Hillary Clinton getting closer to a federal indictment

clinton

Hillary Clinton’s woes get worse after the office of the Inspector General issued a damning report into her email server issues.

A federal watchdog has issued a highly critical report of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private emails server while head of the State Department.

The 83-page report published by the department’s Office of the Inspector General found “longstanding, systemic weaknesses” relating to electronic records keeping, archiving, and poor cybersecurity practices.

The report was started prior to Clinton’s appointment in 2009, but had significant focus on her time as secretary of state, a position she left in 2013.

The report said that her use of a private email server was “not an appropriate method” for preserving records and emails, given that the department and its staff were subject to federal rules requiring strict records keeping.

“At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department issues before leaving government service,” said the report. “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,” it added.

Clinton later provided the records in 2014, a year after her post ended. Dozens of those emails were considered “secret” or the highest level of classification, “top secret.”

The former secretary of state is expected to be nominated as the Democratic presidential candidate in the coming weeks.

You can read the full report.

I think it is inevitable that the FBI will indict her.

There were four major findings:

1. CLINTON’S EMAIL SERVER WAS ATTACKED NUMEROUS TIMES

Clinton, who is currently running for president, said amid the brouhaha on her campaign website that the private email server was not hacked.

“No, there is no evidence there was ever a breach,” reads the website. A campaign spokesperson said earlier this year that the Clinton team was “not aware of any evidence whatsoever” that the server had been hacked.

However, the inspector general’s report said there were a number of attacks against the server:

“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.'”

It’s not clear if any of the attacks were successful, however.

A footnote in the report added that the inspector general “found no evidence that the Secretary or her staff reported these incidents to computer security personnel or anyone else within the Department.

This is extremely damaging. Not only were her servers attacked, and it appears access gained, but Clinton never bothered to tell anyone about that. It also shows that Clinton continues to lie and obfuscate over the server.

2. CLINTON ACCUSED OF TRYING TO SKIRT FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS

Clinton has long been accused of trying to skirt federal records’ keeping rules by using the private server, which was believed to be outside the scope of the Federal Records Act.

From the report:

“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.'”The department’s executive secretary said it would provide two devices for Clinton to use, one of which would be subject to information requests, and one that wouldn’t. But Clinton’s then deputy chief of staff rejected the idea, arguing it “doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”

So much for her claims of being open an transparent and operating in an highly ethical manner.

3. STATE DEPT. WAS WARNED IN 2010 THAT A PRIVATE SERVER WOULD NOT BE STRICTLY LEGAL

There were red flags not long into Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. According to one line in the report:

“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 record keeping 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 noted, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton’s personal system.

“…the Director stated that the mission of [Office of Information Resources Management] is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.”

Cover up?

4. CLINTON DIDN’T WANT TO HELP WITH THE INVESTIGATION

According to Clinton’s campaign website, the former secretary of state “directed her attorneys to assist by identifying and preserving all emails that could potentially be federal records.”

That was as much help as Clinton would provide. According to a footnote in the report, Clinton declined the inspector general’s request for an interview.

Former staffers Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jake Sullivan all declined to co-operate with the inspector general’s investigation.

I don’t think the FBI has any choice anymore. It is clear that laws were breached and if the law doesn’t apply to someone attempting to become President then who should they apply to?

 

– ZD Net


Do you want ad-free access to our Daily Crossword?

Do you want access to daily Incite Politics Magazine articles?

Silver Subscriptions and above go in the draw to win a $500 prize to be drawn at the end of March

Not yet one of our awesome subscribers? Click Here and join us.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story.  And when he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet.   Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet, and as a result he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist that takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him.  But you can’t ignore him.

41%