Conservative Musings

Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details

Showing posts with label fifth amendment. Show all posts

Thursday, June 30, 2016

Hillary's Server Caused All Sorts Of Problems.

Deposition: Huma Abedin Was Frustrated With Hillary's Private Server

(Wire Services Photo)

By Greg Richter | Wednesday, 29 Jun 2016 04:06 PM

0
inShare

Huma Abedin revealed in a deposition Tuesday she was at one point frustrated by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server for official government business, Bloomberg News reports.

The deposition of one of Clinton's top aides was part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch to release Clinton's emails and look into her use of the server.

Abedin, Clinton's chief of staff at the time and now vice chair of her campaign for the White House, told Judicial Watch lawyers she was concerned that Clinton's ability to conduct business was being impeded. Judicial Watch's lawyers told Bloomberg that Abedin was cooperative during the deposition.

Tuesday's deposition at least partly focused on an email exchange Abedin had with Clinton in 2010 in which Abedin told Clinton they "should talk about putting you on state email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam."

Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Servergate Is An Example Of Clinton's Ability To Lead. Details Don't Matter, US Secrets Don't Matter As Long As Her Highness Gets What She Wants When She Wants It And Regardless Of Who It Hurts (Or In The Case Of Benghazi--Kills)

Report: Clinton Server's Software Had Hacking Risk

Tuesday, 13 Oct 2015 08:47 AM

The private email server running in Hillary Rodham Clinton's home basement when she was secretary of state was connected to the Internet in ways that made it more vulnerable to hackers, according to data and documents reviewed by The Associated Press.

Clinton's server, which handled her personal and State Department correspondence, appeared to allow users to connect openly over the Internet to control it remotely, according to detailed records compiled in 2012. Experts said the Microsoft remote desktop service wasn't intended for such use without additional protective measures, and was the subject of U.S. government and industry warnings at the time over attacks from even low-skilled intruders.

Records show that Clinton additionally operated two more devices on her home network in Chappaqua, New York, that also were directly accessible from the Internet. One contained similar remote-control software that also has suffered from security vulnerabilities, known as Virtual Network Computing, and the other appeared to be configured to run websites.

The new details provide the first clues about how Clinton's computer, running Microsoft's server software, was set up and protected when she used it exclusively over four years as secretary of state for all work messages. Clinton's privately paid technology adviser, Bryan Pagliano, has declined to answer questions about his work from congressional investigators, citing the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.

Some emails on Clinton's server were later deemed top secret, and scores of others included confidential or sensitive information. Clinton has said that her server featured "numerous safeguards," but she has yet to explain how well her system was secured and whether, or how frequently, security updates were applied.

Clinton has apologized for running her homebrew server, and President Barack Obama said during a "60 Minutes" interview Sunday it was "a mistake." Obama said national security wasn't endangered, although the FBI still has yet to complete its review of Clinton's server for evidence of hacking.

Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon said late Monday that "this report, like others before it, lacks any evidence of an actual breach, let alone one specifically targeting Hillary Clinton. The Justice Department is conducting a review of the security of the server, and we are cooperating in full."

The AP exclusively reviewed numerous records from an Internet "census" by an anonymous hacker-researcher, who three years ago used unsecured devices to scan hundreds of millions of Internet Protocol addresses for accessible doors, called "ports." Using a computer in Serbia, the hacker scanned Clinton's basement server in Chappaqua at least twice, in August and December 2012. It was unclear whether the hacker was aware the server belonged to Clinton, although it identified itself as providing email services for clintonemail.com. The results are widely available online.

Thursday, September 17, 2015

Don't Mess With The Clinton Machine Otherwise You WILL Get Run Over! Pagliano Just Found Out He Is In Their Cross Hairs!

Hillary's Secret Police: New Target Is Bryan Pagliano
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
Published on TheHillaryDaily.com on September 14, 2015

The Clinton campaign played some serious hardball last week after Bryan Pagliano invoked his 5th amendment right against self-incrimination and refused to testify before the Benghazi Committee. To do that, a witness must have a reasonable belief that any testimony offered by him would lead to criminal charges.

That's why Pagliano is a grave threat to Hillary and may hold the fate of her run for the White House in his hands. He' set up and maintained her private server and he's the only one who with intimate, first-hand knowledge of what happened to all of the documents on it. If he thinks he might have criminal exposure, that's a big problem.

And that's why the Clinton folks were so upset about his announcement that inferred criminal conduct.

So they decided to take some action and change the storyline.

Enter the Hillary Clinton "Secret Police," the Clinton operatives who sent Pagliano a warning about what happens when you cross the Clintons.

All of a sudden, confidential information about payments to Pagliano -- ostensibly made by the Clintons -- was leaked to The Washington Post. (Anonymously, of course) The Clinton aides helpfully added that he might not have reported all the payments on his mandatory confidential executive branch financial disclosure form and found a friendly State Dept. spokesman, anonymous of course, to confirm it.

Of course, a failure to report this outside income is a felony.

Did Hillary's people leak this information implicating Pagliano in the commission of a felony to hold it over his head and keep him quiet? Or were they trying to suggest that the only criminal conduct that Pagliano's testimony might expose had nothing to do with the server, but rather with his own failure to report the alleged payments?

Either way, they were trying to intimidate him.

But here's the really important question: How did Clinton's "secret police" learn that Pagliano didn't disclose his payments from Hillary in the first place? (If in fact, the Clintons did really pay him?)

Answer: Their usual way. They wrongfully invaded his confidential State Department personnel file, just like they did with Kathleen Willey and Linda Tripp. It's what they do when they are in a crisis mode. No rules apply to them.

It's important to remember that the key word here is "CONFIDENTIAL," a word that means nothing to the Clintons when they want to make a point. How the campaign aides suddenly had access to Pagliano's confidential personnel file was not revealed, of course.

They have some help at the State Department. Last month, another helpful unnamed Hillary-friendly State Dept. official reported that there was "no evidence that he ever informed the department that he had outside income," also a felony. Since when does the State Department make public comments concerning personnel files of former employee?

According to The Washington Post, anonymous campaign aides said that the Clintons personally paid Pagliano $5000 to set up the server before he came to the State Dept. and continued to pay him to maintain it. They did this to avoid the impropriety of the State Department paying for the non-governmental use of the server by Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton and Bill Clinton's aides. (If that concern were true it would be a first for the couple who emptied out everything that wasn't nailed down in the White House and trucked it up to Chappaqua.)

The campaign aides said that the $5000 payment was listed on a disclosure form he filed in April 2009, just before arriving at the State Dept. That's curious because he was also paid $15,861 by Hillary's political action committee, HILL PAC from January 2009 through April 2009 -- exactly when the server was set up and launched.

The Clinton leakers said that Pagliano was paid by the Clintons even though he was an employee of the State Department at a salary of $136,000 (only $13,000 less than Hillary's own salary as Secretary).

The timing of the leak was instructive. The Clinton folks knew that once Pagliano invoked the Fifth Amendment, he could not say a single word about the controversy without jeopardizing his privilege. That's how it works. You can't decide to talk about some aspects of the matter and refuse to speak about other points. Once you discuss anything at all, there is a danger that you have waived your right. So the Clinton folks knew that Pagliano would not respond.

The Secret Police are at it again.

Thursday, April 2, 2015

Department Of "Injustice" Protects Lois Lerner

BREAKING: Holder’s DOJ Makes Massive Announcement About Lois Lerner

Virtually everyone who paid even the slightest bit of attention to the news last year heard about the massive scandal at the IRS, in which they targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny as part of their tax-exempt status applications.

At the heart of the targeting scandal was former IRS employee Lois Lerner, who headed up the tax-exempt status division, and who also suspiciously “lost” all of her emails from the period in question, then refused toanswer questions when grilled by Congress.

Few can forget how Congress went round and round with both the IRS and the Obama administration to get to the bottom of the scandal, efforts which persist to this day, although the media has largely moved on.

Lois Lerner was twice called before Congress to testify, and although she gave an opening statement professing her innocence, she then clammed up and pleaded the Fifth Amendment, refusing to testify further as she would likely incriminate herself.

This refusal to cooperate earned her a charge of contempt of Congress last year, a charge which remained unaddressed by the Department of Justice, until today that is.

According to Politico, the DOJ has determined that Lerner in fact did not waive her Fifth Amendment rights, as Congress claimed, and have declined to further pursue the contempt charge brought up against her by Congress.

Sadly, this is not a shock or a surprise, as the contemptible Attorney General Eric Holder has gone out of his way to remain a thorn in the side of the Republican-controlled Congress, and block any and all efforts they make to uncover and expose any of President Obama’s numerous scandals, the IRS targeting being just one.

Hopefully, a Republican will become President in 2016, and the hard work can be started to clean up the mess made by the Obama administration.

The first order of business in the next Republican administration will be to start holding the many criminal actors of Obama’s team accountable, and they can start with Lois Lerner, who still isn’t entirely off the hook yet, though she may dodge the contempt charge.

Monday, December 15, 2014

Good Bye Your Constitutional Rights!

Congress has just overruled your 1st, 4th and 5th Amendment Rights.

Rlgrimes12/12/2014

As of today, Bill HR4681 has passed the house and senate, and is currently undergoing arbitration before being sent to the President for his signature in to law. The law says that the intelligence community can collect, retain, and disseminate all electronic communications including voice calls [without any constitutional restrictions] on all US citizens and everyone else in the world. And they have 5 years before they are supposed to destroy the records. However, they can keep them indefinitely if they fall into several categories of interest.

It is all out in the open now. Your 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendment protections are gone. This act gives new meaning to ‘land of the free, home of the brave.’ The intelligence community isn’t doing anything in secret any more. Americans are now living in an environment much like the days of the old Stalinist Soviet Union, where the presumption was that all conversations were monitored and one takes measures to have a ‘private’ conversations.

So turn up your radio or turn the water on in the sink and watch what you say on the phone or Facebook, even casual remarks on twitter may come back to haunt you in the future. Don’t believe me, I have pasted the relivant parts of the bill below this story. Still don’t believe it? Just go to www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4681/text and read it from the horse’s mouth.

What are you willing to do about it?

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[H.R. 4681 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

H.R.4681

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

of the

United States of America

TITLE III–GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subtitle A–General Matters

Sec. 309. Procedures for the retention of incidentally acquired

communications.

SEC. 309. PROCEDURES FOR THE RETENTION OF INCIDENTALLY ACQUIRED

COMMUNICATIONS.

(a) Definitions.–In this section:

(1) Covered communication.–The term “covered communication”

means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired

without the consent of a person who is a party to the

communication, including communications in electronic storage.

(2) Head of an element of the intelligence community.–The term

“head of an element of the intelligence community” means, as

appropriate–

(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community;

(B) the head of the department or agency containing such

element.

(3) United states person.–The term “United States person”

has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign

Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801).

(b) Procedures for Covered Communications.–

(1) Requirement to adopt.–Not later than 2 years after the

date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the

intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the

Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the

requirements of paragraph (3).

(2) Coordination and approval.–The procedures required by

paragraph (1) shall be–

(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National

Intelligence; and

(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.

(3) Procedures.–

(A) Application.–The procedures required by paragraph (1)

shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not

otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or

certification issued by a court established under subsection

(a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence

Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or

similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result

in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a

United States person and shall permit the acquisition,

retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject

to the limitation in subparagraph (B).

(B) Limitation on retention.–A covered communication shall

not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless–

(i) the communication has been affirmatively

determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign

intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to

understand or assess foreign intelligence or

counterintelligence;

(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to

constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law

enforcement agency;

(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably

believed to have a secret meaning;

(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably

believed to be non-United States persons;

(v) retention is necessary to protect against an

imminent threat to human life, in which case both the

nature of the threat and the information to be retained

shall be reported to the congressional intelligence

committees not later than 30 days after the date such

retention is extended under this clause;

(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or

compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery

obligation, in which case access to information retained

for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be

reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an

annual basis; or

(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is

approved by the head of the element of the intelligence

community responsible for such retention, based on a

determination that retention is necessary to protect the

national security of the United States, in which case the

head of such element shall provide to the congressional

intelligence committees a written certification

describing–

(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to

protect the national security of the United States;

(II) the duration for which the head of the element

is authorizing retention;

(III) the particular information to be retained;

and

(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence

community is taking to protect the privacy interests of

United States persons or persons located inside the

United States.

Read more at http://universalfreepress.com/share-story-now-congress-just-overruled-1st-4th-5th-amendment-rights/