Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

floppyboo

(2,461 posts)
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:01 PM May 2016

Enough of this 'rules' vs. 'legal requirements'!!!

The OIG conclusion says: "... the office of the Secretary ... been slow ... to manage effectively the legal requirements..."

If someone can explain to me why the OIG used this term 'legal requirements' instead of 'party rules' or 'department rules' , I will stop pushing this point.

54 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Enough of this 'rules' vs. 'legal requirements'!!! (Original Post) floppyboo May 2016 OP
it's like how they said Honduras was a coup but not a MILITARY coup MisterP May 2016 #1
And Brazil and Venezuela aren't economic coups either floppyboo May 2016 #4
Here's the whole quote annavictorious May 2016 #52
Being "slow to manage effectively the legal requirments" is not breaking the law. YouDig May 2016 #2
What "red tape" rule are you referring to? Press Virginia May 2016 #3
That she should have kept paper copies instead of electronic copies of her emails. YouDig May 2016 #5
She could have used the SMART system. Saved them Press Virginia May 2016 #6
Tsk tsk. She still saved them, but yeah she broke some little rule. YouDig May 2016 #7
The rule is in place because of a law Press Virginia May 2016 #9
That is not a little rule nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #11
The goal of the rule is preserving documents, and the documents were preserved. YouDig May 2016 #14
Under legal jeopardy two years after nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #18
Here's what's going to happen. The FBI will come back and say that she technically YouDig May 2016 #21
You realize there are folks doing hard time nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #22
No criminal intent. No classified material, except retroactively. There's nothing. YouDig May 2016 #23
Mens rea is not necessary in national Intel cases nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #24
Explained by a pro, huh? That sounds very credible to me. YouDig May 2016 #25
Yup a lawyer who specializes in these cases nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #29
So when the FBI doesn't recommend any charges, you can ask him to help you out with YouDig May 2016 #30
Frankly we will be surprised nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #33
Yes, a lot of Berners will be surprised. Happens a lot, Berners being surprised. YouDig May 2016 #34
Except that I am an American not a Berner nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #37
You can be both an American and a Berner. YouDig May 2016 #38
Sweet one for all you know I could be voting for her nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #40
Your vote is indeed your business. There we agree. YouDig May 2016 #41
Then you chose your party nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #42
You can have as much contempt for me as you want. That is your choice too. YouDig May 2016 #43
Two right wing conservative parties nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #44
No, just one. The Republicans. Yeah, the Dems are more right than their counterparts in Europe, YouDig May 2016 #45
Political science is not your strong point either I see... the DNC is now a RW party nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #47
Pretty strong, I'd say actually. YouDig May 2016 #49
So you are a fan of hte one we all make fun off? If you are what you say, nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #54
Better ask Bush II and Cheney about theirs too. tonyt53 May 2016 #26
In 2006 people were up in arms over that too nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #32
Wrote to Senator Leahy myself. Aerows May 2016 #48
and it took a lawsuit for her to comply with that "little rule" Press Virginia May 2016 #50
Hmm that is because she purposely avoided nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #8
Not purposely, she just didn't know. Didn't read all the minor technical red tape rules. YouDig May 2016 #10
That is not what the report says. nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #12
All 100 pages? I've read enough excerpts and analyses from others who have. YouDig May 2016 #13
Yes all of it. Include footnotes nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #15
No thanks. Others who know what they are talking about already have. Plenty of other YouDig May 2016 #16
Continue to live in the bunker nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #17
It is minor or the FBI would have at least gone to the trouble of talking to her scscholar May 2016 #19
They intend to interview her nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #20
So you're saying she is not very smart? notadmblnd May 2016 #27
Not very tach-savvy. Also had more important things to do than red tape. YouDig May 2016 #28
Smart woman like her- can't figure it out? Or she just refuses to? notadmblnd May 2016 #35
This is not the ballpark you are looking for. Aerows May 2016 #46
here it does mean more procedural, civil things treestar May 2016 #31
Good explanation. COLGATE4 May 2016 #36
It's true Dem2 May 2016 #39
thanks floppyboo May 2016 #53
Zzzzzmog Hillary drove 47 in a 45 !!!!!! Lol@hds uponit7771 May 2016 #51

floppyboo

(2,461 posts)
4. And Brazil and Venezuela aren't economic coups either
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:08 PM
May 2016

Got nothing to do with OPEC and the dollar being the for-now currency, nothing at all. Look at that tree

 

annavictorious

(934 posts)
52. Here's the whole quote
Tue May 31, 2016, 05:28 PM
May 2016

"Longstanding, systemic weaknesses related to electronic records and communications have existed
within the Office of the Secretary that go well beyond the tenure of any one Secretary of
State. Nevertheless, the Department generally and the Office of the Secretary in particular have
been slow to recognize and to manage effectively the legal requirements and cyber security
risks associated with electronic data communications, particularly as those risks pertain to
its most senior leadership."

Why did you leave so much out?

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
2. Being "slow to manage effectively the legal requirments" is not breaking the law.
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:03 PM
May 2016

It's breaking some red tape rule that nobody would care about if they weren't trying to score political points.

 

Press Virginia

(2,329 posts)
6. She could have used the SMART system. Saved them
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:15 PM
May 2016

in another approved medium.

She chose to do nothing.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
11. That is not a little rule
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:21 PM
May 2016

Document preservation for historic value and FOIA request is a big deal, especially for open and transparent government advocates. I will put you down into the pro corruption types though. They usually are not open about that though

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
14. The goal of the rule is preserving documents, and the documents were preserved.
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:25 PM
May 2016

It's got nothing to do with transparency, it's a bureaucratic rule. I get why bureaucratic rules are necessary, but breaking some red tape rule is not committing a crime.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
18. Under legal jeopardy two years after
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:40 PM
May 2016

And after State could not fnd the documents. Which led to secretary Kerry asking questions.

There, I fixed that for you

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
21. Here's what's going to happen. The FBI will come back and say that she technically
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:53 PM
May 2016

broke rule xyz and she really really shouldn't have done it and it's very serious and blah blah, but it doesn't rise to a prosecutable criminal offense. And then people like you are going accuse the FBI of corruption and protecting her. But that won't matter because you're just another person on the internet who doesn't know what you are talking about..

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
22. You realize there are folks doing hard time
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:08 PM
May 2016

For losing control (check) of classified material right? I expect a pardon though. Politically it is the least damaging this can go.

There are also people serving hard time for giving access of classified material, in this case Special Access Program,close, if not the Crown Jewels of national Intel to somebody without a clearance.

I expect the denial. It is a symptom of a mature scandal.

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
23. No criminal intent. No classified material, except retroactively. There's nothing.
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:14 PM
May 2016

Petraeus didn't even get time and he intentionally shared actual classified material with someone he was having an affair with.

Watch you'll see. I'm sure you'll be shocked, and then you'll make a bunch trying to claim the FBI doesn't understand the law.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
24. Mens rea is not necessary in national Intel cases
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:16 PM
May 2016

This was explained in painful detail to me by a pro who works in these types of cases. Though there is motive counselor, and any competent lawyer would use it to get the pity of the court

As to Patreaus, Intel folks are still pissed. Care to get out of the buble and consider carefully why there was a plea deal?

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
25. Explained by a pro, huh? That sounds very credible to me.
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:21 PM
May 2016

Intel people should be pissed about Petreaus. He intentionally shared actual classified info with a woman he was having an affair with. Hillary had non-classified material on a server that didn't get hacked, same as other secretaries of state and other state employees who also aren't going to be indicted.

What's your excuse going to be when the non-indictment comes?

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
30. So when the FBI doesn't recommend any charges, you can ask him to help you out with
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:33 PM
May 2016

your "why the FBI is wrong and I am right" posts.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
33. Frankly we will be surprised
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:40 PM
May 2016

Because the IG report has the skeleton of a pretty serious case

So what happens when you are wrong? Oh and articles are now starting to appear suggesting she will implode. That is in the water. Again, a very mature scandal.

Oh and this is fully self inflicted. People have been warning you folks all this time. That is a train light down the tracks...it is moving

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
34. Yes, a lot of Berners will be surprised. Happens a lot, Berners being surprised.
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:42 PM
May 2016

Usually followed by a bunch of excuses and conspiracies.

If I'm wrong? That would suck. Good thing I'm not.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
37. Except that I am an American not a Berner
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:54 PM
May 2016

Expected though. By your logic Kerry is a Berner, so is Judge Sullivan, and even maybe the President himself.

For the record, your party has a choice. You can use that very loaded gun to commit political suicide and hand the WH to a fascist. This is a Weimar Republic mistake, or you can run somebody else that is not damaged.

Who your party chooses is your business. For all I care you can appoint the man on the moon after the goat sacrifice, and entrail reading ok. But you run her, with all this baggage. I guess suicide is painless.

And if you go for plan B, who emerges ultimately will be a timing issue. Many are thinking Biden. I am thinking somebody truly dark. As in a dark horse

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
38. You can be both an American and a Berner.
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:57 PM
May 2016

I didn't realize that John Kerry thinks the FBI should indict Hillary. Is that something your lawyer friend told you?

The party is going to run the candidate that the voters chose in the primaries. That is Hillary Clinton.

And given that Berners have long thought, and even many still think, that Bernie is going to be the nominee, I'm not too worried about their other prognostications.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
40. Sweet one for all you know I could be voting for her
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:08 PM
May 2016

My vote is truly my business. Your choice soon will be party or country. My, Republicans were this stubborn too, in 1973 and 2003. Your choice will be stark and for that I feel sorry for you. It will be painful. But this is not going away.

If the IG report was a slap in the hand, it was not, you might have a point. It was't.

On the bright side, people who I talk to, some democrats higher than you in pay grade were shaken by this report. People who do make those decisions are starting to realize this is very serious. It took the party elder statesmen to get Nixon to concede. Am afraid that conversation will come.

And my, you and me as voters have nothing to do with this decision. This is at a very different level, assuming the party does not want to commit suicide. If they do, by all means, pick up that gun. None will stop you, but we will not take the blame for the damage either. It will be completely on your party.

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
41. Your vote is indeed your business. There we agree.
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:17 PM
May 2016

My choice is not party or country. I'm a Democrat, so I can proudly choose both party and country. I think Hillary will be a good-to-great president, like Obama before her. And compared with Trump, voting Hillary is the easiest decision I can imagine. For you maybe it's a tough call. Not me.

As for all the insider connections you claim to have, you can give that game up, at least with me. It's kind of funny that you feel the need to "pull rank" by talking about all the inside info you get, but sadly it's very transparent. People who actually talk to experts aren't as poorly informed as you, nor do they keep trying to brag about it.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
42. Then you chose your party
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:28 PM
May 2016

good to know

Can I have the same level of contempt for you I have for partisan Republcians? There, I said it, you are not that different from them. But I do feel sorry for you, This will not be easy. Though when all is said and done, you might be one of the few Republcians who actually admired voting for Nixon... I found one, rare breed that this was, in 2003 in Hawaii. That took brass balls, even that many years after Watergate.

For the record, I do not fall in love with politicians, I cover them, they are slimey little creatures, I look at their policies. And of course, who gave money to whom... it is quite revealing. Local democrat getting moneys from a local REPUBLICAN PAC... hmmm lovely. What favors is he promising already? Then there is the mayor in the pocket of the local developer mafia, who might indirectly benefit over construction projects, YOU DIG.

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
43. You can have as much contempt for me as you want. That is your choice too.
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:37 PM
May 2016

I think that the Democratic party is clearly superior to the Republican party. If that makes you want to scorn me, so be it. I'm proud of it. Look at what the Dems stand for, and look at what the GOP stands for. Look at Obama/Hillary, then look at Trump, and even before Trump, the rest of them, the tea party, all that. Look issue by issue. Abortion, LGBT, environment, labor, taxes, everything. Every single issue. I can't think of one where the GOP is better. Can you?

So yeah, have your contempt, if that's what you like. Having political views means some people are going to scorn you for them. I don't know your politics, it seems to be mostly an anti-Hillary vendetta, but whatever they are, be they right left or center, you are welcome to your contempt.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
44. Two right wing conservative parties
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:46 PM
May 2016

your party would not nominate, let alone elect, FDR, JFK, LBJ, or for that matter Carter OTOH, you would elect real Reagan,, that is how far right this neoliberall party has gone. What is the matter with Kansas. indeed.

And no my politics, are what the democratic party used to be, As to HRC, I do not know her, I don't care to know her. see what I wrote about politicians. But nobody is above the law That at least used to be an accepted principle of American jurisprudence, the fall from that actually was Nixon. What she did, would see people I know in club fed for DECADES, you dig.

So what is there to love? One party is more open about it. She manages to get elected... and I expect Social Security to be privatized a classic of neoliberal policies around the world. I expect her to sing the TTP, yes, she will, I expect her to push for more TPAs, for the record I expect the Republcians to do the same.

And I expect us, to cross beyond the points of no return for climate change. HUMAN EXTINCTION is no longer out of the realm of possibility and due to it I expect more wars, a lot more wars, like a fucking world war at some point. I dig policy, not fucking politicians. Oh and yes that includes Sanders ok.

Enjoy the fall, it will be fun to watch. Oh and I am with a lot of former democrats, YOUR FUCKING PARTY left my working class behind.

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
45. No, just one. The Republicans. Yeah, the Dems are more right than their counterparts in Europe,
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:58 PM
May 2016

but that doesn't make them right-wing conservative. That's just dumb.

I said in my last post, look at the issues. Can you find even one where the GOP is better, or even the same as the Dems? I can't. Maybe there is one, but I can't think of it. Maybe you can help me out.

On the issues you mention, there's a huge difference. Climate change you bring up, that's a big one. Guess what the GOP's policy is there? It's to deny that it exists. Guess what Trump wants? More fossil fuels and less regulations. If you can't tell that Clinton is way better on climate and environment than Trump, I have nothing to say. To me it's obvious. To the NRDC it is also. I guess not to you.

And the idea of Hillary going to prison for having non-classified information on a private email server, when Colin Powell and Condi Rice also had the same kind of non-classified info on private emails, it's just nuts, really. Yeah, I know, it wasn't a private server, but an aol account is just as non-permitted as a private server. Actually, even a state department email account is not supposed to be used for classified info. Did you even know that? Did your lawyer friend not mention it?

Yeah, classified isn't supposed to circulate by email, period. Now you know. As a practical matter, sometimes it does, especially info that's in the grey area or one department thinks its classified but not another, or retroactively classified like the Clinton stuff, but nobody ever goes to prison for that or even loses their job for it or anything. So enjoy your prayers to the email fairy and your false equivalence between the Dems and the GOP.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
47. Political science is not your strong point either I see... the DNC is now a RW party
Tue May 31, 2016, 05:04 PM
May 2016

The RNC is a far right wing party, with strokes of hyper nationalism and fascism...

As to the rest, you are clueless, Don't worry, you will have your bunker where you can hide from the ongoing investigation.
My goodness, we should not find out what is really going on....

It will come... and the gluten and nut free cookies will be good here... I hear they will create such a safe space that reality will not intrude either. Like FR circa 2006, the denial will be hilarious to watch, That is a bright side. It is comedy gold, but also predictable, within the anatomy of all scandals.

As to your last para, I read the full report. Try that again... Have a wonderful day, I have actual work to do and I am done wasting my time with you. You think I hate people, nope, but I have the same contempt for you guys as I do for republicans now. Partisanship is the reason we are in this shitty hole partly and you guys are partly responsible for it. HEY GO, TEAM GO!!!!

It is not a fucking game. People die due to this shitty mentality.

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
49. Pretty strong, I'd say actually.
Tue May 31, 2016, 05:13 PM
May 2016

You can define the spectrum however you want. The important thing is that the Dems are very different and very much better than the GOP. Personally I'm a bit to the left of the average Dem, but I'm still very happy to stand with the party. They stand for what I stand for, and they are infinitely better than the GOP.

I notice that you ignored all the differences between the Dems and GOP on global warming, the issue that you brought up. Can you really not see them? I find that hard to believe.

Yeah, you think I'm clueless, and I think you are clueless. After all, you didn't even know that a state.gov email account cannot be used for classified info either. Those experts of yours failed to mention that one, I guess. I suggest getting new experts. Maybe real ones this time.

I agree that it's not a game. People will die if Trump is elected. Hopefully you will realize that before November. If not, I hope we win without your vote.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
54. So you are a fan of hte one we all make fun off? If you are what you say,
Tue May 31, 2016, 10:44 PM
May 2016

you will know which one I mean.

Live with hit, both parties are right wing. And politics does abhor a vacuum, so sooner or later, a labor party will rise. Which national party will be replaced? That is the question. But anyway, on my way to an actual wild fire, NPR was actually covering the scandal, Hey it is a flood!!!!

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
32. In 2006 people were up in arms over that too
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:33 PM
May 2016

We still are. But my ethics is not situational. Perhaps yours is. Oh and who took impeachment for actual war crimes under article 1 of the Nuremberg indictment? You go ahead and take all the time in the world to think about that one, ok

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
48. Wrote to Senator Leahy myself.
Tue May 31, 2016, 05:07 PM
May 2016

Does that still classify as a "new" "concern" or do I get to gripe about it now 10 years later?

Because I've been told by members of this forum that I'm not allowed to comment on "certain types" of bigotry because it "seemed so sudden" so I am just wondering when the expiration date of "not being able to show concern" is.

I want to note it in my calendar.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
8. Hmm that is because she purposely avoided
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:19 PM
May 2016

The SMART system which logs this automatically. The paper requirement is for the infrequent and emergency use of a private email. It's in the report. I wonder if you will read that. Nah, too much work

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
10. Not purposely, she just didn't know. Didn't read all the minor technical red tape rules.
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:20 PM
May 2016

She still kept her emails, so in the end it doesn't matter.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
15. Yes all of it. Include footnotes
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:26 PM
May 2016

At this point you are looking quite ignorant. The apendix... A few actually, will explain the possible legal peril as well. Don't worry, that is not their job. But do worry,it is the FBI's to recommend those. This is not a nothing burger.

Oh and a cog would be facing 35 to life

YouDig

(2,280 posts)
16. No thanks. Others who know what they are talking about already have. Plenty of other
Tue May 31, 2016, 02:30 PM
May 2016

people used private emails, and none of them are facing 35 to life. You are in a fantasy world.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
27. So you're saying she is not very smart?
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:29 PM
May 2016

Or are you saying she is smart but made it a point not to read all the minor technical red tape rules so she could play stupid?

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
35. Smart woman like her- can't figure it out? Or she just refuses to?
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:47 PM
May 2016

Not very smart or lazy? You decide.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
46. This is not the ballpark you are looking for.
Tue May 31, 2016, 05:00 PM
May 2016

It's ---------------------------------------way----->

over there.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
31. here it does mean more procedural, civil things
Tue May 31, 2016, 03:33 PM
May 2016

like when the Department of Commerce audits people - there are going to be mistakes. They just correct them and suggest better ways of keeping up. Any Department will audit - for instance the bar may audit lawyer's trust accounts. They will always find the lawyer doing some little thing wrong and will just tell them how to fix it.

The Department of Education may keep track of student records - they find mistakes and fix them. No one gets arrested.

This is the problem with exaggerating everything to death. Nobody running a huge department will always be doing things exactly right, especially now - the new technology and how to best use it is in flux everywhere.

Dem2

(8,164 posts)
39. It's true
Tue May 31, 2016, 04:02 PM
May 2016

Add than many people think the rules are too strict and there's minor violations by the thousand happening all the time.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Enough of this 'rules' vs...