HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » For those who don't recal...

Fri May 27, 2016, 09:48 AM

For those who don't recall, Hillary left the Inspector General position at State unfilled

Hillary never filled the vacant IG position at the State Department in 4 years. Now we see why.

29 replies, 4814 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 29 replies Author Time Post
Reply For those who don't recall, Hillary left the Inspector General position at State unfilled (Original post)
BernieforPres2016 May 2016 OP
NWCorona May 2016 #1
BernieforPres2016 May 2016 #2
morningfog May 2016 #3
NWCorona May 2016 #5
NWCorona May 2016 #4
shanti May 2016 #23
riversedge May 2016 #6
NWCorona May 2016 #7
LiberalFighter May 2016 #8
riversedge May 2016 #11
LiberalFighter May 2016 #15
tonyt53 May 2016 #9
Octafish May 2016 #10
riversedge May 2016 #12
Octafish May 2016 #18
KoKo May 2016 #13
Octafish May 2016 #19
tazkcmo May 2016 #26
jeff47 May 2016 #24
Avalux May 2016 #14
pdsimdars May 2016 #16
Avalux May 2016 #17
pdsimdars May 2016 #20
Avalux May 2016 #25
Darb May 2016 #22
Darb May 2016 #21
annavictorious May 2016 #28
annavictorious May 2016 #27
felix_numinous May 2016 #29

Response to BernieforPres2016 (Original post)

Fri May 27, 2016, 09:53 AM

1. Kerry had one nominated, vetted, confirmed and seated within 6 months after taking over.

People should read the other audits from the OIG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #1)

Fri May 27, 2016, 09:56 AM

2. Imagine Hillary's people telling computer security people this issue is never to be brought up again

Who is going to stop her from doing whatever she wants if she becomes President?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Reply #2)

Fri May 27, 2016, 09:59 AM

3. That is an important point. It is a glimpse into how she would run the executive.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #3)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:00 AM

5. No doubt about it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Reply #2)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:00 AM

4. And that's something people really need to realize.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Reply #2)

Fri May 27, 2016, 01:57 PM

23. that's what makes me nervous

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NWCorona (Reply #1)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:18 AM

6. It is the President who puts forth the nomination of cabinate-level positions such as the

the Inspector General for SOS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Reply #6)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:24 AM

7. I'm aware of that. I said Kerry because it's his department.

The fact remains that there was a permanent IG installed in less than half a year after Kerry took over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Reply #6)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:31 AM

8. You are being silly. Facts are immaterial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalFighter (Reply #8)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:10 AM

11. If you think I am incorrect-then prove the proof. Waiting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Reply #11)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:24 AM

15. Did you read the last part? (Facts are immaterial.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Original post)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:45 AM

9. You can thank the GOP for that. The SOS doesn't make the appointment, the prez does.

 

No way they would go along with Obama on that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tonyt53 (Reply #9)

Fri May 27, 2016, 10:50 AM

10. WTF are you talking about?

Perhaps you're thinking of justices nominated to the Supreme Court requiring Senate confirmation. Department of State Inspectors General are appointed by the president, based on the nominations forwarded by the Secretary of State.


The Clintons Have Not Changed: The Clintonian War on the IGs

By William K. Black
February 23, 2016 Bloomington, MN

Secretary Hillary Clinton is asking Democratic voters to believe that she has experienced a “Road to Damascus” conversion from her roots as a leader of the “New Democrats” – the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party. When exactly this conversion occurred is never stated, but an interesting fact has emerged that demonstrates it did not occur during her service as the Secretary of State. A Wall Street Journal story provides the key facts, but none of the analysis.

Newly released emails indicate that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top staff were involved in the selection process for the State Department’s internal watchdog, a position that ultimately went unfilled throughout her four-year tenure.


The WSJ’s angle is that such involvement in the selection of the Inspector General (IG) is a threat to the IG’s vital independence. True, and also true as the story notes that Hillary was far from rare as an agency or department head in seeking to select behind the scenes the supposedly independent IGs.

The function of the IG is to “speak truth to power.” Naturally, “power” hates IGs with a purple passion. Government leaders are most likely to hate having its abuses made public by IG when the government leader is secretly acting in concert with immensely powerful private leaders for their mutual benefit at the expense of the public.

What the WSJ missed is that the Clinton’s, for decades, have sought to destroy the independence and effectiveness of the IGs precisely because of the threat that they pose of blowing the whistle on these abuses. The Obama administration, of course, is famous for its prosecutions of those who blow the whistle on such abuses. The real story is not that Hillary attempted to select a lap dog as IG – the real story is that for her entire tenure as Secretary, four years, she left unfilled the leadership position of the only institution in the State Department dedicated to maintaining integrity and preventing the abuse of public power to aid cronies. That aid, of course, comes with the clear expectation that the cronies will make the head of the State Department wealthy as soon as she or he steps down. There is no possible defense for that, and it does not happen accidentally. The primary blame goes to President Obama, who made no nomination for the position for the entire four years. It wasn’t Republican intransigence that explains this scandal.

CONTINUED...

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/03/clintons-not-changed-clintonian-war-igs.html#more-10101


Maybe you were thinking of a way to insert disinformation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #10)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:11 AM

12. As I said above--it is the President to nominates the IG of cabinate-level positions (eg. SOS)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Reply #12)

Fri May 27, 2016, 12:29 PM

18. Great, thanks! I stand corrected.

Senate confirms. Here's a link for my fellow Doubting Thomases:

President Obama nominated Steve A. Linick as State Department Inspector General back in June filling a 1,989-day vacancy. (After 1,989 Day-Vacancy — President Obama Nominates Steve Linick as State Dept Inspector General). He will succeed Howard J. Krongard who announced his resignation on December 7, 2007. Mr. Linick went before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 30, 2013 (see video here). During his confirmation hearing, he made the following pledges:

From a strategic and leadership perspective, I understand that the responsibilities of the position to which I have been nominated are great. Based on the significant issues facing the Department of State, it is clear to me that assuming the leadership role of Inspector General will be challenging and rewarding. I look forward to this task, if confirmed.

If confirmed, I pledge to:

Ensure that the Department of State Office of Inspector General (OIG) is an independent and objective organization that provides timely, robust, fact-based oversight, transparency, and accountability to the programs and operations of the Department of State;
Consult stakeholders regularly (including the Government Accountability Office and affected communities)
Efficiently and effectively deploy OIG resources to those areas that present the highest risk to the Department of State;
Collaborate with other inspectors general who have potentially overlapping interests, jurisdiction, and programs;
Ensure whistleblowers have a safe forum to voice grievances and are protected from retaliation; and
Aggressively protect taxpayer funds against fraud, waste, and abuse.


CONTINUED...

https://diplopundit.net/2013/09/30/senate-confirms-steve-linick-state-dept-finally-gets-an-inspector-general-after-2066-days/


No wonder Hillary didn't want to see an Inspector General appointed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #10)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:17 AM

13. Recommend for exposure...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #13)

Fri May 27, 2016, 12:36 PM

19. Sunlight Foundation

In researching how an IG gets appointed (as there are no links above) I discovered:



What a State Department's inspector general can tell us about open government

by Alex Howard
Sunlight Foundation, MAY 26, 2016, 4:15 P.M.

The release of a critical report by the U.S. State Department’s inspector general on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email practices answers questions that have lingered since last March, raises new ones and creates a moment to reaffirm our expectations for accountability from public servants and their staff.

The former secretary of state's contention that she complied with the law evades the broader issue: She relied exclusively on a private, unaccountable email system that shielded public records from internal and external scrutiny, disregarded internal efforts that should have led to a change in that system, and then made a series of decisions that created much more difficulty for investigators auditing the systems to assess security or classification issues.

Unfortunately, Clinton’s arrangement, instead of protecting the public trust, seems designed to do the opposite — shield information from any potential public view.

Electronic records are getting harder to manage, but government security rules, regulations and laws exist for a reason. While compliance with them can be time-consuming, no official should be above the law. Proper records management empowers public oversight, and setting up a parallel email system allowed Clinton to evade the Freedom of Information Act, congressional oversight and the reach of inspectors general — all of which play a critical role holding agencies accountable.

Since Clinton left office without turning over her email records to the State Department, it has become extremely difficult to determine which records were governmental and which were not. Allowing a full, independent legal review of a cabinet secretary’s email account (covering both personal correspondence and official business) would have been an extraordinary concession for Clinton to make — but so was using a private email server exclusively for government business.

Gaps in the email trove turned over to the Department of State also drive home how problematic it was for Clinton’s private lawyers to review records to determine what was public business or not. Given that emails with government business have been found that were not turned over, public trust in that process is understandably shaken.

In addition to the concerns about email practices and retention, the inspector general report raises questions about the security of the systems used to transmit data. The apparent disregard for internal checks and balances regarding securing legal authority or security assurance is far short of what we should expect of political appointees and their staffs. We expect government officials to respect security warnings when transmitting sensitive data. If legal and IT practices are in question, the agency and its leadership have a responsibility to address those and work together to develop secure mobile options for those who need them.

The report also indicates that Clinton’s former staff did not fully cooperate with investigators. The public should not have to expect the Department of Justice or a federal judge to compel executive branch secretaries to explain how they used personal email or detail how they protect and secure confidential diplomatic communications.

CONTINUED w/links, resources and stuff that helps us know...

https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2016/05/26/what-a-state-departments-inspector-general-can-tell-us-about-open-government/



Amazing what one can learn reading DU, KoKo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #19)

Fri May 27, 2016, 08:08 PM

26. RW smears.

Nobody cares.
She is the nominee.
Deal With It
She won't be indicted.
No laws were broken.
It's a "review".

What else?

Bernie's fault.
She's not adept at desktop email.
It was convenient.


edited to add:Kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tonyt53 (Reply #9)

Fri May 27, 2016, 03:11 PM

24. This claim has the minor problem that there is currently a State IG

who was nominated to Obama by Kerry, appointed by Obama, and confirmed.

If GOP obstruction was the entire problem, that could not have happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Original post)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:19 AM

14. Hillary used her position to help the Clinton Foundation.

The private email server, Sidney Blumenthal....I can't even imagine the emails we haven't seen and the deals made that were not State Department business. We'll never know because there's no audit trail.

She didn't fill the IG position on purpose, so she could do whatever she wanted with no oversight. Haughty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Avalux (Reply #14)

Fri May 27, 2016, 11:42 AM

16. What do you mean we'll never know? The FBI recovered all those deleted emails. THEY know

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #16)

Fri May 27, 2016, 12:05 PM

17. I don't believe I've heard that, do you have a link?

It's my understanding that all State Department emails were under Hillary's control; there were no copies saved on government servers. She provided copies of her emails, but we have to take her word for it that she provided the ALL. I don't believe that was the case, especially after reading the IG report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Avalux (Reply #17)

Fri May 27, 2016, 01:48 PM

20. A very balanced informative overview

 

http://thompsontimeline.com/The_Clinton_Email_Scandal_Timeline


Get some popcorn and be prepared to be amazed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #20)

Fri May 27, 2016, 07:54 PM

25. Thank you.

I appreciate the information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Avalux (Reply #14)

Fri May 27, 2016, 01:55 PM

22. She should sue you.

 

If your opinion mattered. So no worries, just keep on making shit up as you go along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Original post)

Fri May 27, 2016, 01:53 PM

21. She is sooooo crafty.

 

Dr. Evil I tell ya, Dr. Evil.

We need to stop her at all costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darb (Reply #21)

Fri May 27, 2016, 08:13 PM

28. This is as nonsensical as the claim that Clinton gave a stand down order to the military

 

in Benghazi because everyone knows that the SOS controls the military.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Original post)

Fri May 27, 2016, 08:10 PM

27. They're worse than the birthers

 

It's the president's job to make the appointment. The SOS does not have the authority to appoint an inspector general. It was Obama who left the acting IG in place during Clinton's years at State.

Wait...if Obama left the acting IG in place, that means there was an IG during Clinton's tenure. Darn it! There goes another phony conspiracy theory...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/us/politics/top-posts-remain-vacant-throughout-obama-administration.html?_r=0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Original post)

Fri May 27, 2016, 08:30 PM

29. A person who avoided oversight

for four years got a lot done under the radar, and it would likely take another four years to uncover. Endless investigations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread