2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIs there anyone here NOT troubled by Hillary's not cooperating with the IG investigation?
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
(6,551 posts)The IG report does not matter. It's the FBI investigation that does.
Why spend time and effort with the IG?
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)What possible bearing could it have on how Hillary would be president.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)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
(57,936 posts)report or the FBI report?
Which report is likely to be more objective?
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)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
(8,541 posts)panader0
(25,816 posts)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
(443 posts)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
(10,650 posts)if it's in a "good cause"
senz
(11,945 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)kstewart33
(6,551 posts)I'm the one who trips nuns, spits nails and I routinely kick my two dogs.
Hurrah! You win!
Vattel
(9,289 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)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
(38,578 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)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
(55,981 posts)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
(45,251 posts)Yet again.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)Plus there are labor laws that make this illegal for private employers.
karynnj
(59,507 posts)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
(114,904 posts)And sorry, anything that generates wall to wall negative coverage is bad for her.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)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
(10,650 posts)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
(5,811 posts)She's turned over emails she said complied with the federal records acts. Those emails were discussed in detail.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)So, I'll put you in the "NO" it doesn't bother me column.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)George Orwell where are you?
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)She provided other information requested the OIG. I think she made the right decisions because we're in the era of wingnuttery.
merrily
(45,251 posts)That move/victim card has been played out for a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vast_right-wing_conspiracy
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)FBI investigation cause the records issue is dead.
But I think that will die too as regards Hillary.
merrily
(45,251 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)which the OIG concluded was a systemic problem even in the agency that's suppose to manage the record keeping.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)It's back for round 2.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)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
(2,125 posts)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
(45,251 posts)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
(55,981 posts)I know I am dating myself.
LAS14
(13,789 posts)"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
(18,115 posts)4139
(1,893 posts)procon
(15,805 posts)Response to procon (Reply #35)
TM99 This message was self-deleted by its author.
procon
(15,805 posts)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.
Response to procon (Reply #52)
TM99 This message was self-deleted by its author.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)she is above the law.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Have you read it?
The key takeaway seems to point to a larger problem with the way federal agencies communicate with one another.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)JudyM
(29,294 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)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
(29,294 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)The article specifically says the she broke rules, not laws. Major difference between the two from a legal standpoint.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)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 Departments policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.
NARA agrees with the foregoing assessment but told OIG that Secretary Clintons 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 Clintons production was incomplete. For example, the Department and OIG both determined that the production included no email covering the first few months of Secretary Clintons tenurefrom 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 Clintons 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 Secretarys 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 Clintons 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 Clintons representative and on November 6, 2015, the Under Secretary for Management reported to NARA that the representative responded as follows:
and here is the choice quote from the report
oberliner
(58,724 posts)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
(154,021 posts)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
(17,196 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)There is no accusation against Hillary for violating any law.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)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
(154,021 posts)realmirage
(2,117 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)know better.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)k8conant
(3,030 posts)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 OIGs 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
Clintons 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 Clintons personal email system but who was never employed by the Department.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)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
(4,711 posts)TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)Jesus.
I guess if the truth is bothersome you just invent your own little reality, huh?
Tarc
(10,478 posts)!!!
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)vintx
(1,748 posts)icecreamfan
(115 posts)Clinton seems to hate transparency and openness.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)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
(2,125 posts)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
(16,631 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)lies, flip flops, or conservative politics.
senz
(11,945 posts)So... either they're not troubled or they're so troubled that they're whistling past the graveyard.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)"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
(55,981 posts)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
(11,945 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)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
(5,344 posts)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
(55,981 posts)In any case to the ignore list for YOU. Bob-Bye
I think that makes 65
merrily
(45,251 posts)An oldtimer.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)If you just want Hillary to be president, then I suppose it doesn't.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)BootinUp
(47,207 posts)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
(1,674 posts)that is a lame excuse
The e-mails were a distraction away from real problems
MFM008
(19,826 posts)No one needs to know her secret sauce recipie.
frylock
(34,825 posts)that Blumenthal was stovepiping. *wink-wink*
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)It looks angry and frustrated.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Otherwise you wouldn't care enough about us irrelevant Sanders supporters. You'd be obsessing over Trump.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)deathrind
(1,786 posts)...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
(17,196 posts)Babel_17
(5,400 posts)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
(1,674 posts)never owns up to mistakes, and soooo many mistakes
senz
(11,945 posts)except to manipulate others into doing what they want.
tandot
(6,671 posts)cheapdate
(3,811 posts)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
(33,224 posts)/bob beaudelang
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)If only she would.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)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
(72,790 posts)And that the system never changes for the better. Hillary is better than Trump, but she's not good for America.
Vinca
(50,322 posts)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
(9,977 posts)...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
(7,638 posts)because I am not suffering a loss like the Sanders folks.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)"go ahead and hate your neighbor
go ahead and cheat a friend
do it in the name of heaven
justify it in the end"