State Dept debunks a few of Hillary's Lies in IG Report

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/05/26/us/politics/state-department-hillary-clinton-emails.html

WASHINGTON —The State Department’s inspector general has sharply criticized Hillary Clinton’s exclusive use of a private email server while she was secretary of state,saying she had not sought permission to use it and would not have received it if she had.

In a report delivered to members of Congress on Wednesday,the inspector general said that Mrs. Clinton “had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business” with officials responsible for handling records and security but that inspectors “found no evidence” that she had requested or received approval from anyone at the department to conduct her state business on a personal email.

The report also said that department officials “did not —and would not —approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business.”

It also added new detail about Mrs. Clinton’s motivation for using the private server,which she has said was set up for convenience. In November 2010,her deputy chief of staff for operations prodded her about “putting you on state email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam.” Mrs. Clinton,however, replied that she would consider a separate address or device “but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

The report,as well as an F.B.I. investigation and other legal challenges seeking information about her use of the server,is certain to keep alive a controversy that has shadowed Mrs. Clinton’s campaign for the presidency. The events have all come to a climax just as she is close to defeating Senator Bernie Sanders for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Mrs. Clinton and her aides have played down the inquiries,saying that she would cooperate with investigators to put the email issue behind her. Even so,through her lawyers,she declined to be interviewed by the State Department’s inspector general as part of his review. So did several of her senior aides.

The report states that the issues are systemic and were present with past Secretaries of State as well.  Note, the state department has a systemic email problem.  Note, this isn't a specific Clinton problem but a systemic IT control issue of the State Department.  Were the executive branch to conduct a similar report, they would likely conclude the same thing and point to Bush, Cheney, and hundreds of their staffers conducting official business on private email servers.  

So I guess we're done here!

I am still trying to figure out what "lies" PK is referencing. I mean the got nothing innuendo king, just never connects dots. I will wait, but as usual there will be another posting which goes nowhere, but raises an innuendo. It is simple.....have congress pass a law that all staff, congress, and executive departments, must use government servers.......done.......but why do you think NOBODY in Congress is working for that result......let's see if PK can figure out why these sloppy procedures basically have not been addressed by STATUTE......too funny.

Look the facts are simple Since the internet age, SOS Kerry is the first SOS who has exclusively used the Government email server for SOS business.....that means at least four SOS like Clinton did not, and NOT ONCE was this ever considered criminal, and the remedy if there is a problem is for congress to pass a bill. Done, but if that was the agenda of the Republican Party, it could have been done a year ago.......instead we are given innuendo and here outright claims of lies.

As shown in the video, Dana Perino says, "We screwed up, and we're trying to fix it." This in the midst of a Congressional investigation into the firing of 8 (?) US attorneys, whose only transgression appears to have been not pursuing blatantly partisan witch hunts. 22 MILLION emails on a PRIVATE RNC SERVER used by 22 White House staffers, and barely a peep from the media. And now SOS Clinton is raked over the coals...for what? My guess is that she was less worried about foreign hackers than the home-grown variety...even within the State Dept.

Meanwhile, in an ironic twist, former prosecutor Kenneth Starr, now president of Baylor University (Waco), faces termination by the Board of Regents for failing to investigate rape charges brought against members of the Bears football team.

The regulations evolved under Clinton - ones that weren't even effect under previous SoS's. She chose to ignore those regulations even as she demanded her minions to follow them.....

"Clinton’s inexcusable, willful disregard for the rules"

By Editorial Board May 25 at 7:13 PM
HILLARY CLINTON’S use of a private email server while secretary of state from 2009 to 2013 has been justifiably criticized as an error of judgment. What the new report from the State Department inspector general makes clear is that it also was not a casual oversight. Ms. Clinton had plenty of warnings to use official government communications methods, so as to make sure that her records were properly preserved and to minimize cybersecurity risks. She ignored them.

The 83-page report declares that “beginning in late 2005 and continuing through 2011,” the department revised its Foreign Affairs Manual and “issued various memoranda specifically discussing the obligation to use Department systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not doing so.” Ms. Clinton didn’t.

During her tenure, State Department employees were told that they were expected to use approved, secure methods to transmit information that was sensitive but unclassified, or SBU. If they needed to transmit SBU information outside the department’s network, they were told to ask information specialists for help. The report said there is no evidence that Ms. Clinton ever asked, “despite the fact that emails exchanged on her personal account regularly contained information that was marked as SBU.” On June 28, 2011, a cable was sent to all diplomatic and consular posts over her signature warning that personal email accounts could be compromised and officials should “avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts.” At the time, Ms. Clinton was doing exactly that.

On March 11, 2011, an assistant secretary sent a memorandum on cybersecurity threats directly to Ms. Clinton, noting a “dramatic increase” in attempts to compromise personal email accounts of senior department officials, possibly for spying or blackmail. That didn’t stop Ms. Clinton either. There were also numerous notifications that some emails (but not all) are considered federal records under the law and that she should print and file those in her office and, before leaving office, surrender all emails dealing with department business. She did so only about two years later, in December 2014.

tarting in 2009, there was a new, electronic system, known as SMART, to properly archive department emails without having to print and file them, but Ms. Clinton opted not to use it, out of concern that there was “overly broad access to sensitive materials.” According to the report, after a staff member “raised concerns” with another official about Ms. Clinton’s personal email server, the staff was instructed “never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.”

The department’s email technology was archaic. Other staffers also used personal email, as did Secretary Colin Powell (2001-2005), without preserving the records. But there is no excuse for the way Ms. Clinton breezed through all the warnings and notifications. While not illegal behavior, it was disturbingly unmindful of the rules. In the middle of the presidential campaign, we urge the FBI to finish its own investigation soon, so all information about this troubling episode will be before the voters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/clintons-inexcusable-willful-disregard-for-the-rules/2016/05/25/0089e942-22ae-11e6-9e7f-57890b612299_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

While not illegal behavior, it was disturbingly unmindful of the rules.

Ok......fair enough. She believed her server afforded her more security. I agree with her. My server was hacked around 2002 with the Code Red Virus where microsoft had left a vulnerability. Since then most platforms are more secure than a government server simply by the fact that those with security clearance are in the thousands, while my server it is my wife and I who could get access. The logs did not indicate a successful hack, but the point is that department policy rule making is not the way to solve this. It should be statutory. Best practices certainly would not result in this kind of nonsense innuendo and over reaction to what Clinton did. It is pure BS at every level.

Clinton's email server doesn't make Trump any more electable.  Trump doesn't acknowledge climate science.  Trump wants to end net neutrality.  Trump wants to back out of the Iran nuclear agreement.  Trump wants to sharply cut taxes for top tier tax brackets.  Trump could potentially seat three supreme court justices.  Trump thinks Mexico is going to build a massive wall on our southern border.  Trump wants Saudi Arabia, South Korea, and Japan to acquire nukes.  The rest of the world is watching in horror at the spectacle that republican voters - in their best judgement - have thrust upon us.  Russia is the only nation on the planet actually wants a Trump presidency. This should tell you something.

If my choices are all of the above, or accepting Clinton's email server - which is a non-issue -, well,  I'll take Clinton's email server for $500, Alex.

"...while not illegal behavior..."

I watched Fox News tonight and Rudy was on Bill's show telling the world with certainty that Hillary is going to be indicted.....it was like he was drunk, because he kept repeating himself and kept calling Hillary the Attorney General which Bill had to correct him......He went so far as to almost guarantee the FBI will find a crime........it is so silly.

Mr. 9/11 can KMA.

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/27/time_to_care_about_damn_emails_hillary_clinton_has_a_serious_legal_problem/

Every legal defense of Clinton’s emails has just been shattered.

First,Clinton’s “convenience” excuse,which rests upon the notion that the State Department allowed her to use a private server,is now obsolete. As explained in the State Department report,there’s “no evidence” Clinton asked for,or received,approval for a private server.

This undermines every defense for Clinton,since the narrative must go from “convenience” and naiveté,to intentionally breaking protocol. As stated in the report,State Department protocol and guidelines correlate to existing laws regarding record keeping and the handling of classified data. Now that Clinton can’t simply claim “convenience,” there’s the obvious intent to hide information

Whether or not the over 30,000 emails she deleted were truly private (or abou yoga) is now irrelevant; they should never have been combined with classified data,on an unguarded private server.

This isn’t Whitewater. It’s a huge story,and a controversy that will lead to the FBI recommending indictments. If you disagree,then store your Social Security number,bank account information,and address on a friend’s private server. After you’ve stored your most precious data on another person’s server,then try to sleep easy at night.

Nobody before Clinton,Republican or Democrat,has ever linked a private server to government networks used to store Top Secret intelligence.

Hillary Clinton broke State Department guidelines,which makes storing 22 Top Secret emails on the server even more egregious. As explained by CBS News January,these files contained Special Access Program information:

The Obama administration confirmed for the first time Friday that Hillary Clinton’s unsecured home server contained some of the U.S. government’s most closely guarded secrets,censoring 22 emails with materi demanding one of the highest levels of classification.

…But seven email chains are being withheld in full because they contain information deemed to be “top secret.” The 37 pages include messages recently described by a key intelligence official as concerning so-called “special access programs” –a highly restricted subset of classified material that could point to confidential sources or clandestine programs like drone strikes or government eavesdropping.

It is a crime to store Top Secret intelligence anywhere other than government networks; regardless of whether or not Clinton believed her server to be more secure. Furthermore,SAP data is so secretive,the U.S. government often time denies the existence of these projects.

The “high bar” that defenders of Hillary Clinton cite was just lowered to a level indicating she intentionally used a private server. This intent correlates to lega consequences. Intent means a deliberate act,and this deliberate act can’t be explained as “convenience.”

The Espionage Act states that whoever is “entrusted” with state secrets must ensure this data isn’t “removed from its proper place of custody” and that “gross negligence” isn’t a defense:

Yes,Clinton’s 22 Top Secret emails were “illegally removed from its proper place.”

Also,how did Brian Pagliano transfer this intelligence from secure State Department networks,onto a private server,without authority or documentation from State?

Who helped Pagliano transfer this data?

The recent State Department report states there’s no documentation approving Clinton’s server.

This intentional need to circumvent U.S. government networks correlates to breaking State Department guidelines. As written in the Inspector General’s report,“At a minimum,Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service.”

According to The Washington Post,“she ignored” everything from government record keeping to cyber security. Also,“Ms. Clinton had plenty of warnings to use official government communications methods.”

If The Washington Post is correct,and “Ms. Clinton had plenty of warnings to use official government communications methods,” and her email use actually broke State Department rules,then Espionage Act laws directly relate to the 22 Top Secret emails on a private server.

There goes the “convenience” excuse found in a CNN article from 2015 titled Hillary Clinton: I used one email ‘for convenience’:

“I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which wa allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two she said.

After the recent State Department report,even this benign excuse would lead to repercussions. Now,we know that State never gave her permission to own the server,even for the sake of convenience.

"...breaking protocol..." "...breaking guidelines..." Gotta love the terminology.

But not breaking the law. And what about Bush's 22 MILLION missing emails on the RNC server? Care to address that, or just continue to pound nails with your teensy-tiny little hammer?

I used to think that leftists had compunction when they willingly ignored the facts... not so much anymore. Especially you. You know every instance of pub misdeed... and every tangent conspiracy theory... but ignore every leftist malfeasance.

PkrBum wrote:I used to think that leftists had compunction when they willingly ignored the facts... not so much anymore. Especially you. You know every instance of pub misdeed... and every tangent conspiracy theory... but ignore every leftist malfeasance.

You should know by now that I miss very little. The GOP has gone off the rails; there is no denying that. I will support the candidate(s) that represent my political stance...which has caused me no end of grief with my own family, so don't think for a minute that it's easy...there are no viable Republican candidates, and the ones in office have demonstrated clearly that their only interest is self-perpetuation...in short; the GOP couldn't give a good damn about the people. No, I won't vote for a Republican...not even a judge.

Libertarian VP candidate Bill Weld says Clinton email scandal has no merit.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/libertarian-vp-candidate-dispells-clinton-email-scandal-20-seconds/

(video..22 seconds)

Libertarian vice presidential candidate Bill Weld, who earlier this week joined a ticket with Gary Johnson for the third party’s unlikely lunge at the White House, had his own “sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails” moment Tuesday afternoon with MSNBC host Chuck Todd. “I’m not buying it,” Weld said. “You can’t indict somebody if there’s no evidence of criminal intent, and I don’t see any evidence of criminal intent.”

And he would know. In addition to serving from 1991 to 1997 as governor of Massachusetts, Weld was previously a U.S. attorney and former chief of the Department of Justice Criminal Division under Ronald Reagan — the very official who would have been making decisions about major cases like this one, along with the attorney general.

“I will give you one news tip,” he began. “All this stuff about Secretary Clinton’s use of email accounts and the report that came out, how she might get indicted, I’m not buying it.”

Progressives are in a panic as seen by their responses to more facts and truth coming out about their wounded candidate.

Five lies from Hillary’s Past Statements, THIS was all in the 83 page report.

“Everything I did was permitted” 7/7/2015 LIE

“I did it for convenience” 3/10/15 LIE, she said she didn’t want to carry two devices.

“I’m more than ready to talk to anybody, anytime” 5/8/16 LIE, she has forbidden her staff from talking and refused to be interviewed.

“It was allowed by the State Department” 9/4/15 LIE The State Department did not know. They say if she had asked permission, she would have been refused.

“There were no security breaches” 3/10/15 LIE at least two breach’s occurred, she reported neither
“I did not email any classified emails to anybody on my email list there is no classified email”. Over 2,000 classified documents were found on her server. HRC personally authored 104; there were 22 ABOVE TOP SECRET 3/10/15

Floridatexan wrote:
"...breaking protocol..." "...breaking guidelines..." Gotta love the terminology.

What do you suppose those rules and guidelines are in place for?

PkrBum wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
"...breaking protocol..."  "...breaking guidelines..."  Gotta love the terminology.

What do you suppose those rules and guidelines are in place for?

Never end a sentence with a preposition . . . . . . lol

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
"...breaking protocol..."  "...breaking guidelines..."  Gotta love the terminology.

What do you suppose those rules and guidelines are in place for?

Never end a sentence with a preposition . . . . . . lol

I take it you have no idea either?

PkrBum wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
"...breaking protocol..."  "...breaking guidelines..."  Gotta love the terminology.

What do you suppose those rules and guidelines are in place for?

For the umteenth time,Pkr. There were no rules you couldn't use a private server. You just had to archive the state dept. emails.