Clinton email timeline ..

[Siete]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

 

[the_human_being]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Yes, the F.B.I. has nothing to do so they are spending their time investigating for practice. LOL!!

 

[Meathead]

Good luck with that.

 

[Freewill]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

True but only half the truth.

Hillary Clinton’s e-mails: a timeline of actions and regulations

 

[Siete]

how do you break a law that didn't exist when you were in office ?


could be why the Bush Cartel wasn't hammered for having two private servers and deleting most of their emails.

or why 9 investigations by House Republicans went totally empty.


I know ... the media wouldn't let the law do its job.

silly me.

 

[Siete]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

True but only half the truth.

Hillary Clinton’s e-mails: a timeline of actions and regulations

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

 

[depotoo]

how do you break a law that didn't exist when you were in office ?


could be why the Bush Cartel wasn't hammered for having two private servers and deleting most of their emails.

or why 9 investigations by House Republicans went totally empty.


I know ... the media wouldn't let the law do its job.

silly me.

Uhh, those emails were there. Just mislabeled. Amazing how many still believe the falsehood.
Update at 3:25 p.m. ET: The e-mails had been mislabeled and effectively lost, according to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the National Security Archive (NSA), which announced a final settlement of their lawsuits against the executive branch.
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...house-e-mails-reportedly-found/1#.Vqpkj31OloM

 

[Siete]

how do you break a law that didn't exist when you were in office ?


could be why the Bush Cartel wasn't hammered for having two private servers and deleting most of their emails.

or why 9 investigations by House Republicans went totally empty.


I know ... the media wouldn't let the law do its job.

silly me.

Uhh, those emails were there. Just mislabeled. Amazing how many still believe the falsehood.
Update at 3:25 p.m. ET: The e-mails had been mislabeled and effectively lost, according to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the National Security Archive (NSA), which announced a final settlement of their lawsuits against the executive branch.
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...house-e-mails-reportedly-found/1#.Vqpkj31OloM

uhhhhh, makes no difference, there wasn't a law against them.

 

[depotoo]

Not what he said. This, in his own words written as an article-
First, while it is accurate for Secretary Clinton to say that when she was in office there was not a flat, categorical prohibition on federal government officials ever using their personal email accounts for the conduct of official business, that’s a far different thing from saying (as she apparently would like to) that a government official could use his or her personal email account exclusively, for all official email communications, as she actually did. In fact, the Federal Records Act dictates otherwise.

That law, which applies to all federal agency employees who are not within the White House itself, requires the comprehensive documentation of the conduct of official business, and it has long done so by regulating the creation, maintenance, preservation and, ultimately, the disposition of agency records. When it comes to “modern-day” email communications, as compared to the paper memoranda of not so long ago, these communications now are themselves the very means of conducting official business, by definition.

To be sure, this cannot as a practical matter be absolute. When Obama administration officials came into office in 2009, the Federal Records Act certainly allowed room for the occasional use of a personal email account for official business where necessary—such as when a secretary of state understandably must deal with a crisis around the world in the middle of the night while an official email device might not be readily at hand. That just makes sense. But even then, in such an exceptional situation, the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.

This appears to be exactly what former Secretary of State Colin Powell did during his tenure, just as other high-level government officials may do (or are supposed to do) under such exceptional circumstances during their times in office. Notwithstanding Secretary Clinton’s sweeping claims to the contrary, there actually is no indication in any of the public discussions of this “scandal” that anyone other than she managed to do what she did (or didn’t) do as a federal official.

Second, the official availability of official email communications is not just a matter of concern for purposes of the Federal Records Act only. It also makes an enormous (and highly foreseeable) difference to the proper implementation of the Freedom of Information Act (known as the “FOIA” to its friends, a group that evidently does not include Secretary Clinton). That is because the starting point for handling a FOIA request is the search that an agency must conduct for all records responsive to that request’s particular specifications. So any FOIA request that requires an agency first to locate responsive email messages sent to or from that agency’s head, for instance, is necessarily dependent on those records being locatable in the first place. And an agency simply cannot do that properly for any emails (let alone all such emails) that have been created, and are maintained, entirely beyond the agency’s reach. Or, as it sometimes is said somewhat cynically in the FOIA community, “You can’t disclose what you can’t find.”

In this case, which is truly unprecedented, no matter what Secretary Clinton would have one believe, she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it—perhaps forever. “Nice work if you can get it,” one might say, especially if your experience during your husband’s presidency gives you good reason (nay, even highly compelling motivation) to relegate unto yourself such control if at all possible.

Third, there is the compounding fact that Secretary Clinton did not merely use a personal email account; she used one that atypically operated solely through her own personal email server, which she evidently had installed in her home. This meant that, unlike the multitudes who use a Gmail account, for instance, she was able to keep her communications entirely “in house,” even more deeply within her personal control. No “cloud” for posterity, or chance of Google receiving a congressional subpoena—not for her. No potentially pesky “metadata” surrounding her communications or detailed server logs to complicate things. And absolutely no practical constraint on her ability to dispose of any official email of “hers,” for any reason, at any time, entirely on her own. Bluntly put, when this unique records regime was established, somebody was asleep at the switch, at either the State Department or the National Archives and Records Administration (which oversees compliance with the Federal Records Act)—or both.
Hillary’s Email Defense Is Laughable

And you might want to download this from state.gov
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/85696.pdf#page=5

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

True but only half the truth.

Hillary Clinton’s e-mails: a timeline of actions and regulations

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

 

[depotoo]

Download the pdf and read it. Check out the 1995 date.

how do you break a law that didn't exist when you were in office ?


could be why the Bush Cartel wasn't hammered for having two private servers and deleting most of their emails.

or why 9 investigations by House Republicans went totally empty.


I know ... the media wouldn't let the law do its job.

silly me.

Uhh, those emails were there. Just mislabeled. Amazing how many still believe the falsehood.
Update at 3:25 p.m. ET: The e-mails had been mislabeled and effectively lost, according to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the National Security Archive (NSA), which announced a final settlement of their lawsuits against the executive branch.
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...house-e-mails-reportedly-found/1#.Vqpkj31OloM

uhhhhh, makes no difference, there wasn't a law against them.

 

[RandallFlagg]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Sonny, you're as full of shit as the day is long. Here's a hint from someone who worked for the government in Intel for over 20 years - keep your mouth shut until you have something TRUTHFUL to say.

Thanks.

 

[Siete]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Sonny, you're as full of shit as the day is long. Here's a hint from someone who worked for the government in Intel for over 20 years - keep your mouth shut until you have something TRUTHFUL to say.

Thanks.

Sonny huh ?

Ok Goober here's a hint. Laws aren't retroactive. TRUTH.

When the Supreme Court says they are, call me. Until then YOU STFU.

 

[depotoo]

And you ignored the pdf and the real article by Metcalfe, because you want to hang on to the lie, I guess.

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Sonny, you're as full of shit as the day is long. Here's a hint from someone who worked for the government in Intel for over 20 years - keep your mouth shut until you have something TRUTHFUL to say.

Thanks.

Sonny huh ?

Ok Goober here's a hint. Laws aren't retroactive. TRUTH.

When the Supreme Court says they are, call me. Until then YOU STFU.

 

[Siete]

Not what he said. This, in his own words written as an article-
First, while it is accurate for Secretary Clinton to say that when she was in office there was not a flat, categorical prohibition on federal government officials ever using their personal email accounts for the conduct of official business, that’s a far different thing from saying (as she apparently would like to) that a government official could use his or her personal email account exclusively, for all official email communications, as she actually did. In fact, the Federal Records Act dictates otherwise.

That law, which applies to all federal agency employees who are not within the White House itself, requires the comprehensive documentation of the conduct of official business, and it has long done so by regulating the creation, maintenance, preservation and, ultimately, the disposition of agency records. When it comes to “modern-day” email communications, as compared to the paper memoranda of not so long ago, these communications now are themselves the very means of conducting official business, by definition.

To be sure, this cannot as a practical matter be absolute. When Obama administration officials came into office in 2009, the Federal Records Act certainly allowed room for the occasional use of a personal email account for official business where necessary—such as when a secretary of state understandably must deal with a crisis around the world in the middle of the night while an official email device might not be readily at hand. That just makes sense. But even then, in such an exceptional situation, the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.

This appears to be exactly what former Secretary of State Colin Powell did during his tenure, just as other high-level government officials may do (or are supposed to do) under such exceptional circumstances during their times in office. Notwithstanding Secretary Clinton’s sweeping claims to the contrary, there actually is no indication in any of the public discussions of this “scandal” that anyone other than she managed to do what she did (or didn’t) do as a federal official.

Second, the official availability of official email communications is not just a matter of concern for purposes of the Federal Records Act only. It also makes an enormous (and highly foreseeable) difference to the proper implementation of the Freedom of Information Act (known as the “FOIA” to its friends, a group that evidently does not include Secretary Clinton). That is because the starting point for handling a FOIA request is the search that an agency must conduct for all records responsive to that request’s particular specifications. So any FOIA request that requires an agency first to locate responsive email messages sent to or from that agency’s head, for instance, is necessarily dependent on those records being locatable in the first place. And an agency simply cannot do that properly for any emails (let alone all such emails) that have been created, and are maintained, entirely beyond the agency’s reach. Or, as it sometimes is said somewhat cynically in the FOIA community, “You can’t disclose what you can’t find.”

In this case, which is truly unprecedented, no matter what Secretary Clinton would have one believe, she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it—perhaps forever. “Nice work if you can get it,” one might say, especially if your experience during your husband’s presidency gives you good reason (nay, even highly compelling motivation) to relegate unto yourself such control if at all possible.

Third, there is the compounding fact that Secretary Clinton did not merely use a personal email account; she used one that atypically operated solely through her own personal email server, which she evidently had installed in her home. This meant that, unlike the multitudes who use a Gmail account, for instance, she was able to keep her communications entirely “in house,” even more deeply within her personal control. No “cloud” for posterity, or chance of Google receiving a congressional subpoena—not for her. No potentially pesky “metadata” surrounding her communications or detailed server logs to complicate things. And absolutely no practical constraint on her ability to dispose of any official email of “hers,” for any reason, at any time, entirely on her own. Bluntly put, when this unique records regime was established, somebody was asleep at the switch, at either the State Department or the National Archives and Records Administration (which oversees compliance with the Federal Records Act)—or both.
Hillary’s Email Defense Is Laughable

And you might want to download this from state.gov
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/85696.pdf#page=5

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

True but only half the truth.

Hillary Clinton’s e-mails: a timeline of actions and regulations

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act.


I'll go with Daniel.

 

[depotoo]

Honey, click the link I gave you where I posted what he really said. The article at the link is his-not quotes of his, but his damn article. And you are misrepresenting what he said over and over. Don't play dumb, unless you just want to be.

Not what he said. This, in his own words written as an article-
First, while it is accurate for Secretary Clinton to say that when she was in office there was not a flat, categorical prohibition on federal government officials ever using their personal email accounts for the conduct of official business, that’s a far different thing from saying (as she apparently would like to) that a government official could use his or her personal email account exclusively, for all official email communications, as she actually did. In fact, the Federal Records Act dictates otherwise.

That law, which applies to all federal agency employees who are not within the White House itself, requires the comprehensive documentation of the conduct of official business, and it has long done so by regulating the creation, maintenance, preservation and, ultimately, the disposition of agency records. When it comes to “modern-day” email communications, as compared to the paper memoranda of not so long ago, these communications now are themselves the very means of conducting official business, by definition.

To be sure, this cannot as a practical matter be absolute. When Obama administration officials came into office in 2009, the Federal Records Act certainly allowed room for the occasional use of a personal email account for official business where necessary—such as when a secretary of state understandably must deal with a crisis around the world in the middle of the night while an official email device might not be readily at hand. That just makes sense. But even then, in such an exceptional situation, the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.

This appears to be exactly what former Secretary of State Colin Powell did during his tenure, just as other high-level government officials may do (or are supposed to do) under such exceptional circumstances during their times in office. Notwithstanding Secretary Clinton’s sweeping claims to the contrary, there actually is no indication in any of the public discussions of this “scandal” that anyone other than she managed to do what she did (or didn’t) do as a federal official.

Second, the official availability of official email communications is not just a matter of concern for purposes of the Federal Records Act only. It also makes an enormous (and highly foreseeable) difference to the proper implementation of the Freedom of Information Act (known as the “FOIA” to its friends, a group that evidently does not include Secretary Clinton). That is because the starting point for handling a FOIA request is the search that an agency must conduct for all records responsive to that request’s particular specifications. So any FOIA request that requires an agency first to locate responsive email messages sent to or from that agency’s head, for instance, is necessarily dependent on those records being locatable in the first place. And an agency simply cannot do that properly for any emails (let alone all such emails) that have been created, and are maintained, entirely beyond the agency’s reach. Or, as it sometimes is said somewhat cynically in the FOIA community, “You can’t disclose what you can’t find.”

In this case, which is truly unprecedented, no matter what Secretary Clinton would have one believe, she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it—perhaps forever. “Nice work if you can get it,” one might say, especially if your experience during your husband’s presidency gives you good reason (nay, even highly compelling motivation) to relegate unto yourself such control if at all possible.

Third, there is the compounding fact that Secretary Clinton did not merely use a personal email account; she used one that atypically operated solely through her own personal email server, which she evidently had installed in her home. This meant that, unlike the multitudes who use a Gmail account, for instance, she was able to keep her communications entirely “in house,” even more deeply within her personal control. No “cloud” for posterity, or chance of Google receiving a congressional subpoena—not for her. No potentially pesky “metadata” surrounding her communications or detailed server logs to complicate things. And absolutely no practical constraint on her ability to dispose of any official email of “hers,” for any reason, at any time, entirely on her own. Bluntly put, when this unique records regime was established, somebody was asleep at the switch, at either the State Department or the National Archives and Records Administration (which oversees compliance with the Federal Records Act)—or both.
Hillary’s Email Defense Is Laughable

And you might want to download this from state.gov
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/85696.pdf#page=5

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

True but only half the truth.

Hillary Clinton’s e-mails: a timeline of actions and regulations

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act.


I'll go with Daniel.

 

[Siete]

5 FAM 443.6 Future Technology (TL:IM-19; 10-30-1995) a. The Department is actively working to develop systems that will enable those E-mail messages that are official records to be preserved electronically.

Check. 1995.


1995... nothing about PERSONAL SERVERS until two years after Clinton left office.

Get it?

 

[RandallFlagg]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Sonny, you're as full of shit as the day is long. Here's a hint from someone who worked for the government in Intel for over 20 years - keep your mouth shut until you have something TRUTHFUL to say.

Thanks.

Sonny huh ?

Ok Goober here's a hint. Laws aren't retroactive. TRUTH.

When the Supreme Court says they are, call me. Until then YOU STFU.

Yeah, sonny suits you to a tee.

United States Code 18. -798 anyone who has ever served with a Security Clearance knows this.

 

[Meathead]

how do you break a law that didn't exist when you were in office ?


could be why the Bush Cartel wasn't hammered for having two private servers and deleting most of their emails.

or why 9 investigations by House Republicans went totally empty.


I know ... the media wouldn't let the law do its job.

silly me.

Aren't we waiting for the FBI?

 

[Siete]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Sonny, you're as full of shit as the day is long. Here's a hint from someone who worked for the government in Intel for over 20 years - keep your mouth shut until you have something TRUTHFUL to say.

Thanks.

Sonny huh ?

Ok Goober here's a hint. Laws aren't retroactive. TRUTH.

When the Supreme Court says they are, call me. Until then YOU STFU.

Yeah, sonny suits you to a tee.

United States Code 18. -798 anyone who has ever served with a Security Clearance knows this.

you sir are not above the LAW, regardless of your military record.

 

[RandallFlagg]

the legal requirement to immediately preserve e-mails from non-government e-mail accounts was not made mandatory until nearly two years after she stepped down.

Sonny, you're as full of shit as the day is long. Here's a hint from someone who worked for the government in Intel for over 20 years - keep your mouth shut until you have something TRUTHFUL to say.

Thanks.

Sonny huh ?

Ok Goober here's a hint. Laws aren't retroactive. TRUTH.

When the Supreme Court says they are, call me. Until then YOU STFU.

Yeah, sonny suits you to a tee.

United States Code 18. -798 anyone who has ever served with a Security Clearance knows this.

you sir are not above the LAW, regardless of your military record.

But apparently you believe Hillary is...... Figures.