State Department identifies 23 violations, 'multiple security incidents' concerning Clinton emails

Just in time

The State Department revealed Monday that it has identified “multiple security incidents” involving current or former employees’ handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails, and that 23 “violations” and 7 “infractions” have been issued as part of the department’s ongoing investigation.

The information came in a letter to Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who is responsible for overseeing the review.

“To this point, the Department has assessed culpability to 15 individuals, some of whom were culpable in multiple security incidents,” Mary Elizabeth Taylor, the State Department’s Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Legislative Affairs, wrote to Grassley. “DS has issued 23 violations and 7 infractions incidents. … This number will likely change as the review progresses.”

The State Department said it expected to conclude the investigation by Sept. 1, and acknowledged that the probe was unusually time-consuming.

“Given the volume of emails provided to the Department from former Secretary Clinton’s private email server, the Department’s process has been necessarily more complicated and complex requiring a significant dedication of time and resources,” Taylor wrote.

The department also noted that disciplinary consequences were pending.

“In every instance in which the Department found an individual to be culpable of a valid security violation or three or more infractions, the Department forwarded the outcome to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security’s Office of Personnel Security and Suitability (DS/PSS), to be placed in the individuals’ official security file,” Taylor wrote. "All valid security incidents are reviewed by DS and taken into account every time an individual’s eligibility for access to classified information is considered.


Even the mainstream media have abandoned Hillary.
She is no longer useful.

1 Like

Now Barr needs to do his job and appoint a special prosecutor to handle her whole case.

1 Like

That first bit seems to say something that I find shocking.

Here it is: “The State Department revealed Monday that it has identified “multiple security incidents” involving current or former employees’ handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails, and that 23 “violations” and 7 “infractions” have been issued as part of the department’s ongoing investigation.”

Please note that these incidents involved “former employees” who handled “Hillary Clinton’s emails”.

Now, look at that uncritically one might think: they may go after Hillary; but, no, that is not what it seems to say.

The former employees are those that handled the emails.

Well, who, besides Clinton obviously, handled the emails?

Well, there is her tech guy and people on her staff.

BUT the wording leaves open the possibility that some of these people handled the emails later, which would be during the investigation.


You mean maybe like those who leaked information about the emails as whistleblowers? Could people who didn’t go along with the cover up be part of those meant?

Because we had inklings about these emails before they were all found on Weiner’s laptop and those rumors / whatever has to start somewhere.

So what I’m guessing I’m saying is that while I still expect Hillary to skate, and I certainly don’t expect Schiffless to pay a price for all his leaking, I wonder just how vengeful the Deep State may end up being to people who handled Clinton emails in ways that didn’t serve the Deep State’s interest?

If I were a Republican in Congress I think I’d be sensing a danger lurking at this point…

During the hearings there were at least four of her staffers and deputies responsible for sending emails that violated the law including attempts to remove classified markings to avoid their later being found during FOIA requests.

Remember too, we have emails back and forth between Hillary and Staff specifically stating that the private server and account was to circumvent any FOIA requests producing her emails.

They planned the coverup before even committing the crime.

Absolutely no question of criminal intent.


But, and this may be the cynic in me, would you be surprised if the people in question weren’t those who committed the original crimes but those who wanted those crimes exposed?

The way the story is written seems to leave that open.

1 Like

Four years ago sure, under the current regime, no.

Don’t be so sure. Trump may have peeled away some of a top tier of those Obama labored to install but there’s no telling how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Donald Trump WILL NOT lock her up…:wink:

Why won’t he? There’s paper trails everywhere. Are you saying he won’t because she’s connected?

Well, besides agreeing with what @Rurudyne has stated, Trump himself long ago declared that he didn’t care about that.

And then besides all that generally, America just doesn’t hold those at the top accountable, unfortunately.

Crooked Hillary is a criminal and anybody with the slightest bit of intelligence knows it. The reason she was not prosecuted for the crimes that she obviously committed is because the Obama regime was just as corrupt, which, of course, she was a part of. How convenient


It’s not up to Trump, Einstein. It’s up to the attorney general to charge her. He could charge her today because the evidence is overwhelming and conclusive

1 Like

One has to ask, why isn’t the house investigating the issue?

1 Like

And congress could easily investigate the entire issue yet the House is mysteriously quiet on the issue.

Besides all that, I thought investigations were a waste of money. At least that’s what we’ve been hearing for the last couple years.

Investigations into phony concocted political crimes are a waste of money. That’s what Democrats do. Investigations into real crimes like what Hillary did are not a waste of money. As usual, you distort and pervert the facts in order to promote your propaganda


Besides the destruction of evidence and the bitbleaching of the computers there is the Clinton Foundation that stole funds directed towards the suffering Haitians and the pay for play with Russia for the uranium. I would think the uranium one deal would be considered treason and could not be swept under the rug.


Aside, when we learned that Francis O’Rourke had been a hacker in his youth my reaction was: finally, a Democrat who can erase what’s on a smart phone rather than hit it with a hammer.

1 Like

Yet nothing but crickets from the DOJ and the House.

The hypocrites of the left.

I often wonder why there are no investigations and can only come up with one reason. The right doesn’t want to piss off half the country investigating criminal activity of the beloved clinktons.

1 Like