Waching daily Apr 29 2017

Congress Refers Hillary's Private Server Company To DOJ For Prosecution

Last September we were among the first to note that Hillary's "Oh Shit Guy" (a.k.a Paul

Combetta), who was responsible for wiping her private server clean with BleachBit despite

acknowledging he was aware of a Congressional subpoena demanding the preservation of all

records, was looking like he would be the 'fall guy' to take the blame for Hillary's

various federal crimes.

Well, as it turns out, Combetta was one of the Clinton aides offered an immunity deal

by Comey which the "FBI was handing out like candy."

That said, Platte River Networks' CEO Treve Suazo was not offered such a deal and, after

obstructing an investigation led by Rep. Lamar Smith (R - TX) of the House Science, Space,

and Technology Committee for the better part of year, he has just been referred to the

DOJ for prosecution.

Per The Washington Free Beacon:

Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee,

has asked the DOJ to prosecute Platte River Networks CEO Treve Suazo for obstructing a

congressional investigation into his company�s role in providing security for Clinton�s

home brewed email server, which began the subject of widespread debate following revelations

that it had multiple security vulnerabilities.

Senior congressional aides apprised of the situation said their investigation shows there

is mounting evidence there were "pretty serious cyber security concerns" with Clinton�s

server.

Multiple subpoenas and letters from the congressional investigation team went unanswered by Platte

River, prompting Smith to refer the case to the DOJ for criminal prosecution.

Congressional investigators allege that the company is guilty of failing to produce key

documents, making false statements to Congress, and of obstructing the investigation into

Clinton�s server.

At least two subpoenas issued by the committee were not answered by Platte River.

As one committee aide noted, "This is atypical.

There were absolutely zero negotiations, there was no willingness on their part to discuss

whether any information they would provide would satisfy the committee's request.

It was just the company, with council, refusing to discuss

the matter."