Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy

Removal from google auto-suggestions

Can we add the fact that "hillary clinton email" does not appear on google auto-suggestions as opposed to searches of other politicians followed by the word "email"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.179.131.54 (talk) 23:28, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I think it does, but you would need a reliable source that comments on this. TFD (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

FBI discovers even MORE hidden Hillary Clinton emails

In November 2019, Judicial Watch reported that the FBI had uncovered more Hillary Clinton emails that were not fully investigated at the time when the director James Comey exonerated her.

[T]he Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) recently sent [the State Department] additional documents as part of the ongoing inter-agency consultation process in connection with other FOIA litigation. [The State Department] is working to determine whether that set of documents includes any responsive, non-duplicative agency records that have not already been processed. [The State Department] will promptly update [Judicial Watch] and the Court once that initial review is complete. 174.158.157.41 (talk) 02:53, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Judicial Watch is not a reliable source of information. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:53, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

It was reported during a TV broadcast on Fox News by Sara Carter Federal investigators have told a court that they found "additional Clinton emails that potentially had not been previously released."174.158.157.41 (talk) 03:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Fox News is not a reliable source of information either. The investigation is closed.[1] – Muboshgu (talk) 03:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Sara Carter is also not reliable. JW asserts the FBI asked State if the "documents" are responsive and non-duplicative of what was already known. So let's wait and see what State says. soibangla (talk) 03:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

This has no weight until multiple RS cover it. So far only unreliable sources have done so. -- BullRangifer (talk) 07:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Do the 31,000 deleted "personal" emails still exist?

I cannot tell from the article whether the 31,000 "personal" emails that Hillary deleted still exist somewhere. The article seems to indicate that they existed in the cloud backup that Datto possessed, but I can't find any indication of whether the FBI did or did not find them in the hardware that Datto turned over to the FBI. Republicans argue that an impartial 3rd party should review all these emails and judge whether or not they were truly private. But I cannot tell from the current article whether this would be possible or not. Shouldn't this loose end be tied up? Do the 31,000 emails still exist or don't they? It feels like this article is incomplete if it does not answer this question. --Westwind273 (talk) 03:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Good point Westwind273. Certainly, the article is incomplete in this regard. It is vague and possibly intentionally concealing. But we can only use reliable source info as defined by wiki, which may not tell the entire truth - hence the term "Fake News" 174.158.119.69 (talk) 18:50, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Westwind273, hope this helps. soibangla (talk) 19:03, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

This article is very outdated. Of those subpoenaed emails (~33000, not ~31000) she destroyed, ~5000 were restored and some even released under FOIA (see list https://www.judicialwatch.org/tag/00687/ ) and FBI still tries to restore all of them (in 2020 even) and Clinton still tries to stop it (last her attempt https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-state-hrc-depo-mandamus-01242/ from 5 days ago on 83 pages https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-lawyers-for-hillary-clinton-ask-appeals-court-to-overturn-order-for-her/ ). From https://www.judicialwatch.org/tom-fittons-weekly-update/fbi-finds-new-clinton-emails/ "The production of documents in this case was to have been concluded with the FBI’s recovery of approximately 5,000 of the 33,000 government emails Clinton took and tried to destroy, but, as you see, this case is still in progress." 2A00:1FA0:422C:50EB:C58A:E35E:CCA2:79D4 (talk) 02:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Judicial Watch habitually misrepresents this matter, among many others. I recommend not believing what they tell you unless corroborated by a reliable source. soibangla (talk) 02:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I am reading directly from lawsuits and H.R.C. "petitions". Judicial Watch is not a source. 2A00:1FA0:422C:50EB:C58A:E35E:CCA2:79D4 (talk) 03:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

But they are not reliable sources either and as primary sources have no weight anyway. TFD (talk) 04:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Judicial Watch has just been added as a source and should be removed immediately. I can't do it on my cellphone.

Once an email is sent it exists in at least two, and often more, places. Deleting it from the sending PC only eliminates that copy. -- BullRangifer (talk) 07:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Judicial Watch subpoena to Google for Clinton emails (Google should produce them by May 13)

She used CarterHeavyIndustries@gmail.com (gmail user name is case insensitive those idiots in Jucial Watch do not know that, LOL) https://www.google.com/search?q=CarterHeavyIndustries%40gmail.com 2A00:1370:812C:9562:4C22:3085:2D74:9E11 (talk) 12:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

She is going to be asked under oath on 2th June!!! Yeah! 94.29.3.116 (talk) 10:36, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Valerie Jarrett

How can you write a lengthy article on this subject and not mention Valerie Jarrett?[2] The March 2, 2015 New York Times article that brought this matter to public attention is dealt with in an awfully low key way, just another item in the tick-tock. Allan Rice (talk) 01:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Allan Rice, that's NY Post you linked to, not NY Times. And it's all speculation and unverified info. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

The Post is just a right of center newspaper. Perhaps readers are interested in the story of how and why this matter got into the mainstream media. You certainly can't figure it out from the way the article is currently written. Allan Rice (talk) 02:07, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Recording: Clinton testimony about all her 💩 on 2nd June

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6b9Wd8xPpg8 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdwm95U0G1w 94.29.3.116 (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2020 (UTC)