Benghazi Fail

Report: Logs Show the Clinton Email Server Was Never Breached

Republicans enjoyed a brief moment of climax several days ago when news broke that Bryan Pagliano, the man responsible for administrating Hillary Clinton's email server, agreed to cooperate with the investigation of the email account in exchange for immunity.

Republicans thought the smoking gun and evidence of -- something -- was finally going to be revealed, but what Pagliano revealed was not quite what they expected.

Mister Pagliano delivered security logs to the FBI that show the email server was never hacked or compromised.

The security logs bolster Mrs. Clinton’s assertion that her use of a personal email account to conduct State Department business while she was the secretary of state did not put American secrets into the hands of hackers or foreign governments. [...]

Mr. Pagliano told the agents that nothing in his security logs suggested that any intrusion occurred. Security logs keep track of, among other things, who accessed the network and when.

I'm sure for a certain group of people Pagliano's demand for limited immunity is itself evidence of something, but I don't see it that way.

I see it as a preemptive defense against any spurious claims Republicans in Congress and in the media throw at him. One can't be too careful when dealing with the Select Solyndra IRS Committee to Investigate the Benghazi ACORN Birth Certificate Email Account.

Republicans in Congress have the spent the last 6 years trying as hard as they can to find someone, anyone, to charge with a crime.

  • Thank you, Asby. We keep saying it, maybe some day, some moderates might hear us over the screeching of the right.

  • muselet

    Republicans spend a large percentage of every day declaring that private entities (which employ only qualified, indeed talented, individuals) can do literally everything better than the omni-incompetent government (which is universally staffed by goldbricking morons and featherbedders). Yet those same Republicans are reduced to spittle-flecked rage because Hillary Clinton used a private email server instead of one run by the government, because—they claim—the government server was intrinsically more secure than the private server.

    Curious, isn’t it?


    • Logic schmogic, who needs it?! Amiright?

  • WhittakerWalt

    No evidence of wrongdoing? That just proves it’s an EVEN MORE EFFECTIVE conspiracy.

  • Victor the Crab


    And that’s just the opinion of a whiney diaper baby Berniebum.

    • Scopedog

      Yep–see H.A. Goodman, f’r instance.

      In any case, it is pretty disheartening to see some on the Left pick up and run with a Republican crafted scandal. But when it comes to Hillary Clinton, it really is a matter of “both sides doing it”.

      • Victor the Crab

        I believe the initials in his name stand for Huge Asshole.

  • ChrisAndersen

    I heard a plausible sounding theory the other day that prosecutors might have offered immunity in this case so as to complete the investigation well before the Fall campaign ramps up. If they issued an exoneration right before election they would be accused by the Republicans of trying to influence the election. If they issue it after the election they’ll be accused by Democrats of trying to hurt Clinton by holding back. This way, they take themselves out of the equation.

    But why issue immunity if there was no wrong-doing? Because then they can avoid a situation where an innocent man (really, his lawyers) drags the case out.

  • Draxiar

    It must be driving the GOP utterly friggin’ crazy that the Obama Administration was spic and span all this time. If you think about it though it makes sense because President Obama knew going into the presidency that he would be under constant scrutiny and continually dissected at every moment. So, he made sure that there was nothing there fro them to chew on. This is not to say that he would have been anything but clean but rather that it was likely that extra attention was paid to be sure that every step was reasonably surefooted to avoid any scandal. This is why the made up “scandals” have become zombies that won’t die…the GOP needs to believe they are real so it matches with the fictional Obama in their head.

  • gescove

    It just doesn’t matter. No amount of evidence that there is no wrong doing, no cover up, no stand down order, no carelessness with state secrets, no NOTHING!… the RW will remain utterly convinced otherwise. I was recently in Orange County CA and was stunned by the number of faux campaign lawn signs (e.g., Hillary – 2016 – Prison) that I saw. It’s a derangement. Like the shrill Republican condemnations of how Obama is destroying the country at every turn. Based on what, exactly? Sen. Moynihan once said that “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.” I once thought that was something everyone could agree on. But it no longer seems applicable to the Republican party today.

    • Draxiar

      When “facts” are dismissed and reported as “liberal media bias” or opinion then things get woefully muddy. Add in the fact that people want to believe the propaganda and you get a dangerous breed of ill-informed voter.

    • GrafZeppelin127

      The “proof” is always under the next rock; the “truth” is always around the next corner. If the known facts undermine or contradict the narrative, it’s because there are additional facts that are being hidden and/or as-yet-undiscovered.