Hmm: Five Month 'Gap' in Hillary Emails?

Guy Benson
|
Posted: Sep 15, 2015 10:20 AM
Hmm: Five Month 'Gap' in Hillary Emails?

It may be time to resurrect the Nixon comparisons, which were recently raised by someone with unique expertise on such matters. Via Judicial Watch, which has done yeoman's work using FOIA and other transparency tools to pry information out of the opaque Obama administration.  What's this about?

Judicial Watch today released newly obtained Department of State documents showing a nearly five-month total gap in the emails former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided to return to the State Department late last year. The documents also show that one key State Department official did not want a written record of issues about the Clinton emails. The documents also raise new questions about the accuracy of representations made to Judicial Watch, the courts, Congress, and the public by the Obama administration and Clinton. The documents were produced under court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit Judicial Watch filed on May 6, 2013 (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00687)). The lawsuit was filed after the Obama State Department violated federal law and failed to respond to two separate FOIA requests, including a request for records about the actual production of the emails records by Clinton to the State Department. The first batch of documents obtained by Judicial Watch contains a heavily redacted email from State Department official Eric F. Stein to Margaret P. Grafeld, dated April 21, 2015, with the subject “HRC Emails.” Stein is deputy director of global information systems at the State Department and Grafeld is deputy assistant secretary of global information systems. Stein reports to Grafeld that the “gaps” in Clinton’s emails include:

Jan. 21 – March 17, 2009 (Received Messages)
Jan. 21 – April 12, 2009 (Sent Messages)
Dec. 30, 2012 – Feb. 1, 2013 (Sent Messages)

So within those "more than 50,000 printed pages" of emails the Clinton camp brags about turning over (while failing to mention that they only did so under duress and that the trove doesn't include more than 32,000 deleted emails), there are weeks-long stretches over which Mrs. Clinton apparently neither sent nor received any emails.  That seems...curious, no?  Judicial Watch's write-up goes on:

The chart shows a significant email gap lasting 40 days before Miguel Rodriguez, with the email address “Miguel_Rodriguez @clinton.senate.gov,” sends Clinton’s account an email on March 18, 2009. Rodriguez worked in the Clinton State Department and is now a private attorney representing Clinton aide and confidante Huma Abedin in Clinton email-related litigation. This “email gap” information was forwarded to other top officials in the State Department, including Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy. These emails raise questions about whether Clinton told the truth last month when she declared, under penalty of perjury, “I have directed that all of my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State….” Clinton made this statement in response to a court order Judicial Watch obtained in separate FOIA litigation. Another new State Department email shows that one of the agency’s top officials for the records management and public disclosure did not want to create a written record about issues. State Department FOIA official Peggy Grafeld, in an October 20, 2014, email wrote to her colleagues,“Fyi. I’d prefer to discuss, rather than email. Thx.” The State Department redacted details about what caused Grafeld’s desire for secrecy. The State Department almost completely redacted several September 25, 2014, “high” importance emails about Clinton’s emails, including information about “earlier conversations and fact finding.”

A fresh Washington Post-ABC News poll shows Hillary's image and support among Democratic women falling precipitously, which may help explain Bernie Sanders' double-digit leads in CBS News' latest surveys of Iowa and New Hampshire:


Overall, voters aren't buying Hillary's insistence that she's done nothing wrong, even though she's kinda sorta sorry, but not really:


The public is more evenly split on whether Hillary's "use of personal email" is a legitimate news story, with a narrow plurality (44/49) saying it's not.  It's her improper use of personal email, including sending and receiving highly classified material through an unsecure server, that's the core issue.  The FBI wasn't called in to examine whether Hillary used a gmail account to send photos of puppies; the feds got involved due to potential lawbreaking and the possibility that national security was compromised.  That's the element of this scandal that opponents should emphasize; most Americans view national security breaches as a legitimate issue, as they ought to.