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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
25. NIXONIAN
Sun May 29, 2016, 06:07 PM
May 2016

These are the implications of the issues you raised, ms liberty:



With Clinton’s Nixonian Email Scandal Deepening, Sanders Must Demand Answers

by DAVE LINDORFF
CounterPunch, MAY 27, 2016

EXCERPT...

The power couple’s two foundations, the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, now together reportedly worth more than $2 billion, both function effectively as money-laundering operations providing salaries to Clinton family members and friends. And Hillary Clinton, particularly while serving as President Obama’s secretary of state, was in a perfect position to do favors for unsavory foreign leaders seeking to have their countries kept off of State Department lists of human rights violators, and for US businesses seeking lucrative business deals abroad. It’s those kinds of email conversations that would have benefitted from a private server, since US State Department official computers have dedicated back-up systems that would be hard or impossible to wipe, and are also by law subject to Freedom of Information inquiries from journalists and the public.

SNIP...

However Politico reports that on Wednesday, a report by the State Department’s Office of Inspector General, has issued its report on the emails. It is a scathing indictment, concluding that Clinton failed to comply with US government and State Department policies on records, and that counter to assertions made publicly by her, she never sought permission from the department’s legal staff to use a private server — a request which if made, the report insists “would not” have been approved. The inspector general’s report states, “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.”

It’s not as though Clinton didn’t know what she was doing was wrong and even illegal. The just released report states that technology staff in the State Department’s Office of Information Resource Management, who raised concerns about her private server, were instructed by the department’s director, a Clinton appointee, “not to question the arrangement.” When one staffer mentioned that her private account could contain federal records that needed to be preserved “in order to satisfy federal recordkeeping requirements,” the report says the director of that office “stated that the Secretary’s personal system had been reviewed and approved by the department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further.” Yet the inspector general says that assertion by the director was false, as there was in fact no evidence that in the State Department’s office of the legal advisor had ever reviewed or approved the private system, or even been asked to do so by Clinton.

Again and again through her four years at State, Clinton is found to have resisted efforts to get her to stop using exclusively her private email to conduct official business. On several occasions, the report says, she expressly said her concern was having her mail subjected to FOIA, or in other words, public discovery. Clinton tried to claim that since her communications with State Dept. personnel ended up on their servers, there were records of her communications there. But as the report notes, that wouldn’t include any State Department-related communications she had with persons outside of the State Department or the government. And those are precisely the kinds of conversations that the public really needs to know about — particularly when we’re talking about someone who is running for the top position in government, and who has demonstrably spent years with her hand out to powerful people and organizations. After all, it is those communications that would include any discussions of financial transactions involving foreign or domestic interests seeking beneficial assistance from the Madam Secretary.

This scandal is not about someone simply ignoring some arcane rules. As Secretary of State, Clinton had a legal obligation to operate in an above-board, legal and transparent manner in conducting the business of government. Instead, for our years in office, she conducted that business in a manner that can only be called Nixonian, opting to openly violate the rules, to hide her communications from government oversight and public review, to dissemble about her allegedly having received clearance to do so, and even to attempt to erase records from her server when ordered to turn them over. Furthermore, suspicions have to be raised because if Clinton’s concerns were about people accessing her genuinely personal emails, she had only to set up a State Department email address and obtain a State Department secure Blackberry phone, and limit her personal server and personal Blackberry to genuinely personal emails and calls, conducting all State Department business on State Department systems. According to the IGO report, she studiously avoided doing that kind of segregation for four years despite frequent instructions and advice to do so.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/27/with-clintons-nixonian-email-scandal-deepening-sandes-must-demand-answers/



Bottom line is burning red: Sec. Clinton ordered, created and used an off-the-books email system when she had been warned not to. Why she did remains to be discovered, but that's why it was off-the-books. From what appears: she didn't want the People to know what she was doing in our name, with whom she was doing it, and why she was doing it.
Random thoughts LOL. Call that what it is: talking points. cherokeeprogressive May 2016 #1
...audit disagrees with you... HumanityExperiment May 2016 #2
You understand that these are separate topics, right? tandem5 May 2016 #14
...private server... HumanityExperiment May 2016 #32
... ... tandem5 May 2016 #34
..you got the msg... HumanityExperiment May 2016 #35
no, I was just commenting on your odd use of ellipses tandem5 May 2016 #36
... ... HumanityExperiment May 2016 #45
oh the memories are flooding back! tandem5 May 2016 #48
Read the second article before advertising your ignorance CajunBlazer May 2016 #3
I know right? ismnotwasm May 2016 #5
You do realize pmorlan1 May 2016 #27
..read... HumanityExperiment May 2016 #33
..why?... Eccho May 2016 #54
Personally... quickesst May 2016 #4
She jeopardized national security and lied about it. AtomicKitten May 2016 #6
That is total BS CajunBlazer May 2016 #8
The IG report confirmed it. AtomicKitten May 2016 #11
That's a flagrant misstatement of facts CajunBlazer May 2016 #18
You really don't have the slightest idea how to read the IG report Tarc May 2016 #23
but the msm has been saying that Hillary lied, as it turns out, according to the IG report. Voice for Peace May 2016 #31
The State Department's system is antiquated ms liberty May 2016 #7
After 8 years of Bush and a global economy on the edge of collapse... yallerdawg May 2016 #9
Way to miss the point. ms liberty May 2016 #20
You're cluelees CajunBlazer May 2016 #10
Wasn't GOP who set up an off-the-books email system. Octafish May 2016 #13
I've replied to Cajun Blazer's insulting post ms liberty May 2016 #21
Colin Powell used Yahoo Mail, not a server of his own jmowreader May 2016 #61
Did Colin Powell's lawyer determine what was official and what was personal business? Octafish May 2016 #64
Did Bernie Sanders attempt to force poor Hispanics in Texas to accept Vermont's nuclear waste? jmowreader May 2016 #65
I'm not sure what you mean? ms liberty May 2016 #19
Do you recall what was going on when Obama and Hillary took office? yallerdawg May 2016 #24
I remember very well ms liberty May 2016 #30
NIXONIAN Octafish May 2016 #25
Having read your posts here for many years ms liberty May 2016 #28
Except for the part where she ... yallerdawg May 2016 #38
Except she did not turn over all the emails. Octafish May 2016 #43
That is the option as specified in the guidance. yallerdawg May 2016 #44
Big Deal. Octafish May 2016 #47
National security doesn't interest you? 840high May 2016 #58
There seems to be differing opinions on the finding to date. CentralMass May 2016 #12
Should all emails of all elected officials be made public, personal or official? kentuck May 2016 #15
Newsweek article not excellent unc70 May 2016 #16
Have you read all 749 pages of the Inspector General's report? CajunBlazer May 2016 #17
What I've read doesn't matter, but it is not 749 pages unc70 May 2016 #37
Some corrections. NWCorona May 2016 #22
Hillary was Secretary of State. yallerdawg May 2016 #39
It didn't come from the state department. That's the problem Hillary is facing NWCorona May 2016 #40
Dianne Feinstein has reported any "classified" material... yallerdawg May 2016 #42
I didn't say it came from Hillary. It was on her server tho NWCorona May 2016 #46
Here's a random thought pmorlan1 May 2016 #26
Bingo! +1 B Calm May 2016 #62
You make some point, but I have some rebuttals DonCoquixote May 2016 #29
Some of the federal government technology rules are ridiculous democrattotheend May 2016 #41
The restrictions on saving government data in a cloud environment are still in place CajunBlazer May 2016 #49
To the extent her goal was to get around antiquated bureaucracy, it doesn't bother me democrattotheend Jun 2016 #66
Here's the bottom line folks: CajunBlazer May 2016 #50
Your first sentence is a lie. That dude was appointed later. Not a State IT employee. KeepItReal May 2016 #51
Was he competent? CajunBlazer May 2016 #52
Turning off a server to prevent a hack is competence? KeepItReal May 2016 #53
It stopped that attempt didn't it CajunBlazer May 2016 #55
Your lie still stands. KeepItReal May 2016 #60
You have most of it completely wrong. bobbobbins01 May 2016 #56
BS CajunBlazer May 2016 #57
Yes - your posts are. 840high May 2016 #59
What do you expect Mnpaul May 2016 #63
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Random thoughts on Clinto...»Reply #25