Is there anyone here NOT troubled by Hillary's not cooperating with the IG investigation?

[BillZBubb]

She's talked so much about how cooperative, open, transparent, and eager to help she has been.

I'm not a Hillary fan, but even I didn't know about that. It was somewhat surprising news to me. It certainly contradicts the image she has been trying to project on this.

[kstewart33]

1. No, it's as smart as not debating Bernie.

The IG report does not matter. It's the FBI investigation that does.

Why spend time and effort with the IG?

[NWCorona]

7. I know right? It's only an audit from the agency Hillary headed

What possible bearing could it have on how Hillary would be president.

[kstewart33]

56. Oh guys, give it a rest.

The IG report does not matter. The reason: the FBI set specific limits on the information that the IG could examine and on the range of its investigation.

The FBI's report will be the most complete and exhaustive investigation. Clinton's team is cooperating fully with the FBI, and Clinton if they ask her to be interviewed.

Stop making a mountain out of a molehill. The truth will come out.

Stop assuming the worst. You guys seem to be so desperate.

What's next? She spits nails, trips nuns, and kicks her dog?

[JDPriestly]

102. Which agency is more neutral, less under the influence of the White House, the IG

report or the FBI report?

Which report is likely to be more objective?

[Jitter65]

104. She didn't want to interview with them BEFORE the FBI interview. Smart IMHO. Anything she does

is always blown way out of proportion. She turned over the e-mails, State Department already has or had accesses to her internal e-mails and computer use. She just refused to be interviewed until the FBI investigation is over.

[NWCorona]

107. Well that's highly convenient

[panader0]

11. Um, because she said she would?

Both cooperate with the audit, as did Albright, Rice, Powell and Kerry, and she also agreed to debate.
Both are lies. That's why you spend the time and effort--because you said you would.

[TimPlo]

75. Lying does not matter to them.

Once you taste the kool-aide your brain loses all felling that normal people get over lying. As someone above said "No, it's as smart as not debating Bernie." Seem you and I are just dummies for thinking lying for someone running for POTUS is wrong. No lying is smart as long as it benefits you.

[BillZBubb]

12. Wow, I find that attitude incredible. You seem to have little problem with dishonesty,

if it's in a "good cause"

[senz]

21. Hill fans resemble their candidate rather closely.

[Vattel]

51. I've noticed that in quite a few of them anyways

[kstewart33]

57. I confess. I am a terrible person.

I'm the one who trips nuns, spits nails and I routinely kick my two dogs.

Hurrah! You win!

[Vattel]

58. I knew it! lol

[merrily]

83. No, but you are the one justifying not cooperating with a government

investigation after Hillary said she would cooperate. Not to mention that she wants to be the officer whom the Constitution of the US charges with faithful execution of federal laws. If you see nothing wrong with what you've been posting on this thread, IMO, at the very least, you've lost healthy perspective.

[dchill]

55. They are her 'droids.

[840high]

74. Man o man - do they ever!!!!

[merrily]

82. The "means ends" philosophical debate doesn't usually count personal ambition as a good

cause. Usually, it's things like killing Hitler before he has 12 million people slaughtered, not, "I want to be the guy/gal who goes down in history as the one who prevented the Holocaust."

[rhett o rick]

19. "Why spend time and effort with the IG?" What a sad rationalization. Why cooperate when there is a

more important investigation? LOL. Rationalization apparently is the key to your happiness.

She can't debate Sanders at this point because it's time for her to shift hard right. How can she argue to Sanders that she doesn't approve of fracking and then tell her possible Right wing voters that it really aint so bad?

[merrily]

84. She needs the freedom to evolve.

Yet again.

[scscholar]

54. Plus, would you help your old employer for free?

Plus there are labor laws that make this illegal for private employers.

[karynnj]

59. Yes -- and I did

A person in a group that I had worked for was reviewing past analyses and had some questions relating to one I did. I had retired about a year before - I met with him and gave him whatever insight I had.

Why? I enjoyed the job, including that work. I also greatly respected his boss - who had been my former boss. I knew that his recommendation would be important in the unlikely case I wanted to work again.

By the way, it was absolutely not illegal.

[cali]

105. Not debating Bernie is possibly smart. This was stupid.

And sorry, anything that generates wall to wall negative coverage is bad for her.

[Lurks Often]

2. Oh, this should be fun!

[underthematrix]

3. there were a significant number of people who declined to be interviewed

by the OIG. They don't have the means to force former employees, including Sec Clinton to comply with interview requests. However, current employees must comply. This is discussed in the report in the main body and in footnotes

[BillZBubb]

9. Again, doesn't this contradict her statements about cooperation?

Sure, she didn't have to cooperate, but she talked like she was doing nothing but that. You don't find that troubling at all?

[underthematrix]

16. Declining to be interviewed doesn't mean she's not cooperating

She's turned over emails she said complied with the federal records acts. Those emails were discussed in detail.

[BillZBubb]

20. It means she's not cooperating fully. She always talked like she was cooperating fully. No hedges.

So, I'll put you in the "NO" it doesn't bother me column.

[rhett o rick]

22. Let me get this straight. Declining to cooperate doesn't mean she isn't cooperating.

George Orwell where are you?

[underthematrix]

66. She does not have to submit to an interview.

She provided other information requested the OIG. I think she made the right decisions because we're in the era of wingnuttery.

[merrily]

86. The "vast right wing conspiracy" is not an excuse for Clinton misbehavior.

That move/victim card has been played out for a long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vast_right-wing_conspiracy

[underthematrix]

92. This is not anything. You're gonna have to work the

FBI investigation cause the records issue is dead.
But I think that will die too as regards Hillary.

[merrily]

100. Ah, the non sequitur reply. They must be in for Spring!

[underthematrix]

120. OIG said Clinton violated the rule regarding storage of federal records

which the OIG concluded was a systemic problem even in the agency that's suppose to manage the record keeping.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

72. It depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Remember that one?

It's back for round 2.

[rhett o rick]

73. I am not giving up on Sanders. Clinton hasn't been elected yet.

[spin]

90. “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” ...

I recently reread Nineteen Eighty Four. I originally george Orwell's novel while in high school back in the 1960s. At that time I wasn't all that impressed. When I finished reading the book this time I found I was disturbed by the similarities in that dystopian society and the one we live in today.

[farleftlib]

25. Not all the emails. She came up like 20K short.

Her cooperation has been spotty at best. Just like the Goldman Sachs speeches. She vows full transparency
then does everything in her power to change the terms or wriggle out whichever way she can.

She. Can't. Be. Trusted.

[merrily]

87. 20K missing. Gee, who would have guessed

it would not be even more.

Wipe? Like with a cloth?

I remember the first bs I saw on DU was that she was too old to comprehend email--from the same poster who had cautioned us against mentioning Hillary's age, appearance or weight. Meanwhile, they call Sanders old and comment on his appearance. Always special rules for the Clintons--which can also be broken whenever breaking them may help the Clintons. And then it's the Clintons who are the victims. If the pattern could be sadder, I'm not sure how.

[rhett o rick]

114. I think Rose Marie Woods was involved.

I know I am dating myself.

[LAS14]

115. From the OIG report.

"She does not have custody of e-mails sent or received during the first few weeks
of her tenure as she was transitioning to a new address, and we have been unable to
obtain these. In the event we do, we will immediately provide the Department with
federal record e-mails in this collection."

[morningfog]

116. Fn. 101. only 5 of 26 Hillary staff responded.

[4139]

4. You left out ... After pledging she would

[procon]

35. Sounds remarkably similar to, "Mommy, you promised!" Didn't work back then either. nt

[procon]

52. There a case to be made for skepticism when it comes to politicians

Most politicians are liars and narcissists, and with good reason. They're arrogant, self centered, and the grandmasters of exploitation... every single one of them, without exception.

Politicians count on their adoring followers to believe their lies and stick with them even in the face of irrefutable evidence to the contrary. They all basically live in the same echo chamber anyway, sucking off the same feedback loop. Every politician makes great promises. If elected, they will cure the ills of society, end corruption and pollution and ban teenage zits, and we love hearing that malarkey.

Voters must have a childlike eternal optimism, and no matter how many times some politician looks them in the eye and lies without blinking, they still expect miraculous results... like Sanders can really win.

[840high]

76. yes

[NorthCarolina]

5. She's a Clinton...

she is above the law.

[oberliner]

36. The IG report did not accuse her of violating any law

Have you read it?

The key takeaway seems to point to a larger problem with the way federal agencies communicate with one another.

[NorthCarolina]

37. Wouldn't matter either way. -nt-

[JudyM]

60. Yes it did. Records law... Just about preservation and relinquishing, but still.

[oberliner]

63. No it didn't

The inspector general's report cited "longstanding, systemic weaknesses" with State Department records that predated Clinton's tenure, and found problems with the email record-keeping of some of her predecessors, particularly Powell, that failed to comply with the Federal Records Act.

But it singled out Clinton for her decision to use a private server in her home in Chappaqua, New York, for government business.

"OIG found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server," the report said, using an abbreviation for the office of inspector general.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSKCN0YG21Z

[JudyM]

64. 5 seconds on google, my friend.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/clinton-broke-federal-rules-email-server-audit-finds-n580131

[oberliner]

95. That links makes me point

The article specifically says the she broke rules, not laws. Major difference between the two from a legal standpoint.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. I actually read it

In general, the Federal Records Act requires appropriate management, including preservation, of records containing adequate and proper documentation of the “organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency.”16 Although emails were not explicitly mentioned in the Federal Records Act or FAM until the mid-1990s, the law has stated since 1943 that a document can constitute a record “regardless of physical form or characteristics.”17

NARA officials told OIG they learned of former Secretary Clinton’s email practices through media accounts in March 2015. Immediately thereafter, NARA requested that the Department provide a report concerning “the potential alienation of Federal email records” created by former Secretary Clinton and actions taken to recover such records.76

Secretary Clinton (January 21, 2009 – February 1, 2013): Former Secretary Clinton did not use a Department email account and has acknowledged using an email account maintained on a private server for official business. As discussed above, in December 2014, her representative produced to the Department 55,000 hard-copy pages of documents, representing approximately 30,000 emails that could potentially constitute Federal records that she sent or received from April 2009 through early 2013. Secretary Clinton’s representative asserted that, because the Secretary emailed Department officials at their government email accounts, the Department already had records of the Secretary’s email preserved within its record keeping systems.97
As previously discussed, however, sending emails from a personal account to other employees at their Department accounts is not an appropriate method of preserving any such emails that would constitute a Federal record. 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.98 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.

NARA agrees with the foregoing assessment but told OIG that Secretary Clinton’s production of 55,000 pages of emails mitigated her failure to properly preserve emails that qualified as Federal records during her tenure and to surrender such records upon her departure. OIG concurs with NARA but also notes that Secretary Clinton’s production was incomplete. For example, the Department and OIG both determined that the production included no email covering the first few months of Secretary Clinton’s tenure—from January 21, 2009, to March 17, 2009, for received messages; and from January 21, 2009, to April 12, 2009, for sent messages. OIG discovered multiple instances in which Secretary Clinton’s personal email account sent and received official business email during this period. For instance, the Department of Defense provided to OIG in September 2015 copies of 19 emails between Secretary Clinton and General David Petraeus on his official Department of Defense email account; these 19 emails were not in the Secretary’s 55,000-page production. OIG also learned that the 55,000-page production did not contain some emails that an external contact not employed by the Department sent to Secretary Clinton regarding Department business. In an attempt to address these deficiencies, NARA requested that the Department inquire with Secretary Clinton’s “internet service or email provider” to determine whether it is still possible to retrieve the email records that might remain on its servers.99 The Department conveyed this request to Secretary Clinton’s representative and on November 6, 2015, the Under Secretary for Management reported to NARA that the representative responded as follows:

With regard to her tenure as Secretary of State, former Secretary Clinton has provided the Department on December 5, 2014, with all federal e-mail records in her custody, regardless of their format or the domain on which they were stored or created, that may not otherwise be preserved, to our knowledge, in the Department’s recordkeeping system. She does not have custody of e-mails sent or received during the first few weeks of her tenure as she was transitioning to a new address, and we have been unable to obtain these. In the event we do, we will immediately provide the Department with federal record e-mails in this collection. 100

and here is the choice quote from the report

Accordingly, these staff failed to comply with Department policies intended to implement NARA regulations, because none of these emails were preserved in Department record keeping systems prior to their production in 2015.103 As noted above, NARA has concluded that these subsequent productions mitigated their failure to properly preserve emails that qualified as Federal records during their service as Department employees. However, OIG did not attempt to determine whether these productions were complete. None of these individuals are currently employed by the Department.

[oberliner]

96. That quote supports my claim

Did not comply with policies/regulations. But did not herself violate any laws according to the report. There is an important legal distinction there.

[nadinbrzezinski]

110. This is not a legal report but a process report

That quote is extremely damning. This is the nice report

The introduction. Go to Reporting San Diego...we are hosting it, will explain that to you

[840high]

77. They did.

[oberliner]

97. No they didn't

There is no accusation against Hillary for violating any law.

[JDPriestly]

106. The FBI is responsible for determining whether laws were broken.

The IG report should focus on whether the agency is working properly and whether she broke agency rules, regulations or protocols seems to me. I don't know for sure, but that may be the reason that she is not yet accused of violating any law.

[nadinbrzezinski]

112. You are correct it is a process report

[realmirage]

91. That's Madam President to you

[Trust Buster]

6. That's funny. The IG's report actually stated that she cooperated just fine. But I guess you

know better.

[reformist2]

23. No it didn't. It said no such thing. Quite the opposite, really.

[rhett o rick]

24. No I think the IG report stated, "We wish Sec Clinton would cooperate".

[k8conant]

62. Of the Secretaries of State only Clinton declined to be interviewed:

In conjunction with the interviews, OIG reviewed paper and electronic records and
documents associated with these offices. OIG also consulted with NARA officials. Finally, OIG
interviewed Secretary Kerry and former Secretaries Albright, Powell, and Rice. Through her
counsel, Secretary Clinton declined OIG’s request for an interview. 7"

7

In addition to Secretary Clinton, eight former Department employees declined OIG requests for interviews: (1) the
Chief of Staff to Secretary Powell (2002-05); (2) the Counselor and Chief of Staff to Secretary Clinton (2009-13); (3) the
Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy to Secretary Clinton (2009-11) and the Director of Policy Planning (2011-13); (4) the
Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations to Secretary Clinton (2009-13); (5) the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Strategic
Communication (2009-13); (6) the Director of the S/ES Office of Information Resources Management (2008-13); (7) a
Special Advisor to the Deputy Chief Information Officer (2009-13) who provided technical support for Secretary
Clinton’s personal email system; and (8) a Senior Advisor to the Department, who supervised responses to
Congressional inquiries (2014-15). Two additional individuals did not respond to OIG interview requests: the Deputy
Secretary of State for Management and Resources (2011-13) and an individual based in New York who provided
technical support for Secretary Clinton’s personal email system but who was never employed by the Department.

[lumberjack_jeff]

68. I'm intrigued.

Do you guys just imagine these things, or do you read the news, see that X happened, and then turn to the keyboard and report -X?

[Jester Messiah]

101. So you're just gonna outright lie now? Is that the new strategy coming down in the morning memos? n/

[TransitJohn]

111. LOL

Jesus.

[vintx]

117. WOW

I guess if the truth is bothersome you just invent your own little reality, huh?

[Tarc]

8. I can only express my response pictorially

[MFM008]

31. Lol

!!!

[NCTraveler]

10. I'm not bothered by it. Nt

[hobbit709]

13. There's IOKIYAAR and now there's IOKIYAHRC.

[vintx]

118. Yep, seems so. nt

[icecreamfan]

14. Has she even held a formal press conference in 2016?

Clinton seems to hate transparency and openness.

[loyalsister]

28. She seems to believe she is entitled to secrecy

And the defenses are to cry sexism!! andor the VRWC. People will allow both Clintons to get away with it because they victimized themselves by leaving trails for investigtions. It's an extremely cynical way to cultivate loyalty.

[farleftlib]

41. She has the nerve to claim there was no prohibition against using her server

But the State Dept. obligates their employees to use the official .gov one they supply.

This is Clintonian parsing at its worst. Like trying to quibble about what the definition of is is.

The prohibition is implicit, it doesn't have to be spelled out. Bill and Hill have to go.
This kind of sleaze is very un-presidential and 8 years of it was more than enough. They're
obscenely wealthy, her greed and ambition are going to drive this country over a cliff and
into an abyss.

[amborin]

15. It's part of her "above the law" elite stance. One of many factors that raise her untrustworthy #s

[Doctor_J]

17. There are quite a few that are untroubled by any of her crimes, bad decisions,

lies, flip flops, or conservative politics.

[senz]

18. Hill fan response: "Who Cares?" and "Nothingburger."

So... either they're not troubled or they're so troubled that they're whistling past the graveyard.

[rhett o rick]

27. Authoritarian Adulation

[senz]

40. Same thing on the other side.

"I could stand in the middle Of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters."

The two most unpopular candidates in U.S. history just happen to be authoritarians with a blindly devoted following.

Bernie supporters are an oasis of sanity.

[rhett o rick]

45. Sanders supporters are not special. We are normal people just looking to make a fair living.

We want jobs and homes and college for our children. We want to not have our children choose the military because it pays more than Hillary Clinton's min wage, and die fighting, not for our freedoms, but for corporate profits.

But the Clinton supporters are fighting us tooth and nail. They are for bigger profits for corporations and those among us suffering can just die. They don't want us to die, they just see our deaths as collateral damage for the Clinton Family to gain more and more wealth. They worship the wealthy and wish they could be like that.

[senz]

48. Very well said, rhett o rick.

[840high]

78. .that^

[merrily]

88. "Nothingburger" is pure, Grade A, 100 proof(less) Brockoli.

[senz]

94. Barbara Boxer used it. Then the underlings picked it up.

[merrily]

98. Correct the record!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511664937

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=578664

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251472339

[senz]

113. Thanks, merrily. I wonder if it's a common phrase

that I'm unfamiliar with or if it was thought up just for Hill's "problems?" I don't care for the phrase.

But you found all that! You're a good investigator.

[calguy]

26. Count me in the "not troubled" column

I'm with her so she can defeat HIM!!
All this hatred crap is not helping anyone
Bernie will not be the nominee
I support our nominee

[rhett o rick]

29. Wait you are new here and disparage Sen Sanders. Wow.

In any case to the ignore list for YOU. Bob-Bye

I think that makes 65

[merrily]

89. The October 2015 batch.

An oldtimer.

[BillZBubb]

30. OK. But if you want honest, open government, this should trouble you.

If you just want Hillary to be president, then I suppose it doesn't.

[Armstead]

70. That wasn't the question

[BootinUp]

32. Not Troubled. Never expected any big revelations. I expect her and aides

to be smart about these things. By these things, I mean political attacks that were initiated by her enemies. Let me put it this way, when some other pol volunteers to bend over and be examined let me know.

The OIG views the issue as a systemic problem, I agree.

She has aleady admitted she would not do it that way again.

As for transparency, how many emails would she have had to turn over to make you happy?

Lets see what the FBI says.

[larkrake]

47. Officer, I learned my lesson, I will never kill again

that is a lame excuse

The e-mails were a distraction away from real problems

[MFM008]

33. Very not troubled.

No one needs to know her secret sauce recipie.

[frylock]

50. Secret sauce meaning the faulty intel on Libya..

that Blumenthal was stovepiping. *wink-wink*

[hrmjustin]

34. Doesn't bother me in the least.

[senz]

42. Your sig line gif makes you look quite bothered.

It looks angry and frustrated.

[hrmjustin]

43. No.

[Armstead]

69. The fact that you still have it indicates it bothers you

Otherwise you wouldn't care enough about us irrelevant Sanders supporters. You'd be obsessing over Trump.

[hrmjustin]

71. Oh ok.

[deathrind]

38. It is SOP

...for both HRC and her husband. Say one thing and do another. A little effort of research will unveil a long and detailed history of it.

[840high]

79. 20+ years starting in Arkansas.

[Babel_17]

44. I think we might all agree that the press will try to provide more context about this

The responses to their inquiries will be useful, imo. This coming out on a Wednesday, and early in the day, is going to fuel lots of reporting and commentary (and through the weekend).

[larkrake]

46. she is a khalidescope of conflicts

never owns up to mistakes, and soooo many mistakes

[senz]

49. Narcissists generally do not apologize

except to manipulate others into doing what they want.

[tandot]

53. Link?

[cheapdate]

65. Not me. I hardly give a shit.

It's just not anything I give a crap about. Reviews will be completed. Reports will be written. I'm not interested in diving into the minutiae of this fiasco. She was a solid and competent SOS, even if I am 180 degrees apart from her conception of America's role in the world.

[lumberjack_jeff]

67. It's totally not because of an attitude of entitlement, so stop saying that!

/bob beaudelang

[JonathanRackham]

80. She has the right to remain silent.

If only she would.

[slipslidingaway]

85. Just as she backed out of a debate in California, rules and commitments are for the common folk ...

so not surprised, disappointed not really, but I am surprised that she flaunts her arrogance with little notice and support by so many people.

[bigwillq]

93. It bothers me that we elect the same corrupt politicians over and over

And that the system never changes for the better. Hillary is better than Trump, but she's not good for America.

[Vinca]

99. There's only one reason for her not to cooperate and that is to not inadvertently

provide any damning evidence against herself. That, of course, means there probably is damning evidence. Happy Memorial Day news dump . . . can't wait for the Fourth.

[Mike Nelson]

103. Her lawyers probably said...

...stick with the FBI people. People are always looking for stuff against her... even a small discrepancy. Report readers would parse every Hillary Clinton word, unlike the others IG questioned, and FOX would call for another Congressional investigation.

[MyNameGoesHere]

108. Nope. Moving on now

because I am not suffering a loss like the Sanders folks.

[BillZBubb]

109. So, anything is justified as long as you win?

[hobbit709]

119. These words seem to fit a lot of HRC supporters

"go ahead and hate your neighbor
go ahead and cheat a friend
do it in the name of heaven
justify it in the end"