Clinton’s Email Scandal Is Much Bigger Than Clinton

by | Sep 14, 2016 | Articles | 6 comments

nif_emailscandalby James Corbett
September 14, 2016

In yet another sign that the establishment media has completely lost any semblance of a grounding in reality, the Washington Post just opined that “The Hillary Clinton email story is out of control,” whining about how much attention the story of Clinton’s homebrew email system is receiving in this campaign. This despite the fact that the facts on the ground here are incontrovertible:



But never mind all of that; the Washington Post has decided that the public is too concerned about the issue so I guess it’s time to move on, right?

wapo-hillary-biasWrong. Thankfully this is 2016 not 1966, and the dinosaur media no longer dictates the news cycle like they used to. CNN and the NYT can call it a “stumble” all they want, but we’ve seen the video; we know that Clinton’s feet didn’t move at all and she was literally dragged into that van. Similarly, we don’t have to take the talking heads word for it; we know that Clinton broke the law with the emails, tried to lie her way out of it, and has only gotten away with it because of her political connections (and the body count, of course; let’s not forget the body count).

But as it turns out, there’s an even bigger story here than Clinton’s illegal activities or the establishment media’s willingness to cover it up.

A new email exchange between Clinton and former Secretary of State Colin Powell has just been released. In it, Powell is remarkably frank about how he defied CIA/NSA and State Department orders not to use personal computers and how to avoid leaving a data trail that could become part of the public record (and thus subject to FOIA):

“I didn’t have a BlackBerry. What I did do was have a personal computer that was hooked up to a private phone line (sounds ancient.) So I could communicate with a wide range of friends directly without it going through the State Department servers. I even used it to do business with some foreign leaders and some of the senior folks in the Department on their personal email accounts.”

He goes on to explain:

hillarypowell“However, there is a real danger. If it is public that you have a BlackBerry and it is government and you are using it, government or not, to do business, it may become an official record and subject to the law. Reading about the President’s BB rules this morning, it sounds like it won’t be as useful as it used to be. Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data.”

Shocking, right? Well, it’s much worse. It’s not just Secretaries of State pulling these kinds of shenanigans to evade potential FOIAs and cover up whatever they’re trying to cover up when “do[ing] business with some foreign leaders.” It’s all of government trying to do this.

As TechDirt points out, it wasn’t until 2014 that the DC Circuit Court finally ruled that city officials couldn’t use private servers to hide information from the public record anymore.

And as long-time Corbett Reporteers will remember, the FBI goes to remarkable lengths to create separate storage devices for investigatory material that they use to keep information from being FOIA-ed.

foia-denied-575The point here is not in any way to exonerate Clinton, of course. She is vile, corrupt, a criminal, a neocon warmonger, and, oh yeah, a threat to all of humanity.

The point is that if the powers-that-shouldn’t-be truly don’t want you to know about a piece of sensitive information then it isn’t going to be available via FOIA.

But if you’re reading this, then you probably already knew that. And if you didn’t know it, maybe it’s time to put down The Washington Post and spend more time with the alt media.


  1. I can’t help but grin at the humor.
    “…because of her political connections (and the body count, of course; let’s not forget the body count).”

  2. Colin Powell has been covering things up for a long time;

    think Mỹ Lai, in 1968.

  3. Greg,

    Not defending Hilary, but what evidence are you referring to when you say “it’s obvious she was engaging in a ‘pay to play’ by selling access to classified info on her server to foreign powers in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation”?

    I’m not sure what she was doing, other than using unsecured systems to transmit and receive classified information. But the assertion you make above must be based on factual evidence – right? Can you supply links for this evidence, so we can all look at it?


  4. It also sounds like neither one (Clinton/Powell) trust State Dept staffers.

  5. Here’s my theory,

    Benghazi was an orchestrated “October Surprise” created by same people that orchestrated 9/11 in order to derail Obama’s foreign policy triumph of bagging Bin Laden in the spring of 2011, thereby creating the narrative that Obama is weak on foreign policy in order to give an edge to Mitt Romney in the run up to the November elections of 2012.

    And as far as Colin Powell is concerned, well, I believe there are many in Washington that know 9/11 was an inside job and weren’t initially part of the scheme. If you look back, Colin Powell seems to be one of these people that was strung along after the fact. He never looked comfortable to me holding that vial of anthrax while giving that bullshit presentation to the United Nations Security Council in the lead up to the war in Iraq. You can tell he didn’t want to do that lying speech.

    Of course, he like many others in Washington know how these same people that orchestrated 9/11 use government servers to spy on and keep politicians in line so to speak, which is probably why he told Hillary, his successor, that he used a personal computer to email foreign leaders “without going through State Department servers”.

    That’s my theory.

Submit a Comment


Become a Corbett Report member