Use of personal email for government business

[PhilFish]

Weekend news brought word that Hillary Clinton may have used personal email to conduct government business.

Example here: http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/did-h...vernment-information-vulnerable-to-hackers-2/

As is the norm, we also learn that others may have done, or did so, too.

Example here: http://news.yahoo.com/beyond-clinton-many-2016-hopefuls-used-private-email-161351272--election.html

Since I don't know, I'll ask...

>What does the law say on the use of personal email to conduct government business?

>Where the law says yay or nay, does said use merely constitute an archival, recordkeeping issue?

>Or, where the law says NO-no.. what is the measure of remedy?

>And where the law did say No-no... does said remedy extend to all persons so doing?

>If yes. I say mete out what the law requires upon all.

 

[as seen on tv]

hillary is in the news because her staff, and state department officials, warned her "many times" that she was transgressing state department procedures. she persisted after warnings, and now has selectively released "hardcopy only" versions of her emails.

republicans in congress have already pointed out that there are "many gaps" (weeks at a time) in the records she released, suggesting that the material released is far from complete.

 

[PhilFish]

hillary is in the news because her staff, and state department officials, warned her "many times" that she was transgressing state department procedures. she persisted after warnings, and now has selectively released "hardcopy only" versions of her emails.

republicans in congress have already pointed out that there are "many gaps" (weeks at a time) in the records she released, suggesting that the material released is far from complete.

Understood.

But what does the law say. and does the law apply to all?

 

[as seen on tv]

Understood.

But what does the law say. and does the law apply to all?

my understanding is that its not a clear cut violation of the law to use an outside system. but where hillary tripped up is that she set up a private system which had none of the usual protocols/safeguards for archiving, security, and other anciallary requirements. she might have been on firmer ground if she had selected an established, highly secure outside provider . . . like colin powell did, years earlier, before civilian US government email was a robust and secure.

setting up a private server for ONLY ONE user is a transparent attempt to evade accountability and hide things from the government.

 

[connieb]

Weekend news brought word that Hillary Clinton may have used personal email to conduct government business.

Example here: http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/did-h...vernment-information-vulnerable-to-hackers-2/

As is the norm, we also learn that others may have done, or did so, too.

Example here: http://news.yahoo.com/beyond-clinton-many-2016-hopefuls-used-private-email-161351272--election.html

Since I don't know, I'll ask...

>What does the law say on the use of personal email to conduct government business?

>Where the law says yay or nay, does said use merely constitute an archival, recordkeeping issue?

>Or, where the law says NO-no.. what is the measure of remedy?

>And where the law did say No-no... does said remedy extend to all persons so doing?

>If yes. I say mete out what the law requires upon all.

I think some of the confusion about this is that the law was changed after she was in office to make it not able to use personal email at all. I wonder if her use had any thing to do with the change. And, the archivers problems in getting at them.

From what I have read and heard on news and radio, it seems that all of her emails in her capacity were to be archived so that shee could use her outside email BUT that they had to all be archived in according to the law. So, I guess it is technically a record keeping issue, BUT , multiple FOIA's were filed for those emails in addition to subpeona's and the State Department didn't turn over a one, so they clearly did not have access to them, and they were clearly not archived properly so they could be turned over on request. Everyone and their brother knows that the Select Committee and other groups have been searching for those emails for the last two years. So, its not like she can play ignorance about that.

I think too, that if she has emails on there that are classified, it could potentailly be the same situation Petreaus was in.

But, I don't think there was a requirement at the time to use a Gov't email.. why there wasn't is mind boggling.

 

[PhilFish]

my understanding is that its not a clear cut violation of the law to use an outside system. but where hillary tripped up is that she set up a private system which had none of the usual protocols/safeguards for archiving, security, and other anciallary requirements. she might have been on firmer ground if she had selected an established, highly secure outside provider . . . like colin powell did, years earlier, before civilian US government email was a robust and secure.

setting up a private server for ONLY ONE user is a transparent attempt to evade accountability and hide things from the government.

why is it an attempt to evade? couldnt it be that she's the only user...and why would there need to be others?

 

[Dawg]

Understood.

But what does the law say. and does the law apply to all?

Hillary FIRED ambassador for using Private Email..............Hillary was a Officer of the Constitution and ALL her emails are property of the public.......she didn't set up an account for a private person (Hillary)..............the supposedly person she claims set up the server is unknown even to those in the internet world.

need I say more

 

[Boltlady]

Understood.

But what does the law say. and does the law apply to all?

What law is there that applies to everybody?

I forget.

 

[Dino]

Hillary FIRED ambassador for using Private Email..............

need I say more

And before you get berated, the story...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/c...r-using-private-email-in-2012/article/2561102


Despite relying exclusively on her own private email system during her time in office, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ousted the U.S. ambassador to Kenya in 2012 in part for the same offense.
An August 2012 inspector general report revealed former Ambassador Scott Gration had set up an unsecured network in the bathroom of his embassy office and encouraged his staff to use commercial email in a move that drew State Department ire, the Federalist reported Thursday.
Gration's use of an unauthorized email system to conduct government business broke agency protocol, the watchdog report said.
"The ambassador's requirements for use of commercial email in the office and his flouting of direct instructions to adhere to department policy have placed the information management staff in a conundrum: balancing the desire to be responsive to their mission leader and the need to adhere to department regulations and government information security standards," the inspector general said.

 

[Dawg]

Who is Eric Hoteham?
No One Knows:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...wn_server_in_chappaqua_for_secret_emails.html

supposedly the person hired to maintain Hill & Bills Private server............

 

[MrMike]

But to the loyal lefties... because it's Hillary and because she's a LibDem, it's somehow....DIFFERENT

And of course... OKAY

And before you get berated, the story...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/c...r-using-private-email-in-2012/article/2561102


Despite relying exclusively on her own private email system during her time in office, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ousted the U.S. ambassador to Kenya in 2012 in part for the same offense.
An August 2012 inspector general report revealed former Ambassador Scott Gration had set up an unsecured network in the bathroom of his embassy office and encouraged his staff to use commercial email in a move that drew State Department ire, the Federalist reported Thursday.
Gration's use of an unauthorized email system to conduct government business broke agency protocol, the watchdog report said.
"The ambassador's requirements for use of commercial email in the office and his flouting of direct instructions to adhere to department policy have placed the information management staff in a conundrum: balancing the desire to be responsive to their mission leader and the need to adhere to department regulations and government information security standards," the inspector general said.

 

[Caroljo]

 

[SW48]

Weekend news brought word that Hillary Clinton may have used personal email to conduct government business.

Example here: http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/did-h...vernment-information-vulnerable-to-hackers-2/

As is the norm, we also learn that others may have done, or did so, too.

Example here: http://news.yahoo.com/beyond-clinton-many-2016-hopefuls-used-private-email-161351272--election.html

Since I don't know, I'll ask...

>What does the law say on the use of personal email to conduct government business?

>Where the law says yay or nay, does said use merely constitute an archival, recordkeeping issue?

>Or, where the law says NO-no.. what is the measure of remedy?

>And where the law did say No-no... does said remedy extend to all persons so doing?

>If yes. I say mete out what the law requires upon all.

I worked for the department of defense. We weren't allowed to attach a thumb drive to our computers and we were not allowed to use personal email. We were not even allowed to access personal email and personal email websites like gmail, yahoo etc were not accessible from government computers.