Slashdot Mirror


Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email At State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules

HughPickens.com writes: The NY Times reports that Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, according to State Department officials. She may have violated federal requirements that officials' correspondence be retained as part of the agency's record. Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act. "It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of government business," said attorney Jason R. Baron. A spokesman for Clinton defended her use of the personal email account and said she has been complying with the "letter and spirit of the rules."

20 of 538 comments (clear)

  1. Politics aside for a moment. by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This seems indicative of sense that the rules do not apply to me.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This seems indicative of sense that the rules do not apply to me.

      That's pretty much the definition of politics.

    2. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by 50000BTU_barbecue · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, of the power class. It doesn't have to be politics, a simple engineering company with a dozen workers and a mentally-ill sociopathic boss can have the same behavior.

      --
      Mostly random stuff.
    3. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This seems indicative of sense that the rules do not apply to me.

      Nobody who would vote for Hillary Clinton will care about things like this. There might be some hoopla on Twitter and Fox News for a few days, and then there will be some stragglers like with Benghazi, but it will mostly fade out of the mainstream media within a few hours from now.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    4. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ...and I'll bet pretty much any ranking politician does much the same, and thinks along the same lines - in any party, in any country, in any system of governance.

      If I'm honest, I reckon to be a politician of any note, you pretty much have to be a bit under-handed from time to time, and you pretty much have to push the rules to their limits. If you just want to be a local politician, or even maybe a national politician that doesn't do much more than that (what we call 'back bench' here in the UK) then you can probably be fairly noble, if you really want to be. If you've got any sort of ambition though, then you've got to 'play the game' considerably harder than that, and so pushing boundaries of the rules/decency/morality start to become more of a requirement.

      I've heard it said that we get the type of candidates for political office that we do because the system is not attractive to good and noble candidates.

      It also rings true that we have lowered the bar of expectation with regard to decency and morality from our politicians.

      Fortunately, we can both still vote in our respective nations to change this perversion. FWIW, there are many candidates for the upcoming presidential vacancy I would be less pleased to see in power than Mrs. Clinton.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    5. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by RoccamOccam · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What does this have to do with Benghazi? If anything there's a major difference in that Clinton actually did something wrong in this one.

      Well, we don't actually know that, do we? And that was the whole point of her conducting her job via personal email. She can completely cover her trail on any and all issues. Her staff combed through her email and only released the completely innocuous emails into official channels. She adopted this strategy, undoubtedly, because of her Presidential aspirations.

      It really speaks volumes about her character (or lack of it).

    6. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It also rings true that we have lowered the bar of expectation with regard to decency and morality from our politicians.

      That!

      I've had a number of arguments against certain candidates because they quite obviously lied... and partisan apologists for that candidate would say "yeah, but all politicians lie!" This has happened, of course, for politicians from every party... but it shows that far too many of us not only accept it, but condone it. "It's OK because it's the one I support... but if your candidate lies I'll never stop mentioning it!"

      I remember when Bill lied to a grand jury, and there were far too many people who said "yeah, but who wouldn't in that situation?" I wouldn't... I wouldn't have been in that situation, either. Which leads us to the fact that it's not just politicians, it's a large (and growing) segment of our society that believes that lying and deceitful behavior, immorality and selfishness are OK.

      There is no sense or morality or common decency anymore. Sure, most kids lie about their bad behavior, but it used to be that parents would punish them even worse for lying about it. Nowadays so many people don't want to punish their kids - they want to be "friends," that kids get away with anything by lying about it... and those kids grow up, and breed more kids just the same; they grow up to be politicians, businessmen, police officers, and all manner of people that we are supposed to be able to trust. I even had an argument with someone boasting about screwing up someone else... their defense was "there's no law against it." I had to ask "since when to common decency and common sense need to be written into law?"

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    7. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The different is Hillary Clinton is a very bright woman, at the top of her game, recognisable around the world; she knew what she was doing.

    8. Re: Politics aside for a moment. by kenh · · Score: 5, Funny

      I further assume that the people around her are also smart, intelligent people, and not all political-appointees - didn't they think it odd to address their emails to the Secretary of State at pantsuit@hillary2016.org?

      --
      Ken
    9. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course they won't.

      There is a very good reason she exited the State Department stage when she did. She only had the job so she could check off the box labeled " Experience " for her upcoming Presidential bid. Without it, her lack of experience would have been front and center during her entire campaign. This has been planned for quite some time. Though her success at her previous job posting is certainly up for debate.

      Her election team knows how short the average voter memory is. Exit the spotlight a few years in advance of the main election and you're golden. Can't have all this ISIS, Ukraine, Iran, Syria business getting in the way of a potential Presidential Candidacy now can we ? Though the closer we get to election season, we'll see all the skeletons dragged from the closets and put on display for both sides.

      I would expect nothing but the usual smear campaigns from both parties telling us that Candidate X is better than Candidate Y because they are not AS evil as their counterpart over in the other party. Our entire system isn't about who is best qualified anymore, rather it's about picking the lesser of two evils. ( Which, if you think about it, still makes us Evil . . . :D )

      I do have to thank the current administration, however, for introducing a good dose of reality to the upcoming generations. ( In fairness, it happens every election cycle ) I do hope those that voted for Mr. Hope and Change Yes-We-Can remember just how that turned out and not be so easily swayed with the next candidates election promises. ( But I won't hold my breath )

      Hillary certainly has a shot at the title, but only if the Republican side fails to field any serious competitor to oppose her. ( We so need a new system to replace this very outdated and increasingly corrupt one we have now )

      Third party ? LOL. Never happen.

      While we may have far better candidates in the Third Party corner, the media is not on their side. All of the mainstream media in this country is controlled, or has interests in, one of the two major parties. As a result, a Third Party will never see the same exposure to the populace as the other two candidates. No exposure = no chance of getting elected.

    10. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by unixcorn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody is talking about Republicans, their crimes or what they will do. Let's not project on Republicans what the Democrats do daily with their own special version of vitriol and rancor. Let's face it, besides Fox News and Al Jazera, you can't tune into a news program that isn't controlled by the left wing. So no reason to even try and deflect here. Hillary is a liar and a cheat and a good one at that. I thought she made a good Secretary of State, just for the record.

    11. Re:Politics aside for a moment. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Informative

      The different is Hillary Clinton is a very bright woman, at the top of her game, recognisable around the world; she knew what she was doing.

      I remember an interview from years back where she was asked if she used email and her response was along the lines of " Oh no. Emails are discoverable".
      So yes, she knew exactly what she was doing and why she was doing it.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  2. Re:B0ll0cks... by bickerdyke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "A spokesman for Clinton defended her use of the personal email account and said she has been complying with the "letter and spirit of the rules.""

    That alone made me blow my coffee across my desk.

    When there are regulations about email retention in place, using your personal email is NEITHER to the letter NOR to the spirit of the rules.

    Even more absurd than to "smoke, but not inhale".

    --
    bickerdyke
  3. Re:Why now? by funwithBSD · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They didn't care. It is a pretty wide spread practice in this administration:

    Lisa Jackson- EPA
    Kathleen Sebelius - HHS
    Seth Harris - Department of Labor.
    and more

    The AP covered it in 2013, it is not like we didn't know, we just did not pay attention.

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article...
     

    --
    Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  4. Bush White House Email Controversy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Bush White House email controversy surfaced in 2007 during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available, because they were sent via a non-government domain hosted on an email server not controlled by the federal government. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act. Over 5 million emails may have been lost or deleted. Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove lost emails, leading to damaging allegations. In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been deleted.

    The administration officials had been using a private Internet domain, called gwb43.com, owned by and hosted on an email server run by the Republican National Committee, for various communications of unknown content or purpose. The domain name is an acronym standing for "George W. Bush, 43rd" President of the United States. The server came public when it was discovered that J. Scott Jennings, the White House's deputy director of political affairs, was using a gwb43.com email address to discuss the firing of the U.S. attorney for Arkansas. Communications by federal employees were also found on georgewbush.com (registered to "Bush-Cheney '04, Inc.") and rnchq.org (registered to "Republican National Committee"), but, unlike these two servers, gwb43.com has no Web server connected to it — it is used only for email.

    The "gwb43.com" domain name was publicized by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), who sent a letter to Oversight and Government Reform Committee committee chairman Henry A. Waxman requesting an investigation. Waxman sent a formal warning to the RNC, advising them to retain copies of all emails sent by White House employees. According to Waxman, "in some instances, White House officials were using nongovernmental accounts specifically to avoid creating a record of the communications." The Republican National Committee claims to have erased the emails, supposedly making them unavailable for Congressional investigators.

    On April 12, 2007, White House spokesman Scott Stanzel stated that White House staffers were told to use RNC accounts to "err on the side of avoiding violations of the Hatch Act, but they should also retain that information so it can be reviewed for the Presidential Records Act," and that "some employees ... have communicated about official business on those political email accounts." Stanzel also said that even though RNC policy since 2004 has been to retain all emails of White House staff with RNC accounts, the staffers had the ability to delete the email themselves.

  5. Re:Jail time by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, if anybody else in government did this, they'd get fired, lose their pension, and possibly face criminal charges.

    When the people at the highest levels of power decide that the law doesn't apply to them, nothing at all happens.

    So, on behalf of the rest of the world ... when the political leaders ignore the law and face no consequences, the rest of us want to send a big collective "fuck you".

    This has nothing to do with her politics. If Bush or Cheney had done this, we'd want them prosecuted as well.

    Laws which are selectively applied are crap. Assholes in power who believe the law doesn't apply to them need to be punished.

    These laws exist so there is a public record of activities, not some place where you can sidestep that and conduct business elsewhere away from oversight.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  6. Hillary is a divisive figure *among Democrats* by hey! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That may surprise people here. The Republicans have done a good job painting her as the quintessential ultra-liberal Democrat, but really she is no such thing. She is, in fact, from the right wing of the party and could have been an establishment Republican a generation ago. She is widely reviled by the left over her vote on the Iraq War Authorization of Military Force (although to be fair, Joe Biden voted for it too and he's seen as generally reliable on liberal issues, as long as he doesn't open his mouth).

    On the other hand she's the first really plausible female presidential candidate for a major party, and I think a lot of people who want to see that milestone project a great deal of their hopes on her. But what makes her plausible in the first place is her acceptability to the establishment.

    And what makes her acceptable to the establishment is her competence and personal accomplishments; being married to Bill helps. But the Ivy League education, experience in high profile NGOs and partnership in a major law firm mean she's seen as serious by "serious people". But in this case that should be held against her here. She's not like old Uncle Joe (Biden), whose heart is in the right place but who the hell can tell where his mind might go a-wandering; Hillary is someone you expect to have her head in the game. She knew damn well that conducting official business on non-government servers is exactly what people do when they're breaking the law.

    I'm neither a Hillary partisan nor a Hillary hater. On the political spectrum I tend to fall a little to the right of the most vocal Democratic base and to the left of the establishment "DLC" wing that dominates the party at the national level. When the Secretary of State does something this fishy, that's a big deal. I think there should be something like a special prosecutor appointed, even though when the words "Clinton" and "special prosecutor" are uttered in the sentence the word "circus" can't be far behind. But then if the special prosecutor finds no indictable offense I'd be happy with that result.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Hillary is a divisive figure *among Democrats* by jratcliffe · · Score: 5, Informative

      Richard Nixon proposed and drove the creation of the EPA.
      He expanded Medicare coverage to include long-term disabled under 65.
      He created the Federal disability insurance (SSDI).
      He proposed a national health care plan, with federal subsidies (something more "socialized" than Obamacare).

      Advocating any of these things today would make it impossible for any Republican to get the Presidential nomination.

  7. Mencken said it decades ago by swb · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." - H. L. Mencken

  8. Re:What exactly were the rules? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AND remember the liberal democrat cries about Sarah Palin's alleged use of private email for public use (until it was hacked and nothing was found) ??

    Yeah, the same people who were screaming lunatic mad about that, are the same ones suddenly silent here. Those people need to be "named and shamed".

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.