The State Department says it did NOT withhold key email from the FOIA response,

[pnwmom]

Last edited Wed Apr 27, 2016, 10:03 AM - Edit history (1)

despite reports that have been spread around DU.

Normally, I wouldn't post a story from the Free Beacon, but they are the outlet that posted the original story that was then echoed elsewhere, and the State Department contacted them with a correction.

This was the original uncorrected story that was posted in Late Breaking News and has dozens of recs:'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1428582


This is the update from the State Department.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[blm]

1. Free Beacon is MOONIE News. Anyone posting from there is not interested in truth, imo.

Moonie News was set up to craft and deliver propaganda for BushInc/GOP over 3 decades ago. Free Beacon is just one of their latest vehicles.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/bad-moon-rising-john-gorenfeld/1102623743


Bad Moon Rising: How Reverend Moon Created the Washington Times, Seduced the Religious Right and Built an American Kingdom

What does it say about American politics when a famous 1970s cult leader publishes a Washington newspaper, dresses up in the U.S. Senate offices like King George III, and no one in D.C. seems to care? One night in 2004, at one of Washington’s most outrageous dinner parties, members of Congress bought a shining crown and robes to a billionaire mystery man

>>>>

[sharp_stick]

2. Exactly right

and the fact that it's original bullshit was reprinted in other RW outlets and brought up here as a legitimate breaking news articles is absolutely pathetic.

We have some really interesting posters around here right now.

[pnwmom]

3. Unfortunately, Moonie news is the only place I could find with the State Dept. response.

Places like Lawnewz just have the original story.

[blm]

4. I understood that. Just wanted others to be clear about its origins. State Dept.

likely cornered them to include their response - Free Beacon wouldn't have done it on their own.
Of course, they know their false story spread all over the internet already, so few would read the State Dept's response.

[azurnoir]

16. could be there's a reason for that

[NWCorona]

25. So is it OK for Bernie supporters to use this site against Hillary?

[Sancho]

37. Sure...as long as you are posting a retraction!

[karynnj]

23. BLM because only right wing sources are covering this at all -- only right wing sources

are covering the State Department explanation. Even before the SD correction, the RW sources noted that there was no November 14th response with email -- and they then, with no proof, suggested that this should have been September 2014. The point is that JW itself knew the November date was wrong. Moving the date forward aids their claim that it was done to cover up.

This ignores that had the email address been the problem, they could have just redacted it - replacing it with HILLARY CLINTON. This is what they did for many other private email accounts in the release. Had they done that, I doubt it would have raised any red flags. It would not have suggested ALL her email was on a private server - just that this one piece of email went to a private account - if anyone would have thought anything at all.

It has to be frustrating that there is this flare up and interesting to thing how did the screwup happen. The State Department is referring to it as a low level clerical error. I suspect that the wrong date reflected something, though obviously not when they should have released it. I wonder if the November 14 date might be the date that the State Department received the many boxes of Clinton emails. That would fit the time line - as it is referred to as the end of the year after the SD asked in spring and then publicly asked in October for the email.

From memory, the first thing the SD did with the email, even as they processed them to get them on the computer, was to find all the one related with Benghazi etc to respond to Congressional inquiries and the FOIA requests. The new date, in June 2015, would make sense. Here, someone recently second guessed NOT releasing this due to it being privileged as internal conversation.

The real question may end up should the SD have gone public a year before March 2015 with the fact that Hillary Clinton had run her email on a private server and had NOT given them the work emails when she left. If it goes there, it shows how disastrous Clinton's choice was to Obama. If it comes to that, I will never forgive her and it will be a huge negative (for me) no matter what she accomplishes as President.

[emulatorloo]

27. Exactly right. I wouldn't believe them if their tongues came notarized

They are liars. It annoys me that Moonie Times and Free Beacon have become go to sources for some DU members.

The enemy of my 'enemy' is not my friend.

[workinclasszero]

44. Yup reich wing organs

speak zero truths.

On the old timey DU a poster would get a tombstone for linking to moonie right wing propaganda sites.

Its all good now for some insane reason.

[Gothmog]

5. Thanks for posting

[pnwmom]

8. You're welcome!

[Iliyah]

6. More misinformation by the RWers and other vocal untrue bulls**ters

[Agnosticsherbet]

7. Lying Sack of Crap Media Outlet Caught Being Lying Sack of Crap and Recants.

Now that would be a headline.
But this story will continue to echo because those who passed it on can't handle the truth.

[pnwmom]

9. I think it's worse when people repeat it here.n/t

[hughee99]

13. So a media outlet runs a story with facts based on a State Department legal filing,

the State Department admits the information it filed was wrong, and it's the media outlet's fault? Should the default position for all media outlets from now on be that when the government makes a court filing, to assume that the information in that filing is wrong?

[emulatorloo]

28. A >>Moonie<< media outlet with a history of lying about Democrats

Read it if you enjoy it, just take everything they say about a Democrat with a huge boulder of salt.

[hughee99]

30. I didn't read it, but if I understand correctly, the Moonie media outlet, with a history of lying

Last edited Wed Apr 27, 2016, 01:44 PM - Edit history (1)

about Democrats, assumed that the State Departments legal filing was accurate and reported it correctly. Then, after the report came out, the State Department came out with the retraction that says the information it provided in the filing (and the one the Moonie outlet reported) was wrong.

The Moonie outlets may have lied a billion times, but in this particular case it looks pretty clear that it was the State Department that fucked up, yet people are blaming the media outlet anyway.

[pnwmom]

71. I am only blaming the DUers who couldn't be bothered to read the whole article

and/or posted the pieces and deliberately left out the State Department response.

[hughee99]

72. Fair enough, and thank you for providing the latest info.

It looks like some people didn't read the part where this was based on a state department snafu either.

[Cha]

10. Thank you for this, pnwmom~

[pnwmom]

11. You're welcome, Cha!

[ismnotwasm]

12. It's nonsense like the rest of the nonsense.

A friend of mine--a Sanders supporters --is posting indictment crap on Facebook now. Uses Rightwing sources. I have a diverse group of friends, and keep my personal page politics free for the most part, so if I run across the occasional bullshit I just hide it without commenting. But doing republicans work for them is NOT ok to say the least, so I decided to tell her the truth. She can do what she wants with it. It's a sad and pathetic to watch though.

[gordianot]

14. The best propaganda almost always has an element of truth.

Get ready for a deluge.

[George II]

15. In the last day or two people have been digging up trash from years ago and presenting it...

...as though it was "new". This is pure garbage, glad you set the record straight. Thanks.

[pnwmom]

33. Yeah, I've noticed it and I'm sick of it. Thank you for pointing that out. nt

[Squinch]

17. Kick.

[Squinch]

18. It is sad...

[Squinch]

19. ...what people ...

[Squinch]

20. ...are willing to...

[Squinch]

21. ...post here...

[Squinch]

22. Thank you pnwmmom, for the correction!

[pnwmom]

35. Thank you, Squinch!

[AlbertCat]

24. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to

.... withhold in July 2015.


So, just the date they decide to WITHHOLD it was wrong.

[pnwmom]

32. No, that wasn't wrong. They are allowed to withhold any item from the FOIA on proper grounds,

and with notification, and that is what they did.

[Iliyah]

26. Who needs the GOP and corporate media when you have so called Liberals

spreading misinformation for them. UGH

[brer cat]

29. K&R for truth

[Thinkingabout]

31. K & R, ISN'T TRUTH GREAT.

[greatlaurel]

34. K&R for the truth!

Thanks for this important post. Anyone posting using RW wing sources to attack Democratic candidates should be shown the door.

[UtahLib]

36. K&R. nt

[Sancho]

38. thanks for setting the record straight

[pnwmom]

39. You're welcome. n/t

[sheshe2]

40. Thanks for the truth, pnwmom.

[pnwmom]

41. You're welcome, sheshe2.

[William769]

42. Kick & highly recommended.

We know how the rumor mill works on DU when it comes to Hillary.

And they wonder why their guy is losing.

[joeybee12]

43. knr...I think Newsmax and Fox Noise are promoting this...

Surprise, surprise.

[pnwmom]

45. We were promoting the story too, for a while. It was on the Greatest Page with lots of recs. n/t

[joeybee12]

46. Amazing how some people will believe anything without proof

simply because it validates their biases...pretty scary.

[COLGATE4]

60. Well, you know that they can't post it on the internet

if it's not true.

[sufrommich]

47. K&R . nt

[GusBob]

48. Kick for truth

Truth rocks

[SunSeeker]

49. Thank you for the truth, pnwmom. nt

[pnwmom]

50. You're welcome, Sunseeker!

[grasswire]

51. It's ALWAYS ALWAYS an administrative error for HRC.

Always.

[pnwmom]

52. And what kind of error is it when DUers deliberately spread Rightwing lies?

[grasswire]

57. link? nt

[pnwmom]

58. Here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1428582

But they left out their own link's update at the bottom of the article. Too excited about getting to spread mud around DU.

6:40 p.m. UPDATE:

On Tuesday afternoon a State Department official issued the following statement:

The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation. Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.?

[xocet]

53. Where is the link to the update from the State Department? You only link to The Wash. Free Beacon..

n/t

[pnwmom]

55. That site was the source of the original report AND the site of the State Department statement.

Since it was rightwing outlets that were spreading the story, that's where the State Department corrected it.

[Kelvin Mace]

54. Translation:

You caught is, so we are officially changing the record so that we didn't lie.

[pnwmom]

56. Translation: you are accusing John Kerry's State Department and the Obama administration of lying.nt

[COLGATE4]

61. That's what these RW'ers disguised as DU posters

do - fling shit and, when caught and corrected then accuse the other side of lying. It's getting really old.

[spanone]

59. K&R...

[DemonGoddess]

62. K&R!

thank you for updating with the correct information.

[Hekate]

63. Thanks pnwmom for correcting the record!

[pnwmom]

65. You're welcome, Hekate!

[murielm99]

64. K&R!

[Sheepshank]

66. I wonder.......

....does posting facts that don't support the anti Hillary meme, even get noticed by those intent on spreading lies
.

[lunamagica]

67. K&R. Thank you pnwmom, for setting the record straight!

[NanceGreggs]

68. Kicked!!!!!

[NEDem]

69. K&R

[rbrnmw]

70. kick

[DesertRat]

73. k&r