Here is a poor example of the MSM attacking Hillary from the right.

[NCTraveler]

It couldn't be anymore blatant. They know their audience.

State Dept. can’t fulfill your FOIA because it’s overwhelmed by Hillary e-mails

"The State Department’s latest defense on why it can’t comply with your ancient Freedom of Information request for documents is: Blame it on Hillary."

"State says its document-reviewing personnel is too overwhelmed by reviewing those 55,000 pages of e-mails former secretary Hillary Clinton turned over last year to do much else."

"That apparently means other folks, who’ve waited years on their requests for State Department documents, are being told they’ll have to wait even longer because of the Clinton review."

Compare that to this little tid bit in the same article.

"State said there’s been a huge “surge” in FOIA lawsuits in the last year alone, suits that “have grown increasingly burdensome and complex.”"

I love how she pisses them of so. I say poor example because I sense even most wingers will laugh at it.

[Iliyah]

1. RWers hate anyone who is not like them. At present they hate her more

since she is the "frontrunner" for the Democratic Party.

Some DUers hate HRC equally as well from the left.

[RobertEarl]

2. Once upon a time...

...Hillary did claim there was a VRWC - Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Does she still believe that? Or is that too controversial these days?

[NCTraveler]

3. The right wing hates her passionatley.

Only a fool would argue otherwise.

[RobertEarl]

4. But what about the VRWC?

Is they or is they not?

The rich right wing think Hillary will save them, much like Obama has. The poor RW are just idiots.

[NCTraveler]

5. I think you left the farm.

Any thoughts on the op?

I think you are meaning to reply to your own op where you are discussing the VRWC.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026661216#post4


My op has nothing to do with conspiracies. If you read it you would see it is blatant. That was my point. How in your face they are. The exact opposite of what you are talking about. Truly. The exact opposite.

[RobertEarl]

6. Heh

Tough luck, eh?

I mean what has Hillary done about the VRWC?

They slam her all the time and she clams up about the VRWC. Is she scared of them? Why is she clammed up these days?

[karynnj]

9. I see nothing blatantly against Clinton here

It IS true that the top priority of that part of the State Department is now processing 55000 pages of paper with emails on them.

The worst thing is that, an official from the department, had to agree that they had to depend on Clinton's word that every relevant email was included. That question, the honest response, suggest where this whole thing goes. Either the Republicans find enough embarrassing things to keep them busy, or they will try to make the story that the Clinton team "cleaned" the emails before printing them. Note the Stare Department can not deny that -- all they can do is repeat that they take Clinton's word.

Both the extra work and the reality that the private server - now scrubbed - means that the State Department can not say these are all the emails sent.

[brooklynite]

7. Um, what does this have to do with the "MSM"?

Are you saying the media made up the story about the State Dept.?

Are you saying the media is the source of all the FOIA requests?

Do you have evidence for either statement?

[karynnj]

8. I thought your point would be that the State Department has had a long backlog for years --

I believe predating Hillary Clinton's tenure.

One question might be whether Congress should allocate more money so they could hire a larger staff for both processing the backlog of requests and for developing more efficient methods to archive the documents for easier searches.

Your point that the number of requests skyrocketed starting with the last year of Clinton's tenure is well taken. However, it is true that Clinton's use of a personal server and her not providing her email in a systematic, timely manner HAS created a huge additional task.

The State Department was given 55000 pages of paper containing emails. This is clearly NOT the most efficient way this could have been transmitted. I don't get why emails - on a computer - could not have been ELECTRONICALLY sent to the State Department. This would eliminate the need to scan them in. (It likely would be more accurate as well)

I get your point that the increase in FOIA requests escalated due to interest in all things HRC did -- because she is running for President as well as normal oversight. I get they were already behind. However, it is true that this entire email mishigas HAS indeed slowed all the FOIA -- because the State Department has had to prioritize processing HRC's paper emails, both for FOIA and for putting them all in the public domain. The latter was because HRC offered that when the email story blew up. However, it requires lawyers to prepare every single one of them to make sure no information that should be redacted is left in what is put out.

I might be ready to bet three things:
1) Even when all this is out, the other side will just speak of HRC and team doing the initial processing and arguing that she would eliminate anything likely to cause trouble.
2) The State Department will be blasted for this taking too long -- maybe even by Clinton campaign people who want this out sooner rather than later.
3) In 55,000 pages, there is likely to be at least some errors and something will go out that should have been redacted - and State will be blamed.

Sorry, but I have more sympathy for the unknown people in the State Department struggling to get all of this done than I do for Clinton, who is partly responsible for this mess.