Hillary Used High Tech Scrubber, BleachBit, To Delete Emails

[tall73]

And I support going after ALL of them, regardless of party. This government doesn't accept "slippery" from businesses or citizens that they oversee. But complete, blatant disregard for public documents they are legally required to retain is overlooked? Why?

The quoted reason was "mens rea". She did not deliberately break the law in the eyes of the investigators - there was no "guilty mind".

No, they didn't even consider the FOIA violations as part of the investigation, as Comey spelled out during questioning at the follow up hearings.

They investigated whether she was involved in espionage, and didn't find deliberate violations. They did not even look into Records Act and FOIA violations. So the finding of no intent, did not apply to the FOIA violations as that was not considered in the investigation.

 

[MrSpikey]

FTR, I stand by this post.

You don't claim things are conclusive.

You just post articles that do, then restate you didn't claim it.

I've always admired people who have the courage of their convictions.

 

[tall73]

Now of course the congressional folks called for a perjury investigation but did NOT call for a FOIA investigation. I think it is likely because anyone who pushes for that in Clinton's case is likely to get it pushed right back in their face. Violations of the record act happen all over the government, so they would be opening themselves up to scrutiny.

FOIA and Records act were rampant in the State department as well, but there seems no will to pursue those involved.

At least following the IG report some reforms are being made. I hope this continues. But if they are serious about reforms they should do what they do with private businesses and individuals, and pursue the ones who violated the law.

 

[MrSpikey]

No, they didn't even consider the FOIA violations as part of the investigation, as Comey spelled out during questioning at the follow up hearings.

They investigated whether she was involved in espionage, and didn't find deliberate violations. They did not even look into Records Act and FOIA violations. So the verdict of no lack of intent (which was not required by that statute anyway), did not apply to the FOIA violations as that was not considered in the investigation.

Do you think that she herself is responsible for maintaining these records? If she has successfully claimed she didn't know what she was doing was wrong, why do you think she'd get blamed for not documenting it correctly, as opposed to some member of her staff?

 

[tall73]

Do you think that she herself is responsible for maintaining these records? If she has successfully claimed she didn't know what she was doing was wrong, why do you think she'd get blamed for not documenting it correctly, as opposed to some member of her staff?

A. Each employee is required to maintain their records.

B. She is the secretary and maintenance of records is particularly in her job description:

Notice the following from the State Department IG report:

The Federal Records Act requires the head of each agency to “make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the
information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities.” Effective records management is critical for ensuring that sufficient documentation of an agency’s business is created, that an agency can efficiently locate and retrieve records needed in the daily performance of its mission, and that records of historical significance are identified, preserved, and made available to the public.

 

[tall73]

If she has successfully claimed she didn't know what she was doing was wrong,

Again, in relation to espionage, the investigation did not look at FOIA violations as Comey stated in his testimony.

 

[MrSpikey]

A. Each employee is required to maintain their records.

B. She is the secretary and maintenance of records is particularly in her job description:

Notice the following from the State Department IG report:

The Federal Records Act requires the head of each agency to “make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the
information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities.”n Effective records management is critical for ensuring that sufficient documentation of an agency’s business is created, that an agency can efficiently locate and retrieve records needed in the daily performance of its mission, and that records of historical significance are identified, preserved, and made available to the public.

And that have to do that individually? No delegation allowed?

Wow. Some of those people must work ridiculous hours...

 

[tall73]

And that have to do that individually? No delegation allowed?

Wow. Some of those people must work ridiculous hours...

She is responsible for her own documents. However, they offered her a phone that would capture them. She declined as she wanted to use it for personal and work, and was worried about FOIA requests extending to the personal.

And she is responsible for making sure that her department is compliant. I am sure she can delegate some of that. On the other hand, it is quite clear from the IG report that this was not done. Violations were widespread, and what documents were retained were not done so in a way to be easily recalled. She is the one the Federal Records Act holds responsible for that. Even if you delegate a task, if you are charged by federal law to do the task you better follow up to make sure it gets done. That is oversight.

Now, it is patently clear she did not

a. keep all of her records
b. turn over her records upon leaving State, as is required
c. give proper oversight to the department in maintaining records.

And it is clear from Comey's testimony that FOIA violations were not investigated.

 

[tall73]

Now the reason you will not likely see that pursued is that folks were violating federal law all across the government, depriving the people of the records we deserve, and they were required to keep.

In the IG report it noted:

In its most recent annual assessment of records management, NARA identified similar weaknesses across the Federal Government with regard to electronic records in particular.

 

[Hank77]

So I pointed out that they have recovered work emails that she did not turn over as part of her work product.

Now I understand what you are talking about, I think. You are talking about emails that have been recovered, of coarse they know what those emails say.
I was talking about the emails that have Not been recovered because they are too fragmented or were on the servers that were scrubbed. Those emails that no one knows what they are about.

Rep. Trey Gowdy brought the involvement of the program to light Thursday when he told Fox News that Clinton's emails were so fully deleted that "even God can't read them."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/t...rom-recovering-clinton-emails/article/2600283

 

[Hank77]

It is, and he goes right into the damage assessment using the terms interchangeably because she used the one account for both personal and business. Otherwise she would not have to sort through and delete.

Exactly, and that is what she did.

And this would be true whether one was working for the government with classified information or working for a corp. If you send personal and business emails from the same email account you could find yourself having to turn over personal emails right along with business emails if the corp. you work for is investigated by the IRS, Labor Department, etc. It is just a stupid thing to do, which I did, and that was my point.

 

[tall73]

I haven't concluded beyond doubt she had separate personal and work accounts.

The IG report indicates that she used her personal email account, on her personal server, exclusively.
I spelled out all of the abbreviations in brackets.

Throughout Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the FAM [Foreign Affairs Manual] stated that normal day-to-day operations. should be conducted on an authorized AIS, [automated information system] yet OIG [office of the Inspector General] 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 [chief information officer] 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 [Bureau of Diplomatic Security] and IRM [Bureau of Information Resource Management] 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 [Foreign Affairs Manual] and the security risks in doing so.

 

[tall73]

Exactly, and that is what she did.

If you send personal and business emails from the same email account you could find yourself having to turn over personal emails right along with business emails if the corp. you work for is investigated by the IRS, Labor Department, etc. It is just a stupid thing to do, which I did, and that was my point.

True.

The problem here is she didn't turn over the personal, which would have been better, but instead deleted them in a way that was bound to delete business ones as well. And of course this appears to be after Gowdy asked for them.

The difference between your situation and hers was that the IG report details attempts to switch her over to a government account or device that would record it. And there was guidance at the time on the use of personal email accounts.

The IG report said she would not have been approved for exclusive use of a personal email account. But it also spelled out that periodic personal email account usage could be pre-approved, and you would have to take steps to make sure the emails were preserved.

So while you did this without really being aware of the problems, she did it in contradiction to policy, and continued to do it once it was pointed out it was a problem. And she also sent classified information on the system, which was even worse.

 

[Hank77]

True.

The problem here is she didn't turn over the personal, which would have been better, but instead deleted them in a way that was bound to delete business ones as well. And of course this appears to be after Gowdy asked for them.

The difference between your situation and hers was that the IG report details attempts to switch her over to a government account or device that would record it. And there was guidance at the time on the use of personal email accounts.

The IG report said she would not have been approved for exclusive use of a personal email account. But it also spelled out that periodic personal email account usage could be pre-approved, and you would have to take steps to make sure the emails were preserved.

So while you did this without really being aware of the problems, she did it in contradiction to policy, and continued to do it once it was pointed out it was a problem. And she also sent classified information on the system, which was even worse.

You went to some work here explaining again, without any reason to.

 

[MrSpikey]

The IG report indicates that she used her personal email account, on her personal server, exclusively.
I spelled out all of the abbreviations in brackets.

Throughout Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the FAM [Foreign Affairs Manual] stated that normal day-to-day operations. should be conducted on an authorized AIS, [automated information system] yet OIG [office of the Inspector General] 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 [chief information officer] 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 [Bureau of Diplomatic Security] and IRM [Bureau of Information Resource Management] 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 [Foreign Affairs Manual] and the security risks in doing so.

I don't think that's evidence that she used a single account for everything. It says she didn't ask for "approval to conduct official business via a personal email account" and that it wouldn't have been granted if she had. That doesn't imply that she then did that.

On a slightly less literal level as well, do you not think the CIO etc would view every account on a private server as "personal" to the owner, regardless of what it was used for in practice?

 

[tall73]

I don't think that's evidence that she used a single account for everything. It says she didn't ask for "approval to conduct official business via a personal email account" and that it wouldn't have been granted if she had. That doesn't imply that she then did that.

You may want to read the IG report. He lists her as one of three people at State to use a private email account exclusively.

Here is another quote:

In his interview with OIG, Secretary Kerry reported that he was not involved in any of the discussions regarding Secretary Clinton’s emails and that he first became aware of her exclusive use of a personal email account when an aide informed him around the time the information became public.

and

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

 

[MrSpikey]

You may want to read the IG report. He lists her as one of three people at State to use a private email account exclusively.

Here is another quote:

In his interview with OIG, Secretary Kerry reported that he was not involved in any of the discussions regarding Secretary Clinton’s emails and that he first became aware of her exclusive use of a personal email account when an aide informed him around the time the information became public.

and

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

Your first quote says that Hillary had a personal email account. I didn't think that was in dispute. It makes no allusions as to what it was used for.

The second says her CoS didn't know she had a personal email address. Again, I didn't think this was in dispute, and it makes no allusions to what it was used for,

 

[tall73]

On a slightly less literal level as well, do you not think the CIO etc would view every account on a private server as "personal" to the owner, regardless of what it was used for in practice?

Then that also undercuts your entire premise because you were stressing the term private account in Comey's statement to make a huge distinction that he never made. Comey never made reference to private and work accounts. In fact, his entire statement was about her usage of a private server, private account, private domain, etc.

And you still have not explained why she would need to weed through her emails to delete the private emails if she had separate private and work accounts.

 

[tall73]

Your first quote says that Hillary had a personal email account. I didn't think that was in dispute. It makes no allusions as to what it was used for.

The second says her CoS didn't know she had a personal email address. Again, I didn't think this was in dispute, and it makes no allusions to what it was used for,

Did you miss the word "exclusive" both times? She only used the personal email account.
That was the whole point of that section, that she used a personal email account, and was one of three people to do that at the State Department.

And of course that is why her personal and work emails were all together.

 

[tall73]

And of course this exclusive use of her personal email has been at the heart of the whole issue for some time.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-breaks-silence-on-her-emails/

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that her decision to use a personal email address for all of her government correspondence while at the State Department was a matter of convenience and allowed by the State Department.