Remember the Clintoon \u201cprivate\u201d e-mail server brouhaha?\u00a0 You know, the one where the serving (at the time) SECSTATE refused to use government email, had her minions set up a “private” email server \u2013 which later was professionally wiped, but which has been confirmed to have contained over 2,000 classified items, including 22 items classified Top Secret as well as more than one SAP and\/or TS\/compartmented item?<\/p>\n
Well, we have some recent news concerning that little \u201cshortcut\u201d taken by Clintoon.\u00a0 And from Clintoon’s perspective, the news isn\u2019t that good.<\/p>\n
First<\/span>:\u00a0 the Romanian hacker \u201cGuccifer\u201d was extradited to the US a few weeks ago.\u00a0 That apparently was not coincidental<\/a>.<\/em>\u00a0 You see, it appears \u201cGuccifer\u201d \u2013 who is currently in Federal custody – may well now be cooperating with the FBI in their investigation of related to the Clintoon “private” e-mail server.\u00a0 (The administrator of that \u201cprivate” e-mail server, Bryan Pagliano, is also believed to be cooperating with the FBI.)<\/p>\n It also appears that Guccifer penetrated the Clintoon \u201cprivate e-mail server\u201d \u2013 easily.\u00a0 He claims to have done exactly that<\/a><\/em>.\u00a0 While the claim cannot be independently verified now (due largely to destruction of the original server), longtime cybersecurity experts who have knowledge of his claims say that the method Guccifer claims to have used to penetrate what little security did exist on Clintoon’s “private” e-mail server is eminently plausible.<\/p>\n The \u201cso what\u201d?\u00a0 Well, \u201cGuccifer\u201d may well be quite good at breaking computer security \u2013 and security on Clintoon\u2019s \u201cprivate e-mail server\u201d was reportedly rudimentary at best.\u00a0 But I\u2019m betting the foreign intelligence services of Russia, China, and maybe a few other adversaries are likely even better than Guccifer, and have access to even better methods and tools.\u00a0 And if Guccifer relatively easily penetrated that private server and thus obtained access to the classified information illegally stored there, well, . . . .<\/p>\n Second<\/span>:\u00a0 it also appears that Clintoon may be forced to give a deposition regarding the case<\/a>.<\/em>\u00a0 So far, she\u2019s been spared the \u201chorror\u201d of telling her story under conditions requiring a truthful answer – like a LE interview, or a deposition given under oath.\u00a0 Looks like the latter may be upcoming, presumably in the relatively near-term future.<\/p>\n Third<\/span>:\u00a0 while Clintoon herself hasn’t yet been deposed, apparently the same is not true of her “close aide” Huma Abedin.\u00a0 Abedin was reportedly interviewed by the FBI recently<\/a><\/em>.\u00a0 And while the FBI hasn’t commented on the interview, I’m guessing it wasn’t a social call to discus the weather, or to ask her opinion on the latest fashions. (smile)<\/p>\n And, finally<\/span>:\u00a0 a curious expense on the part of the Clintoon campaign has been uncovered and made public.\u00a0 In Feb and March, apparently the Clintoon campaign made payments to a Nevada company \u2013 a firm that provides IT security services.\u00a0 What services do they provide?\u00a0 Well, it seems that the company \u2013 American Document Destruction, Inc. – \u00a0apparently specializes in document and hard disk drive destruction<\/a><\/em>.\u00a0 The payments could have paid for the destruction of up to 14 hard drives.\u00a0 Hmm.<\/p>\n Yeah, I think I’ll keep following this story.\u00a0 This could easily get really<\/span> interesting.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n (Author’s note<\/span>:\u00a0 yes, I know that “Clintoon” isn’t the way the individuals I reference when using that spelling spell their last name.\u00a0 The variant spelling here is intentional.\u00a0 IMO, the individuals I’m referencing when using that variant spelling are little more than poor cartoonish caricatures of individuals worthy of holding high national office.\u00a0 The spelling “Clintoon<\/span><\/strong>” is intended to highlight that fact.) <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"