State admits that there may have been successful hacks into Clinton server

[ebayfool]

20. Wouldn't this bolded section indicate a charge of perjury or Contempt of Congress ...

for her Chief of Staff (Miller?)?

Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff also testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi that she was unaware of anyone being consulted about the Secretary’s exclusive use of a personal email address. OIG did find evidence that various staff and senior officials throughout the Department had discussions related to the Secretary’s use of non-Departmental systems, suggesting there was some awareness of Secretary Clinton’s practices. For example:

• In late-January 2009, in response to Secretary Clinton’s desire to take her BlackBerry device into secure areas, her Chief of Staff discussed with senior officials in S/ES and with the Under Secretary for Management alternative solutions, such as setting up a separate stand-alone computer connected to the Internet for Secretary Clinton “to enable her to check her emails from her desk.” The Under Secretary’s response was “the stand-alone separate network PC is great idea” and that it is “the best solution.” According to the Department, no such computer was ever set up.

• In November 2010, Secretary Clinton and her Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations discussed the fact that Secretary Clinton’s emails to Department employees were not being received. The Deputy Chief of Staff emailed the Secretary that “we should talk about putting you on state email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam.” In response, the Secretary wrote, “Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

• In August 2011, the Executive Secretary, the Under Secretary for Management, and Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff, in response to the Secretary’s request, discussed via email providing her with a Department BlackBerry to replace her personal BlackBerry, which was malfunctioning, possibly because “her personal email server is down.” The then-Executive Secretary informed staff of his intent to provide two devices for the Secretary to use: “one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her identity, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests), and another which would just have phone and internet capability.” In another email exchange, the Director of S/ES-IRM noted that an email account and address had alreadybeen set up for the Secretary and also stated that “you should be aware that any email would go through the Department’s infrastructure and subject to FOIA searches.” However, the Secretary’s Deputy Chief of Staff rejected the proposal to use two devices, stating that it “doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.” OIG found no evidence that the Secretary obtained a Department address or device after this discussion.