Read the Inspector General Report That Says Hillary Clinton Broke the Rules by Using Private Email

[ExFreeper]

Read the Inspector General Report That Says Hillary Clinton Broke the Rules by Using Private Email

By Vice News

The State Department's inspector general found that Hillary Clinton did not comply with the agency's policies on records in her use of private email while US secretary of state, and she also declined to be interviewed for an investigation into the matter, according to a report delivered to US lawmakers on Wednesday.

Clinton's use of private email, held on a server at her home in Chappaqua, New York, has come up in various investigations, and the controversy over it has hung over her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination for months.

Thousands of emails that Clinton sent from the private account during her tenure as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2012 have been made public as a result of Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by VICE News senior investigative reporter Jason Leopold.

The report (viewable in full below) by the department's inspector general cited "longstanding, systemic weaknesses" with State Department records that predated Clinton's tenure, but criticized her for using private email for government business and for failing to turn over records promptly.

"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," the report read.

The report goes back several secretaries of state and explains how records management and cybersecurity have long been institutional problems in the State Department.

"As is the case throughout the Federal Government, management weaknesses at the Department have contributed to the loss or removal of email records, particularly records created by the Office of the Secretary," the report said. "These weaknesses include a limited ability to retrieve email records, inaccessibility of electronic files, failure to comply with requirements for departing employees, and a general lack of oversight."

The report said Secretary of State John Kerry and predecessors Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and Madeleine Albright were interviewed in the investigation. Clinton and her deputies, including Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan and Huma Abedin, declined to be interviewed for the inspector general's investigation.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating whether any laws were broken as a result of the server kept in her home.

https://news.vice.com/article/inspector-general-state-department-report-hillary-clinton-private-email

THE LINK BELOW GOES TO THE REPORT DIRECTLY:

https://cryptome.org/2016/05/state-oig-clinton-emails.pdf

[Oceander]

This won't form the basis for charges against Clinton because it implicates a number of other Secretaries of State and any attempt to use it on Clinton will engender waves of outrage and demands that all the others be prosecuted as well.  This is Clintons briar patch, which we throw her into at our peril. 

[Mechanicos]

There is no question Hillary is Judgment proof. The only question is how much is Obama charging her for the blanket pardon to come?

[r9etb]

This won't form the basis for charges against Clinton because it implicates a number of other Secretaries of State and any attempt to use it on Clinton will engender waves of outrage and demands that all the others be prosecuted as well.  This is Clintons briar patch, which we throw her into at our peril.

Disagree.  The effort Clinton put into creating, maintaining, and using her own e-mail system makes it a completely different animal from what the other people did. 

And as a result, the auditor found that "she did not comply with the Department's policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act."  It is highly likely that she committed a felony.

If we did throw Clinton into that briar patch, her argument would have to be "well, they committed felonies, too!"  An argument founded on an admission of guilt is not exactly the sort of argument she would want to make.

The really important finding, though, is that she can no longer blame a Republican witch hunt.  She is guilty, guilty, guilty of violating the policies and the Federal Records Act, regardless of whether or not the DoJ chooses to indict her.

[ExFreeper]

PAGES 39-43

Secretary Clinton:

By Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the Department’s guidance was considerably more detailed and more sophisticated.  Beginning in late 2005 and continuing through 2011, the Department revised the FAM and issued various memoranda specifically discussing the obligation to use Department systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not doing so.

Secretary Clinton’s cyber security practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more Comprehensive directives.  Secretary Clinton used mobile devices to conduct official business using the personal email account on her private server extensively, as illustrated by the 55,000 pages of material making up the approximately 30,000 emails she provided to the Department in December 2014.
Throughout Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the FAM stated that normal day-to-day operations should be conducted on an authorized AIS yet 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.

According to the current CIO and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, Secretary Clinton had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices, who in turn would have attempted to provide her with approved and secured means that met her business needs. However, according to these officials, DS and IRM did not—and would not—approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business, because of the restrictions in the FAM and the security risks in doing so.

During Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the FAM also instructed employees that they were expected to use approved, secure methods to transmit SBU information and that, if they needed to transmit SBU information outside the Department’s OpenNet network on a regular basis to non-Departmental addresses, they should request a solution from IRM.

However, OIG found no evidence that Secretary Clinton ever contacted IRM to request such a solution, despite the fact that emails exchanged on her personal account regularly contained information marked as SBU. Similarly, the FAM contained provisions requiring employees who process SBU information on their own devices to ensure that appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards
are maintained to protect the confidentiality and integrity of records and to ensure encryption of SBU information with products certified by NIST.

With regard to encryption, Secretary Clinton’s website states that “robust protections were put in place and additional upgrades and techniques employed over time as they became available, including consulting and employing third party experts.”

Although this report does not address the safety or security of her system, DS and IRM reported to OIG that Secretary Clinton never demonstrated to them that her private server or mobile device met minimum information security requirements specified by FISMA and the FAM. In addition to interviewing current and former officials in DS and IRM, OIG interviewed other senior Department officials with relevant knowledge who served under Secretary Clinton, including the Under Secretary for Management, who supervises both DS and IRM; current and former Executive Secretaries; and attorneys within the Office of the Legal Adviser.  These officials all stated that they were not asked to approve or otherwise review the use of Secretary Clinton’s server and that they had no knowledge of approval or review by other Department staff.

These officials also stated that they were unaware of the scope or extent of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email account, though many of them sent emails to the Secret ary on this account. Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff also testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi that she was unaware of anyone being consulted about the Secretary’s exclusive use of a should be conducted on an authorized AIS, yet OIG found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email a count on her private server.

Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff also testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi that she was unaware of anyone being consulted about the Secretary’s exclusive use of a personal email address [151]. OIG did find evidence that various staff and senior officials throughout the Department had discussions related to the Secretary’s use of non-Departmental systems, suggesting there was some awareness of Secretary Clinton’s practices.

For example:

In late - January 2009, in response to Secretary Clinton’s desire to take her BlackBerry device into secure areas, her Chief of Staff discussed with senior officials in S/ES and with the Under Secretary for Management alternative solutions, such as setting up a separate stand-alone computer connected to the Internet for Secretary Clinton “to enable her to check her emails from her desk.” The Under Secretary’s response was “the stand-alone separate network PC is [a] great idea” and that it is “the best solution.” According to the Department, no such computer was ever set up.

In November 2010, Secretary Clinton and her Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations discussed the fact that Secretary Clinton’s emails to Department employees were not being received. The Deputy Chief of Staff emailed the Secretary that “we should talk about putting you on state email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam.” In response, the Secretary wrote, “Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

In August 2011, the Executive Secretary, the Under Secretary for Management, and Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff , in response to the Secretary’s request, discussed via email providing her with a Department BlackBerry to replace her personal BlackBerry, which was malfunctioning, possibly because “her personal email server is down.” The then -Executive Secretary informed staff of his intent to provide two devices for the Secretary to use: “one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her identity, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests), and another which would just have phone and internet capability.” In another email exchange, the Director of S/ES - IRM noted that an email account and address had already been set up for the Secretary and also stated that “you should be aware that any email would go through the Department’s infrastructure and subject to FOIA searches.”  However, the Secretary’s Deputy Chief of Staff rejected the proposal to use two devices, stating that it “doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.” OIG found no evidence that the Secretary obtained a Department address or device after this discussion.

OIG identified two individuals who provided technical support to Secretary Clinton. The first, who was at one time an advisor to former President Clinton but was never a Department employee, registered the clintonemail.com domain name on January 13, 2009.  The second, a Schedule C political appointee who worked in IRM as a Senior Advisor from May 2009 through February 2013, provided technical support for
BlackBerry communications during the Secretary’s 2008 campaign for President.  OIG reviewed emails showing communications between Department staff and both individuals concerning operational issues affecting the Secretary’s email and server from 2010 through at least October 2012.  For example, in December 2010, the Senior Advisor worked with S/ES-IRM and IRM staff to resolve issues affecting the ability of emails transmitted through the clintonemail.com domain used by Secretary Clinton to reach Department email addresses using the state.gov domain.

Two staff in S/ES - IRM reported to OIG that, in late 2010, they each discussed their concerns about Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email account in separate meetings with the then - Director of S/ES - IRM. In one meeting, one staff member raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton’s account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements.  According to the staff member, the Director stated that the Secretary’s personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further.  As previously not ed, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton’s personal system.  According to the other S/ES - IRM staff member who raised concerns about the server, the Director stated that the mission of S/ES - IRM is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.

On January 9, 2011, the non-Departmental advisor to President Clinton who provided technical support to the Clinton email system notified the Secretary’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations that he had to shut down the server because he believed “someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to.  ” Later that day, the advisor again wrote to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, “We were attacked again so I shut [the server] down for a few min.” On January 10, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations emailed the Chief of Staff and the Deputy Chief of Staff for Planning and instructed them not to email the Secretary “anything sensitive” and stated that she could
“explain more in person.”

Footnote 151
The pertinent testimony from the former Chief of Staff, who declined OIG’s request for an interview, reads as follows:

Q Was anyone consulted about Secretary Clinton exclusively using a personal email address for her work?
A I don't recall that. If it did happen, I wasn't part of that process. But I don’t believe there was a consultation around it, or at least there's not one that I’m aware of, maybe I should better answer that way based on my knowledge.
Q So no private counsel?
A Not that I'm aware of.
Q Okay. The general counsel for the State Department?
A Not that I'm aware of.
Q Okay. Anybody from the National Archives?
A Not that I'm aware of. But I can only speak to my knowledge, obviously.
Q Sure. And anyone from the White House?
A Not that I'm aware of

Note:  I had a terrible formatting issues from pdf, hopefully I have corrected and edited properly.  LB

[ExFreeper]

Disagree.  The effort Clinton put into creating, maintaining, and using her own e-mail system makes it a completely different animal from what the other people did.  And as a result, the auditor found that "she did not comply with the Department's policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act."  It is highly likely that she committed a felony.

 

Per other media outlets such as Wash Times: 

"... is devastating in its evaluation of Mrs. Clinton’s behavior, saying it can find no record of her getting approval from either security or legal staffers for her unique arrangement. The report also undercuts many of her campaign’s explanations for her use of the system, dismisses comparisons to her predecessors’ email use, and points to repeated hacking attempts that she failed to report.

After one of the 2011 hack attempts Mrs. Clinton’s tech staffer shut the server down for a few minutes, hoping that would solve the situation, but quickly warned top aides not to send Mrs. Clinton “anything sensitive” after the attempted breach, according to the report...

[r9etb]

Note:  I had a terrible formatting issues from pdf, hopefully I have corrected and edited properly.  LB

You done good, sir.

I'm particularly interested in where it says:

Director stated that the mission of S/ES - IRM is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.

That suggests a coverup.

[Mechanicos]

Good information.
You seem to provide a lot of good material like here and the Egypt air crash, Thank you.

IMHO Hillary is Judgment proof, Above our laws. The Only question I have about her that way is how much is Obama going to charge the Clintons for a Blanket Pardon?

[r9etb]

IMHO Hillary is Judgment proof, Above our laws. The Only question I have about her that way is how much is Obama going to charge the Clintons for a Blanket Pardon?

Judgment-proof only if (and because) the Obama DoJ refuses to indict.

But in an election year, the Court of Public Opinion is the one that matters most.  Over the past several years she has established an unbelievable record of corruption.  A properly-run ad campaign could do incredible damage to her electoral prospects.

[INVAR]

The Mao Pantsuit (like Obama) could rob seven banks and kill the tellers with ample evidence she was the one who did the crime - and unless there is a will among those charged with executing justice and upholding the law - she (and he) can get away with anything and be untouchable.

There is a reason the government now ruling us is lawless and above any attempt from the institutions they have corrupted, to hold it to account.

[INVAR]

But in an election year, the Court of Public Opinion is the one that matters most.  Over the past several years she has established an unbelievable record of corruption.  A properly-run ad campaign could do incredible damage to her electoral prospects.

A corrupted and wicked population will not be moved by evidence of corruption, wickedness in their political champions.

The rulers reflect the populace, north of 40% and growing.

[ExFreeper]

Good information.

We may disagree on issues, politicians, etc., however we are all Americans first and foremost.  Thanks for allowing us newbees at TBR.  I noticed on a post that you wore the uniform (Marines).  Oorah 

 

[r9etb]

A corrupted and wicked population will not be moved by evidence of corruption, wickedness in their political champions.

True enough -- of both Clinton and Trump supporters, IMO.

Still, I think the majority of the population is still appalled by both candidates, and can still be swayed by evidence of corruption and wickedness on both parts.

The issue then becomes one of knowing how to respond to the evidence.  Many will not vote at all.  Many will figure that they "have to vote," and will attempt to choose between them. 

Corrupt Democrats (e.g., the pro-aborts) will vote lockstep for Clinton regardless -- but then, they're corrupt already, and aren't bothered by the smell of one more corrupt member of the group. 

[INVAR]

Still, I think the majority of the population is still appalled by both candidates, and can still be swayed by evidence of corruption and wickedness on both parts.

I'm not convinced of that at all.  As I've witnessed in churches and groups that have gone apostate from foundational teachings and core beliefs over the years, those still holding to core principles will just up and leave, never to return and congregate amongst themselves in new and smaller places (like we are seeing here at TBR) with better vetted like-minds.   They are often a minority, but a very valuable minority that were once the pillars of the congregation that was perverted and changed.  The scars make them more untrustworthy of new brethren and they often stick with those that they have known for a greater number of years rather than make new friends and zealously work to remake the glory days of what they once identified with among their new surroundings.

The ones who stay in apostate and wayward churches are fully corrupted by wickedness and apostasy.  They learn to justify perversions and new explanations to discard and redefine what they once held as incontrovertible and unwavering truth.  Often, these are people who follow a man and his teachings, or a movement and their teachings, rather than the principles and plain words they can read in the foundational sacred writings that once defined who they were.

The common denominator between church congregations and this election that I recognize is that apostates tend to be governed by strength in numbers and by the men they hold as infallible in their presentations of new truth that redefines what it means to be a member of their church. 

[Timber Rattler]

In November 2010, Secretary Clinton and her Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations discussed the fact that Secretary Clinton’s emails to Department employees were not being received. The Deputy Chief of Staff emailed the Secretary that “we should talk about putting you on state email or releasing your email address to the department so you are not going to spam.” In response, the Secretary wrote, “Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

Boom!