2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBreaking: State Dept report sharply criticizes Clinton's email practices...MSNBC... She is...
, perhaps?MSNBC reporter reporting from the report: "Hillary Clinton didn't comply with the rules about preservation of government records and that she should have preserved all the emails and handed them over to the State Department when she left office."
Thanks to DUer think for a link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2049123
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Why are you ignoring this? It's real and it's all over every single news network right now as breaking news at the top of the hour.
She's in big trouble and they also criticized other former secretary's of state.
This isn't good man. It's flippin' serious shit.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)At least now there will be one round of primary voters with access to (most of) the whole truth. I have faith in American voters, when they have the relevant information.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)Do you actually need an explanation of why it's so ridiculous???
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)If this email nonsense was going to hurt Clinton---it would have already..Why is that so hard to understand? Voters would have made it clear that they believe Clinton broke the law--of course she did not. But the primary would be very different right if voters believed all this nonsense. Democrats want her in the White House.
cali
(114,904 posts)Bernie not only didn't attack her on it, he defended her. The ads write themselves.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)And that, hornet, is what we are discussing. Are you going to argue that he has attacked her on that issue??
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)asuhornets
(2,405 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)In a GE everybody gets to vote. How many times must we say this, people hate Hillary.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Incredibly so.
Tell us how it is not. Seriously, explain to us how the Inspector General of the state department coming out saying Hillary broke the rules isn't serious.
She's running for POTUS for shit sakes!
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Yet, here we are, and that drip drip drip is starting to flow pretty freely. She won't be able to opt out when she gets the call from Director Comey.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)This email nonsense was launched even before Clinton decided to run for president.. They were trying to scare her into not running at all--even Godzilla knows that.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Whatever you say. See you on Friday when the shit really hits the fan. I look forward to hearing about how this is all about nothing.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Especially when your target is wealthy, powerful and politically connected.
That it's taking this long means they're doing a thorough investigation. I also happen to think, based upon their subpoenaing records from the Clinton Foundation that they've discovered other potential crimes.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)LuvLoogie
(6,855 posts)asuhornets
(2,405 posts)stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)I think so!
What an ironic statement you made.
Sorry but this is real and you can choose to embrace reality or continue with the disconnect. The FBI is a real organization and so is the State Department who falls under the jurisdiction of the Obama administration.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)corruption. They will never hold her accountable.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)Plus he said policies may have been broken. He said nothing about any possibility of laws being broken.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)It's not his place to determine crimes.
In fact, his very job is to investigate policy goals.
The FBI will address any criminality.
frylock
(34,825 posts)stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Any other stupid questions I can answer for you?
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...school?
Why on earth (or the moon, as it were) would you ask such an odd question?
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)We will probably have to wait for the FBI to finish their work for toast to be served.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)...and washed it down with the blood of kittens.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Though they were never shown on live television.
TheBlackAdder
(28,078 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)"She made herstory!"
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)sigh
morningfog
(18,115 posts)They think that since the email/server issues came to light, in part, due to the ridiculous witch hunt, it is all right nonsense.
They either aren't very bright, or are shaking in their collective boots.
think
(11,641 posts)By Rosalind S. Helderman and Tom Hamburger May 25 at 10:18 AM
The State Departments independent watchdog has issued a highly critical analysis of Hillary Clintons email practices while running the department, concluding that she failed to seek legal approval for her use of a private email server and that department staff would not have given its blessing because of the security risks in doing so.
The inspector general, in a long awaited review obtained Wednesday by The Washington Post in advance of its publication, found that Clintons use of private email for public business was not an appropriate method of preserving documents and that her practices failed to comply with department policies meant to ensure federal record laws are followed.
The report says she should have printed and saved her emails during her four years in office or surrendered her work-related correspondence immediately upon stepping down in February 2013. Instead, Clinton provided those records in December 2014, nearly two years after leaving office.
The report found that a top Clinton aide was warned in 2010 that the system may not properly preserve records but dismissed those worries, indicating that the system had passed legal muster. But the inspector general said it could not show evidence of a review by legal counsel.
Read more:
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?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)Dem2
(8,166 posts)This is the expected result - don't do this in the future.
Done.
Over.
Nice piece of toast, I'm sure Hillary will have it for breakfast in the WH.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Demsrule86
(68,355 posts)If you bothered to look at it ...you would see, it is a big nothing.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)"The report says she should have printed and saved her emails during her four years in office or surrendered her work-related correspondence immediately upon stepping down in February 2013. Instead, Clinton provided those records in December 2014, nearly two years after leaving office.
The report found that a top Clinton aide was warned in 2010 that the system may not properly preserve records but dismissed those worries, indicating that the system had passed legal muster. But the inspector general said it could not show evidence of a review by legal counsel. "
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)jzodda
(2,124 posts)It says nothing that hasn't been said before ad nauseum.
Its a slap on the wrist.
Its over.
frylock
(34,825 posts)jzodda
(2,124 posts)The FBI will follow will another slap on the wrist.
This I can promise...
The issue is OVER
frylock
(34,825 posts)The slapping will come from Obama's DOJ, and if they fail to indict contrary to FBI's recommendation, we'll be hearing all about it.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Furthermore, despite her claims of cooperation, none of her staff actually cooperated with the IG investigation.
Albright, Rice and Powell all cooperated and did interviews with the IG. HRC declined
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Dem2
(8,166 posts)I don't have an axe to grind in this fight other than I will defend the 2 Democratic candidates from unfair right-wing sounding exaggerations (criticism intended to damage vs. enhance.)
islandmkl
(5,275 posts)jams complicate things, don't you know?
trudyco
(1,258 posts)She did serious security breaches. She lied about it. She doctored up some of the emails she finally had to hand over (hence the printouts of them). She withheld some of the emails until she was called on it. She lied about when she started using her private email server which didn't even have a basic firewall (I think that was it) the first couple of months. I believe she also worked in an era where the security and it's ramifications had been beefed up compared to her predecessors. Wasn't there a new law passed while she was in office about it?
She should be prosecuted and she should do jail time. Just like anybody else who would have done this. Just like Rove should have had done with the RNC server/email scandal.
Argh! Politicians and political minions should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Demsrule86
(68,355 posts)And now wants to blame others...it was their job. Also, they faulted Powell and Rice as well.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Nowhere to run, no one else to blame.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)That's just a silly claim.
frylock
(34,825 posts)The server was setup to prevent State from archiving the email.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...the republicans Powell and Rice?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)How, specifically, was State supposed to maintain the emails that only Clinton had accesss to?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)We'll know them when we see them.
Meanwhile, "her crimes were no worse than Bush's people" is a lame-ass defense
TheBlackAdder
(28,078 posts)dchill
(38,324 posts)Beausoir
(7,540 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Unless the voters in CA, NJ, etc decide they want a Democrat in the WH.
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Lacking any sort of core moral compass will do that...
jzodda
(2,124 posts)Time to move on.
It didn't say anything that I didn't expect.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)She is unfit to be the leader of the free world.
LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)gift that keeps on giving.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)June 8th. He doesn't want to wound her too much yet, and risk having to face Bernie.
tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)His "crooked Hillary" line is sticking to her like glue.
LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)floppyboo
(2,461 posts)I'm in Canada. My friends who are not news junkies, and who are fed up with my obsession with all things politically revolutionary, have been calling this morning: 'Did you hear?' "Wow, Hillary is in trouble'.
Just saying, when these people are getting caught up in this 'scandal' - it is BIG.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)No illegalities....no story.
Keep prayin to the indictment fairy berners LOL
yodermon
(6,143 posts)And "No illegalities.. no story" ... so awesome that *that* is where the bar is set for what you deem acceptable for a President.
I'm sure Trump and the repukes will agree with you.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)This was not a legal investigation. It does show that there is merit to the FBI investigation and civil suits ongoing against Her Majesty.
The news for her, and the Democratic party, is only going to get worse from here.
Be prepared, if you support Hillary, to defend her illegal actions from now until November. You'd better come up with some better material than "this is just a right wing smear", "other people did it too", and "this doesn't mean anything, it is nothing serious". Good luck with that.
KPN
(15,587 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)into this. And then the two IGs looked into it and passed it to the FBI.
Mike__M
(1,052 posts)as last-minute replacement
tabasco
(22,974 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
frylock
(34,825 posts)Sorry not sorry to piss on your parade.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
frylock
(34,825 posts)You see, if Clinton is indicted (can't believe I even typed that), then Sanders is our nominee and I will be just as happy to vote for him.
The only downside would be Sanders supporters -who have been wrong more often than right- infiltrating DU with cries of "See? We were right all along!" That would be unpleasant to see.
But I don't see an indictment as any legitimate possibility. And that's after I've mentally bent over backwards to try to see it that way. I could be wrong but...I'm not.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
Kip Humphrey
(4,753 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Sort of. The exact phrase was "Princess Weathervane's Ostrich Army," but close enough!
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Sadly, they're infrequent...
QC
(26,371 posts)Avalux
(35,015 posts)Oh wait......
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)The government was not prepared for the digital era. This will have no effect on the election IMO.
TeddyR
(2,493 posts)Casts Hills in a bad light, but I agree it probably won't have any real impact. This report won't prevent me from voting for Hills if she is the nominee. However, I will not vote for her if she is indicted and refuses to drop out.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...Hillary to show bad judgement as well?
I see.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)digital age, then attacking one person for reasons of political motivation probably won't solve a systematic problem.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...sand at the bottom of that hole...
840high
(17,196 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Faux pas
(14,586 posts)dream I suppose.
Vinca
(50,172 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)-none
(1,884 posts)How many of Hillary's Super delegates want to be able to continue their own carers, so flip their vote from Hillary?
Hillary will become quite toxic in the coming months.
LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)There will be little dissention in those ranks.
Hillary somehow has to be able to attract enough independents and dissaffected Bernie supporters to beat him. This plays right into Trump's meme that she's "crooked" and does nothing to help her win over the voters she can't win without in November.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)These fantasies of SDs flipping are hilarious.
-none
(1,884 posts)Great democracy we have here.
The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)Spent on this Fox inspired witch hunt.
They have to come up with something.