The Hildabeast update

Hillary's prison face 2My anonymous friend has checked in with another Hildabeast update:

More Hildabeast in the news. You can’t make this stuff up. It seems likely that Patrick Kennedy at the State Dept. has been running interference on behalf of Hillary for years. He has clearly been doing his best to insure that no more of her emails are subject to review by the IG for the Intelligence Community and likely has had a hand in changing at least four certifications from confidential to privileged as part of the deliberative process, an issue raised by whistle blowers.

Thus I was happy to see that John Kerry had appointed a Czar to oversee the production of Hilldabeast documents. What that announcement didn’t include was the fact that the new Czar maxed out her donations to Hillary for the primary, $2,700, a few weeks ago.

Normally, I think that new administrations should not go after prior administrations for breaking the law. It is too banana republic and we inevitably need to move forward. But not this time. I think the first year of the next administration needs to be spent putting half the Obama administration in jail in order to move us out of banana republic status.

A new lawsuit has been filed against the State Dept. asking an important question, particularly in light of the fact that two of the documents on Hillary’s e-mail server were classified not only Top Secret, but compartmentalized. Just so you know, that means it requires more than merely a Top Secret clearance to view that information. It is on a need to know basis and there are all sorts of safeguards that one must go through to view it.

A new lawsuit is demanding that the State Department explain how Hillary Clinton’s private attorney, David Kendall, got permission from the State Department to retain copies of Clinton’s emails after the agency determined some of them were classified.

The suit was filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Washington by freelance journalist David Brown, who sent State a Freedom of Information Act request last month asking for all records about the decision to allow Kendall to retain a thumb drive containing copies of about 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to State in December.

Kendall said in a letter to Congress recently that on July 8, the State Department provided him and his law partner Katherine Turner with a safe to hold the drive. He said both he and Turner have “TOP SECRET” clearances.

After a request from the FBI to return all copies of the emails, Clinton instructed Kendall to give up the thumb drive, which he did in early August.

Lawyers who represent clients in national security cases say it’s highly unusual for a private attorney to be given permission to hold classified records.

“If one of us tried to do this, we’d have our clearance yanked that very day and have a search warrant served on us and something different happened here,” said Brown’s attorney Kel McClanahan. “Not only agree did [State] allow him to maintain these records, but it’s unclear if they even pushed back. … We decided somebody needs to get to the bottom of what exactly happened here. What is it: favoritism or did David Kendall somehow satisify some requirement that others of us never even knew to aim for?”

Kendall and the Clinton campaign did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the case. . . .

And then there’s this, from Hildabeast’s facebook as of this morning (with my friend’s comments in blue):

I wanted you to hear this directly from me:

Yes, I should have used two email addresses, one for personal matters and one for my work at the State Department. Not doing so was a mistake. I’m sorry about it, and I take full responsibility.

[That is a rather unique use of the term “I take full responsibility.” She will acknowledge what she did but accept no consequences]

It’s important for you to know a few key facts. My use of a personal email account was aboveboard and allowed under the State Department’s rules.

[Is that why she put out an email to all State Dept. personnel in 2011 reminding them that it was against State Dept. policy to conduct State Dept. business on a private email account, or why, in 2012, her IG cited as part of a report leading to an ambassador’s resignation that he was using a private email account? I am not going to get into the weeds here and actually research all of the rules, but someone I am sure has. I will look for it.]

Everyone I communicated with in government was aware of it.

[This troubles me, I am not sure why. But then again, “what difference does it make?” That they allowed Hillary to do this without complaining is certainly not proof that what she did was “above-board,” “authorized” or legal.]

And nothing I ever sent or received was marked classified at the time.

[Is your spidey sense tingling? Oh my. She has learned to prevaricate at the feet of the master. She is implying that she would not recognize classified information unless it was marked, yet she was the classifying authority and the operative EO spells out precisely what information should be classified. And I’m sorry, but no one familiar with our national security could possibly see information based on real time satellite data or commo intercepts and not know this information was Top Secret. Nor could our Sec. of State not realize that she shouldn’t be sending out private emails about ongoing diplomatic negotiations as that would be . . . classified. Oh my.]

As this process proceeds, I want to be as transparent as possible. That’s why I’ve provided all of my work emails to the government to be released to the public,

[I’m not even going to bother.]

and why I’ll be testifying in public in front of the Benghazi Committee later next month.

[well, it would look suspicious if she took the Fifth.]

I know this is a complex story. I could have—and should have—done a better job answering questions earlier.

[What she really means: You aren’t supposed to be paying any attention to this. Stop asking me questions about things too complex for you to understand.]

I’m grateful for your support, and I’m not taking anything for granted.

[What she really means: My coronation is scheduled for 2016. Don’t you dare screw this up.]

I understand that you may have more questions, and I am going to work to keep answering them. If you want to read more, including my emails themselves, please go here:

Thank you,


Oh wow. Ron Fournier has the perfect response to this from Hillary. Fournier was in love with Hillary until this private server surfaced. Now he is offended . . . and apparently Hell hath no fury like a Fournier offended. His response is a series of 19 questions . . . and I am going to go out on a limb here and assume Hillary is not going to be doing an interview with him at any time soon. This is one you should read when you get the chance.

This whole situation is so dirty it’s beyond belief.

The above is all from my friend.  I, Bookworm, will add just one thing:  I asked a Leftie friend of mine “Do you think the email situation will affect Hillary’s presidential candidacy?”  There was a dead silence, followed by a firm “No.”

From my friend’s pause and then that brief answer I inferred one of two things:  (1) Relying primarily on intermittent readings of the MSM, my friend had no idea what “email situation” I was talking about or (2) my friend knows about the email thing but couldn’t care less because it matters only that Hillary get into the White House.  Either answer goes a long way to highlighting the fact that we have an uninformed electorate that is blindly loyal to a political party.