Hillary Clinton’s myriad statements explaining her exclusive use of personal email for official business while secretary of state are coming under heavy fire from all sides in the wake of a damaging inspector general report – and her campaign’s insistence the report proves her practices were nothing unusual is being met with similar criticism.
Top Republicans from presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump to House Speaker Paul Ryan slammed Clinton over the report, accusing her of breaking agency rules to “serve her own interests” and putting security at “risk” in the process. But aside from shows of support from Democratic allies on Capitol Hill, other prominent voices in Washington were similarly unsparing toward the Democratic presidential front-runner.
The headline on The Washington Post’s editorial Thursday blared, “Clinton’s Inexcusable, Willful Disregard For The Rules.”
The board wrote that the State Department inspector general audit makes clear her email use “was not a casual oversight,” and Clinton “ignored” repeated warnings to use official communications.
In March 2015, Clinton described her email set-up as a “matter of convenience,” and insisted, “It was allowed.”
But the report, which was formally released Thursday, said investigators found no evidence Clinton “requested or obtained guidance or approval” to conduct official business on her personal email account or server despite having an “obligation” to discuss this. The report said had she notified the appropriate offices, they would not have approved her “exclusive reliance” on a personal account.
The audit said employees also were instructed to use “approved, secure methods” to send information known as “sensitive but unclassified” – yet emails on Clinton’s account “regularly contained information marked as SBU.”
After details of the report first circulated on Wednesday, Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon issued a statement pointing to “longstanding” problems with department recordkeeping and describing Clinton’s practices as “consistent” with those of her predecessors. The statement echoed Clinton’s claims throughout the campaign, holding up the IG audit as proof.
"While political opponents of Hillary Clinton are sure to misrepresent this report for their own partisan purposes, in reality, the Inspector General documents just how consistent her email practices were with those of other Secretaries and senior officials at the State Department who also used personal email,” he said. “… But as this report makes clear, Hillary Clinton's use of personal email was not unique, and she took steps that went much further than others to appropriately preserve and release her records."
Fallon later told Fox News that regulations did not bar using personal email for work purposes, again noting that other officials had done so going back years.
The report did say the department long has had issues with email records, and “email usage and preservation practices varied across the tenures of the five most recent Secretaries.”
But the report highlighted Clinton’s practices as out of the ordinary, especially for someone at her level – and coming into the job as new guidance was being issued. The IG found only three cases where officials used non-department accounts “on an exclusive basis for day-to-day operations.” Just two of those cases involved secretaries of state: Colin Powell and Clinton.
And the report noted that during Clinton’s tenure, the guidance was “considerably more detailed and more sophisticated” than in the past. Yet she still defied the guidelines.
Further, while Clinton has said she’s happy to talk to “anybody, anytime” about the issue, the report said she declined an OIG request for an interview, though her predecessors made themselves available. Aides Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills and Jake Sullivan also declined interviews with government investigators.
Regulations show they were essentially required to help the inspector general, who has broad powers to compel testimony.
On another front, Mills also reportedly has asked a federal judge to intervene and prevent any recordings of her scheduled deposition to a conservative group about the email system from being released.
The IG report also showed department staffers shielding Clinton’s set-up from scrutiny.
The report said two staffers said they discussed their concerns in 2010 with officials, but were told Clinton’s personal system had been approved “and the matter was not to be discussed any further.” One staffer said a top official with Information Resource Management “instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.”
Clinton, too, was personally involved in the decision-making. In November 2010, Clinton aide Abedin emailed Clinton about the possibility of getting her on an official email account. Clinton responded, “Let’s get separate address or device but I don't want any risk of the personal being accessible."
The report also raised questions about security risks, pointing to one message from an adviser that acknowledged her system was “attacked” in 2011, though it apparently failed.
But perhaps the most explicit violation pertained to recordkeeping rules.
The report said 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.”
She did not, the report said, and therefore “did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.”
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said “she was in clear violation of the Federal Records Act.”
In this case, the inspector general report faulted Powell for the same violation.
Fox News’ Catherine Herridge and FoxNews.com’s Judson Berger contributed to this report.
電郵門,FBI問了希拉裏三小時 下一步恐成大選震撼彈(圖)
文章來源: 世界日報 於 2016-07-03 09:46:23 - 新聞取自各大新聞媒體,新聞內容並不代表本網立場!
打印本新聞 (被閱讀 1126 次)
原文鏈接>>
聯邦調查局對喜萊莉「電郵門」進行的調查,不論結果如何,都可能傷害她競選總統的大計。圖為喜萊莉於6月28日在洛杉磯出席會議。(路透)
聯邦調查局探員2前往喜萊莉在華府的家裡調查電郵門事件。圖為安全人員在喜萊莉住家外值勤。(美聯社)
喜萊莉?柯林頓接受聯邦調查局探員問話,使她使用私人電郵伺服器的做法受到的調查更接近終結。調查人員將把問話結果,與他們掌握的資料加以比對,在未來數周結束調查作業。如喜萊莉受到聯邦起訴,可能對大選造成空前震撼。
司法部長林奇為了避嫌保證接受調查團隊的建議,使負責調查的司法部職業檢察官以及共和黨籍的聯調局長柯梅的態度更受注意。
聯調局必須對正式的起訴建議做決定,而關鍵問題在於喜萊莉的伺服器和她的做法是否違反處理機密的法定標準。
一些觀察家把本案與前中央情報局長裴卓斯處理機密不當事件拿來比較。據悉聯調局原來要求對裴卓斯控以可能判處徒刑的更嚴重罪名,可是當時的司法部長霍爾德將其減為行為不檢輕罪。
喜萊莉若被起訴,起訴本身在技術上並不會使喜萊莉失去參選、獲得黨提名或當選總統資格,可是她不論是在接受黨提名之前或之後受到起訴,都會受到極大的退選壓力。
如在黨代會前提出起訴,而喜萊莉因此退選,黨代表將能擺脫既有承諾和約束,另外支持別的人選。這並不表示桑德斯能夠自動取而代之,民主黨也可能推出別的人選。
在黨代會後才出現起訴行動則發展難料,民主黨可能另推人選,而觀察家表示喜萊莉挑選的副總統人選可能順勢扶正。
不論調查結果如何,喜萊莉一直到11月大選都無法擺脫其陰影,甚至到大選過後都還無法高枕無憂。
喜萊莉有可能自己不會麵對大陪審團,可是她的一些親信助理卻可能為主子扛罪。
聯調局也有可能建議起訴,而林奇儘管保證不幹預,到時候卻拒絕提出起訴或減輕罪名。
鑑於本案涉及濃厚政治意味,這種情況可能導致辦案人員高調辭職。
喜萊莉於去年3月在紐約聯合國總部的記者會上承認,當初任國務卿時,為圖方便而未使用官方的電郵帳號。(Getty Images)
正競選總統的喜萊莉?柯林頓,2日就她擔任國務卿時私設伺服器和完全使用私人電郵帳戶的問題,接受聯邦調查局長達三個半小時的問話,顯示聯調局對電郵門持續將近一年的刑事調查,可能已進入最後階段,即將做出決定。
聯調局找喜萊莉問話是預料之事,並不表示她或任何人可能受到起訴。喜萊莉的競選陣營說,喜萊莉在華府聯調局總部誌願接受問話。「誌願」一詞顯示她並非受到傳訊。
喜萊莉2009年至2013年擔任美國最高階外交官期間使用私人電郵及伺服器引發的諸多質疑,更已糾纏她的總統競選活動長達一年多,並助長選民認為她不值得信賴的疑慮。
喜萊莉使用私人電郵帳戶處理公務往來的做法,在共和黨主持的國會小組去年調查她處理班加西事件的情況時被揭發。喜萊莉曾為此道歉,可是批評者宣稱,這種做法違反保護機密文件法規,並可能構成罪行。
國務院督察長5月間提出調查報告,嚴厲批評喜萊莉使用私人電郵帳戶,並將伺服器設在自宅並未尋求許可,她的團隊也不理會國務院官員對她的電郵做法違反聯邦標準,並可能使駭客得以竊取敏感資料的一再警告。
喜萊莉接受聯調局問話,也趕上她的丈夫前總統柯林頓本周在鳳凰城機場,與主管聯調局的司法部長林奇會麵,因此引發政治風暴,使電郵門調查作業的公正性更加受到質疑。
一些法律專家認為就本案提出刑事起訴極不可能,不過在民主黨四周後就要正式提名喜萊莉為其總統候選人之時,電郵門案懸而不決有如附骨之蛆,也給予對手攻擊把柄。
不論聯調局的調查結果如何,都可能傷到喜萊莉的總統夢。如果她受到起訴,她的誠信會更受質疑,甚至要求她退選。如果她沒受到起訴,批評者也會指控歐巴馬政府為一黨之私枉顧法紀。
數十名共和黨國會議員一直敦促林奇指派不受白宮影響的獨立檢察官,決定喜萊莉的做法是否違反任何法律。但是,儘管歐巴馬一再公開支持喜萊莉,還發生機場私會事件,林奇一直抗拒這些要求。