Press "Enter" to skip to content

Clinton E-Mail Preservation and Security Inexcusable

Hillary Clinton, making my life difficult.
Hillary Clinton, making my life difficult.

The Inspector General’s report on e-mail records management and cybersecurity in the State Department since 1997 makes me one touch gladder that I voted for Bernie Sanders in our Presidential primary and more than a touch more nervous about having to defend the vote I may have to cast for Hillary Clinton in November to save democracy and the free world from Il Duce Trump.

“Office of the Secretary: Evaluation of Email Records Management and Cybersecurity Requirements,” issued by the State Department’s Office of the Inspector General [OIG] this week, offers the following alarming findings:

…OIG interviewed Secretary Kerry and former Secretaries Albright, Powell, and Rice. Through her counsel, Secretary Clinton declined OIG’s request for an interview [p. 2].

The Clinton campaign contends that her practices didn’t differ from the lax practices of her predecessors. But Clinton was the only one who refused to open up to the Inspector General. Additionally, out of the ten other individuals who either explicitly refused or did not respond to OIG requests for interviews, nine were Clinton people [p. 2].

In December 2014, in response to Department requests, Secretary Clinton produced to the Department from her personal email account approximately 55,000 hard-copy pages, representing approximately 30,000 emails that she believed related to official business. In a letter to the Department, her representative stated that it was the Secretary’s practice to email Department officials at their government email accounts on matters pertaining to the conduct of government business. Accordingly, the representative asserted, to the extent that the Department retained records of government email accounts, the Department already had records of the Secretary’s email preserved within its recordkeeping systems.

The requirement to manage and preserve emails containing Federal records has remained consistent since at least 1995, though specific policies and guidance related to retention methods have evolved over time. In general, the Federal Records Act requires appropriate management, including preservation, of records containing adequate and proper documentation of the “organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency.” Although emails were not explicitly mentioned in the Federal Records Act or FAM until the mid-1990s, the law has stated since 1943 that a document can constitute a record “regardless of physical form or characteristics” [p. 4].

Three problems here:

  1. Instead of providing the government with the most convenient form of her records, Clinton dropped 110 reams of paper, tedious for any inspector or researcher to index, search, and reproduce, on the desk. That’s both wasteful and obstructive.
  2. Clinton suggests that being able to comb through hundreds, maybe thousands of other government e-mail accounts to find her assorted e-mails ought to satisfy any record-keeping obligation. Again, that sounds obstructive and wasteful of government official’s time compared to simply handing over one’s inbox on a flash drive.
  3. The OIG concludes that e-mails are pretty clearly included in the dictates of the Federal Records Act. Clinton appears to have failed to follow that law by not turning over her records upon leaving office.

We can perhaps blame State Department policy for all that printing, but the OIG appears to agree that Clinton violated the Federal Records Act:

As previously discussed, however, sending emails from a personal account to other employees at their Department accounts is not an appropriate method of preserving any such emails that would constitute a Federal record. Therefore, Secretary Clinton should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary.* At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, 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 [p. 23].

*To support that statement, OIG cites 5 FAM 443.3, a guideline established in 1995.

It wasn’t just Clinton breaking this law; her staff held onto all sorts of improperly secured e-mails as well:

With regard to Secretary Clinton’s immediate staff, OIG received limited responses to its questionnaires, though two of Secretary Clinton’s staff acknowledged occasional use of personal email accounts for official business. However, OIG learned of extensive use of personal email accounts by four immediate staff members (none of whom responded to the questionnaire). During the summer of 2015, their representatives produced Federal records in response to a request from the Department, portions of which included material sent and received via their personal email accounts. The material consists of nearly 72,000 pages in hard copy and more than 7.5 gigabytes of electronic data. One of the staff submitted 9,585 emails spanning January 22, 2009, to February 24, 2013, averaging 9 emails per workday sent on a personal email account. In this material, there are instances where the four individuals sent or received emails regarding Department business using only their personal web-based email accounts. Accordingly, these staff failed to comply with Department policies intended to implement NARA [National Archives and Records Administration] regulations, because none of these emails were preserved in Department recordkeeping systems prior to their production in 2015. As noted above, NARA has concluded that these subsequent productions mitigated their failure to properly preserve emails that qualified as Federal records during their service as Department employees [pp. 24–25].

On cybersecurity:

With regard to encryption, Secretary Clinton’s website states that “robust protections were put in place and additional upgrades and techniques employed over time as they became available, including consulting and employing third party experts.” Although this report does not address the safety or security of her system, DS [Bureau of Diplomatic Security] and IRM [Information Resource Management] reported to OIG that Secretary Clinton never demonstrated to them that her private server or mobile device met minimum information security requirements specified by FISMA [Federal Information Security Management Act] and the FAM [Foreign Affairs Manual] [p. 37].

In other words, Clinton tells us she kept her—wait, our—information secure, but we have no independent evidence to confirm that claim.

The press offers other useful highlights from the OIG report and subsequent revelations.

Making excuses for Hillary Clinton’s failure to follow information management rules is not as hard as making excuses for Donald Trump’s fascism. But I don’t want to have to spend the rest of this campaign making those excuses. Democratic National Convention delegates, you can spare us that trouble by nominating Bernie Sanders.


  1. Rorschach 2016-05-27 09:11

    If Hillary gets the nomination, the choice in November we will clearly be forced to choose the lesser of two evils. The winner will get under 50% of the popular vote, will have no honeymoon with voters, and will be reviled by over half of the country right from the start. This is a recipe for 4 more years of federal government dysfunction. I’m convinced that Bernie Sanders is the only candidate still in the race who might be able to win a majority of the vote and start his Presidency with some amount of goodwill.

  2. LS 2016-05-27 09:16

    I’m with you on this. I don’t know how it will work. But I hope somehow Sanders gets nominated. If he is the nom, the focus will remain on the issues. I’ve never seen anyone stay on or pivot back to the issues like Sanders. HRC brings too many distractions to the table. Do we want to talk about income inequality, healthcare, and climate change or her damn e-mails?

  3. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 09:25

    Sorry folks,but, dumbass dubya committed impeachable offenses and wasn’t even given a stern talking to.

    You giving Clinton a choice between “Old Sparky”or a firing squad?

  4. Rorschach 2016-05-27 09:32

    I’m curious to see how the vote comes out in the SD primary. Will Hillary win, or feel the Bern? Will Trumpy McTrumpface win, or will it be the Canadian guy from Tejas?

  5. 96Tears 2016-05-27 09:44

    I’m not a Bernie fan. He’s a lightweight’s lightweight who became a voice to an angry movement. That movement will not translate into a serious campaign structure going into a general election, primarily because Bernie is not a leader. He’s just one of 435 voices in Congress. And then a little birdie landed on the microphone. He’s a run-of-the-mill demagogue who will whither quickly against a fire-breathing demagogue like Donald Trump who clobbered his opposition handily in the GOP primary.

    Having said that, I am deeply disappointed with Hillary’s handling of her violations of law involving her emails. This report confirms how pigheaded and stupid she can be. I think she’s more capable of being presidential than the guileless Bernie Sanders, but so would Richard Nixon and that’s no reason to vote for him.

    Right now, Clinton has an obligation to her party to resign her candidacy if, indeed, she does not want Donald Trump to be President. There is no way she can survive the pounding she will deservedly receive by the GOP negative ad machine. And, if by some miracle she gets elected, she will start her presidency in very weak shape. She will give the RCCC and RSCC a new campaign slogan to protect the public from the sleazy Clintons by holding their majorities in the Senate and House.

    The DNC also has a dilemma if it wishes to prevent a Trump presidency. Bernie Sanders can inspire a rabble of pissed-off Democrats and millenials, but that’s the easy part. It’s ridiculously naive to believe that you can mask Bernie as a Commander in Chief in a 21st Century national election. If waving a magic wand was all it took, I’d replace Bernie Sanders with the real deal, Elizabeth Warren. But that’s not how political horse trading works. It’s more about “sausagery.”

    The bottom line is Democrats have wasted a year sparring over two incompetent candidates for a national race. One because she’s incapable of acting corruptly. The other because he’s not cut out for a general election showdown against the GOP machine and The Donald.

    Time for the campaign wizards to stop fooling themselves and get to work now on the sausagery before it’s too late.

  6. Donald Pay 2016-05-27 09:46

    This is horrible, everyone will admit. Or will they?

    Everyone seems to find excuses why their favorite politicians should skate with similar or even more egregious “mistakes.” The fact is you had at least two Republican Governors who ran for President this year who have even worse records about illegally manipulating and hiding public records. Both Scott Walker and Chris Christy have even worse records in this regard. Walker had a private server, just like Clinton. It was illegal. But so far he’s escaped indictment because of his political manipulation of the courts, which are, in Wisconsin, corrupt at the highest level.

    I think what Clinton did was wrong. Unfortunately, it is quite common.

  7. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 09:56

    96, sorry,but, Clinton has been “pounded” by wingnuts for the past 30 years and has gotten stronger. I do not like her at all. I loathe the lying dickwad Drumpf. HRC has the experience and she should have capable advisers all around her. Her arrogance doesn’t even register next to Drumpf’s or dumbass dubya/dick cheney.

  8. Richard Schriever 2016-05-27 09:58

    96 tears – you’re absolutely correct – Sanders is no war-mongering hawk-head; He’s a 100% civilian – which is EXACTLY the sort of person the structure of our constitution wants- no INSISTS is the head of our military. An anti-warrior person.

  9. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 09:59

    If Drumpf gets the job,his first executive order will make it a felony hate crime-punishable by death- not to love Kim Yung Don.

  10. Rorschach 2016-05-27 10:03

    I have long thought that if the Democratic party in 1988 could have moved Lloyd Bentsen into the top spot and Michael Dukakis into the VP position after Bentsen destroyed Dan Quayle at the VP debate we would now be speaking highly in retrospect of President Bentsen.

    I have expressed enthusiasm here both for Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren. If Uncle Joe could somehow be squeezed into the sausage skin along with Elizabeth Warren as his VP with the blessing of Hillary and Bernie it would be good for the Democratic Party and for the country. Is there any way that Hillary will resign her candidacy without being forced to? No way. Somebody needs to get with the forcing, if there is forcing to be done.

  11. Jenny 2016-05-27 10:04

    There’s more fire to Bernie than you think, 96 Tears, and to say that Sanders has not been a leader is funny.
    Bernie probably has the most admirable leadership qualities of all. When it comes to integrity and moral principles he far outshines the others. Where the dirt on him?
    Going against President W (for War) Bush and Congress to vote against sending forces to Iraq is not leadership to 96 Tears, I guess.

  12. Jenny 2016-05-27 10:12

    And for all you gun owners, Bernie does NOT want to take your guns away. He strongly supports gun rights. Really who wants a corrupt Hillary or a narcissistic one percenter when you could have Bernie for president.

  13. Robin Friday 2016-05-27 10:47

    I don’t think the IG report is as serious as it’s being made out. Yes, it was critical, but of course it was critical. Things were done in a poor way and HRC admitted that months ago and took responsibility for it. What’s the IG supposed to say except it was done badly? I don’t believe that’s the same as nefariously. It needs to be cleaned up, for sure. I’m not speaking either for Bernie or HRC, but this e-mail thing is nothing on which anyone should base their opinion as to whom to vote for. Yes, it was handled poorly, but not criminally. Trump is a catastrophe for the nation and the world, waiting to happen.

  14. Daniel Buresh 2016-05-27 11:36

    ” I’m not speaking either for Bernie or HRC, but this e-mail thing is nothing on which anyone should base their opinion as to whom to vote for.”

    This is exactly what people should base their voting on. She not only broke the law, but she is using every attempt in the book to make it harder for them to look into it. She has not been cooperative at all. Such dishonesty and blatant attempts to cause investigators to stumble tells me she only cares about the proliferation of her political career and ambitions. Her entire admission and supposed apology is your childhood response of “Well they did it before me” to which my mother would respond, “Well if they all jump off a cliff, would you too?”. Any other gov’t employee would be looking at serious charges.

    I don’t worry about Trump’s unlikely changes anymore than I do Bernie’s unlikely suggestions. When Trump has the nomination, you are going to watch one of the fastest swings towards the middle and he is going to destroy Hillary in any debate. Trump is literally further left leaning than Hildawg is on a number of topics. People are fed up with the establishment, and Hildawg is the poster child for that. It’s going to be an interesting election and I’ll take anyone over Hildawg. Most Bernie supporters I have spoke with feel the same way. They may not agree with Trump, but you know what you are getting and where he stands. Hildawg changes with the wind, or whoever is writing her a check.

  15. Paul Thronson 2016-05-27 12:03

    I sure hope all the Bernie supporters get out to vote in SD and send a YUGE message to the DNC that many might opt for “none of the above” if our choices are between a reckless warmongering billionaire Republican who ignores the environment and consistency acts above the law and Donald Trump.

  16. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 12:31

    I noticed how wingnuts, in their passion to nail HRC for any conceivable crime, bent the rules to their advantage, lied about their reasons for persecuting HRC (it was to derail her candidacy and nothing else) and refused to allow witnesses to answer questions. The chairman of Benghazi Clinton hearing even classified some documents on his own and blamed HRC. Who are the real crooks?

  17. Rorschach 2016-05-27 13:10

    Daniel, nobody can know what they are getting with Trump. He panders. He changes his position repeatedly back and forth. He says things that he means and other things he probably doesn’t mean. Who can tell?

    Ask yourself this. Is Trump just as likely to appoint liberal or at least moderate Democrats to the Supreme Court as he is to appoint Republicans? He says he’ll appoint conservatives, but he says a lot of things. Is he pro-choice or anti-abortion? Is he really a Republican, or still a Democrat masquerading as a Republican?

    The bottom line is that if Trump is handed the keys to the oval office nobody can be sure what ideology he will follow. He’s a narcissist with no firm ideological, moral, or ethical moorings. Putting him in control of anything is playing with fire. You know that as well as I do.

  18. bearcreekbat 2016-05-27 13:35

    Robin is right. I read the report and it is being unfairly sensationalized. The OIG explains “Longstanding, systemic weaknesses related to electronic records and communications have existed within the Office of the Secretary that go well beyond the tenure of any one Secretary of State.” To blame Hillary for long standing problems is odd. Why not blame Powell or Rice who preceded her in office, or Kerry who was actually the Secretary when the problems were discovered?

    Indeed, the report makes it clear that changes in law after Hillary left office began to clarify email obligations.

    “In 2014, Congress amended the Federal Records Act explicitly to define Federal records to include information created, manipulated, communicated, or stored in digital or electronic form.”2”

    “In the 2014 amendments to the Federal Records Act, Congress added a provision prohibiting agency employees from creating or sending a record using “a non-official electronic messaging account” unless they copy their official electronic messaging account in the original creation or transmission of the record or forward a complete copy of the record to their official electronic messaging account within 20 days.3″

    And before this change in law the report clarifies the vast majority of emails from the State Department did not qualify as public records. “. . . the Department believes that the majority of the millions of emails sent to and from Department employees each year are non-permanent records with no long-term value.”

    And the State Department was not the only agency with these problems.

    “According to a 2010 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, most agencies do not prioritize records management, as evidenced by lack of staff and budget resources, absence of up-to-date policies and procedures, lack of training, and lack of accountability.52 In its most recent annual assessment of records management, NARA identified similar weaknesses across the Federal Government with regard to electronic records in particular. NARA reported that 80 percent of agencies had an elevated risk for the improper management of electronic records, reflecting serious challenges handling vast amounts of email, integrating records management functionality into electronic systems, and adapting to the changing technological and regulatory environments.53”

    Even agencies responsible for assuring compliance with records retention policies were asleep at the wheel.

    “Although NARA is responsible for conducting inspections or surveys of agencies’ records and
    records management programs and practices,59 it last reviewed the Office of the Secretary’s records retention practices in 1991-a quarter century ago. Beginning in 2009, NARA has relied on annual records management self-assessments and periodic reports from the Department to gauge the need to conduct formal inspections. The Department’s last two self-assessments did not highlight any deficiencies.”

    And employees working at State during Hillary’s transition into office apparently were not inclined to properly advise Hillary.

    “OIG identified one email exchange occurring shortly before Secretary Clinton joined the Department that demonstrated a reluctance to communicate the requirement to incoming staff. In the exchange, records officials within the Bureau of Administration wondered whether there was an electronic method that could be used to capture the Secretary’s emails because they were “not comfortable” advising the new administration to print and file email records.”

    There is a lot more in the report and I would encourage reading it before demonizing Hillary. Of course, this might be inconvenient for folks who had their minds made up before the report came out. To condemn Hillary for her role at the department is a disappointing cheap shot, especially considering her qualifications for office and her positive policy positions aimed at improving the lives of us all.

  19. bearcreekbat 2016-05-27 14:15

    Cory, just for your information, when you concluded that Hillary broke the law based on the OIG’s citation to a section of “FAM,” you might have misunderstood what the acronym “FAM” stood for in the report. It stands for “Foreign Affairs Manual” which is an unusual name for a “law.” Failure to follow the directions in a manual doesn’t support an allegation that Hillary broke the law. You need a better citation to support an allegation of non-compliance with the law.

    Recall that there was procedure in place requiring that “the management section of each bureau, office, or post . . . ensure that every departing employee has signed a separation statement (form DS-109) that includes the following certification: “I have surrendered to responsible officials all unclassified documents and papers relating to the official business of the Government acquired by me while in the employ of the Department.”

    And recall further that “as the head of the agency, the Secretary is not asked to follow the exit process. Consequently, Secretaries Albright, Powell, Rice, and Clinton did not sign a DS-109 at the end of
    their tenures.”

    In contrast to Powell, however, Hillary did retain most of her emails and produced the emails still on her server when asked for them by officials shortly after leaving office.

  20. bearcreekbat 2016-05-27 14:22

    And in the third problem you identified in your analysis you stated that Hillary did not comply with the law, citing an NPR story with the headline “In Using Personal Email, Aide Says Clinton Didn’t Break Law.” Indeed, the story states up front: “A State Department spokeswoman says Hillary Clinton did not break any rules by relying solely on her personal email account.”

  21. David Newquist 2016-05-27 14:57

    The fact is, as Bearcreekbat and others have pointed out, the State Department OIG did not accuse Hillary of breaking the law. She did not obey the Department requirement guidelines for establishing and maintaining documents. Ignoring the guidelines is often the case in bureaucracies, whether government or corporate, if someone wants to actually get anything done. The FBi investigation is to determine if she broke any laws.

    But then, we live in an age and a culture where facts have little importance in the national dialogue. People are longing for the age of designated pariahs and the golden oldie songs of Jim Crow, and they have to have someone to call the N-word. Trump calls it for them.

    Dana Milbank in the Washington Post puts the real problem with Hillary in perspective:
    “…investigations into her activities have occupied much of the past 25 years, her accusers, from Whitewater to Benghazi, never really get the goods. But what Clinton has been is nearly as problematic as being crooked: Hunkered Hillary. At the first sign of conflict or accusation, Clinton circles the wagons, shuts her mouth and instructs those around her to do the same. This generates a whole lot of smoke, even if there’s no fire. Her secrecy elevates the accusations — whatever the accusations are.”

    As for who to vote for, I’m with Mark Twain: “If voting made any difference they wouldn’t let us do it.”

  22. Douglas Wiken 2016-05-27 15:06

    The email fuss and all the rest indicates that Hillary has a deadly lack of judgment, lack of common sense, and arrogance which gets her into very needless trouble. This lack of judgment and her tendency to always be wrong first and only barely correct after getting hammered are not what we want in a President.

  23. Roger Cornelius 2016-05-27 15:08

    Democrats will shout Trump is a fascist.

    Republicans will shout Sanders is socialist/communist.

    And than there is Hillary.

  24. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 15:38

    Doesn’t Drumpf have a court date approaching? Some little thing about him SCAMMING people out of tens of millions of dollars?
    Yeah,but he didn’t use a private email server.

  25. barry freed 2016-05-27 16:43

    I felt the Bern until I felt the burn of his gun position. He has lost millions of votes and much support. Of course he wants to take guns away. He is a liar and he tricks you into believing that he does not by using word play that sounds benign, but then lists every single American as someone who should not be allowed to own a gun.

    He also says gun laws are a State issue and we need a Federal Ban. So, which is it, he can’t have both States Rights and a Federal Ban.

    Bernie says no “criminals” should have guns. Okay… How many here have had a rummage sale in the last two years? Did you file the proper SD Dept. of Revenue forms and charge sales tax? If not, you are a criminal. If you have done it more than twice, you are a felon. Maybe some here don’t have rummage sales. Did you buy something online and not file the forms and pay sales tax? Did you catch a ride from someone without claiming the value of that ride on your Federal Income Taxes? Had someone babysit your kids for free? These are little things, but they are crimes nonetheless, and Bernie said: “criminals”, a title that applies to one and all.

    No, Bernie saw the HRC numbers for trashy gun talk and he sold out American Freedoms for his own selfish dream of being President.

    Back on topic: HRC and her handlers are idiots for not responding to questions of her emails by talking about the missing 3.5 million emails on the RNC Servers relating to the firing of AG’s based on politics, an actual crime. The constant reminder of that real crime would have dulled the passion of the attack dogs.

  26. happy camper 2016-05-27 17:10

    It’s mainly a witch hunt. And they found one!!! But she’s still the best choice.

  27. Darin Larson 2016-05-27 18:40

    Holy Cow, if this email much ado about nothing is the main attack against Hillary, she will beat Trump in a landslide. With all the problems in the world this is what people are focused on: whether Hillary turned over the proper format of her emails or whether she made it convenient enough for bureaucrats to gather her emails when the emails were already on government servers.

    Trump can lie, cheat, defraud, file bankruptcy and generally carry on like a two-year-old but some of you Sanders supporters would rather vote for him than Hillary?

    And when I hear Daniel Buresh say that people like Trump because they know where he stands, I know those people are plumb crazy. Trump was pro-choice before he was pro-life, he was for gun control before he was against it, he was for trade agreements before he was against trade agreements, he was against guns in schools and then he was against gun free zones and then he was for teachers having guns in schools, he was a Democrat before he was a Republican, he loved the Clintons before he hated the Clintons, he wants to lower taxes but he wants to raise taxes etc. Etc.

    To sum up: Defrauding people at Trump University: good–using personal email server and turning over paper copies bad, very bad.

  28. Jenny 2016-05-27 19:09

    Don’t give me that bs, barry. Sanders represents Vermont, of the highest gun ownership rates, and knows how much the 2nd Amendment means to that crowd. Any kind of common sense gun control to the NRA always means ‘they’re going to take your guns away’ scare tactics.
    Bernie supports closing the gun show loophole and a national instant background check system. Try to tell me this is taking away your guns.

    And don’t get me started on mental healthcare services in this country, especially in the rural areas. Getting mentally ill male individuals the mental healthcare they need without the stigma should be easier and less expensive (federally funded if you ask me). These are all issues Bernie has fought for which most common sense people would not consider radical.

  29. Jason Sebern 2016-05-27 19:39

    The Democratic establishment and its constituents have been conditioned to support HRC. They buy into the neo-liberal bs of the 1990’s. They think Bill’s policies “worked” and seem committed to follow the same game plan. However, the triangulation tactics are wearing thin. HRC has nothing new to offer … just a repeat of past failures.

  30. owen 2016-05-27 20:08

    Jason. Do you mean the failure like balancing the budget and starting to pay down the debt?

    If you want to see failure look at what Trump wants to do.

  31. Roger Cornelius 2016-05-27 20:12

    And more of Donald Trump’s flip-flops,
    he wants to debate Bernie, now he refuses to debate Bernie.

  32. Roger Cornelius 2016-05-27 20:26

    If the Democratic party is going to hang the future of America and democracy on an email server, we have a serious problem.

    Remember that even Sanders said in the first Democratic debate that he was sick of hearing about Hillary’s emails.

  33. happy camper 2016-05-27 20:27

    There’s no reason for Trump to debate Sanders and simply not in his best interest. We all know it’s Hillary versus Trump so much alike just different gender.

  34. Douglas Wiken 2016-05-27 20:36

    I am not at all sure about source below, but it may be something or not. It indicates Russians may have gotten hold of secret e-mail from Hillary’s server. I have heard nothing about this anyplace else however.,,,lost the link when Firefox crashed. Will try to find it again.

  35. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 20:37

    Jobs Created in Thousands President Political Part Republican
    19,662 Bill Clinton Democrat
    -338 George W. Bush Republican
    7,765 Barack Obama Democrat

    Another of Clinton’s failures. Looks like Obama;s gonna fail on jobs,too. Thank gawd dumbass dubya straightened the job market out.

  36. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 20:41

    Doug, are you talking about Romanian hacker Guccifer who claims he hacked and released HRC’s emails? He is being extradited to America. Fake Noise was all over this.

  37. grudznick 2016-05-27 20:59

    It will be a painful election for all. I can now imagine what Mr. Sibby must feel when 95% of candidates for all offices disgust him, and 99% of them stand no chance. I can now respect his disenfranchisement all the more. It makes one realize that when the wrong minded are put in power it really sucks. Not since before Dick Kneip have we had this situation in South Dakota.

  38. Jenny 2016-05-27 21:06

    I reckon, most Bernie supporters will leave the presidential line blank. Bernie was our last hope for a more peaceful nation.

  39. mike from iowa 2016-05-27 21:23

    If a Dem gets elected, wingnuts won’t change for the better. If it is HRC, wingnuts will be worse than they are now.

    Orrin Hatch posted a statement about his interview with Merrick Garland and said he is not backing him for the Scotus. However, the meeting has not taken place yet. So another lying wingnut makes his obstructionist views public. Message was taken down immediately,but was captured by several people.

  40. grudznick 2016-05-27 21:32

    Gentlemen and ladies, obviously no body blogging here despises Ms. Hillary more than I. But I think some of you need to relax a little bit and not worry so much about these mail things that were probably all deleted and are only little notes anyway. This is way much ado about nothing. Ms. Hillary’s hair and dress fitting is even more important that these mail server things.

  41. Darin Larson 2016-05-27 21:49

    Mike from Iowa-that political cartoon is right on point and down right scary when you think about it!

    Roger- great minds think alike, when I heard that Trump had backed out of debating Bernie I was thinking another flip-flop to add to the list.

    With Trump you can actually see his mind calculating which way to blow in the wind to curry favor with his supporters. He has no moral compass or personal values to guide him, unless profiteering is a value statement. Case in point: when he was asked about David Duke and the KKK supporting him, Trump refused to renounce Duke’s support. He claimed not to know anything about Duke. It was as if he needed to study the KKK bylaws to figure out if he could accept racists supporting him.

    This country could be set back a generation if Trump gets to appoint a couple of justices to the Supreme Court. Citizens United will stand. Roe v. Wade would be in danger. The rich would be sure to get richer at the expense of the middle class and poor. How many wars would Trump start to distract from his poor job as president?

  42. Jason Sebern 2016-05-27 21:57

    Mass Incarceration
    + Welfare Reform
    + Free Trade
    =Failed Policies

  43. Darin Larson 2016-05-27 22:26

    Jason Sebern– Mass incarceration may not be perfect, but it is hard to argue that it doesn’t bring violent crime rates down.

    Welfare reform was on the whole better than not reforming welfare. Welfare is not supposed to be a way of life. Certain states have abused their block grant freedom to cut welfare programs imprudently and the Republicans have refused to make the welfare programs more effective, but that is not on Bill or Hillary.

    Free trade has its pluses and minuses as well. Free trade has helped some of the 2nd and 3rd world countries raise their standard of living. If you want to see what trade wars and protectionism would do for our economy and the world, Trump will help you out.

    I assume if you are attributing Bill’s policies to Hillary that you are also attributing Bill’s policies that resulted in outstanding economic growth, balanced budgets and middle class pay increases to Hillary as well.

  44. leslie 2016-05-28 09:56

    I generally agree DL, however ” Welfare is not supposed to be a way of life”, seems to be a platitude. that’s like saying “Minimum wage is not supposed to be your main job”.

    But we all know in the real world, where the 1% owns most of the word’s resources, if we don’t have a living wage (read minimum wage) or an effective, compassionate welfare safety net, most every one of us is one accident away from bankruptcy. Bankruptcy laws, remember are more a safety net for the elite than for the rest of us.

    and grudz, you don’t even know who the gentlemen and ladies are. your despisal and misogyny is all u have old buddy boy. gonna go to the grave w/o becoming a decent human being, eh?

  45. leslie 2016-05-28 10:19

    mfi-there seems to be a void in reliable current news analysis on whether Hillary’s email issue “is there really a there, there?”

    it seems to be just an inevitable result of the rush and flurry of technology to have the next, greatest, profit generating desktop, laptop, blackberry, iPhone, android, or later today’s “star trek communicator or blouse ornament” new product introduction, with privacy protection now. remember when the slogan for new technology was our privacy concern was antiquated!?

    Just one more corporate hardware scam so consumers will rush from one to another newer non-compatible media format. what a rat race. we, Boomers, Gen Xrs, Gen Ys, and Millennials, all of us just keep spinning the rat’s exercise wheel, foolishly, impulsively spending our minimum wage on whatever psychological advertisement manipulates us caged slaves to do.

    an early example was BETA. Sony could not duplicate the functionality of VHS-C camcorders, and seeing the rapid loss of market share, eventually introduced the Video8 format. Their hope was that Video8 could replace both Beta and VHS for all uses. wiki

    history, unread, repeats.

  46. happy camper 2016-05-28 20:43

    It’s really just tribalism like Wiken said. Nothing is more fun than pointing out Cory was Republican. He didn’t turn over a whole new leaf he’s still the same person just with a different perspective. There must be something in our DNA that tells us to trust the home team as we were thousands of years ago. What else could explain the stupidity of professional sports.

  47. Steve Sanchez 2016-05-29 14:27

    Using any argument that includes the phrase “she didn’t break any laws” in an attempt to justify what Hillary did is weak, weak, weak. That is exactly the argument some in and out of state government (i.e., Rounds, Daugaard, Board of Regents, Dept of Education cronies) have resorted to when attempting to justify their actions after facing solid evidence of questionable and/or illegal activity. If you’re ok with Hillary’s “not having broken any laws”, which I firmly believe she has, then I’m going to assume you’re also fine with much of the skullduggery often discussed on this blog.

  48. mike from iowa 2016-05-29 15:24

    Steve Sanchez- in the past thirty years how many times was either Clinton charged with and/or convicted of a crime? How many times were they falsely accused of rape,murder, theft and jay walking?

    These two have been endlessly accused and investigated and slandered and libeled and have yet to be found guilty of breaking the law. Not one time. When people won’t file charges of mass murder and treason charges against dumbass dubya for outing a covert CIA agent(for political gain), her family and all her contacts around the world, I will not pretend that lying about a bj was grounds for impeaching a sitting Potus- W. J. Clinton. That is the only mark against either of them.

  49. Steve Sanchez 2016-05-29 16:03

    What you’re avoiding here, mfi, is the issue of whether or not Hillary will say and do whatever it takes to get what she wants – legal or not. The “whatever it takes” approach is either acceptable or it isn’t. Former VA Gov. Bob McDonnell and his attorneys are now invoking Citizens United in an attempt to avoid prison time for his conviction on 11 charges of corruption. Let’s not pretend it’s okay for some people to claim what they did was wrong, but not illegal when others are spending time behind bars for the same offenses.

  50. bearcreekbat 2016-05-29 16:51

    SS – What you are missing is mfi’s answer to your question: “whether or not Hillary will say and do whatever it takes to get what she wants – legal or not.”

    mfi’s answer is quite clear: ” in the past thirty years how many times was either Clinton charged with and/or convicted of a crime? . . . These two have been endlessly accused and investigated and slandered and libeled and have yet to be found guilty of breaking the law. Not one time.”

    In other words, you can strike the “or not” from your inquiry.

  51. mike from iowa 2016-05-29 16:54

    This is what you are avoiding. McDonnell clearly broke the laws, was tried and convicted. HRC may have broke department rules, that is yet to be decided. She has not been charged with any misdemeanors or felonies-actual laws that need to be proven to a jury of her peers before you people hang her.

    If she is duly charged and convicted in a court,I will be the first to get in line for her hanging. I am fed up with the lies,the conspiracy theories, the wasted millions on never ending investigations trying to find anything at all to keep her out of the WH. Freaking wingnuts already have drawn up impeachment papers in case she does win in Nov.

  52. mike from iowa 2016-05-29 16:58

    Just for fun, Drumpf is rehashing Vince Foster’s suicide and pretending he is not the one bringing it up. His spokesperson said the five investigations that proved Foster killed himself just weren’t enough.


  53. mike from iowa 2016-05-29 16:58

    Thanks for the support,bcb.

  54. Steve Sanchez 2016-05-29 17:13

    Personal responsibility v. what law might prescribe as legal and illegal. I’m speaking solely to Hillary here and haven’t introduced her husband in my comments. You’re deflecting. She is one bad decision after another. Some call it poor judgement. I’m in that group. You can be in favor of asking forgiveness and not permission, that’s fine.

  55. Steve Sanchez 2016-05-29 17:18

    Remember when AG Jackley declared Benda and Bollen hadn’t committed any prosecutable offense? *spoiler alert*

    They did.

  56. Steve Sanchez 2016-05-29 17:42

    When Hillary releases the transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs, that conspiracy theory can be laid to rest once and for all.

  57. mike from iowa 2016-05-29 18:32

    You don’t know what deflecting is.
    What laws do you personally believe HRC has broken? And how does transcripts of speeches to GS relate to her email problems?

    You do know that all the files and records relating to Benda’s suicide and all the scandals in South Dakota are not available for the public of any reporters to see? HRC’s life has been an open and aggressively invaded and trashed book!

  58. mike from iowa 2016-05-29 19:25

    If that is the best you got, HRC is safe at home.

  59. Lanny V Stricherz 2016-05-29 22:02

    I have been criticized widely here and in other places of my life for my criticism of HRC as a war monger and for her inbedism with the financial industry and corporate America. I have been criticized even more widely for my championing of Richard Milhouse Nixon as more liberal than any President since him including the three Democrats who will have served for 20 years when President Obama’s reign is completed.

    I am currently watching a documentary on Netflix called “Requiem for the American Dream.” It is by Noam Chomsky, who sites RMN as the last of the New Deal Presidents for the many progressive programs which he instigated.

    Chomsky also shows how trade unionism brought more equality for the working people of our country. and how the breaking of the unions, starteed by Reagan firing the air traffic controllers, has led to the stagnation of working people’s income at a time of record financial growth in the US economy and the profits derived therefrom.

  60. happy camper 2016-05-29 23:00

    HRC is not a war monger she’s a political pragmatist.

  61. Roger Cornelius 2016-05-29 23:16

    I’m with Bear and Bernie on the this, I too am sick and tired of hearing about Hillary’s emails.

  62. leslie 2016-05-29 23:54

    me too.

    who is steve sanchez and why does he suddenly want to vilify Hillary? who is he carrying water for?

    she will very likely be the next president by a long shot, but I NEVER underestimate the republicans’ ability to orchestrate a fast one. i’m fine with Bernie too if he can pull it out. but sanchez just seems to be another cog in the republican strategy to confuse voters to suspect Hillary is awful, ugly and untrustworthy-none of which is true as I have personally observed since she came into the public eye.

    my guess is trump will try to pull every distraction and diversion possible-which her organization may be fully prepared to withstand, rebut, and will annihilate him at the polls.

    I certainly could be wrong but I think these next few months are gonna be hilarious and I do not know how the republicans will exist, and in what form, after they lose, and lose the senate, and perhaps the house, and after an Obama SCOTUS appointment (likely highly qualified centrist Merrick Garland) or Hillary appointment is considered and approved.

    then the world is gonna become a safer place and we will come to grips with climate change big time over her 1st and perhaps 2nd terms.

  63. caheidelberger Post author | 2016-05-30 07:17

    Steve Sanchez is as reliable and friendly a commenter as you, Leslie. Let’s stick with the issue.

  64. happy camper 2016-05-30 10:45

    What amazes me is how many of the commenters here are eager to condemn Republicans who think slightly differently while on the other hand they are eager to welcome Muslim refugees who are much more different. If someone is from a “different culture” then you work hard to understand and accept them, but not the people who already live here. What’s up with that? Even moderate Muslims are much more conservative than your actual Republican neighbors, yet vilifying anyone with an R is totally fine. You try to push anyone away who thinks a bit differently. It’s so duplicitous and the constant us versus them is nauseating.

  65. mike from iowa 2016-05-30 11:53

    Republicans think slightly different?
    Global warming is a hoax?
    Trickle down economics works?
    Obama is a Muslim?
    Republicans take care of moral issues,god takes care of the economy?
    Fracking doesn’t cause earthquakes?
    Kids can’t pray in public schools?
    California isn’t having a drought?
    Everybody loves Drumpf?
    Can’t get pregnant of you are legitimately raped?
    The poor don’t pay taxes?

  66. happy camper 2016-05-30 14:57

    Mike points out the extreme as can I:

    Muslims will kill you if you create an image of Mohamoud.
    Muslims honor kill their daughters if they are raped.
    Muslims kill you if you try to leave the religion.
    Muslims genitally mutilate women so they can’t experience sexual pleasure.
    Muslims make women cover their bodies from head to toe.
    Muslims kill gays.
    The list goes on….

    Tossing out extremes there are many, many reasonable Republicans. Our extreme Southern Baptists are not ISIS.

  67. mike from iowa 2016-05-30 16:20

    Not a word about libs, HC?

  68. happy camper 2016-05-31 09:42

    There’s a lot of reasonable libs too.

Comments are closed.