Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumRequest for input from Hillary Group (HCG)
Hello Hillary Group,
I would love to just rest in my strongly held belief that this e-mail thing is a flap like Vince Foster and Travelgate. But I feel compelled to answer back in GDP. And then theres the puzzle part. Im a clarity junky, and this whole thing makes me dizzy. I want to get it straight in my own mind. Ive tried to list all of the things Hillarys critics have extracted from the e-mail flap and answer them.
Im asking any of you with knowledge and energy to edit this before I post in GDP. Please add things that youve seen that ought to get shot down. And please correct any misinformation or confusion.
TIA
LAS
1 Hillary compromised national security.
The State Department OIG investigation does not address classified information. Clintons personal e-mail was for un-classified information only. The FBI investigation is the one looking into handling of classified information. The OIG report does not contain any information about breaches of Clintons e-mail, although it does mention some e-mails questioning certain messages. In fact, according to some experts, her e-mail was more secure than the Dept of States system for non-classified information.
As for the departments unclassified system, the inspector general's report demonstrates that it was horribly insecure, and that hackers obtained terabytes worth of documents out of it; on the other hand, Clintons email system was quite secure and, when evidence emerged that someone was trying to hack in, the security officer overseeing the server immediately shut it down, then notified the relevant officials at State. In other words, while boxcars of documents were digitally pulled out of the agency, there is no evidence a single email was snagged out of Clintons server. So it could be the Clinton arrangement didnt follow the security procedures laid out in the federal regulationsthe inspector general did not reach a conclusion as to whether it did or notbut, as often happens, private security contractors did a better job than the government.
Hillary Clinton did not send e-mails including any information that was classified at the time, with the exception of responding to/forwarding e-mails sent to her by Sidney Blumenthal. These contained classified information which Blumenthal had obtained from public sources. She did not originate them nor was she responsible for their being made publicly available.
2 She violated State Department policies.
The State Department had not promulgated any policy prohibiting the use of private e-mail servers. That was clarified in legislation in 2014, after Clinton had left office.
The State Department required people using personal e-mail to make hardcopies of all of their e-mails to comply with the federal requirement that all communications be preserved.
- Clinton had electronic backup, a much more appropriate approach in 2008-2012, and turned over 55,000 pages on paper -- just as the 1950's law required. She did not make the paper copies until after she left, which was a technical violation.
Here is an excellent description of what the real world of working with the State Departments antiquated systems was like.
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-not-scandal-464414
3 She is a liar.
- Shes been saying that a private server was allowed, but now shes saying she thought it was allowed.
At the time the server was installed there were no state department regulations applying to personal servers. In response to the OIG investigation State Department IT staff said that if she had asked, she would have been told it wasnt allowed. We dont know when they made this decision, but in the face of a changing set of circumstances (State Dept now claims it wouldnt have allowed it), she adjusts her response in a rational way.
- She said, "I'm more than ready to talk to anybody anytime but the report said she declined to be interviewed by the OIG.
OK. So in the heat of a debate or an interview she said something she wanted to back away from later in the face of new circumstances. I dont claim to know the details, but I do understand that total consistency is never found in political campaigns.
- She said that personal e-mail was allowed.
It was. The State Department even specified different ways for preserving copies than the ways used for state.gov.
- She said the State Department approved of her use of private e-mail/server (claims vary).
She never said they approved. They didnt say anything. Regulations allowed for private e-mail, and the use of a private server was never addressed in their regulations.
4 She didnt turn over the first 30,000 early e-mails.
HILLARY GROUP, One answer is a quote from her IT department saying they couldnt find them. Does anyone know where that is? Is it in the OIG report? I couldnt find it.
HILLARY GROUP CAN YOU THINK OF OTHER THINGS THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED?
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)LAS14
(13,783 posts)stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)LAS14
(13,783 posts)Can you explain why you think otherwise?
LAS14
(13,783 posts)I'd thought maybe "Lot's of stuff about Hillary's e-mails."
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/1107147111
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... that this points to. Thanks.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... a Word doc I keep open so I can plop it into responses on DU. Probably half a dozen times this a.m.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)I know it's hard to read the attacks in GDP but I question the need to post anything about the emails there. You'll just get a boatload of Hillary hate and convince no one. Then you'll get more frustrated and want to post another rebuttal and the cycle continues.
Have you thought about staying away from GDP?
LAS14
(13,783 posts)I've always assumed that there are people in GDP who are not Hillary Haters. I want them to see the other side at least now and again. Last week I posted an essay my husband wrote about knowing Hillary at Wellesley. This was one of the responses. These are the people I'm reaching out to. As for the Hillary haters.... "sticks and stones..."
"Good story. Thanks for sharing
As a Bernie supporter who is trying hard to get excited about Hillary this story is helpful."
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Would like to read stories like that!
LAS14
(13,783 posts)Her Sister
(6,444 posts)Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)SharonClark
(10,014 posts)Sparkly
(24,149 posts)See if this helps - Meryl Streep introducing her at Women in the World:
LAS14
(13,783 posts)LAS14
(13,783 posts)Historic NY
(37,450 posts)DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)government and there is the FBI investigation of god knows what that is on going I feel certain that her attorneys would have advised her not to talk to the OIG. One rational reporter on my tv made this comment but most talk shit because they don't have a clue what they are actually talking about. I heard one interview last week where the reporter asked her a question about two things unrelated but he thought they were. He needn't know the terms of art, and I watched as Hillary tried to answer without going into a 1/2 hour explanation or just straight up insulting the idiot. otoh - I don't think a 1/2 hour explanation would of gotten the job done...she would have needed hand puppets, a felt board, and a dry erase board.
Also, it was well known that the OIG guy in charge was biased. He might have been associated with Senator Grassley, can't remember for sure.
I recall something about the early e-mails but that 30,000 is not a number I have heard before. Also, how would anyone know the number if they have vanished. Sounds made up.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... to add a closing paragraph about the general difficulties of wrestling with an antiquated system and explaining it in the sound bytes allowed on debates and interviews.
radical noodle
(8,003 posts)Classified emails are on an entirely different system and could not be sent through her home email server. So if the issue is classified information at the time it was sent or received, it could not have gone to her server. It is apparently an impossibility.
She gave the emails to attorneys to go through to decide which was personal and which was SoS related. She didn't pick through them deciding which was which. Any mistakes made (if a few slippped through the cracks) go back on the attorneys, not her.
The server was in a home protected by the secret service and her husband is a former president, who undoubtedly still has security clearance.
At least that's the things that stand out to me as making a difference in all this.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... the impossibilitiy of sending classified e-mails from the home server? I will explain that the State Dept itself maintains two systems. It's clear what should happen, but I think the FBI investigation is centered around what DID happen. It seems clear that she forwarded an e-mail from Sid Blumenthal in which HE included classified info. Here's the Wikipedia link. She addressed that quikcly once in a debate. I wish I could find a quote of that. Good point about physical security.
radical noodle
(8,003 posts)But you may have already seen them
I know I've seen that more than once but can't remember where. I'll look for it.
It would seem to me that if Blumenthal had classified information he sent to her on email it would be the fault of whoever gave him that information in the first place, and it wasn't Hillary. Why DID he have classified information to send to her? I'm not entirely sure how that happened, or if it was classified later.
I assume you've seen this?
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/07/13/email-facts/
A portion of this article deals with classified information in a separate system:
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-prez-clinton-emails-q-and-a-html-htmlstory.html
(There is also a small portion of this article that refers to the Blumenthal issue.)
This is such a complicated subject and nothing will convince those who hate her anyway, but the emails are going through various departments and each has things they don't want in the public domain, so they mark them "classified" to keep places like Judicial Watch from getting them. That's hardly the fault of Hillary Clinton, though.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)No, this is the first I've heard of this particular take.
It would seem to me that if Blumenthal had classified information he sent to her on email it would be the fault of whoever gave him that information in the first place, and it wasn't Hillary. Why DID he have classified information to send to her? I'm not entirely sure how that happened, or if it was classified later.
I totally agree that it means nothing of a classified e-mail was sent to her. And that was the case. I remember her mentioning it in a debate and am going to try to find her direct quote. This photo of one of the 4 in question is confusing to me, but "classified" is in the middle. It was not originated by Hillary.
https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/16223
I do point out that they were marked classified after the fact, but I think I'll add this bit about different departments with different standards.
Her Sister
(6,444 posts)These earlier emails are not lost!
Sparkly
(24,149 posts)https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/07/13/email-facts/
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/12/myths-and-facts-on-hillary-clintons-email-and-r/204913
The recent OIG report: https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/state-department-report-on-clintons-email-practices/2039/
obamanut2012
(26,080 posts)But my personal opinion is it's best to not post anything like this in GDP.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)Coolest Ranger
(2,034 posts)they don't go off on you for all your hard work
LAS14
(13,783 posts).... for the fact that there are so many Hillary Haters in the world. Mostly on DU, as I understand it. But I wrote it for the quiet ones like the one I quoted in response #20 in this thread.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)good luck with your project.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... supportive. I interpret the lack of Hillary Hater replies as indicating that they don't know what to say. . Lots of views, of course. As with most posts.