These folks are going to have a complete emotional breakdown when the FBI issues their recommendation.

I remember how disappointed I was when I found out John Edwards was screwing around on his terminally ill wife/had gotten another woman pregnant.

I think it's going to be even harder for her true believers.

I am with you. After 2008 I swore to never fall in love with any of our lovely crooked pols. So I have not. It is liberating actually. And yes, that includes Sanders. I just don't fall in love with them. Polucies...and I expect them to break them. There are structural reasons.

But these folks, zero sympathy at this point. And lord knows when tjey call this report propaganda...well then.

posts all I could do is wonder if they lost their minds.

from Crooks and Liars:


Inspector General's Report On Clinton's Email Greatly Exaggerated By Media Outlets

Clinton did take action to preserve her emails, as the report notes. On Page 66 of the report, Janice Jacobs, the State Departments Transparency Coordinator, specifically addressed Clinton's handling of the emails:

In addition the Department had already received Secretary Clinton's emails and undertook to release 30,000 of them to the public. The National Archives and Records Administration concluded that our efforts with respect to Secretary Clinton and her senior staff mitigated past problems, as has a federal district court in a suit brought under the Federal Records Act. As you note in your report, you concur with this conclusion.

The State Department, the OIG, and NARA all concurred that Clinton's actions in turning over the emails she had, in addition to others the State Department was able to discover, did mitigate not following proper procedures (i.e. printing out each email and filing it). It's true that in the beginning of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, during the first two months transition period, some emails were lost. However, there was no indication that an attempt was made to deliberately hide these emails from a salivating public: it's technology; stuff happens.

... I can almost hear the calls of "criminal Hillary" from a certain party who shall go nameless. Note, though, as the report mentions, there were no administrative penalties in place—either about the use of a private email server, or not following the established procedures for preserving emails—at the time Clinton served as Secretary of State. Moreover, there is indication that she wasn't even aware of the requirements.

report:

Although the Department is aware of the failure to print and file, the FAM contains no explicit penalties for lack of compliance, and the Department has never proposed discipline against an employee for failure to comply. OIG identified one email exchange occurring shortly before Secretary Clinton joined the Department that demonstrated a reluctance to communicate the requirement to incoming staff. In the exchange, records officials within the Bureau of Administration wondered whether there was an electronic method that could be used to capture the Secretary’s emails because they were “not comfortable” advising the new administration to print and file email records.

State Department personnel were discouraged from using their private email, but not explicitly forbidden from doing so. As quoted in the CNN story—the one where Clinton was purportedly "slammed' by the OIG—the State Department spokesman concurred:

State Department spokesman Mark Toner briefed reporters Wednesday: "While not necessarily encouraged, there was no prohibition on using personal email. The only requirement is that -- and the regulations do state this, that these records need to be preserved."

To repeat what I wrote earlier, the OIG report was focused on the State Department's procedures in place for emails; it's not specifically focused on Clinton. It may be more titillating to say that the OIG is "slamming" Clinton, or that the OIG report was "sharply critical of Clinton"...but it's also inaccurate, and misleading.


read more: http://crooksandliars.com/2016/05/oig-report-states-email-handling-including

In any shape or form. Nor is this a nothing burger, nor is it going away. Buckle up, turbulence ahead

I love how they can only highlight only certain words while leaving out the ones that contradict the point being made.

This is playing out like a soap opera.

By core supporters.

"The National Archives and Records Administration concluded that our efforts with respect to Secretary Clinton and her senior staff mitigated past problems, as has a federal district court in a suit brought under the Federal Records Act. As you note in your report, you concur with this conclusion."

This says it was the efforts of the state department and the FOIA suit in federal court was the impetus of the mitigation. That doesn't excuse Hillary at all.

"Although the Department is aware of the failure to print and file, the FAM contains no explicit penalties for lack of compliance, and the Department has never proposed discipline against an employee for failure to comply. "

All this says is there isn't any "explicit penalties" it of no way absolves Hillary.


"State Department spokesman Mark Toner briefed reporters Wednesday: "While not necessarily encouraged, there was no prohibition on using personal email. The only requirement is that -- and the regulations do state this, that these records need to be preserved.""

This is so laughable that I will just leave this here.

I like crooks and liars but that article was weak sauce!

The report writer makes it painfully clear that this is not a legal thing, but a process thing. I suspect that BT would not take the offer to go to RSD...and just download the report. We are hosting it.

Basically, gov't IT sucks, and many departments do endarounds to get stuff done in the 21st century.

What this boils down to is that Clinton sidestepped department policies that previous SoSs have as well. This was never about actual lawbreaking or criminal wrongdoing.

Emailgate now has one foot in the grave, and the other one is hanging on by a dirty toenail.

I realize that there's going to be a lot of whining and face-saving attempts by the Berniefans today, but just like when you reach for that last Pringles chip and your hands gets stuck, sometimes you just have to learn to let go.

You should go read the full report.

Concentrate on tje intro and how this is not a legal document. We are hosting it so you do not have to hunt too far

No indictment, no "gross negligence", just a violation of record-keeping rules, as most previous SoS have done.

Enjoy your crow.

Does not do criminal indictments. I understand your confusion. That would be the DOJ

Now if you want to pretend to be informed, go read the report. We are hosting it so citizens read it and make up their own mind. Old fashioned I know

We'll just repeat as needed, since it doesn't seem to be penetrating the fog.

And the scandal is accelerating. I know who is in a fog and it is not me

and this is your only hope, yet no embarrassed that you all have reduced yourself to this 3rd grade behavior, regardless of facts.

Just like election integrity likely is...corruption in government, and document preservation, is pretty much independent of the person, or letter behind their name. This will dog her...it is not dead. Buckle up. And if you actually bother to look at a timeline, you will realize this is not going away.

Just like you all do with your election integrity, with all that integrity applying false accusations and blame.

Your view it is not there is no middle ground

I should add. I read the full report. It is not a good report. And it contradicts her stories fundamentally

It might clue you in as to how this is beyond, or actually a continuum partially with Benghazi. We actually put together a much simpler one than Paul Thomsom's since that is for the general public