Featured Post

Towards a Pro-America, Pro-West Foreign Policy

For years, I have written in this humble blog that Obama and his team have created an unprecedented foreign policy disaster. The disaster be...

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

Hillary's Emails: This Ain't Going Away (I Think, Maybe, Possibly)

I am not good at calling US elections. During my long career in the Foreign Service, I was great (modest, eh?) at calling foreign elections and spotting new political actors and movements. Not so good in my own country. We've gotten kinda strange, and there are just so many unknown factors in the equation, that I can't do the political algebra too well.

With that disclaimer, I am with trepidation going to make a tepid prediction, always conscious that words live forever on the internet.

Here goes.

Hillary Clinton's email problems are not going away. She does a very good job of putting on a poker face and dishing out a loud and aggressive "word salad" whenever some journalist has the rare temerity to raise the matter, but the issue is a serious one, much more serious than she lets on.

I have written before (August 13, 2015) on the Clinton email scandal but the issue is getting worse for her. Press reports show that my old friend and then Executive Secretary of the Department Steve Mull (and here) warned Clinton's personal aide, Huma Abedeen, of problems with  Clinton's use of a personal email system. He offered to get the Secretary of State a government email address and Blackberry, but was shot down by Abedin. Mull's emails clearly show that people at the top of the State Department, including Undersecretary Kennedy, were aware of Clinton's use of a private email server.

This batch of revelations and that the FBI is now investigating Clinton's relationship with the Clinton Foundation SHOULD put the brakes on the Hillary bus. Is that going to happen? I don't know. I have written before  (and here) of how Hillary and Bill manage to dodge the consequences of their corruption, will they be able to do it again?

My crystal ball just lost reception . .  .


58 comments:

  1. I pray you are correct, for the good of the country and the world.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Clintons are a good illustration of how "...some animals are more equal than others."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Why some animals eat their young" is more like it.

      Delete
  3. If you are a Democrat, delay is your friend. And remember who the Attorney General is.

    People say that if the case is muffled, FBI/Justice leaks will doom her anyway. Doubtful. If the Clinton gang can once get the nomination sewn up, then wandering press allegiance is once again secure, and FBI/Justice leaks, however numerous an outraged, will fall in a forest with no one to hear. They will make no sound.

    So the Clintons face a two-front war: bottling up the investigation long enough and winning the nomination fast enough that the latter is determined before the investigators get so frustrated as to burst. A complex problem complicated by the fact that, unlike her husband, Hillary's a terrible politician and poor criminal.

    And it's not as if she can dial up Jim Moriarty. Although any number of first-rate brains are delighted to provide advice, including criminal-defense advice, apparently none above third-rate will give actually criminal advice.

    Given especially the blue wall and the margin of outright voter fraud, I still think she has a better-than-60% shot at the presidency if she does everything right, more's the pity. But in the moment, with things happening swiftly, getting or (worse) not getting conflicting advice and information, it might be hard to do enough things right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dip's blog needs a like button for the comments. This comment is pretty spot on. A lot depends on Biden. If he will sub in, Obama may let her be prosecuted. Obama cares about Obama more than anything else. If he feels that his reputation will not be tarnished he will torpedo her. If she has some dirt on him, then the stonewall will stay in force.

      Delete
  4. Sir Mad,

    Timing is everything. With Justice and the FBI only recently expanding the investigation, we're looking at months before anything happens on the various scandals. So we get to where, end of April or late in May even?

    If Sanders' train derails as badly as I hope it does, he'll have no claim on the nomination. If Hillary is forced out too ... my, oh my, what an interesting convention the Democrats will have!

    Green Bear

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dad, I told you a year ago and several times since, Hillary Clinton isn't going to win the democratic Primary. Liberals and Islam have one thing in common, they hate women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget Ma Ferguson and Lurleen Wallace, speaking of the first ladies of southern Democratic governors who achieved office on their husband's coat-tails.

      Delete
    2. She bears no resemblance to Lurleen Wallace, who was a put upon housewife impressed into service by her appallingly self-centered husband. If their is anything that marked George Wallace as a horrible human being, it was his treatment of Lurleen, especially during the years running from 1962 to 1968.

      Lurleen's function was to defeat Alabama's term-limits provision. Her husband was the (publicly admired) incumbent governor when she ran. That was then, and Hellary has always been willful, ambitious, and unscrupulous. She's quite distinct from her husband. An analogue might be Sala Burton or Maurine Neuberger, who were at least as hip-deep in electoral politics as their husbands. (Burton and Neuberger were merely wrong on issues, not horrors).

      Delete
  6. She will never be called to task on the email issue. The media is so desperate to avoid Trump that they will continue their love affair with the Clintons, however unrequited it will always be.
    I expect that between election day and inauguration day, Obama will issue her a full pardon, whether or not she is President-Elect. What fun that will be!

    Graham

    ReplyDelete
  7. To quote a shrewd observer in a comments thread at the blog The Right Coast:

    The sister of the King of Spain, who is the daughter of the previous King, has been charged with some sort of tax fraud. Meantime the wife of an ex-President of the USA is above the law.

    It would seem that Spain's crowned republic is more republican than the US's elective monarchy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some of the accounting is likely dubious, but figures regarding the budget for maintaining the Windsor clan (the Queen, about 20 of her relatives, and their retinue, including 20 large pieces of real estate) are such that the cost might be less than a tenth of the cost of maintaining the Obamas.

      Delete
    2. Heh, heh. The real estate belongs to the government anyway so if a monarch didn't use it a bunch of politicians would. And they wouldn't run it frugally, as you hint. I'm no royalist, but I am a monarchist; that is, I'm not much interested in the personalities and their lives, but I think the institution a great success. As Hayek observed, the results of human action are often much more impressive than the results of human design.

      Delete
    3. The real estate is held under a variety of tenures, Crown Estates, the Duchy of Cornwall, and personal property she can bequeath at her discretion. None of it is (strictly speaking) public or state property. The Queen has plenary discretion over its use, though she's circumscribed in her exercise of it to avoid public scenes. I think all of her relatives at Kensington Palace are paying rent.

      As for the personalities, there are some interesting curios. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are impressive on a number of scales. Princess Margaret made a number of unforced errors (among them marrying someone unmentionably awful) and then slowly went down the alcoholic drain (making herself difficult to her mother, her sister, her servants &c). The children of that ruined woman have assiduously kept their name out of the papers for more than 30 years and have never paid a dime to a divorce lawyer. Three of their four maternal side cousins married idiots who've generated one embarrassment after another (in addition to the more jejune embarrassments these 3 have generated on their own).

      Delete
  8. One would hope that in a world where a General, a hero in modern times, was beaten down, vilified, and faced the law, for consorting material with his mistress, hardly touches what Hillary has done.
    But, I do not hold my breath....Hillary is the last of the "lead cows", what we call those old cows that shove their way around.....long after their time is passed. One can only hope....East Texas Rancher

    ReplyDelete
  9. I was top secret control officer for my combat support group while stationed in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War. If I had been this careless with handling any classified information, I would still be in prison!

    ReplyDelete
  10. First of all, the MSM is not going to pursue this story. They've gotten on Hillary Clinton's bus and can't get off without seriously damaging their own credibility.

    ReplyDelete
  11. BJ Clinton gets blowjobs in the White House-nobody cares.
    Hilliary involved in inside trading-nobody cares.
    Clinton Foundation steals money from Haiti charities-nobody cares.
    Sandy Berger steals documents from Library of Congress-nobody cares.
    Do I need to continue? The dept of Justice is a corrupt Democrat organization, the eight? supreme justices should be replaced with the three monkeys-hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. The savings would be considerable and end results the same.
    The great republic experiment has failed, nobody any longer upholds his/her oath.
    And while we are on the subject
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-20/tying-it-all-together-rifle-lost-during-fast-and-furious-found-el-chapos-hideout
    When will Obama be impeached?

    ReplyDelete
  12. There's a conjecture slowly making the rounds that the plan being floated to retroactively demote retired Gen. David Petraeus -- for less-egregious security violations than Hillary's -- is a way of preparing public opinion for an indictment of Herself. Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that there's any love between her and Obama. If there's a chance Crazy Uncle Joe "I regret my decision not to run this year every day" Biden could jump in when the time is ripe, I think Obama would go for it. Biden hasn't been Obama's bitch for seven years for nothing.

    If there's anything to this conjecture, watch for an indictment about a month before the Democrats' convention.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh I'm looking forward to Hillary fighting it out in the early primaries and losing to Bernie. That's when Lynch will step in and do the justice shuffle for democrats which means Hillary drops out of the race she is losing to 'straighten out' her record that has been so badly smeared and tarnished by the vast right wing conspiracy. I am so looking forward to that day that I can put off thinking about what will happen when Bernie wins the democratic party nomination.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The Administration really has a problem with the Hillary e mail business and some other unexpected tie ins. If they indict it's over for the Dems in the presidential election and as a party. It also makes the O look bad (she was HIS SOS for several years). If they don't indict now (regardless of the reason) the "people" will make the inevitable conclusion that she and they are above the law. And if they don't indict, then disciplinary action against Patreaus will come back against them. If they slow roll the investigation against Hillary it'll have the drip drip effect. I think from their view point a decision will have to be made fairly quickly to make the best of a very bad situation of their own making.
    James the Lesser

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anybody got the 411 on Jim Webb's hithers and thithers?

    Arkie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Webb is an actual Democrat. Those no longer make of the party.

      Delete
    2. Welcome he. That way, even if a Republican wins the Republican nomination, he can still win. It becomes a four-way race: the Democrat, the Republican, the Donald, and Bloomberg.

      BTW, hello Mr. Wall.

      Delete
    3. Oops. Comment in the wrong place. That was supposed to be a reply to your comment about Bloomberg entering, attended by gigabucks. My apologies.

      Delete
    4. Hey there a6z...where ever you land.

      Delete
  16. Hello. A Canadian here, on the outside trying to look in, I guess. Was hoping the DiploMad or another guest could dispel my own theory: Hillary never expected nor intended to win. Not now, not 8 yrs ago. She had to know the personal email server would disqualify her, but set it up pretty much on day 1. Obama let it slide as insurance against her betrayal while "serving." What did she "lose" 8 yrs ago? 4yrs SoS with self-selected record of her activities. Herself, Bill, Chelsea, everybody connected to the Foundation vastly wealthier. Obama governed the way she would have: diktats, czars, DoA healthplan and gun control, blame GOP. In 07-08 the GOP focused on "Stop Billary." She took the slings and arrows, allowing an unknown cipher to slide in unvetted and unopposed (Unopposed? You Betcha!). My prediction: Hillary indicted, bows out, pardoned. Not President, but richrichrich. Old man Bernie gets medical problems. Dems need somebody in a hurry. Recognizable, already bought, proper gender, proper race. Easy! She won't even have to move her stuff into the White House. 8 more years of Obama

    If any/all of this is too far out, I apologize for polluting your comment board

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome...I believe some Canadians make better Americans than many Americans born and raised here.

      Delete
    2. Hi, neighbor. Given that there's a common language, a trade agreement, and a history of pacific contact (at least after 1815) between our two countries, I don't think there are many of us who mind your listening in.

      I don't think we'll have 8 more years of Obama. For one thing, we have a Constitutional Amendment limiting the Pres. to two terms (two and a partial if he starts as vice president who is sworn in when the president under whom he served dies or is incapacitated). My guess is that in a scenario such as you describe, the Democratic Party will probably put forth Joe Biden; possibly Martin O'Malley (Gov. of my home state of Maryland, who has a lagging campaign).

      I note you're pretty current on your southern neighbors' hangups about race and gender.

      BTW, are Banff, Waterton Lakes, and the Laurentides still spectacular scenery?

      Delete
    3. Our Canadian Friend that I'll call "Bacon" was actually referring to Michelle Obama:

      "Recognizable, already bought, proper gender, proper race. Easy! She won't even have to move her stuff into the White House."

      Delete
    4. Ain't gonna happen. A critic of Obama from his law school days offered that he seemed to want to BE the 'president' of the law review rather than accomplish anything in the post. He's on air talent and will be ready to play golf and run his mouth for big bucks the rest of his life. As for Mooch, she's not that ambitious. She quit practicing law in 1991 in favor of a succession of administrative sinecures (which paid suspiciously well when her husband landed the chairmanship of some key subcommittee in the Illinois legislature). By some accounts, she wanted her husband ca. to land the job of President of the Joyce Foundation (for which he was interviewed) and get out of electoral politics all together. Pat Buchanan, who observed two first ladies up close, gave his opinion in 2011 that she was not happy in the role and wanted to go home.

      Delete
    5. "will be ready to play golf and run his mouth for big bucks the rest of his life"

      I think his ambition is the UN as Sec general but with little actual work.

      Delete
  17. In World War II, patrol orders for specific submarines were probably classified as Top Secret. Anyone asking a sailor in Pearl where they patrolled, whether to the Sea of Japan or the shipping routes from the Dutch East Indies would be asking for TS information. This would not go over well, but the questions themselves reveal little to nothing.

    Also in WWII, anyone asking an employee of Ford regarding Sherman tank production, perhaps details of the gun caliber, would be asking for TS information. This would not go over well, but the questions themselves reveal little to nothing.

    BUT, anyone asking a citizen in Tennessee about the “Manhattan Project” would be doing more than asking for TS information. He would reveal that he was aware that this Special Access Program existed. If his question involved Uranium separation techniques, he would reveal a dangerous understanding of the nature of the SAP involved. Consider this TS query as catastrophic, even if nothing else happened. Revealing the existence and nature of Special Access Programs is what Hillary has done.

    The degree of loss her is unprecedented in the absence of losing a major war.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There was a Congressman who did reveal some TS information about submarines and there was an estimate by Lockwood that it cost about 8 subs, as I recall. It was the depth that the Japanese were setting depth charges, I believe.

      Delete
  18. Now, Mr. Mad, since you left the Foreign Service as a senior level, why don't you educate us all what might have happened to the likes of us had we put top secret info on our personal servers?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a NON senior level, the immediate issue would be that someone had either:
      1. Exported a classified document off a CLASSNET terminal onto thumb drive or burned it onto a CD. EITHER should not have been possible if IPC had done their job and disabled the associated drives.
      2. Printed out a classified document and scanned it into an unclassified PC (either Opennet or home PC).

      First operation requires either incompetent IM section or collusion.
      Second operation would be easy.
      EITHER operation is criminal activity and would be treated as such by the RSO if/when it came to light.

      Delete
    2. Yep, yep, yep. Hillary Clinton would sure look good in an orange jumpsuit.

      Delete
    3. Kepha, my friend, in effect she's already campaigning for Obama's third term; she would just change her slogan to "Orange is the new black."

      Delete
    4. We have actually seen a photo of her in orange. VERY poor choice, under the circumstances.

      Delete
    5. Kepha, had I done anything similar to what Hillary has done, I would be blogging (if allowed internet access) from a Fed institution.

      Delete
    6. Yes, Dip. Even down on my low level I understood that you don't compromise national security. Come to think of it, I'll stop being respectful to Baron Boddisey and Dymphna at Gates of Vienna, and go back to calling Her Disgrace "Shrillary Shroooooo".

      Delete
  19. Diplomad
    You once wrote that the job of the First Lady of nations governed by strongmen was to launder money. In the US, we saw that on a smaller scale in Arkansas with the disappearing billing records and wildly successful (first and only time?) commodities trading. In an inversion of roles, we have more recently seen it when Herself was SoS. After a little flurry 10 days ago, news on the public corruption investigation has gone dark. Is this another bullet she can dodge?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. After earning 3 advanced degrees and wandering in and out of McKinsey-type consulting, academic administration, and television broadcasting, Chelsea has imprudently gone to work for Mama's money laundering operation. If a guy can dream, you'll see indictments handed down of three Clintons and perhaps some dependents and hangers on like Huma.

      Delete
    2. Time was, a mother would teach her daughter at home how to do her laundry.

      Delete
  20. The Clintons do not think they're above the law. They know it. I'm not expecting the Holder-Lynch Department of Lawfare to do a damned thing about it. Laws are for inconvenient people you want to blackmail, like Gen. Petraeus.

    As for Hellary, she's in danger of losing both Iowa and New Hampshire. In national polls, Sanders appears to have whittled her plurality down to 12% of the partisan Democratic electorate. The LIVs could break very quickly for Bernie if he lands a couple of punches. Recall what happened to Walter Mondale in 1984. Gary Hart was at this stage of the game in a much weaker position re Fritz than Bernie is re Hellary.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There is a question making the rounds: "Is Hillary to big to go to jail?" I believe this is better directed to a representative of the pants suit industry. It looks like the FBI will recommend prosecution. If they do that in itself would be amazing. Whether Justice follows through I don't know. I know this is going over old ground but, is this being "managed"? If so by who? Or has it gotten away from who ever was managing it? Who would gain by her downfall? If the FBI recommends prosecution, what's Justice's (Obama) reaction? Stonewall and slow roll (not good for Hillary), withdrawal from the race and case closed (does that benefit the Obamaites?). Actual indictment? If so then what?
    12 months ago I would have never believed we'd even be talking about this. I think there is a civil war going on in the democratic party, largely unseen because of the MSM. I think the Obamaite wing of the party initially let this go on as a warning to Hillary, but they have largely lost control (too much of it has gone public and gotten a life of it's own) of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Enter Michael Bloomberg and his gazillions of dollars.

      Delete
  22. I've changed my mind. Hellary has just issued a lightly-veiled threat to the FBI. Now they have to bring her down out of simple self-preservation. Dear God, she's a chump. Trebles all round!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Andrew McCarthy has some thoughts regarding Hillary

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430211/hillary-clinton-email-fbi-department-justice-obama


    https://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2016/01/25/hillary-clintons-email-scandal-appears-gravely-criminal/

    ReplyDelete
  24. Excellent share, this is a really quality post. In underlying objects theory I’d like to write like this too. Taking time and real effort to make a good article.www.hungarianbusiness.net |

    ReplyDelete
  25. Pretty portion of content. I just stumbled upon your weblog and in accession capital to assert that I acquire in fact enjoyed account your weblog posts. Any way I will be subscribing on your augment or even I achievement you get admission to constantly quickly.www.showcarsupply.net |

    ReplyDelete
  26. Fantastic post however I was wanting to know if you could write a litte more on this subject? I'd be very thankful if you could elaborate a little bit more. Cheers!www.home-in-singapore.net |

    ReplyDelete
  27. well, this is an amazing thing that I found here. You tried best to achieve your thoughts. www.nc-technology.net |

    ReplyDelete
  28. You have done a great job. I will definitely dig it and personally recommend to my friends. I am confident they will be benefited from this site. www.assurahealth.net |

    ReplyDelete
  29. I really loved reading your blog. It was very well authored and easy to understand.www.legaltechnologyblog.org |

    ReplyDelete
  30. Thank you so much! Really rich content and very useful information. I found my problem’s solution starting over here.www.nc-technology.org |

    ReplyDelete
  31. I have not much time to visit many websites. But today I found this site accidently. I explored much information which is useful to my life. Thanks!www.oil-home.org |

    ReplyDelete
  32. Things are very open and intensely clear explanation of issues. Was truly information. Your website is very beneficial. Appreciate your sharing.www.top7business.org |

    ReplyDelete