Obama Labor Secretary Thomas Perez, Holder’s former assistant attorney general for civil rights, allegedly used his private email account to leak non-public information about official business.
As to whether Holder himself ever used personal email for government business, the Justice Department isn’t saying. A spokesman did not respond to requests for information about Holder’s email practices.
In Justice Department emails turned over in a federal Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, Holder’s email name is redacted with no explanation. It’s unknown whether the redactions conceal use of an email address that does not belong to an official government account.
That the practice appears to have been rampant goes without saying, we expect these clowns to hide, but, that nobody noticed until now is unforgivable.
Via Sharyl Attkisson
30 comments:
I love that woman - Ms Atkisson, that is.
She gets her teeth into something and doesn't let go.
The whole atmosphere in D.C. is litigious, alternating plaintiffs and defendants with each White House turnover.
Would you expect attorneys to relinquish their attorney-client privilege? -- releasing their emails unexpunged?
This whole problem probably developed under advice of counsel.
So is as if there an understanding that somehow as long as you don't overly use the government to further your own ends, don't get too greedy, everybody just looks the other way.
This really sucks.
It's time to drain the swamp in DC.
You don't drain it by installing a Clinton.
This is pretty insane. Apparently now Obama claims he wasn't aware that Hillary's emails were coming from a non-governmental account.
But hey - you guys are all for privatization, right? Let's hear it for privatization!
I want a private health care system.
We don't need a server in Hillary's basement in Chapaqua.
Great for deleting stuff in secret.
Terrific quote from Ritmo's link:
"Asked how Mrs. Clinton’s email practices met the standards of transparency that he has repeatedly called for, Mr. Obama said that “the fact that she is going to be putting them forward will allow us to make sure that people have the information they need.”"
They really seem to like having him spit in their faces.
Any release of e-mails will be a like an episode of the Jon Stewart show mixed with a Barnum and Bailey circus.
Highly partisan and thoroughly choreographed, rehearsed and scripted, with tamed caged animals.
eh...
What I meant to say - The release of Hillary's e-mail will be comedy gold.
I'd love to see all the emails Ms Atkinson has gathered. Given I've sent and received thousands of government emails over government servers. Normally ...
The last response email in a string, or the first beginning a string, in government and military formats, shows clearly the email address and server of the sender. In short, if sent directly to you you know where it came from and can respond to that address directly. Pretty easy to know if that server is legit. Prior participants' in a string names are usually just text with an office abbreviation...as shown in the sample cited.
For example:
Georgie Porgie works for the Dippity Do Dah office and sends an email to you...what you see on the top line is:
From: Porgie, Georgie DDD [georgieporgie@hookus.pookus.gobmnt]
Note: I've I've use brackets to replace the caret marks that would normally be there in a router address. Blogger did not like my use of carets & phony stuff, etc.
If you respond, Georgie's name will appear as: Porgie, Georgie DDD ... with out the server identity.
Footnote: It IS possible to restrict the "From" line on a initial message or a response to just the name ...however that would require intentional changes to the normal system and usually require some help from inside.
Rhythm and Balls said...
This is pretty insane. Apparently now Obama claims he wasn't aware that Hillary's emails were coming from a non-governmental account.
Well, Selfie is just proving whom he holds in contempt and why they are deserving of it.
But hey - you guys are all for privatization, right? Let's hear it for privatization!
Ritmo, of course, fails to see a difference between privatization and circumventing the law.
Funny how Ritmo can blame Clinton's illegal behavior on conservatives' desire for smaller government.
Said more simply, anyone in government who intentionally sets up a server in their own home to process their emails is outright trying to hide things. Period.
There is NO other reason to avoid the official servers, which are automatically assigned to you...you have to intentionally avoid them. The question is why?
The next question is how did so many people not rat out the malfeasance?
Fear for their jobs would be my guess.
Biggest question: Did the feds, whether FBI, DOJ, or whomever, seize the Clinton server for forensic analysis?
If not, why not? If it were you, lowly schmuck, the server would be gone on day one of discovery.
It is impossible she did not break the law vis a vis classified info in her emails over 4 years. I spend an inordinate amount of time being sure my emails do not violate the law, both those I send in consulting, and those I receive in the process...99.9% of which have "[UNCLASSIFIED]" in the subject line by system default...my only concern is usually the FOUO items....which I redact upon receipt...within minutes...and delete the originals, using CCleaner and at least a 3 write over process.
Gen Petraeus is coping a plea for less offense. How about Hillary? Why she, like Bill Ayers, is guilty as sin and free as a bird...that's my guess.
Footnote: Had the elections in 2008 and 2012 between a choice between Hillary and Obama, I'd have voted for Obama plain and simple. She has no moral compass, none.
Which come to think of it, the Clintons could dismiss her as a woman on a vendetta.
BTW check out this article advising republicans on how to handle the Clinton scandal. which of course they wont follow. Never in the history of the world has there been a sorrier ass bunch.
my last comment was in response to ndspinelli --> "Atkisson is a smart, tough investigative reporter. The WH and AG fucked w/ the wrong woman!"
"Did the feds, whether FBI, DOJ, or whomever, seize the Clinton server for forensic analysis?"
As far as I know the hard drives are still in her possession. It will take a court order or a congressional subpoena to force her to give them up. The case for doing so has not yet been pursued by anyone, but Gowdy seemed headed that way when he mentioned the gaps in the timeline.
The White House was talking about revising the criteria for pardons the other day. I didn't make the connection to Hillary.
But maybe I'm getting ahead of myself. Could she be pardoned and still get the nomination?
Transparency.
Rabel said...
Terrific quote from Ritmo's link:
"Asked how Mrs. Clinton’s email practices met the standards of transparency that he has repeatedly called for, Mr. Obama said that “the fact that she is going to be putting them forward will allow us to make sure that people have the information they need.”"
They really seem to like having him spit in their faces.
More like shit in their faces. Here is the problem. We don't know what was sent, what was incoming from whom to where and what was kept or deleted. And we will never know. Raise of hands who thought it was this bad?
Funny how Ritmo can blame Clinton's illegal behavior on conservatives' desire for smaller government.
Hey man. I'm all for smaller government, starting with bandwidth!
All kidding aside, though. The feds are facing a huge problem in trying to figure out how to archive all their data.
I didn't like these stories - but then, I find Team Clinton to be immeasurably corrupt. I thought Obama's "Who, me?" response was funny… Funny in that he supposed it believable.
But I heard Shrum and Frum (interesting debate set-up, BTW) recently discuss this. Shrum's pretty convinced it will blow over.
Frum's pretty convinced that the Clintons have been using secret foreign donations to their advantage for decades.
I think it's corrupt. But then, so is corporate control of our sold-to-the-highest-bidder government. I'm not sure how you solve problem without stopping them both. Or else, I guess we're just going to have to learn to live with both.
Oh well.
As for who knew Hillary was cheating, I gave that answer at 08 March at 9:10 PM. The source router is identified in the "from" line. Always. I'd also say that it is possible that Obama, personally, wouldn't know x from y in email addresses...except that Hillary's would not have had the standard government format...if he even noticed or knew what that was or is these days.
Plain and simple, Hillary Clinton hid her emails and broke the law. Flat out broke the law. Had I done that my router address would be in Leavenworth, Kansas.
If you are foolish enough to mix personal emails with official emails on your government address, then all of that belongs to the government, period. You can't retract them. However, if you intentionally avoid government servers for both your personal emails and official emails, you ARE breaking the law if you do not hand over 100% of all items on your server, not 90% or 80%, but all, 100%...they are NOT yours....no later than the time when you resign or retire your position.If you mixed personal with official, tough stuff....they are NOT yours anymore. She did not do so, so she broke the law. Simple.
No one will act on it, of course, but who is surprised by that? I am more worried that she might actually ascend to the Presidency...which would nearly make me wish to vanish from the earth. She has zero moral compass...and never will have one. Good luck if she cons the electorate enough to get elected. She will make Obama look like a Prince, even in my mind.
And...by "hand over" in the above comment, I mean hand over the entire hard drive from the server, every bit & byte, or the server itself. Anything less is concealment. I really hope the waddling critter is charged and convicted and save us the fuss come 2016.
Won't hold my breath as I look really bad with blue lips and glassy eyes.
R & B said ...
I'm not sure how you solve problem without stopping them both.
Though we disagree often, on this we are in full agreement. I have direct experience with this crony contract award thing, within DOD, and it disgusts me. I suggest those who are curious, over one simple incident among thousands, Google the name Bunny Greenhouse and see what they find. I respect that woman and always will respect her...she had guts. I supported her position from start to finish when she finally got a meager settlement from the government. She was right, simple as that. Had I done what she had the courage to do I'd again have been in Leavenworth...this corruption has been going on for a long time, in DOD and in the government per se. It will only stop when the electorate demands it stop, by electing men or women who do not bring corrupt partners with them to the White House.
I am not sure that is possible anymore. Sad as that is to say.
Footnotes: Bunny and the story ...albiet heavily redacted.
Reference my prior comment, the Wiki bit has been cut back to less than a page....without details of any kind. Originally, it told the whole story, of Bunny's margin notes on the contract Rumsfeld/Cheney demanded of her, for a 5 year fuel contract with some Kuwaiti outfit...she asserted, in the margins, that 5 years was not an "emergency" time frame (emergencies are legitimate reasons for exigent awards) , and that an open bid contract could be negotiated in years 2-5. She refused to remove her margin notes and was punished for it. I only wish I had such courage.
The contracts issued to Kuwaitis there after were egregious beyond any sane comprehension. We were FORCED to use those contracts in Iraq, such as paying $1200+ for a fax machine that cost but $120 if bought though the normal channels...e.g., through DLA in Philadelphia...available to anyone in the field in Iraq or Afghanistan. AND required, by law, under 48 CFR Part 8. Go figure.
The contracts issued to Kuwaitis there after were egregious beyond any sane comprehension. We were FORCED to use those contracts in Iraq, such as paying $1200+ for a fax machine that cost but $120 if bought though the normal channels...e.g., through DLA in Philadelphia...available to anyone in the field in Iraq or Afghanistan. AND required, by law, under 48 CFR Part 8. Go figure.
Growing up in Wisconsin, we had a Senator, Bill Proxmire (D), who specialized in rooting out waste and fraud and writing about it and trying to stop it (The Golden Fleece Award, given to the most egregious examples). Those kinds of D's are long gone.
Chickelit....I admired Sen Proxmire for his annual lists...and agreed with nearly all of them. Yes, D's like him are long gone it seems, with maybe a few holdovers.
Post a Comment