Hillary Clinton emails obstruction of justice in Travelgate inquiry, Independent Counsel Robert Ray final report January 5, 2001, Appendix 3 the White House’s non compliance with subpoena requests for electronically maintained documents

Hillary Clinton emails obstruction of justice in Travelgate inquiry, Independent Counsel Robert Ray final report January 5, 2001, Appendix 3 the White House’s non compliance with subpoena requests for electronically maintained documents

“By July 1993, the Clintons and their associates had established
a pattern of concealment with respect to the Clintons’ involvement
with Whitewater and the Madison S&L. Because of the complexity
of the allegations of misdeeds involving these institutions, documents
and files are critical to any inquiries into the matter. Yet,
at every important turn, crucial files and documents ‘‘disappeared’’
or were withheld from scrutiny whenever questions were raised.…Senate Whitewater report June 13, 1996

“Mrs. Clinton personally was involved in the discussions regarding the White House’s handling of documents in Vince
Foster’s office following his death. Mrs. Clinton made known her views that investigators should be denied ‘‘unfettered access’’ to Foster’s office prior to the search of the office on July 22, 1993.”…House Investigation of the White House Travel Office Firings,  September 26, 1996

“The fact that the Secretary exclusively used and maintained a private email server, leaving her with sole and unfettered access to the complete universe of her emails, raises a number of transparency and accountability issues. The fact that the Secretary’s attorneys selfselected the emails to be shared with the State Department raises numerous questions about the completeness of the production of Secretary Clinton’s emails to the Committee, as well as more generally in response to other oversight inquiries by the House with which the Committee has been charged. These questions, which have been raised solely due to the actions of the former Secretary, necessitate a third-party review of the server to ensure that all responsive documents have been produced to the Committee.”…Trey Gowdy, Select Committee on Benghazi update May 8, 2015

Reported at Citizen Wells on April 29, 2015.

“From the NY Times June 23, 2000.

“Statement on Travel Office Inquiry

ASHINGTON, June 22 — Following is the statement today by the independent counsel Robert W. Ray on his investigation of the firings at the White House travel office in 1993:

The office of the independent counsel has concluded an investigation commonly known as the travel office matter. This matter concerned allegations that David Watkins, former assistant to the president for management and administration, and First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton made false statements in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001, committed perjury in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1621, or obstructed justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1503, in connection with their statements and testimony concerning the May 19, 1993, firing of seven employees of the White House travel office. Independent counsel has concluded that the evidence was insufficient to prove that Mr. Watkins or Mrs. Clinton made any knowingly false statements, committed perjury or obstructed justice in this matter.”

“In contrast to the cooperation received from the White House in the F.B.I. files investigation, concluded in March of this year, this office experienced substantial resistance in its efforts to obtain relevant evidence in the travel office matter.

For example, the White House asserted unfounded privileges that were later rejected in court.

White House officials also conducted inadequate searches for documents and failed to make timely production of documents, including relevant e-mails, in their possession.”

http://citizenwells.com/2015/04/29/hillary-clinton-lies-obstruction-of-justice-documented-in-legal-documents-and-ny-times-article-senate-whitewater-report-independent-counsel-robert-w-ray-statement-june-22-2000-ny-times-january-8/

From the Final Report of the Independent Counsel Robert Ray January 5, 2001.

Appendix 3 – White House’s non compliance with subpoena requests for electronically maintained documents.

“I. INTRODUCTION

As of the date of the filing of this Final Report, the White House has failed to produce all documents to which this Office is entitled. Grand juries in the Eastern District of Arkansas and the District of Columbia between March 4, 1994 and December 10, 1998 issued 216 subpoenas to the White House and its affiliates, which required the search of records responsive to those
subpoenas, including all electronic records and e-mails. The Independent Counsel first learned from news accounts in February 2000 that the White House may not have conducted complete searches of records within its custody. It was not until several months later that this Office fully realized the scope of the White House’s lack of compliance with lawfully issued subpoenas.

II. THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL LEARNED IN FEBRUARY 2000
THAT ELECTRONIC RECORDS FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE
ADMINISTRATION MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SEARCHED
IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAWFULLY ISSUED SUBPOENAS.

The Washington Times published a story on February 15, 2000 that first alerted the public and the Independent Counsel that, due to a glitch in the White House’s computer server, over 100,000 e-mails were never searched in response to subpoenas. The Independent Counsel, as well as several Congressional investigations issued these subpoenas to the White House. The Washington Times article reported that Northrop Grumman Corporation (“NGC”) contractors
working at the White House discovered that one of the four White House Lotus Notes e-mail servers handling the e-mail for about 500 computer users had been mislabeled, preventing these e-mails from being properly managed.1 The contractors first discovered the problem in May 1998 and determined that it affected servers dating back to August 1996.2 The problem was not
fixed until November 1998 according to the article.3

The White House Counsel sent a letter to the Independent Counsel on March 15, 2000 detailing the problems with its computer system and its failure to capture certain incoming e-mails for certain periods of time.4 These records had not been reconstructed, and therefore, White House Counsel Beth Nolan was unable to determine whether any responsive documents to grand jury subpoenas had been affected.5 The White House Counsel recently revealed on October 30, 2000 that “incoming e-mail” could include any e-mail not a part of the Executive
Office of the President’s (“EOP”) Automated Records Management System (“ARMS”), such as the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the various units which report to the White House Military Office, the White House Access and Visitor Entry System (“WAVES”), any user of the All-in-One system, and the Quorum system.6

This Office initiated an investigation as a result of the White House’s failure to notify this Office of the problems with its computer system and its inability to certify that all responsive documents to lawfully issued grand jury subpoenas have been produced. The investigation continues at the time of the filing of this Final Report. However, this Office has determined that the White House’s failure to search all records within its care, custody, and control, in response
to lawfully issued subpoenas, could be broken down into seven categories of records:

1. Failure to search reconstructed e-mail for the time period of January 1993 through June 1994;
2. Failure to search incoming e-mails to 526 users for the time period of August
1996 through November 1998;
3. Failure to search incoming e-mails of approximately 200 users for the time period of November 1998 through May 1999;
4. Failure to search over 600 backup tapes of former employees’ hard drives;
5. Failure to search incoming e-mail from the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative, White House Military Office, WAVES system, and any user of
the All-in-One system;
6. Failure to search a correspondence database system known as Quorum; and
7. Failure to search the internal e-mail system in the Executive Residence.”