Hillary Clinton

Obama's Tepid Response to the Clinton Email Scandal

Mr. President, are you not troubled that your secretary of state had a non-secure email account and used it for all of her work?

|

Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former first lady, U.S. senator from New York, and secretary of state, used a private email server for all of her emails when she was President Obama's secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

During that time, she enjoyed a security clearance identical to that of the president, the secretary of defense, the director of the CIA, and others—it is the highest level of clearance the government makes available. She had that classified clearance so that she could do her job, which involved knowing and working with military, diplomatic, and sensitive national security secrets. The government guards those secrets by requiring high-ranking government officials to keep the documents and emails that reflect them in a secure government-approved venue and to return any retained records when leaving office.

I have not seen Clinton's signature on any documents, but standard government procedure is for her to have signed an agreement under oath when she began her work at the State Department requiring her to safeguard classified records, and another agreement under oath when she ended her work that she had returned all records to the government. She violated both agreements, and she violated numerous federal laws.

By using her personal email address—@clintonemail.com—she kept her work documents from the government. Concealing government documents from the government when you work for it is a felony, punishable by up to three years in prison and permanent disqualification from holding public office.

Failing to secure classified secrets in a government-approved facility or moving them to a non-secure facility outside the government's control is a misdemeanor, punishable by a hefty fine and a year in jail. Using a false email address that gives the clear impression that the user is not using a government server when she is, or one that creates the false impression that the emailer is using a government server when she is not, is also a felony.

The legal issues in Clinton's case are all the more curious when one hears Obama's tepid reaction to this latest scandal. Asked by Bill Plante of CBS News last weekend when he first learned of Clinton's use of a personal email server instead of the government's, the president told Plante he learned of it from the media, last week, when the rest of us did. He later had his press secretary state that he did recognize her use of a non-governmental email address, but did not know it was unlawful or unsecured until last week.

Does the White House not know where the president's emails are coming from and where they are going?

I wish Plante had followed up with that question and more. Mr. President, are you not troubled that your secretary of state had a non-secure email account and used it for all of her work? Are you not troubled that she might have kept classified secrets on a server in her barn on her estate in Chappaqua, N.Y. that the Secret Service might or might not have known about, or at a computer company in Texas that the Secret Service was unable to protect?

Does it not trouble you, Mr. President, that foreign intelligence services likely would have had a far easier time hacking into the emails of your secretary of state because of all this? Mr. President, will your Department of Justice prosecute Clinton for retaining 48 months of classified records on her personal server after she left office, as it did Gen. David Petraeus, who kept 15 months of classified records in a desk drawer in his home after he left office?

Mr. President, the premise of the law regulating government records is that the government owns them all, and when a high-ranking government official leaves office, the ex-official may ask the government for copies of her personal emails, and the government decides which ones it will give her. Mr. President, don't you realize that Clinton turned the law on its head by keeping all of her emails from the government?

Thus, rather than the government deciding which emails were personal, Clinton decided which emails were governmental, and she turned those over to the government. How does the government know what is contained in the emails she kept? Mr. President, this is a privilege that even you don't have, and it is the very behavior that the laws you have sworn to uphold were written to prevent.

Mr. President, is it true that there are standards of behavior for Bill and Hillary Clinton and their friends and other standards for the rest of us? Mr. President, do you remember that crackpot Sandy Berger, who was Bill Clinton's national security adviser from 1997 to 2001 and Mrs. Clinton's foreign policy adviser when she ran against you in 2008, and who stole documents from the National Archives in 2003 by hiding them under an on-site construction trailer? Do you know that Bill got Sandy a no-jail-time deal including the return of his security clearance, and he got Sandy's prosecutor a federal judgeship?

Mr. President, when you ran against Hillary Clinton, you promised the most transparent government in history. Do you honestly think you have given us that?

NEXT: President Obama has 'unilateral authority to conclude the impending Iran deal'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. What if the Judge had written an article that was only half questions?

    1. Then we need to up his dosage until the questions go away.

    2. What if: the Judge secretly wrote the lyrics to the Smashing Pumpkins song Appels + Oranjes…

    3. How do you ask half a question?

      1. What do

      2. Put an ellipsis before the question mark, dummy.

  2. One more question: is this administration incompetent or is it a scofflaw?

    1. Why can’t it be both?

    2. I’ll have the lobster AND the cracked crab.

      1. Hard to pick a wine for both…

        1. Chardonnay, oak aged so that you get that buttery quality not apparently in the steel barrel aged vintages.

          And as with all white wine, you can find it stored next to your gay porn.

      2. Extra Primo good!

  3. Keeping work documents from the government as Clinton did is a felony, punishable by up to three years in prison and permanent disqualification from holding public office.

    Judge, those laws as such pertain only to humans. Other than it appears to be pure evil does anyone even know what manner of creature this “Clinton” animal is? I certainly don’t. There is a rumor going around, though, that whatever it is it’s outer casing is pure Teflon?.

    1. Rules are not for the Rulers.

    2. I saw an article a couple weeks ago that Hillary is planning to run as a woman.

      1. Ha ha ha! Well, it has a sense of humor it has.

        1. IT has lady parts – or so it’s claimed.

  4. He made it through six paragraphs this time, and he used a different angle.
    Perhaps we are witnessing a sort of evolution with regards to the good judge’s writing style.

  5. Considering the Administration’s war on whistle blowers and leaks, you would think this would be excessively prosecuted. But, Clinton.

    1. They’d prosecute the reporter who first covered the story.

      1. Remind me of one reporter they have prosecuted. I can’t remember one. Seriously.

        1. I trust you can remember one they have persecuted. Seriously.

        2. Julian Assange (vis. sealed indictment).

    2. Wonder if Snowden’s room in Russia is a double queen or a single king? She could lie low for a while.

      1. She could lie low for a while.

        For a while? Hell, she lies all the time!

  6. Does chocolate Jeebus want his first black Prez legacy to be upstaged by Shrillery’s first vaginal victory?

  7. This article over at the Washington Post has some interesting tidbits:

    Last week, supporters in Congress and others were willing to go on cable television to defend Clinton on the e-mails but were puzzled when her aides did not provide talking points or other information that might help them, according to Clinton allies. “A lot of people were flying blind,” said one Democratic ally who spoke on the condition of anonymity

    You got that? “We have no idea at all what happened or whether you are guilty of criminal activity, but we are willing to go on national TV and defend you against these partisan attacks!”

    If you ever thought this was anything other than a power game, pull the scales from your eyes. Nobody on those political shows believes a word they are saying. They are all just trying to win a game of power.

  8. Mr. President, when you ran against Hillary Clinton, you promised the most transparent government in history. Do you honestly think you have given us that?

    Of all of the things that have transpired over the last 6 years, I doubt this one makes the first page on “transparency”. Sure, it shows a patter of wanton violation of the notion of government accountability and transparency, but when you are playing in the rarified are of this administration even something as brazen as hiding all of your emails in your bedroom closet doesn’t come near the top of the list.

    So, good job Mr. President. You’ve managed to make Hillary look like a piker.

  9. Mr. President, when you ran against Hillary Clinton, you promised the most transparent government in history. Do you honestly think you have given us that?

    “Of course. And the least untruthful.”

  10. Good Morning Peanuts!

    The U.S. Has Too Much Oil and Nowhere to Put It
    Overflowing storage tanks could lead to another drop in prices

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…..rice-crash

    $20/bbl by summer says the article

    1. Funny. No mention in the article of the ban on oil exports. I wonder if they’d have an easier time storing the stuff if they could legally export it.

      1. Yeah, turd is pretty selective, or stupid. Maybe both, right, turd?

    2. Now you’ll have poor people able to afford to travel around the country more freely, less limited by the price because of abundant energy. What is your complaint? Can’t have all that free gamboling about!?

  11. Gotta be the weakest stock photo AND alt-text effort ever…

  12. Mr. President, are you not troubled that your secretary of state had a non-secure email account and used it for all of her work?

    I think you answered your own question, Judge, by noting that he promised the most transparent government in history.

    1. Ahhhh…he meant “transparent” to foreign intelligence services this whole time. Gotcha.

  13. OT: for those who prefer a more gentlemanly flavor of crime… There’s a registry for that.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015…..istry.html

  14. “There is little that Hillary Rodham Clinton could have said or done to instantly quell the controversy surrounding her private email account and, by that meager standard, Tuesday’s 20-minute news conference lived up to expectations.”
    http://www.latimes.com/nation/…..tml#page=1

    Well, she could have said the server is there, the server admin is X, and here’s the password. That might have suggested the hag has some respect for the laws she proposes to enforce.

  15. Pre-email did a Secretary of State not have the theoretical ability to destroy written communications? Tossing a letter into the fire is more final than deleting an email. Would there have been a scandal if the SoS chose to use a nonstandard letterhead?

    1. You know nothing about how classified information is kept and protected, I see.

      Why can’t you be objective? Why is it always defend, always circle the wagons, never face the real issue at hand?

      This is important. It matters not a whit that it was Clinton doing it. If Condoleezza Rice had done it you would have been all over it. Why is “team” so important to you?

      1. Because protecting this country from Republicans became an existential necessity starting this century.

        It was a genuine question though.

        1. So, you’ve just admitted: the actual right or wrong of a situation doesn’t matter. For you, it’s always defend Democrats and reject Republicans. Is that really true?

          By the way your question is trivial. Of course it’s wrong to destroy an official paper document to hide its contents (or for any other reason). But then you pivot to something even more irrelevant: using the wrong letterhead. I just really, truly do not understand.

          1. It’s entirely about right or wrong.

            Starting wars for oil and justifying them with lies and blowing up the Middle East in the process, implementing a pro-torture policy, denying human-caused climate change, and looting the country of its wealth and giving it to plutocratic cronies are all wrong. Democrats are hardly perfect but the fact that they don’t do that stuff means they win, since there are unfortunately only two choices for us.

            Anyway, I use letterhead as an analogy to email programs. There was a time before email. Sure, since we have it now we might as well make required storage as idiot-proof as possible, and new regulations apparently accomplish that, but I do genuinely struggle to see how her email habits differ from someone using pen and paper in terms of who’s responsible for saving documents and the risk of not saving them.

            1. Ok, you’re talking about big, over-arching issues, on some of which I agree with you. But, we weren’t talking about that. We were talking about Clinton violating a whole bunch of rules and laws designed to make government more accountable.

              Stay focused, my friend.

              If someone actively, and knowingly, hides or destroys paper documents, or even just negligently discards them, in contravention of the law, then that person needs to be prosecuted. It is exactly the same as email. The higher a person is, the more important it is to prosecute them.

      2. And who’s talking about classified information?

        1. If Clinton did all of her official Secretary of State email on her own server, it seems impossible to me that there wouldn’t have been some classified information in those emails.

          1. at a minimum we know she receieved email alerts from State that were classified. She wrote about it in her goddamn book.

    2. Tony|3.12.15 @ 1:27PM|#
      “Pre-email did a Secretary of State not have the theoretical ability to destroy written communications?”

      Translation from brain-dead:
      “Oh! Look over there!”
      What a fucking loser.

  16. I’ve been around classified projects. The idea that classified documents or information could or should be allowed to be on a non-controlled and non-secure system is utterly preposterous.

    We had strict rules. Only certain phones could be used. Only certain conference rooms could be used. No personal electronics of ANY kind were allowed in secure areas. If there were physical documents, like drawings, they were kept in a secure room/vault under guard. You had to check in and check out of the room. Any work you needed to do with a drawing had to be done in that room. All secure systems were isolated on their own networks and had very clamped down access points from non-secure systems.

    I’m sure that most of her emails were probably not this sensitive. But, it seems inconceivable to me that none were.

  17. my co-worker’s half-sister makes $86 hourly on the internet . She has been without work for five months but last month her pay check was $15863 just working on the internet for a few hours. read this article……….

    ????? http://www.netjob70.com

  18. my co-worker’s half-sister makes $86 hourly on the internet . She has been without work for five months but last month her pay check was $15863 just working on the internet for a few hours. read this article……….

    ????? http://www.netjob70.com

  19. Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month… The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start… This is where to start……===========
    http://www.jobs-check.com

  20. Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me. I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month… The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start… This is where to start……
    ============ http://www.job-bandana.com

  21. Each BuckyCube is pretty dang strong for its size, four BuckyCubes were used to suspend a nearly 2-pound hammer.BuckyCubes are all about creating and designing.For many projects, you’ll start with a long strand of cubes and then snap and fold them to build mini-structures such as 3x3x3 cubes. You then use these building blocks to create larger and more complicated objects.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.