HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » State Dept. watchdog: Cli...

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:27 AM

 

State Dept. watchdog: Clinton violated email rules

Source: Politico

The inspector general report is the latest headache for Clinton in the scandal over her exclusive use of private email for State business.

The State Department inspector general concluded that Hillary Clinton did not comply with the agency’s policies on records, according to a report released to lawmakers on Wednesday that also revealed that Clinton and her top aides chose not to cooperate with the review.

The agency on Wednesday released the long-awaited report to Capitol Hill, copy of which was obtained by POLITICO, providing just the latest turn in the headache-inducing saga that has dogged Clinton's campaign.



Read more: http://politi.co/27SmOVs



This part is major cause for concern

The report states that its findings are based on interviews with current Secretary of State John Kerry and his predecessors – Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, but that Clinton and her deputies declined the IG’s requests for interviews.

[br][hr][br]

[center][font size=5 color=burnt] LINK to Full OIG Report [/font][/center]

Per - 'LiberalArkie' comment (No. 28) we have Washington Post providing direct link to OIG report.

WaPo's article is titled "State Dept. inspector general report sharply criticizes Clinton’s email practices

But, it also seems to me - the OIG item is a veiled attempt (such as Colin's items) - to diffuse the situation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/state-department-report-on-clintons-email-practices/2039/?tid=a_inl

[br][hr][br][br]

187 replies, 8209 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 187 replies Author Time Post
Reply State Dept. watchdog: Clinton violated email rules (Original post)
laserhaas May 2016 OP
JudyM May 2016 #1
laserhaas May 2016 #3
Laser102 May 2016 #22
forest444 May 2016 #43
laserhaas May 2016 #46
forest444 May 2016 #47
laserhaas May 2016 #55
forest444 May 2016 #122
laserhaas May 2016 #127
laserhaas May 2016 #128
laserhaas May 2016 #129
forest444 May 2016 #135
laserhaas May 2016 #141
forest444 May 2016 #144
laserhaas May 2016 #146
forest444 May 2016 #157
psychopomp May 2016 #180
laserhaas May 2016 #187
bjobotts May 2016 #82
Cryptoad May 2016 #45
Ned_Devine May 2016 #77
Moostache May 2016 #81
Cryptoad May 2016 #88
JudyM May 2016 #128
laserhaas May 2016 #142
thucythucy May 2016 #183
spin May 2016 #132
LanternWaste May 2016 #86
laserhaas May 2016 #98
LiberalArkie May 2016 #4
JudyM May 2016 #8
IdaBriggs May 2016 #5
JudyM May 2016 #6
IdaBriggs May 2016 #10
JudyM May 2016 #12
laserhaas May 2016 #18
JudyM May 2016 #134
laserhaas May 2016 #164
LiberalArkie May 2016 #13
JudyM May 2016 #15
LiberalArkie May 2016 #24
JudyM May 2016 #27
LiberalArkie May 2016 #30
karynnj May 2016 #53
Yupster May 2016 #25
LiberalArkie May 2016 #31
karynnj May 2016 #64
JudyM May 2016 #120
Douseeme May 2016 #2
frylock May 2016 #14
dorkzilla May 2016 #90
laserhaas May 2016 #99
frylock May 2016 #106
felix_numinous May 2016 #104
dorkzilla May 2016 #119
Jester Messiah May 2016 #110
bahrbearian May 2016 #7
leftofcool May 2016 #9
laserhaas May 2016 #11
leftofcool May 2016 #17
ChairmanAgnostic May 2016 #34
Laser102 May 2016 #16
leftofcool May 2016 #19
Duval May 2016 #54
Ned_Devine May 2016 #79
laserhaas May 2016 #101
Ned_Devine May 2016 #102
laserhaas May 2016 #115
Ned_Devine May 2016 #123
laserhaas May 2016 #67
L. Coyote May 2016 #23
thesquanderer May 2016 #26
laserhaas May 2016 #35
cstanleytech May 2016 #76
panader0 May 2016 #40
laserhaas May 2016 #41
yodermon May 2016 #107
laserhaas May 2016 #170
DisgustipatedinCA May 2016 #29
laserhaas May 2016 #36
840high May 2016 #69
Gore1FL May 2016 #92
laserhaas May 2016 #103
L. Coyote May 2016 #20
onehandle May 2016 #21
blackspade May 2016 #33
CountAllVotes May 2016 #48
LiberalArkie May 2016 #28
Worldly Traveler May 2016 #32
laserhaas May 2016 #39
tabasco May 2016 #37
laserhaas May 2016 #38
Politicub May 2016 #42
merbex May 2016 #50
laserhaas May 2016 #56
Jester Messiah May 2016 #112
laserhaas May 2016 #171
Cryptoad May 2016 #44
JudyM May 2016 #138
laserhaas May 2016 #143
Cryptoad May 2016 #153
JudyM May 2016 #154
Cryptoad May 2016 #155
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
JudyM May 2016 #158
laserhaas May 2016 #165
99th_Monkey May 2016 #49
laserhaas May 2016 #57
99th_Monkey May 2016 #61
laserhaas May 2016 #65
vadermike May 2016 #51
laserhaas May 2016 #59
stopbush May 2016 #52
laserhaas May 2016 #60
leveymg May 2016 #71
stopbush May 2016 #78
riderinthestorm May 2016 #73
stopbush May 2016 #80
riderinthestorm May 2016 #85
laserhaas May 2016 #118
karynnj May 2016 #91
democrank May 2016 #58
laserhaas May 2016 #63
hollowdweller May 2016 #62
laserhaas May 2016 #68
pnwmom May 2016 #70
Press Virginia May 2016 #83
pnwmom May 2016 #87
Press Virginia May 2016 #93
pnwmom May 2016 #96
Android3.14 May 2016 #105
laserhaas May 2016 #121
pnwmom May 2016 #136
hollowdweller May 2016 #178
pnwmom May 2016 #179
hollowdweller May 2016 #177
youceyec May 2016 #66
pnwmom May 2016 #72
Press Virginia May 2016 #94
pnwmom May 2016 #95
Press Virginia May 2016 #100
pnwmom May 2016 #133
Press Virginia May 2016 #137
pnwmom May 2016 #139
Press Virginia May 2016 #140
pnwmom May 2016 #148
Press Virginia May 2016 #150
pnwmom May 2016 #152
Press Virginia May 2016 #160
laserhaas May 2016 #166
leveymg May 2016 #156
Press Virginia May 2016 #159
leveymg May 2016 #161
Press Virginia May 2016 #162
leveymg May 2016 #163
laserhaas May 2016 #169
laserhaas May 2016 #168
laserhaas May 2016 #167
leftyladyfrommo May 2016 #108
Press Virginia May 2016 #109
leftyladyfrommo May 2016 #114
Press Virginia May 2016 #117
leftyladyfrommo May 2016 #124
Press Virginia May 2016 #126
yodermon May 2016 #111
Press Virginia May 2016 #116
laserhaas May 2016 #175
valerief May 2016 #74
AzDar May 2016 #75
Press Virginia May 2016 #113
laserhaas May 2016 #125
Press Virginia May 2016 #131
laserhaas May 2016 #172
Press Virginia May 2016 #84
fbc May 2016 #89
SusanLarson May 2016 #97
laserhaas May 2016 #173
Babel_17 May 2016 #145
laserhaas May 2016 #147
Justice May 2016 #149
laserhaas May 2016 #151
laserhaas May 2016 #174
FailureToCommunicate May 2016 #176
laserhaas May 2016 #181
Octafish May 2016 #182
laserhaas May 2016 #184
Octafish May 2016 #185
laserhaas May 2016 #186

Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:32 AM

1. Has Kerry been interviewed about this? Apparently he initiated the internal investigation at State

that was then turned over to the FBI.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:37 AM

3. I think everybody is starting to distance themselves (like Virgina Gov.) - from her

 

And Kerry knows, all to well, how much wrongs - she really has perpetrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #3)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:53 AM

22. OMG!! Please!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #3)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:51 AM

43. Bingo.

Ms. Inevitable was a real liability for Democrats even without these recent controversies -never mind now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #43)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:01 PM

46. They are on board a modern day Titanic, and are spell bound by the music of lady may

 

just sayin....

they be sinkin,,,, and don't care

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #46)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:04 PM

47. "I don't belong to an organized political party," Will Rogers famously quipped.

"I'm a Democrat."

I guess nominating the candidate least likely to win just proves him right - and that's 80 years on!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #47)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:21 PM

55. JFK - expanded on Rogers greatest, with the remarks, apropos, lambasting secrecy

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #55)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:29 PM

122. "Herr" Allen Dulles and his entourage musn't have liked that speech one bit.

The rest, as we all know, is history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #122)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:33 PM

127. Like Dulles being put in charge of Warren

 

American people can be so sheepish...at times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #122)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:33 PM

128. Like Dulles being put in charge of Warren

 

American people can be so sheepish...at times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #122)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:33 PM

129. Like Dulles being put in charge of Warren

 

American people can be so sheepish...at times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #129)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:39 PM

135. Naturally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #135)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:03 PM

141. Ah ..Ha Ha...so apropos...I'm stealing this picture

 

Absolutely awesome..saying more than 1000 words

Ya gits one of my rare 3 Smiley Awards

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #141)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:09 PM

144. Happy you liked it, Laserhaas.

It applies to so much that goes on in the halls of power (be they public or private sector), don't you think?

That has always been my greatest disappointment in Obama, for example. That he almost never saw a hen house he couldn't appoint a fox to watch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #144)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:12 PM

146. I know...part of keeping everybody partly content

 

Is also partly pissing everybody off... Mockingly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #146)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:54 PM

157. Works with my girlfriend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #46)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:28 PM

180. I think Sanders has stayed in b/c he knew this was coming

Things are going to be very interesting over the next three weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to psychopomp (Reply #180)

Thu May 26, 2016, 05:12 PM

187. Do hope so

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forest444 (Reply #43)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:11 PM

82. I'd vote for her but her numbers against Trump really going down. 2 polls show her losing 2 Trump

 

So much Clinton hate among non dems...so much baggage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #3)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:59 AM

45. More GOP hack job attacks on HRC45

rave on Red State Dot Com

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Cryptoad (Reply #45)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:10 PM

81. This is getting to be a tired response to EVERYTHING about the Clintons...

I have no personal animosity for either of the Clintons, just remorse for the lost opportunities of Bill's administration and a growing sense of dread that a Hillary nomination will give the USA a President Trump.

She is her own worst enemy. A terrible campaigner, prone to mistakes and secrecy for secrecy's sake decisions that feed the narrative about her - specifically that she is untrustworthy.

That is NOT right-wing attack material, its true. She DOES act in strangely secretive ways - with her staff, with her public records, with her advisors. There is a reason that Hillary Clinton is not seen as honest by >60% of the country, and while the GOP opportunists attempt to conflate that inherent character flaw into THE WORST THING IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY, their hyperbole does not erase her contributions to the narrative.

Red State is it's own beast, but pointing out that Hillary is bringing massive, self-inflicted baggage onto the General Election Campaign trail is NOT a right wing attack, it is a legitimate left-wing concern and I think Hillary's supporters need to start shoring up INTERNAL Party support and unity and stop courting the so called moderate Republicans. Her path to being elected depends solely on motivating and turning out the liberal base, not her more comfortable center-right positions and cohorts.

I want to be wrong here...I want Hillary (or the Democratic nominee in any case) to be our next president, I just hear the vitriolic hate that she engenders in Republicans and the only motivation I am seeing is being spit out by people who want to deny her the White House simply because she is Hillary Rodham Clinton. Pointing out things that fuel that burning hatred on the right does not constitute carrying the water for Red State. It is actually an act of Democratic Party intervention.

There is real danger in a Clinton campaign running totally off the rails as Trump goes full gutter in the fall...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Moostache (Reply #81)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:35 PM

88. If u goijng to stand with GOP attacks

u shouldnt be surprise to b called a GOP Troll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #88)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:33 PM

128. Because every criticism of HRC is either a RW hack job or sexist. Yeah, we know...




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #128)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:07 PM

142. Yup...but dont dare call crtiques of Bernie

 

Truth man abuse

Ya will gits bojo'd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Moostache (Reply #81)

Thu May 26, 2016, 03:44 PM

183. This pretty much sums up how I feel at this point.

I'm absolutely terrified at the prospect of a Trump presidency, and worried that a Clinton candidacy will in fact lead to just such an awful event.

I wish I could be more optimistic, but each day seems to bring more bad news.

It seems our best hope right now is that Trump screws up--that he says or does something so outlandish (like McCain "suspending" his campaign in Sept. 2008, or Perot dropping out, then dropping in in 1992) that even low information "independent" voters turn against him. You'd think with all his incredible gaffs and expressions of malice and bigotry that this would have happened long ago, but the latest polls don't seem to reflect that.

It's a terrible turn of events, and I do hope I'm wrong, but...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #45)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:36 PM

132. Everything is always the fault of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. ...

Often true however the Inspector General ran an independent investigation. He doesn't work for the Republican Party or the House of Representatives.


The Office of Inspector General of the Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (OIG) is an independent office within the U.S. Department of State with a primary responsibility to prevent and detect waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. OIG inspects each of the approximately 260 embassies, diplomatic posts, and international broadcasting installations throughout the world to determine whether policy goals are being achieved and whether the interests of the United States are being represented and advanced effectively.

Additionally, OIG performs specialized security inspections and audits in support of the Department's mission to provide effective protection to the personnel, facilities, and sensitive information. OIG also audits Department and BBG operations and activities to ensure that they are as effective, efficient, and economical as possible. Finally, OIG investigates instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement that may constitute either criminal wrongdoing or violation of Department and BBG regulations.[1] OIG is a member of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency.[2]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_the_Inspector_General_of_the_Department_of_State


It is also disturbing that Hillary and her aides refused to cooperate with the IG. At a minimum that brings into question her transparency.


Clinton, who served as the nation's top diplomat from 2009 to 2013, and her deputies, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan and Huma Abedin, declined to be interviewed for the inspector general's investigation, the report said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSKCN0YG21Z


In my opinion the IG report damages Hillary. The big and far more important question is what are the results of the FBI investigation? Time will tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #3)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:16 PM

86. What specifically and objectively leads you to that belief?

"I think everybody is starting to distance themselves..."

What specifically and objectively leads you to that particular belief (other than post hoc ergo prompter hoc scenarios)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #86)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:06 PM

98. Pelosi is doing it too...and you dont see other politicos

 

Rushing to her side...saying its all okay.

Though...Im sure...Republicans are foaming at the mouth to hear thud is proper...because theyll take charitable (tax free) quid pro quo...with foreign nationals

Too a whole new level

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:37 AM

4. In the full report the only current and past SOS who did not consent to in view was Clinton

The report states that its findings are based on interviews with current Secretary of State John Kerry and his predecessors – Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, but that Clinton and her deputies declined the IG’s requests for interviews.

Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and Huma Abedin are among those who did not cooperate with the investigation.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalArkie (Reply #4)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:41 AM

8. Wondering about more public media interviews, sorry, my question was ambiguous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:37 AM

5. It says he was interviewed as part of the report. Hillary declined. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #5)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:40 AM

6. Right, I meant in the media. I haven't seen him. This might be the start...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #6)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:42 AM

10. He will probably stay out of it. If he comes forward....

 

Yikes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #10)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:47 AM

12. Seems so, but since he's the 1 who started the ball rolling, the media is going to want him up front

What will he say? Sugar coat or authentic concern?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #12)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:53 AM

18. You can't sugar coat the fact that Hillary, nor her aides, had any right to delete

 

Once items were all placed on the - ONLY - server; all rights to claim as private were voided, ab initio.

Compounding the violations, are the (very specious) refusals to be open about it all.

And the IT guys entire email history vanishing - would get anyone convicted, if it were to go to trial (why he took immunity - IMO)

“Therefore, Secretary Clinton should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary,” the report states. “At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #18)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:38 PM

134. Boxer on CNN said she didn't do anything differently than prior SOSs - and that she apologized(!)

Facts are that 1) she did operate differently and 2) she did break the rules which were more comprehensive by the time she took office.

So the spin is going to be denial, apparently.

And the fact that she refused to be interviewed... Whew...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #134)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:13 PM

164. I did mothing...I know nothing

 

But I gots $100 million

Whoopie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:48 AM

13. Kerry has to stay out of it since this is an inspector generals investigation. He really

has nothing to do with it at all and really would not even know what is going on at the IG's office. He could requested that they look into it, and he would not know anything until the report was finished.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalArkie (Reply #13)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:50 AM

15. And the report is finished, and since he's the head of State...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #15)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:56 AM

24. Damn, I read that story 3 times and each time I read it that the report was leaked to Politico,

and did not catch that it was completed and eat to capital hill. Damn I am getting senile.

Considering that it was released today, maybe a Friday afternoon blip on it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalArkie (Reply #24)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:05 AM

27. Yeah, right?! 83 pages, done. Released midweek. I'm thinking Kerry is going to have to step out

in front of the cameras.

And it will be very telling whatever Obama says. Will he be dismissive?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #27)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:13 AM

30. I think both will take a "it is what it is" and neither condemn nor apologize for her behavior.

It is after all out of their hands, she is not an employee of the U.S. Government, but an ex employee. So I really do not anticipate much comment at all, at this time.

But saying that, if she had come forward and admitted it and asked for forgiveness I think it would have been forgotten about and nothing would have ever come forward. But that did not happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #27)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:15 PM

53. The State Department IG should be at the cameras. I think both Kerry and Obama are in Vietnam.

There is more reason for Obama to speak than Kerry. Kerry was not Clinton's boss and he also appropriately left the investigation to the non political IG. Kerry, himself, has since the day he became SoS handled his own work email appropriately according to every account. Note that means he did so two years BEFORE HRC's email became an issue. Putting him out would simply draw attention to the contrast between them. Kerry, either through his own nature OR following the 4 year wiser direction of the Obama people, did the right thing.

However, the person who, more than anyone, should be out in front of the cameras on this is --- Hillary Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #15)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:58 AM

25. I think Kerry has handled it exactly correctly

He has done his job honestly and professionally and has turned it over to the correct department for further investigation.

He needs to worry about important affairs of the world and let the FBI take it from here, wherever it goes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yupster (Reply #25)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:14 AM

31. Totally agree. Totally professional in all respects. As are most public servants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:33 PM

64. What part of he handed it over to the SD IG did you miss? That is the sense in which it is said that

he "initiated" the internal investigation. In ONE step he both recluses himself and people working for him AND suggested that there was reason for the IG to investigate. Kerry rightfully saw that there were things that needed investigating and he completely understood that it should be done by non political parts of the administration.

Note also that where JK quickly named people for Obama's team to vet as IG in his first months in office, there was no IG for the entire 4 years HRC was Secretary.

I think Kerry is still overseas. The last I read he and Obama were in Vietnam. I think Kerry was in the US for about 1 day this month - and that day he was with the 5 Nordic heads of government at meetings and a SD lunch and a t the WH dinner - then departing again. He has been very busy doing his job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #64)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:26 PM

120. Interviewed by the media. But thanks for the "tone."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:35 AM

2. I have a list of email news that were "Yuuuge"

 

before Clinton piled up an unsurmountable lead in pledged delegates.
Human Amedin was a "Yuuge game changer!".
And so was Guccifer.
and Sydney Blumenthal.


By the way, she will win NJ and CA despite this "Yuuuuge" news #12,235

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douseeme (Reply #2)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:49 AM

14. ..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #14)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:40 PM

90. I love you, frylock

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #90)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:06 PM

99. Ha ha....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dorkzilla (Reply #90)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:17 PM

106. Oh, you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #14)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:10 PM

104. Reminds me of a really old

(like me) SNL skit with a song about 'chopping broccoli'...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to felix_numinous (Reply #104)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:26 PM

119. She chop, she chop...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #14)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:20 PM

110. Yep, grade-A fresh off the shelf Brockoli! n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:40 AM

7. Complying to FOIA is for little people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:42 AM

9. Another much ado about nothing.

Won't change a thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:45 AM

11. The fact that you are so obtuse to how sad that state of affairs is - vexes the entire nation

 

It all wreaks of oligarch haughtier, beyond compare

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #11)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:52 AM

17. OMG Pearl clutching!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #11)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:31 AM

34. If being obtuse is contagious, I best put someone on ignore

And it is not you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:50 AM

16. Nothing criminal. Just sloppy. Oh dear. What are we to do now? I know. Let's go to the next scandal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laser102 (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:53 AM

19. I think Bernie supporters already have. Vince Foster, Monica

I am waiting for something new.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #19)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:20 PM

54. Oh please!

 

Bernie supporters?? Sigh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duval (Reply #54)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:06 PM

79. Yes, the DOJ is full of Bernie supporters. Derr!

 

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 02:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ned_Devine (Reply #79)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:08 PM

101. Say What!....Sorry Ned...I'm calling bullchit on this one.

 

Show me a Bern in charge of fed inquiries

And Ill show you a Fort Knox full og gold

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #101)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:09 PM

102. Sorry, I don't know how to use the sarcasm thingy

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ned_Devine (Reply #102)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:24 PM

115. Ha ha...its at the bottom of the smileys...tap the 3 dots

 

Next to the one with the candle

(post script: ..I didnt figure it out...fir 3 years)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #115)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:29 PM

123. Done!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #19)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:42 PM

67. This report is something new - a lambaste critique

 

with caveats that things may be out of control - sneakily diffusive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laser102 (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:53 AM

23. Back to Benghazi we go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laser102 (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:00 AM

26. Great defense for a president. "I wasn't criminal, just incompetent." (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #26)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:31 AM

35. You can't point out - how dark the cave is - to the willfully blind

 

Just sayin.....

They - Don't - CARE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #26)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:02 PM

76. I am willing to bet that could be applied to almost every President at time or another

because everyone makes mistakes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laser102 (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:38 AM

40. She chose not to comply. That's not sloppiness, that's not accidental, that's on purpose.

It shows intent, and intent is needed to indict.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panader0 (Reply #40)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:44 AM

41. I'm not so sure about the mens rea/scienter of this particular issue; but do concur with the

 

conclusion that an indictment is warranted.

If nothing else, the country deserves and indictment and trial, to set a clear example this crap isn't tolerated.

Had anybody else, Bill Clinton, Obama, Kerry, or even Bernie, took in tens of millions of dollars - via a charity - while being Sec. of State, making tens of thousands of emails vanish, concurrently.

BAM - Wham - go to jail - they can.

It is all so damn unnerving, how openly blatant and flagrant the quid pro quo is...

when you consider the fact Senator Stevens went to jail for a chair;
and Governor Siegelman for even less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laser102 (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:18 PM

107. "Vote Clinton, she's Not Criminal!" yeah ok go with that.

Your candidate's actions are providing and endless supply of ammo for Trump.
Own it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yodermon (Reply #107)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:27 PM

170. Or a certain future of 999 other politicis pulling similar stunts

 

Because they are overjoyed she got away with it all

Just sayin......

Who wants to be a millionaire...politico

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:09 AM

29. Care to bet on that?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #29)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:32 AM

36. I think criminal obstruction is already established; but I'd make a wager

 

on - whether or not - corruption keeps her 'Scot Free'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:50 PM

69. Why not - because it's Clinton?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:42 PM

92. Becasue fuck ethics! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gore1FL (Reply #92)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:09 PM

103. Been that way...for a while

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:53 AM

20. If that is the biggest concern, this is bigger than Benghazi! And that is Yooouuuuge!

What a total non-story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 10:53 AM

21. Still going through the motions. No crimes. No indictments. Sorry, 'Not Hillary' Party. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #21)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:28 AM

33. "Hillary Clinton did not comply with the agency’s policies on records"

I guess accountability is for the little people....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blackspade (Reply #33)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:04 PM

48. Its not "her turn" yet

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:20 AM

32. It Begins

Hillary brought it on herself, it would be a good idea for her supporters to prepare themselves, there is a lot more to come.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Worldly Traveler (Reply #32)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:37 AM

39. Her diehards will just blame it on Bernie

 

It's his fault that she couldn't keep the past - from following her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:33 AM

37. H. Clinton is lawyered up and "remaining silent."

 

If she becomes the Democratic nominee, she will be trounced in the general election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tabasco (Reply #37)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:37 AM

38. For sure. Trump (or Mitt - or who ever) will not play as nice as Bernie has

 

They bring out someone good looking, young, and hence, more than likely - clean

and we have a real HUGE problem, on our hands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:45 AM

42. Glad the report is out -- let's get the slap of the hand overwith

So we can get on to the general election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Politicub (Reply #42)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:11 PM

50. You think this is the ONLY report?

Oh boy, someone's going to be surprised as Judicial Watch depositions were/are probably videoed and then we are ALL waiting for the FBI to make it's report known.

This is just the start.

Buckle up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merbex (Reply #50)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:23 PM

56. Concur! - But we shouldn't have to buckle up - this crap should have been written off - already

 

Just sayin.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Politicub (Reply #42)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:23 PM

112. That post reminds me of the Affluenza kid. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jester Messiah (Reply #112)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:28 PM

171. Except for the fact...they cant run....anywhere

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 11:57 AM

44. Oh NO,,,,,, Emails,,,, Oh the horror of it all! Drink!



`

yet no policy or laws at the time were broken……. only policy that is valid today not then ,,,,,,LMAO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #44)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:49 PM

138. You are embarrassing yourself, whether you know it or not. Drank too much kool-aid? Read the report.

Concludes outright that she didn't follow rules that were in place at that time and that when concerns about it were raised by her staff they were hushed up and told not to raise it again. Failing to follow rules wasn't an oversight, it was intentional.

I guess reporting what is in the democratic administration's IG report that was requested by SOS Kerry makes me a RW troll though.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #138)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:08 PM

143. Yup...you and Kerry should never dare...

 

Wait a second...

[
div class="excerpt"]Oops

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #138)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:45 PM

153. I knew abt the counting disabilty

but reading too..... the report does not say what u say it is saying.... to the contary, nothing is said that it was required that she had to do all this things u day she didn't do.. if it were true, there would be criminal charges produced for HIllary , Rice and Powell. Critical Reading is Critically Fundamental . Nothing illegal has taken place. that's what the report says.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #153)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:49 PM

154. I'll say it slower: Powell. And. Rice. Had. Different. Rules.

And while this may not be criminal, the facts established by the Dept show both knowledge of the rules and intent to not follow them. This may be important factual underpinning for the FBI to give deference to in ITS Investigation, which may be criminal. Also, there are some experts arguing that just on the basis of what's in this report criminal liability should attach, but I am not suggesting that because I don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #154)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:51 PM

155. I try it slower,,,,,,,report says no such thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #155)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:55 PM

158. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JudyM (Reply #158)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:15 PM

165. Ha...this one is Spot On true..but the other one with fox in

 

Hen house...is awesome

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:09 PM

49. Why is Politico using the word "Review" instead of calling it what it is; an INVESTIGATION? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #49)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:25 PM

57. Hey, she may still skate by to the nomination, and get into the WH, by (whatever) type of election

 

Lord forbid a major media may have really pissed off, the entitled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #57)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:32 PM

61. It's exceedingly odd, after the FBI itself goes out of its way to scream "stop using 'review'"

 

I don't disagree with your post however, as to Politico's thinking on the matter. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #61)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:37 PM

65. Evidently, you don't know who I am - and how much my whistleblowing, against RICO Romney

 

has all been in vain.

The DOJ openly takes bribes

Just look at US Attorney Chris Christie giving former USAG John Ashcroft, a $50 million Deferred Prosecution Agreement.

Christie was rewarded with a Governorship - and he does specious quid pro quos and wife cronyism - EveryWhere!
[br][hr][br]

And - we used to call it something else - when fed prosecutors took millions of dollars, to forgo prosecutions.


Just sayin.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:14 PM

51. Ok

So now Pres Trymp is gauranteed?! God help us all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vadermike (Reply #51)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:26 PM

59. I don't know about that. He's got issues, including misogny - that will be banging away at a woman

 

Cards hard, against hard cards

That is, of course, assuming The Donald, is the one/only - there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:15 PM

52. Why no mention that this kind of sloppy practice was a long-standing problem at the State Dept?

A State Department audit has faulted Hillary Clinton and previous secretaries of state for poorly managing email and other computer information and slowly responding to new cybersecurity risks.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of the report by the agency's inspector general Wednesday.

It cites "longstanding, systemic weaknesses" related to communications. These started before Clinton's appointment as secretary of state, but her failures were singled out as more serious.

The review came after revelations Clinton exclusively used a private email account and server while in office. Clinton is now the likely Democratic presidential nominee.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/apnewsbreak-state-dept-audit-faults-clinton-emails-39365621

Why do the Hillary haters exclude exculpatory information?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #52)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:29 PM

60. On this item, I concur, this report could actually be a well thought out - Test the Waters dynamic

 

Seeing where the real mindset of the nation, truly is.

Trump would be smart, to play it down, and then bang it back up, during the General Election.

If I were her, I'd just say, "Haters are going to hate, no matter what I say or do, so I let the process continue - because the real issues are ........."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #52)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:51 PM

71. There isn't any exculpatory evidence for Hillary in the DOS Report.

The State Dept report doesn't touch on classified information violations. The Intelligence Community report, out next, and and FBI reports will go into her many acts of mishandling classified information. It is up to the AG whether to indict. In the end, Obama will likely pardon Hillary, but she isn't going to be President.

The DOS report does find she violated numerous regulations dealing with information security and records retention, however. That is as far as this one goes, but it points to how the other agency report and the Bureau findings will find she violated federal laws by similarly mishandling classified materials. She's cooked, and the party needs to replace her and, I think, she will release her delegates at the Convention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #71)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:05 PM

78. She isn't going to be president?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #52)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:54 PM

73. Rice is mentioned 13x, Powell 17x, Hillary 125x in the report.

 

Her misuse is on an unprecedented scale.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #73)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:10 PM

80. Er, could the mentions be high for Hillary

because she was the focus of the investigation?

Unless you can produce the actual number of instances of "misuse" and present that as a % of total use of the e-mail system by each individual user, it's meaningless to harp on how many times Hillary is mentioned in a report as opposed to Rice and Powell.

Grasping at "I hate Hillary" straws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #80)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:13 PM

85. I was responding to the "others did it too" statement only

 

I too would be interested in that comparison but I believe that will be some years in the future when someone is interested in a thesis topic.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #85)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:25 PM

118. With oligarchs..the wheels grind super slow

 

Because the powers that be want it to grind slow...for them..also

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #73)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:41 PM

91. Even then, all the Rice counts simply are listing her in various places

to say that her practices were examined. The conclusion is that they could find nothing that countered her claim that she used no email for SD business. Link to PDF - http://static.politico.com/f3/9b/19d29ab14abeb4a30ca2975f1e6c/oig-report.pdf

Powell did use his private account and failed to insure those emails were given to the SD, but nothing countered his claim that most of his email was on .gov.

In fact, counts don't tell the whole story as they also recount finding where good procedures were adopted. Any reference to Kerry contains nothing new - he primarily used .gov and when there was an occasional email (that was SD related) that someone sent to his private email - he forward it to the SD account.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:26 PM

58. I`m really curious....

If George W. Bush had the exact same email "problem", what would Hillary supporters say about it?

That`s a good test to use. That`s how I decided I couldn`t buy Hillary`s support for the Iraq War, because I didn`t buy Bush`s support either, and they pretty much matched in their hawkishness. Similarly, I wouldn`t approve if Bush hadn`t complied with State Department policies on records, so I don`t approve of Hillary`s lack of compliance either.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrank (Reply #58)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:33 PM

63. If it were anybody else, even Bill or Obama (much less Kerry) - this would NOT be okay

 

It is plain to see, in your face, quid pro quo, Clinton Foundation taking in millions, of dynamics Sec. of State had jurisdiction on.

You can call it what ever you wish to, pay to play is the only way a person amasses a hundred million dollars

Or are they going to argue the Clinton's got all that money, because they're real nice people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:32 PM

62. Nothing will happen to Clinton

 


She's rich, she's well connected.

She might lose a few votes but not many because the media is on her side against Trump.

Those who defend her will get jobs in the admin.

Anybody who promoted this issue will never work in the Clinton White house.

It's a non issue really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #62)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:44 PM

68. Sad state of affairs that your reflection - is possibly - Spot On

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #62)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:50 PM

70. Nothing will happen because her practices were no worse than multiple Secretaries before her.

Colin Powell used his AOL account instead of a .gov account, and he destroyed millions of State related emails when he left office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #70)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:11 PM

83. Which former SOS routed 100% of their emails

 

through their private server in the name of "privacy"?
She violated the FOIA act, willfully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #83)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:21 PM

87. Colin Powell exclusively used his AOL account for non-classified govt. emails,

and she used her private server.

Both of them used the secure government system for classified emails.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #87)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:44 PM

93. That is untrue.

 

We already know she had classified material on her server. She authored e-mails that were classified.

Powell only used personal e-mail occasionally

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #93)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:04 PM

96. That is untrue. There has been no evidence that anything on her server was classified

at the time the document was created.

Some of her emails were retroactively classified, years later, as part of a FOIA response.

And Powell used his AOL account for all non-classified emails. He never used the .gov account.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/19/colin-powell-emails-hillary-clinton-424187.html

In addition to the classified email system used in SCIFs, there are personal email accounts. Prior to 2013, these could be accounts inside the relatively unsecure State Department system or private email accounts. If they are private—running through a commercial or personal server—they have to follow some rules set up in the Federal Register . There are no guards, no red-black procedures, no construction rules, no special rooms, no TEMPEST, no TSCM. And most important: Until 2013, there was no rule against using them. In fact, the rules specifically allowed for them. Check out the relevant section in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Chapter XII, Subchapter B, section 1236.22b) for the rules regarding the use of personal email accounts by any State Department official.

To give an idea of how insecure these communications could be, Powell’s personal email is an AOL account, and he used it on a laptop when he communicated with foreign officials and ambassadors, unless the information qualified for a SCIF. (Clinton sent only one email to a foreign dignitary through her personal account, and her communications with ambassadors were, for the most part, by phone.)

SNIP

So did Powell and the aides to Rice violate rules governing classified information, since the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) staff has recently determined that some of their years-old personal emails contain top-secret material? No. The rules regarding the handling of classified information apply to communications designated as secret at that time . If documents that aren’t deemed classified, and aren’t handled through a SCIF when they are created or initially transmitted, are later, in retrospect, deemed secret, the classification is new—and however the record was handled in the past is irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Android3.14 (Reply #105)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:28 PM

121. Yup...Luv the babbling banter obfuscating ...incongruous

 

As if such is gospel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Android3.14 (Reply #105)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:40 PM

136. You apparently aren't capable of reading and understanding your own links,

which confirm the information in the article I linked to.

From your WA post link:

“State’s upgrading process is retroactive,” said one congressional aide. “It’s not a sign of wrongdoing but rather the normal process used by State under all administrations before unclassified documents are made public (usually via FOIA). Often an unclassified email will be retroactively classified to protect foreign and diplomatic communications, for example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #87)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:45 PM

178. I believe Clinton did not even have a state.gov account so explain what you mean by she used secure

 

Gov't system?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollowdweller (Reply #178)

Wed May 25, 2016, 09:33 PM

179. She used the SCIF system for classified emails. That was the only secure system

that anybody used.

The separate .gov system was not designed for classified emails that needed to be sent in a secure system. The SCIF was specifically used for classified documents, and she had that both at home and at work.

More info on SCIF here:


http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/19/colin-powell-emails-hillary-clinton-424187.html

But Powell and Rice’s aides did nothing wrong. (I’m going to focus on them so that partisans who say Clinton broke the law have to attack respected Republicans first.) Start with this: Powell and Rice, like all modern secretaries of state, each had at least two email accounts—one personal and the other for communications designated as highly classified at the time of their creation . For classified information, both of them—and their aides with appropriate clearance—had a sensitive compartmented information facility, or what is known in intelligence circles as a SCIF. Most senior officials who deal with classified information have a SCIF in their offices and their homes.

These are not just extra offices with a special lock. Each SCIF is constructed following complex rules imposed by the intelligence and defense communities. Restrictions imposed on the builders are designed to ensure that no unauthorized personnel can get into the room, and the SCIF cannot be accessed by hacking or electronic eavesdropping. A group called the technical surveillance countermeasures team (TSCM) investigates the area or activity to check that all communications are protected from outside surveillance and cannot be intercepted.

Most permanent SCIFs have physical and technical security, called TEMPEST. The facility is guarded and in operation 24 hours a day, seven days a week; any official on the SCIF staff must have the highest security clearance. There is supposed to be sufficient personnel continuously present to observe the primary, secondary and emergency exit doors of the SCIF. Each SCIF must apply fundamental red-black separation to prevent the inadvertent transmission of classified data over telephone lines, power lines or signal lines.I could keep going for thousands and thousands of words explaining the security measures used for SCIFs. And all of this— all of this—is designed to protect the confidentiality of emails and communications determined to be classified at the time of transmission.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #70)

Wed May 25, 2016, 08:41 PM

177. No. Nothing will happen because the money and power are behind her.

 


Plus, really, if Clinton does not even know how to use a fax machine, and Huma Aberdin keeps Clintons phone in her purse, how much did Clinton even know about how to use email?

People feed her, answer her calls, wait on her hand and foot. She probably has deniability on any wrongdoing just because she doesn't do anything for herself.

When you get to the level of wealth and power that she is at, like a queen or something, you can do whatever you want and nothing will happen to you.

Let's just hope when she wins she appoints some cool people to the Supreme Court and that the Bernie influence keeps the number of Big Bank employees down to a level that some crumbs fall off for us working folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:38 PM

66. So?

 

Clinton campaign should turn this into a positive. Is this case they should do what trump might do, swipe it aside. American people do not care about email rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to youceyec (Reply #66)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:52 PM

72. Yes. And the bottom line is that Clinton's set up was no worse than multiple

other Secretaries who preceded her, including Colin Powell with his AOL account, who destroyed millions of State emails when he left office.

The 83-page report reviews email practices by five secretaries of state and generally concludes that record keeping has been spotty for years.

It was particularly critical of former secretary of state Colin Powell — who has acknowledged publicly that he used a personal email account to conduct business — concluding that he too failed to follow department policy designed to comply with public-record laws.

Mark Toner, a State Department spokesman, said the report underscores the need for federal agencies to adapt “decades-old record-keeping practices to the email-dominated modern era.” He said it is clear from the report that the department could have preserved emails better under multiple secretaries of state but said that multiple improvements have been put in place under Secretary of State John F. Kerry to improve record retention.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/state-dept-inspector-general-report-sharply-criticizes-clintons-email-practices/2016/05/25/fc6f8ebc-2275-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #72)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:53 PM

94. Powell didn't decline to use a SD E-mail because of privacy

 

Powell also cooperated with the IG Investigation.

The same cannot be said for the current presidential candidate who formerly ran the SD

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #94)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:56 PM

95. Neither Hillary nor Powell used a .gov account for non-classified. And both of them

used the secure classified system for classified documents.

And Powell isn't involved in an FBI investigation because the Rethugs never complained about how he sent his emails or that he destroyed millions of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #95)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:08 PM

100. Again. That is untrue.

 

Powell did use an AOL account but not for 100% of his non secure work related e-mails.
Hillary didn't use the secure system as she didn't have a state dept e-mail account. How did she check secure e-mail without a secure e-mail account on the state dept system?
Powell isn't involved in an investigation because the IC IG didn't find classified e-mails in his homebrew server. Should he be investigated? Absolutely. But he isn't the one running for president. He isn't the one who retained classified information in his basement. And he didn't cite "privacy" as a reason to have his own server.

Furthermore, Powell cooperated with the IG's investigation. Neither HRC nor her staff did the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #100)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:36 PM

133. You have a fundamental misunderstanding. Hillary, like Powell, used the secure SCIF system

for her classified documents.

And the state department .gov system -- which neither Hillary nor Powell used -- was NOT secure and was NOT intended for classified documents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #133)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:42 PM

137. Then how did TS/SAP information end up on her server.

 

She didn't have a state department e-mail so she couldn't access the secure e-mail system.
She didn't use a computer, based on the e-mails that were released, just her blackberry.
Furthermore, she authored about 120 classified e-mails, that were confidential, when created. That's a no no

Powell had a secure computer and a state dept e-mail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #137)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:58 PM

139. That information was retroactively classified. And she could and did access the secure SCIF system.

She had an SCIF for classified documents set up both at her home and her work.

You don't understand that the state department .gov email and the secure SCIF system were ENTIRELY SEPARATE. She could and did use the SCIF even though she used her personal account for non-classified state department business.

And as the head of the state department, she had the full authority to classify or not classify any document that she authored -- by Federal law. If she deemed her email non-classified, then that's what it was.

Powell had a state dept .gov email but, like Hillary, he didn't use it. And the .gov non-classified email system was hacked and several hundred thousands of emails were exposed. So it wasn't any safer than Hillary's personal system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #139)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:02 PM

140. No, it was not. The IG has already stated he found 4 e-mails that were classified at the time

 

they were created.
She didn't have a SCIF at home. She didn't have a secure e-mail account. She didn't have a secure server in her basement. She didn't have a SCIF where her server and its contents were stored.

She has no authority to declassify information provided by the intelligence community. Furthermore, confidential communications, which she authored, are classified based on Executive Orders....she has no authority to overrule her boss(President Obama) on this policy.

Powell is irrelevant to what Hillary did. And neither is the SD non classified system, which Hillary wasn't using.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #140)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:22 PM

148. You keep making false assertions with zero evidence. She had the full authority to decide

whether any of her own emails should be classified or not. The Executive Order you mention gives her that authority, as the Head of the Agency.

And she did have a SCIF at home and at the office, and that is what she used to send and receive classified documents that weren't sent by courier.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2016/02/07/the-technology-behind-hillary-clintons-email-scandal-explained/#c19f77578c94

In fact, government operates under the presumption that email messages will be intercepted, and uses two methods to keep sensitive information secret. The first, for the most highly secret material, involves hard copies of classified documents. These are not allowed to be copied or sent electronically and can only be transferred by a government courier.

The second method involves something called a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), a facility which is used for electronically encrypted information. This is done by using large random numbers to scramble messages so that, even if they are intercepted, they can’t be read by anyone who doesn’t have the key. Truly secret information is never sent by regular email.

So, for the purposes of security, it really doesn’t matter whether Hillary Clinton was using a government issued email or her own personal server. To a large extent unencrypted email is unencrypted email, no matter where the server resides. And while it is true that Clinton used her own private server for unclassified business, she also regularly used a SCIF for secure communication (one was installed at her residence).

http://prospect.org/article/why-hillary-wont-be-indicted-and-shouldnt-be-objective-legal-analysis

Is there one rule for agency heads like Clinton and another rule for the rest of us?
Yes, more or less. This is true both literally and as a practical matter. When it comes to classified information, agency heads have special responsibilities and special privileges. They have plenary authority to classify or declassify information. If rules regarding classified information are broken, they have the authority to determine administrative punishments. Unless they go so far as to break the law, no one is authorized to administratively punish them. But beyond this, rules are always different for those at the very top of organizations. Government leaders like business leaders are chosen for their judgment and discretion. They must be free to exercise both. In the public sphere, problems arise because laws and administrative rules and regulations are often written in ways that admit of no exception. Moreover, some laws, like laws against corruption or against spying, should admit of no exceptions. But for the most part heads of agencies do what they think best, and if we want an effective government, this is as it should be. If leaders behave badly, appropriate sanctions are less likely to be criminal sanctions than pressure to resign or even impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #148)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:32 PM

150. As someone who worked for a contracter that built SCIFS, I can say without a doubt

 

unless there was construction on her house, she didn't have a SCIF in her home where her server was stored. She might have had a safe or file cabinet but she didn't have a secure computer put in her home nor a SCIF.

Donald Reid, the State Department's coordinator for security infrastructure, reported in a 2009 e-mail
"As I had been speculating, the issue here is one of personal comfort… [Secretary Clinton] does not use a computer, so our view of someone wedded to their e-mail (why doesn't she use her desktop when in the SCIF?) doesn't fit this scenario... during the campaign she was urged to keep in contact with thousands via a BB... once she got the hang of it, she was hooked... now every day, she feels hamstrung because she has to lock her BB up... she does go out several times a day to an office they've crafted for her outside the SCIF and plays email catch-up. [Clinton's Counselor and Chief of Staff] Cheryl Mills and others who are dedicated BB addicts are frustrated because they too are not near their desktop very often during the working day... at this 2PM meeting CheryI indicated she last checked her email at 8:30... they are used to having the BB on their hip and staying closely in touch with developments during the day."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #150)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:44 PM

152. There was construction on her house that was done for the SCIF.

And it was guarded by the Secret Service.

And she wasn't the first SoS to have a SCIF system in her house. That was routine.

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/19/colin-powell-emails-hillary-clinton-424187.html

But Powell and Rice’s aides did nothing wrong. (I’m going to focus on them so that partisans who say Clinton broke the law have to attack respected Republicans first.) Start with this: Powell and Rice, like all modern secretaries of state, each had at least two email accounts—one personal and the other for communications designated as highly classified at the time of their creation . For classified information, both of them—and their aides with appropriate clearance—had a sensitive compartmented information facility, or what is known in intelligence circles as a SCIF. Most senior officials who deal with classified information have a SCIF in their offices and their homes.

These are not just extra offices with a special lock. Each SCIF is constructed following complex rules imposed by the intelligence and defense communities. Restrictions imposed on the builders are designed to ensure that no unauthorized personnel can get into the room, and the SCIF cannot be accessed by hacking or electronic eavesdropping. A group called the technical surveillance countermeasures team (TSCM) investigates the area or activity to check that all communications are protected from outside surveillance and cannot be intercepted.

Most permanent SCIFs have physical and technical security, called TEMPEST. The facility is guarded and in operation 24 hours a day, seven days a week; any official on the SCIF staff must have the highest security clearance. There is supposed to be sufficient personnel continuously present to observe the primary, secondary and emergency exit doors of the SCIF. Each SCIF must apply fundamental red-black separation to prevent the inadvertent transmission of classified data over telephone lines, power lines or signal lines.I could keep going for thousands and thousands of words explaining the security measures used for SCIFs. And all of this— all of this—is designed to protect the confidentiality of emails and communications determined to be classified at the time of transmission.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #152)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:57 PM

160. good to know.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #150)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:18 PM

166. Yawnn...facts scmacks...gimmie more millions

 

And I'll enjoy the olgarch world

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #148)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:52 PM

156. The contents of the Sid "Keep 'em Coming" Blumenthal emails were NSA documents

They were classified TS before an associate of Tyler Drumheller pulled them off the classified interagency system and Sid sent them to Hillary "Keep 'em Coming" Clinton. Sid told her on several occasions the information he was sending her was classified. Her response was "keep 'em coming." She's guilty of sin, and violated 18 USC Sec 793(f)(2) by failing to turn Sid in and Sec 793(e) by allowing classified docs to continue to traverse her server.

Hillary can't declassify NSA or CIA documents. Your argument only applies to some of her own messages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #156)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:57 PM

159. Some people are going to be really surprised when she's actually charged with a crime

 

there's ample evidence that she's committed one, just in what we know.
The FBI finds documents that should have been preserved or contained classified information and she'll be hit with obstruction and destruction of government property.
If they were destroyed while under subpoena from Congress, that's another crime.

I'll bet she didn't cooperate with the IG investigation because she was afraid of mixing up her stories or making an admission of criminal wrongdoing.
I fully expect her to invoke the 5th or refuse to meet with the FBI

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #159)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:04 PM

161. To tell you the truth, I think a deal has already been reached. They've had since March 2015 to

do succession planning for her candidacy. All she has to do is agree to release her delegates, to never again run for public office, and the President will pardon her at the end of his term. The AG runs out the clock until then. The FBI may not ever make a recommendation, but will list her acts that mishandled classified information and the laws implicated, and will state it is up to the DoJ to determine whether to indict her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #161)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:09 PM

162. Do you really think she's going to give up? The one thing the Clinton's don't do

 

is take the easy way out of their problems. She will drag this out and continue to lie right up until there is an indictment.

Just look at the Blue Dress from the Lewinsky debacle. Rather than just admit it happened. The Clinton people, first, sought to destroy the girl by calling her an mentally unbalance stalker who was infatuated with Bill. Then we got the VRWC....and then the dress showed up and we got the "it was just sex" and the "what is the definition of is"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #162)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:16 PM

163. This is a lot bigger than marital infidelity, and she has made many enemies, including at NSA

this time around.

I don't think that the real permanent government types, particularly those who happen to be Democrats, are going to let her press on regardless. She's been given a long length of rope, and she is about to reach the end of it with a sudden, agonizing jolt if she doesn't get off the infernal machine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #163)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:23 PM

169. And the Secret Service and (possibly ) Obama

 

Who was hoping they would never be this stupid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #161)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:21 PM

168. This wo7ld be plausible...if she already stepped down

 

I think "they" believe her getting in

Can rig the outcomes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #159)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:19 PM

167. Yup..^^.this + 1000 ^^

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #95)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:18 PM

108. And so did Condoleezza . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyladyfrommo (Reply #108)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:20 PM

109. Rice claims not to have used e-mail

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #109)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:24 PM

114. Not at all?

That was smart. Government people would probably be better off if they found a new way to comminicate. Something that can't be listened to or hacked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyladyfrommo (Reply #114)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:25 PM

117. That's the claim. I don't know if it's true or not.

 

But, supposedly, she did all her communications on paper and in person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #117)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:30 PM

124. In January NBC and CNN

reported that both Colin Powell and Condaleeza used personal email for State stuff. And that both their staff did.

Colin Powell said he never sent anything secret and Rice'S aid said that they just sent documents.

What I got was that the State email system was so outdated that everyone was using their personal computers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyladyfrommo (Reply #124)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:32 PM

126. yeah but only one person was using a personal server.

 

and it wasn't about convenience:

“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 report said. “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.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-personal-email-worry-223559#ixzz49h59Kwld
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #95)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:21 PM

111. Powell destroyed "millions" of emails?

First I've heard it's "millions", do you have a link?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yodermon (Reply #111)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:24 PM

116. It's the HRC defense. Sure Hillary had a nonsecure server in her basement

 

where numerous classified documents were found. Sure she set up her own server so she could control what people saw.
But that Powell guy....look at what he did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #116)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:46 PM

175. OMG...is that why he didnt run for President?

 

Awh...the scandal of it all

.......the

..................s c a n d a l

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 12:55 PM

74. But no consequences. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:01 PM

75. "Did Not Comply"... "Chose Not To Cooperate"... Didn't she proclaim full/complete cooperation?

 



Or Am I Thinking Of Another Investigation? Hard To Keep Track...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AzDar (Reply #75)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:23 PM

113. she's evolved on this issue

 

besides, what is the definition of cooperation?
It's just more Clinton sleaze. She'll probably claim the IG investigation is politically motivated, even though it was directed by Kerry and performed by an Obama appointee.

The question is, now, will the press ask her about it or, better yet, will she even have a press conference to address the report at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #113)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:31 PM

125. I think we are all...being tested...by this P.R.

 

If the outcry swells...okay

But...if its ho hum

Hillary will be dancing in the streets
(remember how she hi 5d when the public hearings failed)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #125)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:34 PM

131. I think the media is going to do their best to bury the story

 

until it can't be buried anymore. She won't be asked about it. She won't personally address it.

you can bet this is going to end up in a campaign ad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #131)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:32 PM

172. Its possible...its possible

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:13 PM

84. We also find out there were, at least, 2 hacking attempts

 

and HRC, along with her staff, refused to cooperate with the IG investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:35 PM

89. She violated rules, but is too big of a name to be prosecuted

 

Or does that only work for republicans when the democrats are in power?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:05 PM

97. They weren't rules they were federal regulations and laws

 

Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) requirements states that:

“Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record keeping system.”


Her purpose was concealment as we get in this quote from her own mouth. This is also why she sent the records to the state department in a printed form, to ensure that they were not easily accessible. Each record would have to be scanned then OCR'd at considerable effort and expense.



"As much as I’ve been investigated and all of that, you know, why would I —- I don’t even want -— why would I ever want to do e-mail?" Hillary Clinton seen on tape telling Peter Paul on home video captured at a fundraiser.

"Can you imagine?" she said.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

...(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.


abcnews.go.com/Politics/Election/hillary-clinton-email-2000/story?id=29396854

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SusanLarson (Reply #97)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:33 PM

173. Former USAG Mukasey said the same bout § 2071

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:11 PM

145. "Clinton declined to be interviewed"

The inspector general has rejected allegations of bias, noting that the scope of the review encompasses secretaries of both parties and that it was undertaken at the direction of Clinton’s Democratic successor, Kerry. The report includes interviews with Kerry and Powell and former secretaries Madeleine Albright and Condoleezza Rice, but it says that Clinton declined to be interviewed. The inspector general, Steve Linick, was appointed by President Obama and has served since 2013.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/state-dept-inspector-general-report-sharply-criticizes-clintons-email-practices/2016/05/25/fc6f8ebc-2275-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Babel_17 (Reply #145)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:14 PM

147. She pled the.....umm...I have the right to

 

Not give a chit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:31 PM

149. Clinton’s actions were unlawful under either federal records preservation laws or criminal laws


Stephen Vladek, a law professor at American University in Washington, said the findings by the Office of Inspector General are "deeply consistent with what most legal experts have long suspected -- that Secretary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server to conduct official business was inconsistent with internal State Department guidelines."

"Critically, though, the OIG report does not appear to conclude that any of Secretary Clinton’s actions were unlawful under either federal records preservation laws or criminal statutes," said Vladek, who specializes in constitutional and national-security law.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-25/clinton-e-mail-use-violated-rules-state-department-audit-finds

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justice (Reply #149)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:37 PM

151. Oligarchs are only unlawful....if the puss off other oligarchs

 

In this case...both right and left lords of the beltway are hoping she gets away with it all...

Then indy servers are going to be a whole new ..venal..industry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justice (Reply #149)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:35 PM

174. By the way..thanks for Bloomberg link

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 07:46 PM

176. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Thu May 26, 2016, 09:15 AM

181. My perfect world of Bernie v Romney..just may happen

 

After All




Cause the joke of Clinton or True for America is toast

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Original post)

Thu May 26, 2016, 03:22 PM

182. Thanks for the heads-up, laserhaas!

Seems a concerted effort was made to separate We the People from the State Department's official business.

After Wikileaks, I can certainly understand why.

http://anonhq.com/wikileaks-clinton-emails-show-rothschild-rockefeller-partnership/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #182)

Thu May 26, 2016, 03:48 PM

184. So much wrong..and so little we can do about it

 

Unless change..comes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laserhaas (Reply #184)

Thu May 26, 2016, 03:54 PM

185. The Aspens look like a forest, yet they're cloned from one tree, grown from the roots.



Scooter Libby, in an email to Steno Judy Miller of NYT:

"Out West, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning," Mr. Libby wrote. "They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them."

http://warisacrime.org/node/3677


Then there are the Old Money Aspens...



The Bush Family's Slaveholding Past

Was their dynasty built on slavery?


By: Edward Ball|Posted: February 15, 2008 at 12:00 AM
TheRoot.com

The image most people have of slavery involves a cotton plantation with a big white house, a black village where 300 people live in cabins and a cruel overseer in the wings. This was not the model followed by the ancestors of President George W. Bush when, 175 years ago, they enslaved about 30 people on the shores of the upper Chesapeake.

SNIP...

A new book by Jacob Weisberg, The Bush Tragedy, mentions in passing that at one time some of the president's family owned slaves. Weisberg doesn't dwell on the links between the White House and the antebellum past except to say the Bush clan's story is a long-held "family secret." The Bush Tragedy, a revealing book about family dynamics in the Bush political dynasty, treats the slavery matter only briefly, focusing instead on the "spectacular, avoidable flame-out" of the receding administration. But the story that joins the 43rd president to predecessors who held title to dozens of people bears retelling in detail.

The skeletal facts surfaced in April 2007, when an amateur historian named Robert Hughes published his research in the IllinoisTimes, a small paper out of Springfield. Hughes found census records showing that during the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth centuries, in Cecil County, Maryland, five households of the Walker family, the president's ancestors via his father's mother, Dorothy Walker Bush, had been slaveholding farmers. The evidence is simple but persuasive: genealogies of the Bush family match up with census data that counted farmers who used enslaved workers. With this, the president joins perhaps fifteen million living white Americans who trace their roots to the long-gone master class.

SNIP...

The family, nevertheless, seems to have looked back with nostalgia on their old slave hold. There are two pieces of evidence for this. In The Bush Tragedy, Jacob Weisberg refers to one of the later patriarchs, David Walker, as "a believer in eugenics and the 'unwritten law' of lynching," and cites as proof a letter Walker published in the St. Louis Republic in 1914. Black people, he wrote at the time, were more insidious than prostitution and "all the other evils combined."

The second piece of evidence is within living memory. In 1930, when they could afford it, the family again embraced the antebellum lifestyle. That year President Bush's great-grandfather, George Herbert Walker, bought Duncannon plantation, an old cotton estate in South Carolina, to use as a hunting retreat and vacation home. His namesake, George Herbert Walker Bush, the current president's father, spent many youthful vacations on Duncannon, where teams of black cooks, valets, and drivers served him and opened doors when he approached. The Bush heirs no longer own Duncannon plantation; but for a time, the estate provided a version of the baronial life, to which the antebellum Walkers aspired, but never achieved.

CONTINUED...

http://www.theroot.com/views/bush-familys-slaveholding-past



And how it connects to modern day feudalism, I mean, banking...



Baron de Rothschild and Prescott Bush, sharing a moment and a bit o' information in this small world.



Rothschild and Freshfields founders’ had links to slavery, papers reveal

By Carola Hoyos
Financial Times

Two of the biggest names in the City of London had previously undisclosed links to slavery in the British colonies, documents seen by the Financial Times have revealed.

Nathan Mayer Rothschild, the banking family’s 19th-century patriarch, and James William Freshfield, founder of Freshfields, the top City law firm, benefited financially from slavery, records from the National Archives show, even though both have often been portrayed as opponents of slavery.

Far from being a matter of distant history, slavery remains a highly contentious issue in the US, where Rothschild and Freshfields are both active.

Companies alleged to have links to past slave injustices have come under pressure to make restitution.

JPMorgan, the investment bank, set up a $5m scholarship fund for black students studying in Louisiana after apologising in 2005 for the company’s historic links to slavery.

CONTINUED (with registration, etc) ...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7c0f5014-628c-11de-b1c9-00144feabdc0.html



The back of the object they are examining shows typing in a box, similar to what is often used for identifying content on the front of a photograph. Or map. Either way, small world for them. Great plantation for the 99.9-percent of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #185)

Thu May 26, 2016, 04:08 PM

186. Whoa

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread