HRC's email problems just got worse

[jpmonk91]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by mcar (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Here is the article:https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/25/hillary-clintons-email-problems-just-got-much-worse/

Letting her go to the presidency is political suicide! She broke the law!

[snooper2]

1. Always check out the author before reading a piece if I have never heard of them

This guy sounds swell LOL


" Cillizza and Dana Milbank appeared in a series of humor videos called Mouthpiece Theater, which appeared on the website of The Washington Post. An outcry followed a video in which, during a discussion of the White House "Beer Summit", they chose new brands for a number of people, including "Mad Bitch Beer" for Hillary Rodham Clinton. Both men apologized for the video and the series was canceled.[4]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Cillizza

[grasswire]

6. Czilla has been beating up Bernie.

You might want to get informed. It's pretty weird that you have never heard of him.

[snappyturtle]

13. I'm a bit surprised you haven't heard of Cillizza...he's on teevee and been around for some time.

It's not like he's some random blogger trying to make a name for himself.
Cillizza works for MSNBC and the Post.

[Egnever]

47. Oh hes swell alright

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/29/washington-post-corrects-faulty-report-that-nea/209615

Same clown same issue and same made up BS

[gwheezie]

2. She broke the rules

Not the law. Just to be clear.

[leveymg]

25. Just to be clear, wait for the Intel Community and FBI report

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 03:59 PM - Edit history (1)

for the criminal acts. The DOS did find she violated the Federal Records Act, however, that had no criminal penalties attached.

[gwheezie]

30. I'll wait for that but the op

Said she broke the law. I'm just clarifying there's been no formal result of a criminal investigation.

[leveymg]

48. Technically, as head of agency, she did violate the Federal Records Act. That's in the report.

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 05:25 PM - Edit history (1)

That finding from the State Dept. came about as the result of multiple civil cases pending and an active federal criminal investigation. She can't be charged under the Federal Records Act because she's not presently in gov't and there are no criminal penalties in that statute. However, there are other federal laws referenced in State Department regulations that criminalize the destruction of federal records that she could be charged with, as was former National Security Sandy Berger.

[Egnever]

38. Along with 80% of governments agencies

Hardly breath taking.

Another Gem from the report. Nara the agency responsible for conducting inspections and surveys to asses compliance last reviews the SOS office in 1991. Most people didn't even know what email was then.

[liberal N proud]

31. But it sounds so much better to bash her by being loose with terms

[Hoyt]

3. She "jaywalked," like several administrations and agency heads before her.

Do you go through life adhering to, and worrying about, every little policy that some fool dreamed up to preserve their job?

[jwirr]

4. Hillary does a lot of things out of paranoia and it is not good

to have that as we saw with Nixon.

[moonbabygo]

8. as they say

it's never the crime it's the cover up. I suspect nothing is going to come out of this or she wouldn't be running for president.

The thing that bothers me the most is she knew she was going to run for president so why did you use her own server? She is too smart have thought this was ok.

[Trust Buster]

5. Just got worse ? Did we learn anything today that we didn't already know ? No, we did not.

Please proceed.

[jpmonk91]

12. Do not accuse me of

Supporting that fascist fuck Trump! Just because I don't support your queen!

[leftynyc]

20. Why is it only

Bernie supporters that call Hillary "our queen" - why pretend anyone else considers her royalty? Your hysteria over the emails tells everyone they need to know about you.

[joeybee12]

27. Apparently that's today's Revolution Messaging talking point...nt

[Egnever]

39. Same poster yesterday was running around excusing all of Cornel's questionable remarks

Saying it was just Hillary worship that makes people uncomfortable with him. Seems to be a constant theme with this poster and honestly with the low post count and trending theme I think this one is a plant.

[leftynyc]

41. June 7th can't come soon enough

Time for the sewer to get emptied.

[The Polack MSgt]

32. Evidently, repeating right wing talking points are ok in the service of Sanders

Accusing someone of being a right winger is allowed if it's a Sanders fan accusing a Clinton fan.

Accuse a Sanders fan with the same language and that's worth a hide...

On Wed May 25, 2016, 11:42 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Take your pro-Trump trolling to the Primaries forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7855903

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing posters of RW proclivities is highly uncivil.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed May 25, 2016, 11:46 AM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Can't directly accuse DUer of being right wing troll without more evidence than just a distorted, inflammatory OP, which is common among supporters of both candidates.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sauce for the goose sauce for the gander.
Sanders supporters cannot possibly believe that calling some one a right winger is an alertable statement. That has been their favorite thing for 6 months now
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I can't hide a post that is obviously correct. There is no reason for the OP, that should be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

[jpmonk91]

9. If you don't think she broke the law

Than you live in a fantasy world just like the trump supporters

[mercuryblues]

34. What law did she break?

[Egnever]

40. crickets..

[Bucky]

43. She crossed the border to take a job away from a hardworkin' American

Ooops, sorry, got my hates switched up.

Go about your business, folks

[leveymg]

50. As of today, the State Dept has found she violated the Federal Records Act, the Intel Commun IG has

referred her for classified information violations which, according to her signed security agreement, which may be prosecuted under several federal felony statutes, including several parts of the Espionage Act, Section 793. These are 10 year felonies for each act. Shall I go on?

[Egnever]

54. Please do

IC IG made a referral detailing the potential compromise of classified information to security officials within the Executive Branch. The main purpose of the referral was to notify security officials that classified information may exist on at least one private server and thumb drive that are not in the government's possession. An important distinction is that the IC IG did not make a criminal referral- it was a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes. The IC IG is statutorily required to refer potential compromises of national security information to the appropriate IC security officials. [Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton's Emails, 7/24/15]

https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf

[leveymg]

60. There appears to have been some cherry-picking in your selection. Here's the previous paragraph:

These emails were not retroactively classified by the State
Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated
and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This
classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.

https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf

I would also like to remind you that the excerpt of the joint statement dates to July, 2015, and the focus of the investigation has changed and intensified over time, with Mrs. Clinton's operation of the unauthorized email server becoming the focus. As FBI Director Comey recently commented:

Clinton and her team have made a point of not describing the FBI's work as an "investigation," but alternately as a "security review" or "security inquiry." They've also noted that the issue was referred to the FBI not as a criminal matter but as an intelligence breach.

However, in response to a question Wednesday, Comey said he wasn't familiar with the term "security inquiry" that Clinton and her aides have used. The FBI chief said he considers the work agents are doing to be an "investigation."

"It's in our name. I'm not familiar with the term 'security inquiry','" the director said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-investigation-fbi-james-comey-223071#ixzz49htXyo8m

The FBI report and IC AG report will confirm the official statement made last July, that has not changed, and will detail the allegations. It will be clear she violated her security clearance, and in so doing violated several federal felony statutes.

[leftofcool]

10. No she didn't.

[jpmonk91]

11. Have fun in your info free bubble

The republicans like theirs too

[LanternWaste]

19. I too pretend that people who disagree with me do so due to living in a bubble

I too pretend that people who disagree with me do so due to living in a bubble. It's both self-validating and minimizes other opinions, so it's an ethically convenient win-win!

[dawg]

14. I'm sick of hearing about her damned emails.

I don't care what server she used. The official government servers were breached. Who knows, maybe Hillary's bathroom was more secure.

[jpmonk91]

15. OMG

the HRC dems are becoming just as fanatic as the conservatives

[Paladin]

26. Look who's talking. (nt)

[Maedhros]

16. What official government servers were breached? [n/t]

[dawg]

18. Just google it. Here's one article.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/

[Maedhros]

21. Ok - thank you.

Now, how does this hack absolve Clinton from FOIA violations regarding the sequestering of email communications and deletion of same?

[dawg]

22. It just isn't that big of a deal to me. She was damned if she did, damned if she didn't.

The partisan witch hunt against her is a real thing. If she immediately gives over to every request, they'll just pore through everything, take a few words out of context, and create a dozen *new* controversies.

Democrats and other left-leaning individuals need to be fighting with Hillary Clinton over issues of policy. Not over manufactured bullshit like this. (Or Benghazi, or Whitewater, or Vince Foster, etc., etc., etc.)

FWIW, I didn't vote for the woman. But it looks an awful lot like she's going to be my candidate this fall.

[Maedhros]

23. Pardon me if I don't really care how you feel about it.

She's a Democrat, so she gets a pass from you. Just like she gets a pass for the Honduran coup, or bombing Libya based on lies about genocide.

There is no integrity in such a stance.

/ignore list.

[dawg]

29. There's no integrity in helping Trump win the Presidency, either.

If you really put me on your ignore list, well ... that's a shame. The more we surround ourselves within ideologically pure bubbles that agree with us 100% of the time, the more ineffectual we become.

[TeddyR]

51. I agree about your ignore list point

And one reason I like this website is I can debate these issues with others who are generally pretty informed individuals. But with respect to the email issue Hillary violated the rules, was told she was violating the rules, and continued to violate the rules. The folks here on DU would skewer someone like Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio if it turned out they committed similar violations, and we shouldn't excuse Hillary when she does it. For me it at the very least reflects poorly on her decision-making.

[Egnever]

52. Hillary and a large portion of the government.

According to the document over 80% of the government is at risk of non compliance.

[TeddyR]

53. But isn't the real point here

That Hillary was told she was in violation and didn't really care? If I'm going 75 in a 55 and everyone around is also going 75 but I get pulled over for speeding the judge isn't going to let me off because everyone else was going 75. I was breaking the rules and shouldn't have been. And to clarify, a "large portion of the government" wasn't using a private server as the exclusive means of conducting official business. Only Hillary did that.

[Egnever]

55. The point is 80% of the government was told the same thing and didn't care

Why is Hillary special?

in Fact if you actually read the report it is pretty damning when it comes to the governments record keeping in general.

[TeddyR]

57. Hillary is "special"

Because she's the front-runner to be the Dem nominee for president of the United States. And she already has issues with being viewed as untrustworthy. So yeah, whether the entire fucking government violated security rules is irrelevant - the question is did Hillary comply with State Department rules regarding information that is both subject to FOIA and might contain sensitive, indeed top secret, information. The answer appears to be that she did not, and that she knowingly did not.

[Egnever]

59. Not seeing that as the answer at all

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

The actual report is there in all it's glory and if anything the entire theme of it seems to be Clinton did nothing out of the ordinary or different from her predecessor or the vast majority of the federal government.

In fact it specifically states that because of horrible records management by the government they cant verify any of the SOS going all the way back to Albright were ever in compliance. Hillary claims compliance and because of shit record keeping they can't verify weather she did or did not comply.

Really wish I could cut and paste from the report as it paints a picture so ridiculous of government handling of emails it is a wonder the Government doesn't indict itself. Going to need to find a pdf of it because this spin from Cizzila is so off the mark one wonders if he even read it.

[LanternWaste]

17. Every day, someone alleges "this will be the factor that brings her down!"

Every day, someone alleges either directly, or simply by cowering behind implication that "this will be the factor that brings her down!" Every day, those allegations are as quickly forgotten as they do not come to pass. But fear not, oh those of righteousness and purity... tomorrow another poster will allege "this will be the factor that brings her down!" regardless of its inaccuracy.

[Kingofalldems]

24. This is GDP material.

Clever that you used initials instead of her full name.

[notadmblnd]

28. Love this part

This is a bad day for Clinton's presidential campaign. Period. For a candidate already struggling to overcome a perception that she is neither honest nor trustworthy, the IG report makes that task significantly harder. No one will come out of this news cycle — with the exception of the hardest of the hard-core Clinton people — believing she is a better bet for the presidency on May 25 than she was on May 23.

Clinton remains blessed that Republicans are on the verge of nominating Donald Trump, a candidate whose numbers on honesty, trustworthiness and even readiness to lead are worse — and in some cases, far worse — than hers. But Trump's task of casting her as "Crooked Hillary" just got easier.

[pa28]

33. Seems to be withholding of information in an official investigation.

I guess it's up to FBI investigators now to determine if any laws were broken.

[Egnever]

35. Silly

That is the republican spin of the report. The report actually shows what a clusterfuck records keeping is inside the government and says something on the order of 80% of all agencies are not in compliance with the laws.

Pretty hard to single out Clinton when 80% of the government is out of compliance. The republicans and likely many of the hard core Sanders supporters will certainly try to do so but the Idea Hillary broke the law when 80% of government is also out of compliance is going to be a hard sell to anyone not already inclined to buy it.

It may work but if it does it will not because it has any semblance of the reality of government record keeping.

[ismnotwasm]

36. No they didn't

The actual report is interesting reading.

[Egnever]

42. Agreed

it is interesting and actually lays out a pretty bad record of record keeping government wide. Also shows off the snails pace at which government adapts to new technology.

If anything it points out Clinton is just one of many not keeping records correctly and actually lays bare the idea that there is any real control over it at all.

Best part is much of it is blamed on budget cuts..Wonder where those came from. Sometimes starving the government has unintended consequences.

[pnwmom]

37. The article doesn't say she broke law. She broke department policy, which is not a law. n/t

[Andy823]

45. It's like someone else said

She broke the "rules", something that I see every single day here on DU, and the same ones that break the rules here are having a cow because she broke the rules. The crappy part is when they post this crap and say she broke the LAW yet they can't tell you what law it was they claim she broke.

[TeddyR]

56. She violated State Department policy

And did so knowingly. Do you think that is a good thing? And we don't yet know if she violated the law - the FBI is still looking into that. Is this a good thing for the presumptive Dem nominee?

[pnwmom]

62. She followed the same procedures as her predecessors. John Kerry has made good changes,

but her practices were in line with others in the Department.

[TeddyR]

63. They actually were not

Read Chris Cillizza's summit at the WaPo. Hillary was unique in her violations.

[leveymg]

58. DOS report says HRC violated the Federal Records Act and cites criminal penaties against destruction

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 05:18 PM - Edit history (1)

of federal records. See page 10, footnotes 40, 41

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

References to federal laws:

* Additional duties imposed by law upon the head of agency not observed are also cited at p. 12, ft. 48.

* The Secretary failed to timely notify the National Archives of pending destruction of official records according to law. p. 17, ftn 73.

* See, also, the discussion of State Department discussions and efforts to recover emails dating back to 2011. pp. 17-19.

* In particular, Pages 26-27 discuss Clinton and staff's failures to fully comply with Departmental records requests after leaving office.

[spanone]

44. bullshit.

eom

[Egnever]

46. Hey look it is Chris Cilliza

Same clown who claimed 150 anonymous leakers a few weeks ago and had to walk it back.

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/29/washington-post-corrects-faulty-report-that-nea/209615

Color me less than surprised he wrote this BS piece that almost completely ignores what the report actually says.

[Glassunion]

49. She did'nt break the law. Improper practice, and poor policy is not

against the law.

It's not illegal to call a toddler an asshole, it's just frowned upon.

[leveymg]

61. Yes, she did. Please see, #50 and #60