Legal group poised to quiz Clinton aides about email server

[karynnj]

73. Your links are good

Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said she was asked in Oct 2014, but the State Department spokesperson in State briefings has repeatedly said they tried to get them earlier. (This was an instance where the SD has NOT been willing to stand behind HRC's story.) I believe the SD department and the quotes in the NYT from David Wade, rather than HRC, who often does not tell the whole truth.

In addition, the IG position, not filled for HRC's whole term, was filled in September 2013, after being nominated in July - as early as April, Kerry had said he had suggested someone who the WH was vetting. ( http://www.pogo.org/blog/2013/07/obama-makes-second-ig-nomination-in-two-weeks.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/ ) It seems that the IG has taken the lead in investigating what happened for the State Department, which limited its recent role to getting the Clinton emails out.

I think that the top management of the State Department under Clinton completely blew off accountability - not just on email - but not appointing an IG the entire time. I can believe that between the huge job of staffing to backfill the many people who left with Clinton --- who had near free reign to pick her team and the on going work of the State Department, it took time before anyone at a level to do anything got the complete picture of what HRC had done in not insuring that State had the emails they should of had.

Where they might be faulted is that they did not go public when they found the problem, but tried to fix the problem.