prison in late 2014, and he had to wait because Guccifer was spending so much time being questioned by US officials.

So I'm not sure what the extradition is all about, because whatever he says here, couldn't he have just said there? But maybe there's some legal reason for it, like his words would carry more weight if he said them live in a courtroom than being questioned in a Romanian prison cell.

That said, I don't think there's any big Guccifer bombshell. We already have good reason to believe that the FBI was able to recover ALL of Clinton's e-mails. Whatever Guccifer would have is just a small portion of that. At best, his leak would provide a kind of check for them to make sure that they did in fact recover all of her e-mails.

[Fawke Em]

40. Grand Jury.

He may be testifying in front of one, thus the reason to bring him here in person.

[riderinthestorm]

42. lol, jinx! nt

[Fawke Em]

49. :)

I'm a former crime reporter who now works in cyber security PR. This whole story is right up my alley.

[fighting-irish]

68. You rock, Fawke Em!

I am really enjoying your writing.

[riderinthestorm]

41. Any theories why they've brought him here?

I'm thinking you have some ideas...

(Mine is that he was brought over to testify to a grand jury...)

[Fawke Em]

50. Couple of things about what you said:

First off, Guccifer is/was not a hacker in the usual sense. He doesn't know a thing about coding. What his trick was that he'd read up on the lives of his targets then guess at security questions and/or passwords. Sometimes he'd get them right and get into their in boxes.

That's called social engineering. The kid who "hacked" into Sarah Palin's emails did the same thing (caveat: my company worked on that case).

There's no evidence whatsoever he got into Hillary's inbox, and breaking into Sid's didn't help him whatsoever with doing that. When he talks about reading her memos for hours, what he means is the 1000 or so e-mails between Sid and Hillary.

Why was Hillary forwarding CIA memos to a person who was A. Not employed by the State Department and B. Didn't hold a security clearance? That, alone, should be grounds for a criminal charge.

We already have good reason to believe that the FBI was able to recover ALL of Clinton's e-mails.

Yes. The only way to completely wipe a server is to bust it up into small pieces. It's like the old magnetic audio tapes. You may record over it, but there are methods that will pull subsequent layers out.

[paulthompson]

53. Deleted emails

Regarding the recovery of deleted emails, check out this timeline entry:

September 22, 2015: Bloomberg News reports that the FBI has been able to recover at least some of the 31,830 emails deleted by Clinton in 2014. The exact number of recovered emails is still unknown. Clinton claimed she deleted those emails, which make up slightly more than half of all her emails from her time as secretary of state, because they were personal in nature. Bloomberg reports that, "Once the emails have been extracted, a group of agents has been separating personal correspondence and passing along work-related messages to agents leading the investigation, the person said." This clearly indicates that not all of the deleted emails were personal in nature, as Clinton has claimed. Clinton's spokesperson does not address the discrepancy, except to say that Clinton continues to cooperate with investigators. (Bloomberg News, 9/2/2015)
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-22/fbi-said-to-recover-personal-emails-from-hillary-clinton-server
The same day, The New York Times also reports that deleted emails have been recovered. According to two unnamed government officials, "It was not clear whether the entire trove of roughly 60,000 emails had been found on the server, but one official said it had not been very hard for the FBI to recover the messages." (The New York Times, 9/23/2015)
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/us/politics/investigators-find-emails-hillary-clinton-said-were-erased.html
Chris Soghoian, the lead technologist for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), comments, "Clinton's private email server was secure. Clinton's people didn't know how to delete her old emails. These two things can't both be true." (Business Insider, 9/23/2015)
http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-recovered-clintons-deleted-emails-2015-9

Oh, and look what Clinton signed under oath one month previously:

August 10, 2015: Clinton writes in a statement under oath that she has provided to the State Department all of her work related emails that were on her personal email account she used while secretary of state. Her short statement includes this sentence: "I have directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done." That statement is a result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch against the State Department. Additionally, Clinton mentions in her statement that her top aide Huma Abedin also had an email account on her clintonemail.com server that "was used at times for government business," but another top aide, Cheryl Mills, did not. (The New York Times, 8/10/2015)
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/11/us/politics/all-emails-were-provided-hillary-clinton-says-in-statement.html

[Bob41213]

66. This sounds like a lot of wiggle room: "I have directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com"

Sounds like something a Clinton would say: "I have directed." Damn lawyers didn't do what I said.

[paulthompson]

55. About this bit...

Why was Hillary forwarding CIA memos to a person who was A. Not employed by the State Department and B. Didn't hold a security clearance? That, alone, should be grounds for a criminal charge.

Not exactly. Keep in mind the info flow was almost entirely one way. Sid Blumenthal would send her "intelligence" about once every other day. She'd write a short note back like "thanks" or "keep it coming," and then forward it to other officials if she found it interesting.

It appears Blumenthal got his info from Tyler Drumheller. But Drumheller retired from the CIA in 2005, so where did he get his info from?! Drumheller died last August, so we may never know. Probably he had friends in the intelligence agencies sending him stuff. Some of the info in Sid's emails was junk and some of it was gold.

Where Clinton gets into trouble is that she's supposed to recognized classified info from whatever the source, and if she gets it in an unsecure way then there's a series of steps to be taken to properly secure it. She signed a pledge to that effect when she took office. We know in one case that Sid sent her an email that contained classified info from the NSA that was based on surveillance of a secret meeting of rebel generals in Sudan from only the day before! We know this because the email was released without any redactions to the public last year by accident. It was such classified stuff that it has since been reclassified.

You can read an article in the New York Observer about it here. It's a must read (and it's written by a former NSA official who knows his stuff):

http://observer.com/2016/03/hillary-has-an-nsa-problem/

That should have been setting off all kinds of alarm bells for Clinton. She should have immediately flagged the e-mails and had security officials launch an investigation into how Blumenthal got that info. But she didn't, because she obviously liked having a secret window into what the other agencies were learning, since sharing between agencies is a frequent problem.

So yeah, she's in trouble. This is just one of many reasons.

[Fawke Em]

59. I had read that Observer article when it came and an now follow the author on Twitter.

I don't agree with him about Snowden (I think Snowden provided a much-needed wake up call) but I understand why he doesn't like him. At least he's consistent.

Where Clinton gets into trouble is that she's supposed to recognized classified info from whatever the source, and if she gets it in an unsecure way then there's a series of steps to be taken to properly secure it. She signed a pledge to that effect when she took office. We know in one case that Sid sent her an email that contained classified info from the NSA that was based on surveillance of a secret meeting of rebel generals in Sudan from only the day before! We know this because the email was released without any redactions to the public last year by accident. It was such classified stuff that it has since been reclassified.

I see what you're saying here. I don't have a security clearance (I'm the company's PR person, not a white hat hacker, but I do have to understand why my analysts do to promote them), but I know there are protocols my analysts have to follow to maintain their clearances. For example, if they're doing a routine pen test for a private organization and find child porn, the are REQUIRED to report it to police, even if that means losing the client and the job (I would hope they would, anyway).

So, this begs the question. Is Blumenthal being investigated and if not, why not? If you're receiving classified intel without being a part of the government and not having a security clearance, shouldn't the NSA or the FBI be hot on your tail?

This whole thing stinks.

[paulthompson]

61. Blumenthal

I would hope they're investigating Blumenthal. But he might be able to get off scot free by using the "clueless middleman" defense. He got his classified info from the already retired Tyler Drumheller, who is dead now, and nobody seems to know where Drumheller got his info. Blumenthal could just say "Hey, I was just forwarding stuff, I had no idea if it was BS or not." It would be hard to prove otherwise.

The most guilty party here would be whomever was inside the government and giving classified info to Drumheller. Then Clinton for not recognizing and flagging clearly classified info.

[haikugal]

38. Thanks for this post..K&R!!

[snagglepuss]

52. I don't even think the Queen Liz says "Oh My Goodness". How phony can Hill get?

It reminds my of Asshat George who in the first press conference after 9-11 referred to the perps as "the folks who did this". Folks!!! God that still irks. Now this oh my goodness. Give me a break.

[reddread]

57. its ok

we tortured some folks.

[Warren DeMontague]

63. I don't think the FBI is in the "security review" business.

I could be wrong.