State Department report slams Clinton email use

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

A State Department Inspector General report said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to follow the rules or inform key department staff regarding her use of a private email server, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN on Wednesday.

The report, which was provided to lawmakers, 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."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

 

[Ford]

but technically it seems it was illegal.

Technically it seems like it was against official government policy.


Like, she did something that if it were in the private sector would get her hauled in front of HR.

 

[Deepak]

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

So then security policy should be updated to say that anyone can do whatever they want as long as nobody is able to wreak havoc on the nation? As Ford mentioned this would be grounds for immediate termination in a private company, and a lesser government employee/contractor would have their security clearance revoked immediately.

The problem with this appeal to consequence is that a good hack is indistinguishable from no hack, and with state secrets it's entirely possible we don't ever find out even if information was compromised and exploited.

 

[bleubird]

The biggest state secret is the USA it dysfunctional.

 

[untermensche]

Sounds like something you apologize for and then people move on because there are serious issues in this world.

 

[KeepTalking]

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

So then security policy should be updated to say that anyone can do whatever they want as long as nobody is able to wreak havoc on the nation? As Ford mentioned this would be grounds for immediate termination in a private company, and a lesser government employee/contractor would have their security clearance revoked immediately.

So, they should have revoked the security clearance she no longer needed, as this was an issue that occurred when she left office. Once again, this is much ado about nothing. I have a conservative coworker who after reading this news, is absolutely convinced that it is telling him that the FBI will be filing charges against her any day now.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Important people don't get in trouble over stuff like this.

Hopefully she learns her lesson and doesn't get another private server while President.

 

[Derec]

Important people don't get in trouble over stuff like this.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Don't worry Derec, she'll be indited the day trickle down economics starts working.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So, they should have revoked the security clearance she no longer needed, as this was an issue that occurred when she left office. Once again, this is much ado about nothing. I have a conservative coworker who after reading this news, is absolutely convinced that it is telling him that the FBI will be filing charges against her any day now.

According to conservatives, she's been a few days away from a life sentence in prison every day for the past twenty years. At least back in the day, it was because her and Bill straight up murdered a dude or stole money from the government or something interesting like that. Now they've basically given up and aren't even trying to come up with a real scandal to get passionately vehement about.

 

[Deepak]

So then security policy should be updated to say that anyone can do whatever they want as long as nobody is able to wreak havoc on the nation? As Ford mentioned this would be grounds for immediate termination in a private company, and a lesser government employee/contractor would have their security clearance revoked immediately.

So, they should have revoked the security clearance she no longer needed, as this was an issue that occurred when she left office. Once again, this is much ado about nothing. I have a conservative coworker who after reading this news, is absolutely convinced that it is telling him that the FBI will be filing charges against her any day now.

Can you cite that claim? I thought this was regarding her using a private unauthorized email server for official business while serving as Secretary of State. If your claim is true then she has an iron-clad alibi.

 

[KeepTalking]

So, they should have revoked the security clearance she no longer needed, as this was an issue that occurred when she left office. Once again, this is much ado about nothing. I have a conservative coworker who after reading this news, is absolutely convinced that it is telling him that the FBI will be filing charges against her any day now.

Can you cite that claim? I thought this was regarding her using a private unauthorized email server for official business while serving as Secretary of State. If your claim is true then she has an iron-clad alibi.

It was in the OP, quoting the linked article:

A State Department Inspector General report said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to follow the rules or inform key department staff regarding her use of a private email server, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN on Wednesday.

The report, which was provided to lawmakers, 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."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

 

[dismal]

I think people are missing the big picture here: The vast right-wing conspiracy of Clinton-obsessed Republicans are now running the State Department.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Important people don't get in trouble over stuff like this.

*pic snip*

The George W Bush Admin willfully leaked the ID of a NOC-List CIA agent, and we'll never know the fallout from that. The George W. Bush Admin in the wide open, let out the CIA's ability to arm drones with missiles in a press conference.

Speak about intelligence leaks! And people want to get their shit in their pants over an email server.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Can you cite that claim? I thought this was regarding her using a private unauthorized email server for official business while serving as Secretary of State. If your claim is true then she has an iron-clad alibi.

It was in the OP, quoting the linked article:

A State Department Inspector General report said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to follow the rules or inform key department staff regarding her use of a private email server, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN on Wednesday.

The report, which was provided to lawmakers, 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."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

The two things seem related.

i.e, because it was on a private email server, she did not retain the records for dept/govt use. It's not just that the next guy should have access to information from the last guy. Record retention is an important part of business/govt and various regulations cover the extent of necessary compliance.

- - - Updated - - -

but technically it seems it was illegal.

Technically it seems like it was against official government policy.


Like, she did something that if it were in the private sector would get her hauled in front of HR.

If her actions violated the Federal Records Act which the article seems to suggest, then it's even more serious than that.

 

[KeepTalking]

It was in the OP, quoting the linked article:

A State Department Inspector General report said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to follow the rules or inform key department staff regarding her use of a private email server, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN on Wednesday.

The report, which was provided to lawmakers, 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."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

The two things seem related.

i.e, because it was on a private email server, she did not retain the records for dept/govt use. It's not just that the next guy should have access to information from the last guy. Record retention is an important part of business/govt and various regulations cover the extent of necessary compliance.

Regardless, the statement refers to an issue that occurred as she was leaving office, so revoking her security clearance would have had no effect, she was already out the door.

If her actions violated the Federal Records Act which the article seems to suggest, then it's even more serious than that.

The devil is in the details there. The statement seems carefully worded so as not to say that she violated the Federal Records Act, but rather that she did not comply with policies that were implemented in accordance with that Act. The policies could have gone above and beyond what is stipulated in the Act, so non-compliance with the policies is not necessarily a violation of the Act.

 

[prideandfall]

still waiting for the moment when we all suddenly remember the local (and national) right-wing dipshits losing their fucking minds over the bush administration doing this exact same thing and losing millions of governmental emails.

any day now i'm sure we'll recall how derec and dismal were chomping at the bit calling for bush to be arrested.

 

[Deepak]

Regardless, the statement refers to an issue that occurred as she was leaving office, so revoking her security clearance would have had no effect, she was already out the door.

That statement is calling out the minimum remedy she could have taken - the violation happened when she was in her appointment as SecState. Reading that as something which happened after she was out of the position defies standard English.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It was in the OP, quoting the linked article:

A State Department Inspector General report said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to follow the rules or inform key department staff regarding her use of a private email server, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN on Wednesday.

The report, which was provided to lawmakers, 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."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/state-department-report-faults-clinton-over-email-use/

I don't think it was a big deal because no one really spied on her successfully and used such information to wreak havoc on the nation, but technically it seems it was illegal.

The two things seem related.

i.e, because it was on a private email server, she did not retain the records for dept/govt use. It's not just that the next guy should have access to information from the last guy. Record retention is an important part of business/govt and various regulations cover the extent of necessary compliance.

Regardless, the statement refers to an issue that occurred as she was leaving office, so revoking her security clearance would have had no effect, she was already out the door.

If her actions violated the Federal Records Act which the article seems to suggest, then it's even more serious than that.

The devil is in the details there. The statement seems carefully worded so as not to say that she violated the Federal Records Act, but rather that she did not comply with policies that were implemented in accordance with that Act. The policies could have gone above and beyond what is stipulated in the Act, so non-compliance with the policies is not necessarily a violation of the Act.

If that were true, then it'd be a non-sequitur or superfluous.

Sometimes, the way these things work is that the regulation says you must have a policy to handle X and in those cases if you do not follow the policy you are in violation of the law. Record retention is sometimes in those areas, though often not.

ETA:

A federal law requires the preservation of government records, and Clinton has said that since most of her emails were sent to people on the State Department system, she was complying.

This defense makes no sense. Just because someone complies most of the time, doesn't mean the times they were not compliant with law is legal. So the times [the some times] she did not email State Dept people about official business, she was acting contrary to federal law because she was not preserving govt records.

 

[jonatha]

I think people are missing the big picture here: The vast right-wing conspiracy of Clinton-obsessed Republicans are now running the State Department.

Well duh!

Why do you think she left it?