Home > Controversy, Elections - Voting > Review of the Hillary Clinton email Scandal

Review of the Hillary Clinton email Scandal

August 7th, 2016 Leave a comment Go to comments
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

August 7th, 2016 original post date
September 5, 2016 update (reflects posting FBI’s Notes during Clinton interview, additional 15,000 (deleted) emails recovered, and Clinton’s alleged memory problems during FBI interview).
September 6, 2016 update (reflects evidence to an apparent cover-up, intentionally destroying records while under official investigation. Additional legal/ criminal citations added.)(Updates are marked in red bold date and indented to show additional reporting).
October 19, 2016 update (reflects additional charges that could be brought vs. HRC and associates involved in removing/ destroying federal records 44 USC § 3106 and § 3105 safeguards).
October 28, 2016 update FBI reopens investigation “due to recent developments.”
November 6, 2016 After 9 days, FBI closes Clinton-email investigation (again).
June 17, 2017 Additional updates, link updates, typographical corrections, further report links, additional legal references.

Hillary Clinton held a press conference at the United Nations in New York which included answering questions about her controversial email scandal (Image Credit: Steve Sands/WireImage).

Hillary Clinton held a press conference at the United Nations in New York which included answering questions about her controversial email scandal (Image Credit: Steve Sands/WireImage).

Review of the Hillary Clinton email Scandal

original article written by Net Advisor

WASHINGTON, DC. FBI Director James Comey said the agency would not bring charges against Hillary Clinton, the now candidate for the 2016 Democrat Party. [Comey’s statements (Official Transcript)].

Early on, Hillary Clinton was very angry over this investigation. In 2015, Clinton reportedly told President Obama to “Call off your F***ing Dogs.

On March 10, 2015, I watched an interview with Clinton. I felt she was not being truthful citing what I saw as non-verbal deception cues. I have several other notations on record citing Clinton’s apparent deceptions (examples: 03/11/2015, 08/15/2015, and 07/25/2016).

[1] FBI Clears Up Hillary Clinton’s Deceptive Statements.

Clinton previously claimed that everything she did was “permitted.” The Washington Post gave this “Three Pinocchios” and the FBI testified before Congress (second video below) that what she did was not permitted.

Clinton said that other Secretary of States did what she did in the past.

The State Department IG found that “Secretary [Madeleine] Albright did not use a department or personal e-mail account during her tenure, and . . . Secretary [Condoleezza] Rice did not use a personal e-mail account to conduct official business.” So neither of those two Clinton forerunners had any classified documents come or go via e-mail.

Former Secretary Colin Powell used both government and personal e-mail accounts, although he had no private server…

…The Wall Street Journal calculates that the total number of classified e-mails on Clinton’s server totaled 2,115. So, among “other Secretaries,” the final score is: Albright 0; Powell 2; Rice 0; Clinton 2,115.”

— Source: New York Post (PDF), 06/03/2016.

Clinton said she was never subpoenaed to testify before Congress. This was also not true. Here is a copy of the subpoena.

Clinton said the FBI investigation was a “security review.” The FBI Director later responded to reporter inquiries and said:

“(I am not) familiar with the term “security inquiry” that Clinton and her aides have used. The FBI chief said he considers the work agents are doing to be an “investigation.”

“It’s in our name. I’m not familiar with the term ‘security inquiry’,’” the director said.”

Clinton has produced a “fact sheet” (cleaner copy) on her website. The Daily Caller found (PDF) “35 lies” and other evasive statements on Clinton’s “fact sheet” website.

ABC News reported that the word “liar” was most associated with Hillary Clinton, more than any other political candidate.

Clinton said she doesn’t think she has lied to the American public, then qualifies her answer with, she ‘hasn’t always been perfect.’

CBS News reported (website/ PDF) that the majority of Americans (67 percent) now say that Hillary Clinton is Not honest or trustworthy.

A video highlight reel was created to show the former Secretary of State’s public statements and compared those with the FBI Director’s findings.

AFTER the FBI Director made the above statements, Secretary Clinton went on Fox News Sunday (FNS) with Chris Wallace saying that her email answers to the FBI were ‘truthful.’ (FNS transcript PDF).

The Washington Post immediately came out and gave Clinton’s statement “Four Pinocchios” (meaning what she said was not true). So Clinton lied about lying?

After basically being called a liar by the FBI, the Washington Post (and by many others) Clinton said she “short circuited,” and still would not admit to her ongoing public deceptions.

[2] Crime.

Based on the above video and other similar statements, it would appear that Hillary Clinton repeatedly provided false, and misleading statements while under the jurisdiction of a department or agency (FBI).

“Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry…”

“…shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years…”

903. False Statements, Concealment—18 USC § 1001 (Bold emphases added to note key wording in the law). Additional, Cornell University Law School.

[3] Off the Record – Permanently?

As it turns out, during the FBI interview with Secretary Clinton, the FBI did not record Clinton’s testimony so it could be publicly reviewed including by Congress and archived.

The FBI also did not swear-in Mrs. Clinton. If someone is under possible criminal indictment, generally one would swear-in the subject under oath before taking legal testimony. If there is a possibility for a criminal arrest, the subject is also read their legal rights.

If the subject under oath lies, they could face the penalty of perjury (28 USC § 1746), in addition to whatever charges may be applied. If the subject is not given their Miranda rights beforehand, those statements could be inadmissible in court. See Miranda v Arizona 384 US 436 (1966). It is extremely odd that the FBI did not record anything, make any notes, and did not advise Mrs. Clinton of her Miranda rights.

UPDATE (09/05/2016): At the time of our original publish date for this post, it was reported that the FBI did not record the interview with Hillary Clinton.

The lack of recording of the FBI-Clinton interview seems to have ignored this 2014 policy memo issued by the Department of Justice.

Since then, the FBI acknowledged unknown person(s) took notes of the interview, but such person(s) was not/ were not stenographers. In other words, there was NO official legal transcript.

Instead the FBI produced what is called Form 302 (FBI Agent’s memos).

The FBI was under pressure to release what information they had due to numerous FOIA requests. Arguably, these FOIA requests would likely have been subject to a federal court subpoena anyway.

The FBI notes are redacted and some information was so sensitive it could not be released. This further contradicts Hillary Clinton’s claims that she ‘did not send or receive classified information.’

Here are the FBI notes: 11 pages (PDF). 47 pages (PDF).

To prevent agents from discussing the Clinton case AFTER it was “over,” the FBI apparently required investigators to sign this non-disclosure agreement (NDA) to prevent them from ever(?) talking about what took place in the case.

When a legal case is over, even a jury involved in the trial are free to talk about it, publish their notes, and some have even written books about what happened.

[4] Congress Holds Hearing with FBI Director.

Congress wanted to know what transpired during the FBI interview. The interview took place, not at the FBI, but rather at Mrs. Clinton’s location, and during the 4th of July weekend (2016), where most of country and news reporters were celebrating Independence Day.

A Congressional Oversight hearing followed where the FBI Director among others were called to testify before Congress. The following is an exchange by former federal prosecutor, former 7th Circuit Solicitor, now Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and James Comely, Director, FBI.

Now we know just a few highlights that Hillary Clinton was not truthful.

The FBI Director acknowledged that Hillary Clinton used home computer(s) to store classified/ top secret data or to the effect, and that this was an “Unauthorized” location to transmit otherwise classified information. Video:

One of the computers holding unsecured and highly sensitive National Security data was stored in a “bathroom closet.”

The FBI had its investigation, but so did the Inspector General. A separate U.S. Inspector General Report found Clinton’s emails had intelligence with the most sensitive classified information on them (video).

  • IG: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs (Fox News).
  • The 9 biggest revelations in the State IG report on Clinton’s emails (Politico).

Here is a copy of the original IG report (summary) (Full Report, 83 pps, PDF).

[5] Judge Napolitano: Case Against Clinton is “Overwhelming.”

Former law professor, retired judge, now a media judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano, discussed the legal basis against Hillary Clinton and said it is ‘Overwhelming, Damning and Grave.’

[6] Admission of Guilt & Obstruction.

Breitbart reported in 2015 that Hillary Clinton has a “long history of hiding documents.”

Clinton stated that she ‘turned over all (her) emails.’

“I have provided all of my work-related emails, and I’ve asked that they be made public…”

— Hillary Clinton. Source: Washington Post, 06/29/2016

This statement is also not true. There was an apparent five month gap in missing Clinton emails. Hillary Clinton and or her lawyers ADMITTED to deleting about 31,000 other emails.

Hillary claimed that the deleted emails were about personal nature such as her daughter Chelsea’s wedding, and yoga routines.

Deleting 31,000 emails would make it difficult for the FBI, Congress or anyone else to ever see or review for FBI’s investigation, and try to protect national security issues. If one deletes one or more – in this case about 31,000 emails, then one did not turn over ‘all’ their emails.

To help facilitate in the cover-up, the Clinton team apparently destroyed further evidence.

A Federal Judge issued an order to Clinton’s then Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills (Mills’ Deposition, 162 pps PDF) to not delete any emails.

What is odd, aside from destroying public records, is that while under legal inquiry, Clinton apparently had the email server(s) in question erased, then joked about it.

In this video, Clinton said she turned over 55,000 pages of email which the FBI said was not true (FBI Statement, P2 , Parr 5-6).

Clinton also printed the emails she choose to submit instead of providing the hard drive, or otherwise electronically storage of the emails. By printing the emails the full headers may be omitted. That makes it more difficult to trace the electronic signatures between email address connections.

It has been questioned whether Hillary’s lawyers even had a security clearance to read sensitive/ classified/ and Top Secret documents.

In 2014, the State Dept. was reportedly “stonewalling” – not providing emails as requested by the Associated Press (AP).

It took a Court Order in 2015 to require Clinton to turn over ALL emails, including the 31,000 deleted emails which Hillary Clinton never did. The Plaintiff’s argued that Hillary Clinton’s (former) State Dept. obstructed FOIA requests (Court Doc).

  • Court: private-account email can be subject to FOIA (Politico).

How do I Avoid Prison?
In an email exchange Hillary Clinton asked to borrow a downloaded book that included a chapter on how to avoid going to jail by deleting emails – permanently.

“The last batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department included one from Clinton asking to borrow a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better,” by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe.

“The Email That Can Land You In Jail.” The chapter includes a section entitled “How to Delete Something So It Stays Deleted.”

— Source: ABC News (PDF)

This could be argued at a conscious attempt to cover up her tracks.

Missing emails.
The U.S. State Dept where Hillary was supposed to be in charge of from 2009-2012 said that they were unable to locate email communications prior to the Benghazi terror attack where four Americans including the U.S. Ambassador were killed.

The spokesperson for the State Dept. said they did not know what emails were turned over and what was not turned over.

Since the July 2016 Clinton interview, FBI recovered some additional 15,000 (deleted) emails that Clinton failed to turn over as she said she did.

[7] Hillary Clinton’s Sudden ‘Amnesia’ During FBI Interview?

UPDATE (09/05/2016): It was discovered that during the (4th of July) holiday weekend interview with the FBI, Hillary Clinton apparently had a sudden case of amnesia.

There were 35 instances where Hillary Clinton basically evaded the FBI’s questions and blamed her 2012 concussion – 4 years ago – as to why she could not remember any key pointed questions (Further archived reports by Reuters/ Daily Mail.UK).

I would argue that Clinton knew exactly what she was doing. She is an experienced lawyer, have been under decades of legal controversy, and has learned how to deceive people. The FBI should have pressed harder on some of these questions as a good prosecutor or investigator should.

If we pretend that Clinton really has lost her memory (coincidentally and exclusively during the time she was Secretary of State), would this become a problem if she were to be President?

A president MUST be in good mental and physical health to perform the duties of the highest office of the land (U.S. Constitution, 25th Amendment).

So we can conclude that one of two things occurred. Either Hillary Clinton lied to the FBI about her sudden memory problems, or she really has memory problems. Both instances should be very disconcerting for voters when considering one as a capable leader.

[8] Sending and Receiving Classifieds emails.

Some of the emails in question involved Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential Campaign AdvisorSidney Blumenthal. A report quoted Blumenthal that he had inside knowledge of the Clinton case. Blumenthal was questioned by investigators and disclosed that he was being paid about $200,000 a year from the Clinton Foundation for part-time work.

“I’d say it’s about $200,000 a year,” Blumenthal said when asked by a committee member how much the part-time work offering up advice and ideas was worth.

— Source:  Los Angeles Times (PDF)

The New York Times reported (PDF) that while Blumenthal was doing this well paid ‘part-time’ work at the Clinton Foundation, he obtained intelligence data on Libya. The Hill reported that Blumenthal had 60 emails covering 120 pages on the topic referencing ‘Benghazi’ and ‘Libya.’

How does someone who is working ‘part-time’ for a ‘charity’ (Clinton Foundation) get confidential emails?

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information…

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

18 USC § 798 – Disclosure of classified information (bold emphases added).

Hillary Clinton responded in a December 6, 2010 email exchange that it is was a ‘good idea’ for U.S. ‘diplomats to stop telling the truth.’

[9] Obama’s Record Prosecutions Under Espionage Act – Except One.

What is interesting to note is that the Obama Administration has prosecuted more people under the Espionage Act than all previous presidents – combined.

Angelo Codevilla, conducted security reviews for Senate Intelligence Committee, now a fellow of the Claremont Institute, and professor emeritus of international relations at Boston University.

Codevilla stated under the 1917 Espionage Act:

“…prohibits the release, communication, or transmission of “information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation…” (793 c).” The mishandling of government secrets should put someone in prison for “10 years” plus a fine for EACH count.

18 USC § 793-798

Another report by attorney Matthew Clark also argues that Hillary Clinton met the definition (violating) the Espionage Act under 18 USC § 793. Clark is Senior Counsel for Digital Advocacy with the ACLJ.

The non-profit, American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) provided further legal analysis and a laundry list of potential violations that could be, or rather should have been applied in the Hillary Clinton case.

But don’t let rules or laws get in the way of a political campaign?

[10] Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice.

The State Department allegedly told Clinton to DELETE emails regarding events related to the September 11, 2012 Benghazi terror attack. Judicial Watch sued to try and obtain the emails in question.

These actions would seem to be an active cover up, obstruction of justice (18 USC § 1503) and destroying official government records.

When two or more people secretly conspiring to delete government records (emails), regardless where they are located, argues to conspiracy against the United States.

“If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”

18 USC § 371 (bold emphases added).

UPDATE (09/06/2016):

Since our August 7th, 2016 post here, Congress has also suggested similar issues.  Jason Chaffetz, Chairman House Oversight Committee sent a letter on September 6, 2016 to Platte River Networks (PRN), Hillary Clinton’s former IT management company. Congress has requested information related to potential evidence destruction.

It is alleged that someone at PRN deleted (destroyed) archives of Secretary Clinton’s email, WHILE under investigation and a Preservation Order (18 USC § 1361), and AFTER conference call with Clinton’s lawyers.

“In brief, the summaries of the FBI’s interviews with a PRN engineer show that within days of a conference call with Secretary Clinton’s lawyers, the engineer deleted archives of Secretary Clinton’s emails, despite knowing those records were covered by preservation orders and a subpoena from Congress.

“The sequence of events leading up to the destruction of Secretary Clinton’s emails… raises questions about whether Secretary Clinton, acting through her attorneys, instructed PRN to destroy records relevant to the then-ongoing congressional investigations.””

— House Oversight Letter, DTD Sept. 6, 2016 (PDF)

This would appear to be conspiracy to cover-up between Clinton’s legal advisors, PRN and or others under 18 USC § 371, and obstruction under 18 USC § 1503.

Someone in the Clinton camp used a software program called “BleachBit” to destroy email records on Clinton’s server that was in connection to her official duties as Secretary of State.

CNN downplays this as as some program you can download and get rid of “old unused files and clearing out internet history and cookies.”

This is partially true, but clearing out ‘internet history’ and ‘cookies’ can be done in a computer browser.

Getting rid of old files can be deleted by hitting delete. Those files will eventually be written over when space is required on the hard drive. This does not permanently delete the files from forensic recovery however, and that is real reason why one would use a program like BleachBit.

“…shredding files to prevent recovery, wiping free disk space to hide traces of files deleted by other applications.”

— Source: BleachBit.org (PDF)

Clearly the Clinton camp did not want the FBI, Congress or anyone to see what she and others talked about as a public official. This would be a criminal act:

“Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

18 USC § 1519 (Source: Cornell University Law School)

A separate letter was sent to the U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia for inquiry.

Next, it was discovered that the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had 13 cell phones, plus 5 iPads, not the one phone Hillary claimed for “convenience.”

So we know this wasn’t true either.

Further, it was found that Justin Cooper, a Clinton aide destroyed at least two of these phones with a hammer or breaking them in half. Cooper reportedly set up Hillary Clinton’s email server, and did not have a security clearance.

[11] Conspiracy Theory.

I have not made it a practice to write about conspiracies but for those who want to entertain the conversation, consider this.

The Republican Establishment clearly is NOT in favor of the candidate who beat out 16 other Republicans for the party’s nomination for President. Some have defected supporting someone who the majority of America considers not honest and not trustworthy (Clinton).

Congress held hearings, and as far as we know, and despite evidence to the contrary, not a single person was even considered for prosecution. If Mrs. Clinton was successfully prosecuted, she could not ever hold office again.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States…”

18 USC § 2071 (b) (bold and red emphasis added).

Section (b) above does NOT require intent to prosecute. Clinton’s own ADMISSION(S), admissions by her lawyers, the State Dept, and others, unlawfully had (private) custody (of the ‘bathroom server’) containing highly classified and other government documents. Such government property (said Clinton emails) was then destroyed (deleted); and (Clinton) publicly made numerous false statements in connection of such emails, and therefore, the above statute 18 USC § 2071 (b) should apply.

So here is the conspiracy theory part. What if the Republican Establishment (along with Obama, DNC, DOJ, liberal media, other Establishment), whom together dislike (or are afraid of) Donald Trump? They dislike Trump so much, that the reason why Hillary was not prosecuted is because it was the Establishment’s only way to try and maintain power?

Any normal person would have been prosecuted and have for far less. Then there is this other oddity. How did a British Secret Service (MI-6) agent get hold of ‘hacked‘ Clinton emails and who killed him?

Republican Richard Nixon, resigned from the Presidency as he was facing impeachment from office, in re: United States v. Nixon (1974).

“The special prosecutor in the Watergate scandal subpoenaed tape recordings made of President Nixon (the “President”) discussing the scandal with some of his advisers. The President claimed executive privilege as his basis for refusing to turn over the tapes.”

United States v. Nixon (1974) Case Brief.

Others also draw parallels to the Nixon-Watergate scandal to Hillary Clinton’s email Gate.

The only modern U.S. President, 2nd in U.S. history to be impeached was William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton (D-Ark.). Bill Clinton was impeached by the U.S. house in 1998 for “perjury and obstruction of justice.”

The reason why Pres. Bill Clinton was not booted from office in the late 1990’s is that impeachment is required to be passed by both Houses of Congress. The Senate acquitted Clinton on the perjury charge but was split on the obstruction charge (Source: CNN, 1999). Without the Senate also passing impeachment, allowed Bill Clinton to finish his term (Further reading: Standards for Impeachment).

Hillary Clinton and Pres. Barack Obama, both have done far more than Nixon ever did in comparison.

When laws appear to be are broken by major elected officials, and those officials are not ever held accountable; that the law does not apply to them, that is a serious problem.

[12] Voters Turn.

In the final analysis, despite the evidence and clear statutes against Hillary Clinton and potential others, it appears that if you are wealthy and powerful the law does not apply to you?

Voters in the November 2016 election can make their views be heard at the ballot box. Either to support what appears to be a clear circumventing of justice as stated hereto; or to not permit such a person from holding high office.

Hillary Clinton said on August 5, 2016 to ‘hold her accountable.’ That decision is now in the hands of the voters.

Oct. 19, 2016 UPDATE ____________________________________________

Additional federal charges that may (or should) apply to anyone involved in the following, including but not limited to Sec. Hillary Clinton, her attorneys and others who either “removed,” or “destroyed” (deleted), (then attempted or actually did) permanently delete federal records.

§ 3106. Unlawful removal, destruction of records

“(a) FEDERAL AGENCY NOTIFICATION.—The head of each Federal agency (Sec of State) shall notify the Archivist of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration, corruption, deletion, erasure, or other destruction of records in the custody of the agency, and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records the head of the Federal agency knows or has reason to believe have been unlawfully removed from that agency, or from another Federal agency whose records have been transferred to the legal custody of that Federal agency.”

—  44 USC § 3106 Archives.gov (bold emphases added)

The DOJ also cites there is a legal duty, to preserve federal records (44 USC § 3101) which includes not only paper records but electronic records including but not limited to email (36 CFR § 1236.22). Deleting or destroying federal records unilaterally is not within the authority of (for example) a Secretary of State.

As Hillary Clinton was the head of the Dept. (Sec. of State) she, must establish safeguards “against the removal or loss (including destruction) of records.”

§ 3105. Safeguards

“The head of each Federal agency shall establish safeguards against the removal or loss of records the head of such agency determines to be necessary and required by regulations of the Archivist. Safeguards shall include making it known to officials and employees of the agency–

(1) that records in the custody of the agency are not to be alienated or destroyed except in accordance with sections 3301-3314 of this title, and

(2) the penalties provided by law for the unlawful removal or destruction of records.”

—  § 3105 safeguards. Archives.gov.

A Secretary of State having installed an unsecured computer server in a home bathroom that involved classified communications regarding National Security matters, only to have publicly admitted in destroying many such government records thereafter, seem to fall within the statutes hereto.

Oct. 28, 2016 UPDATE ____________________________________________

The Director of the FBI, James Comey issued a written letter that discussed in part recent information that has led the law-enforcement agency to reopen the slated ‘Hillary Clinton email case’ to determine whether such information uncovered is relevant to said and related cases.

Mark Toner, Spokesperson for the U.S. State Department said that the FBI hasn’t notified them. Former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton said that the FBI needs to disclose “the full and complete facts.”

As discussed above, Clinton ADMITTED to deleting (destroying) some 33,000 email records. So getting to “the full and complete facts” seems obvious as something she did not want anyone to do – hence the private email server(s) when she was Sec. of State.

Democrats who praised Director Comey’s work just a few months ago, are now his harshest critics. Many Republicans have reversed their stance supporting Comey’s move to reopen the case based on additional evidence allegedly found.

Regardless of the politics, the FBI has a job to do; and that is to determine if ANY laws, statutes, codes or other legal procedures were violated, and to enforce such as part of their mission.

November 6, 2016 UPDATE ____________________________________________

After 9 days after discovery of 650,000 new emails, FBI Director Comey is not recommending charges in Clinton-email investigation (again). We calculated if one actually read the said new 650,000 emails in question the Feds would have had to read just over 50 emails per minuet over the last nine days (and never stop or sleep during this time).

The FBI did NOT say anything regarding to any investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

Additional Reports:


  • Wikileaks Published 30,322 Hillary Clinton emails (Additional 30,000 email were deleted and destroyed by Clinton and her lawyers – unless the emails were hacked*).

*Clinton emails hacked?

Original image, videos, sources by may be copyright by their respective owners. Original article content, Copyright © 2016-2017 NetAdvisor.org® All Rights Reserved.

NetAdvisor.org® is a non-profit organization providing public education and analysis primarily on the U.S. financial markets, personal finance and analysis with a transparent look into U.S. public policy. We also perform and report on financial investigations to help protect the public interest. Read More.


Related posts:

  1. Frederick A Hammons
    August 10th, 2017 at 06:41 | #1

    I’m from Germany. I can’t believe you guys in the U.S.A. have not put this woman in prison yet.

  1. No trackbacks yet.