While the attention nationally has been on the server of Hillary Clinton and the ongoing investigation, there is a new development in the effort to acquire another set of emails that should cause public outcry. Two years ago, the State Department officially stated that there were no emails responsive to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request about a close Hillary Clinton adviser’s contact with the media. Now, after the intervention of a federal judge, the Department has admitted that it has located 17,855 emails that appear to match the criteria. From 0 to 17,855 and no one seems particularly bothered by the false statement of the State Department in its early response to the lawful request under FOIA. No one is under review at the State Department for possible termination or even discipline. No one is being transferred or retrained. The government first says that there were no emails and then is forced to admit that there are potentially thousands. It is being treated as just another day in the life of our government.
The website Gawker filed a FOIA request in 2012 seeking any emails between Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Philippe Reines (a top Hillary Clinton adviser) and a list of 33 major media outlets. Reines was involved in an angry email exchange with journalist Michael Hastings where he lost his temper and told Hastings to “f-ck off.”
In July of 2013, the State Department responded to Gawker’s request with a letter which stated, “After a thorough search . . . no records responsive to your request were located.” Zero. Gawker then went to court. It has become all too predictable for agencies to deny everything and wait to see if they are forced to fess up to the truth on such evidence. This occurs because no one in government is held accountable by the courts.
The truth came out in a “court-ordered status report” where the State Department has admitted to having located 81,159 emails belonging to Reines and estimated that 22 percent may be responsive to the FOIA request made back in 2012. Indeed, three are so many relevant emails that the Department is requesting more time to “conduct a line-by-line review of an estimated 17,855 emails for applicable FOIA exemptions.”
It would seem reasonable to expect a show cause order for the State Department to explain the slight discrepancy from zero to thousands of emails. Otherwise, it appears that Reines’ answer to Hastings reflects a general response of the entire Department to the American people in using FOIA.
Anyone daring enough to raise a public ruckus over glaring inconsistencies and obvious subterfuge better be prepared to incur the wrath of Hildebeest and her goons. Expect a relentless IRS audit, or, perhaps, seriously consider getting your will in order. Those with the audacity to speak up regarding these things have been known to have committed suicide and/or disappear.
I think in 1 years time this will all be forgotten
The science geek
http://www.thesciencegeek.org
Who enforces FOIA compliance? A friend recently filed a FOIA against a local municipality and received a few forms. Missing were key filings with the court that he found on his own.
1) Jonathan, you have no idea if anyone was fired and/or reprimanded over this — yet you pretend you know.
2) Jonathan, You’ve had a hard-on for the Clintons since you demanded President Clinton be impeached.
3) Yes, it’s unfortunate anytime any Administration denies FOIA request — but your article here just sounds more like sour grapes as opposed to logic.
Jerry,
Your post reminded me of the Rothschild dynasty.
______________________________________________________
“Napoleon Escapes and Rothschild Makes a Killing
1815
France
Napoleon escapes from his banishment in Elba, an Island off the coast of Italy, and returned to Paris. By March Napoleon had equipped an army with the help of borrowed money from the Eubard Banking House of Paris.
“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes… Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” — Napoleon Bonaparte
On June 18th, 74,000 French troops led by Napoleon, sizing up to meet 67,000 British and other European Troops 200 miles NE of Paris.
Nathan Rothschild knowing that information is power stationed his trusted agent named Rothworth near the battlefield. As soon as the battle was over Rothworth quickly returned to London, delivering the news to Rothschild 24 hours ahead of Wellington’s courier. A victory by Napoleon would have devastated Britain’s financial system. Nathan stationed himself in his usual place next to an ancient pillar in the stock market. Knowing he would be observed he hung his head and began openly to sell huge numbers of British Government Bonds. Believing this to mean that Napoleon must have won, everyone started to sell their British Bonds as well. The bottom fell out of the market. Rothschild had his agents buying up all the hugely devalued bonds.”
I was thinking of a future secretary of state person like retired 4 star General Ray Odierno that might be a good fit. But Ray got a job.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM) announced the appointment of retired four-star General Raymond T. Odierno, former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army,
to a senior advisory capacity at the firm, effective September 1st. General Odierno will provide strategic advice and global insights to Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon,
the Board of Directors and members of the Operating Committee on a broad range of issues including international planning and country risk analysis, technology,
operations and the rapidly evolving issues of physical and cyber security. He will also provide his expertise to help structure and carry out the firm’s leadership
development training programs and assist on other leadership and workforce development issues.
As the media and the American public continue to get wrapped around the axle on the content of the emails we seem to be losing sight of the fact this is all the result of Clinton’s decision to use a private server for State Department business. We should call it the Clinton Sanctuary Server because the illegal activity of sending/receiving classified emails is a secondary violation resulting from the primary violation of the private server.
Washington needs an exorcism! Too many lies, denials, and more lies.
Perhaps that’s why Trump is so popular, he admits and doesn’t try to hide what he is and says what he thinks. I’m not a fan of Trump, but I think his popularity is because people are fed up with the same old bureaucratic aristocrats (Democrats & Republican’s) who think they can do things the way they want to do them without consequences. These past 15 years has revealed the conniving and corruption in Washington.
A lot of vague apCray here.
Take this lame half sentence:
..”no emails responsive to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request about a close Hillary Clinton adviser’s contact with the media. ”
So what is in the emails that the media wants? What does this have to do with the so called “classified” , or “secret” or “top secret” documents or statements made in emails made by Hillary or her staff? What is her “staff”? The entire State Department?
The whole scenario is orsheHitShay, if you know what I mean by that term.
Catherine Duval was the woman in charge of production request for the IRS during the Lois Lerner debacle. A few months ago, Duval was transferred to the State Dept. to serve the same role. I know that sounds like a late night television joke, but it is not.
Otherwise, it appears that Reines’ answer to Hastings reflects a general response of the entire Department to the American people in using FOIA.
Our aristocracy believes it’s beneath them to be second guessed by the bourgeoisie.
Reblogged this on Scoop Feed.
“In order to be effective the FOIA has to have teeth in it.” -Steve Fleischer
Yep.
Had experience with a California Water Board FOIA request relating to a company that I had worked for.
Fortunately I had access to those some of those records from another source so I had a limited baseline to compare Water Board responses with.
The first request generated roughly 20% of the existing records (and repeated assurances from the Water Board that I had been given “everything”).
I had to make three more requests in order to get copies of all the records that I already had. That generated (hopefully) most of the desired internal memos that the first three requests failed to produce.
(I only started got a real response after I went to the local press and showed how many omissions remained after three FOIA requests. The press also got copies of the emails from the local administrator assuring me three times that I had gotten “everything”.)
I don’t think that the omissions were deliberate (unlike the State Dept/Clinton responses); I think that typical of government, California’s omissions were a combination of laziness and stupidity.
The problem is that A FOIA omission has few consequences to the government.
In order to be effective the FOIA has to have teeth in it.
Old — 03/14/15 — but interesting:
So, Philippe Reines Sent Us an Email
http://gawker.com/so-philippe-reines-sent-us-an-email-1689406566
The United States government model is supposed to be a “constitutional democratic republic” which there is not supreme top-down authority. If agency heads or leaders are following the U.S. Constitution, their authority is checked and diffused down through layers of bureaucracy. In that scenario the top official has limited control on what happens down stream unless, like Nixon, the leader is an extreme “micro-manager” aware of a crime downstream and ordered the actual crimes.
At White House state dinners Richard M. Nixon (not his wife) would excess over the type of napkins and silverware on the tables and micro-managed Watergate with the same zeal.
Contrast the American model with a “dictatorship” government model. Even in dictatorships where the penalty for not following too-down orders could be prison or death – even in dictatorship models, without checks and diffusion, subordinates screw up.
Unless Hillary was an extreme “micro-manager” like Nixon, involved in the small details of actual crimes, she probably has little to worry about.
Why do we expect anything different here? There has been no accountability in this government except for whistleblowers for ages. Look at what Bush/Cheney managed to do with zero accountability to this day so the cover ups still are in place. This is why she thought she could do this in the first place. She is part of the system and they all feel very secure within it.
You see the system worked … really … really.
That was the tactic by the fraudulent insurance company in the book “The Rainmaker”. Deny, deny, deny and hope they go away. Our government will need to learn that the people are not going to go away. There is hope yet.
To paraphrase a famous politician, ‘We will have the most open and transparent government’. Can anyone name that politician???