Addressee Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton is criticized in the United States for failure to fulfill his own instructions for the use of official correspondence

Printing and electronic media in the United States actively discussed in their Sunday materials information that Hillary Clinton, when he was state secretary, used the service of official correspondence exclusively by personal e -mail, and not secure, official.

Nothing criminal Clinton in this case is incriminated, but the fact that she is a probable contender for the president’s post, and even an undoubted favorite of the 2016 race, led to an acute political polemic.

The administration of Barack Obama immediately upon coming to power issued the directive that the entire official correspondence of employees should be conducted through the channels of official mail and stored in the department at the place of work. In 2011, Clinton confirmed this order with her own instruction, sent to his subordinates in the State Department. Nevertheless, as the New York Times found out, the Secretary of State did not follow its own instructions, conducted all the official correspondence through a personal account in e -mail, and, moreover, according to the information of the Associated Press, archived it not on the protected server of its department, but on the personal, which she directly owned.

Ron Furner , deputy chief editor of the political weekly National Journal, sympathizing with the Democrats, sharply criticized the politician. "For some reason, Clinton decided that the law was not written to her. And that the letters that she sent, being a Secretary of State, for some mysterious reason belong to her personally. Nothing like this. All taxpayers are rightfully accessed."

In December last year, Clinton transferred 55 thousand units of her correspondence to the State Department to the Archive Directorate of the State Department. According to Presidential press secretary Josh Ernest, if the Clinton team selected all the correspondence related to her official activities, and returned the letters to her purpose, then the White House does not have any complaints to her. The question of whether the entire correspondence was returned or only the part, which Clinton considered it necessary to return, remains open. As the former member of the collegium of the Supreme Court of the state of New Jersey Andrew Napolitano , not Clinton and the team of her lawyers to determine what to return and what not, noted. Napolitano also reported that the former CIA director David Petreus agreed with the requirement of the Prosecutor General’s Office to admit his guilt in sending a letter containing secret information on an open electronic mail channel. Could Clinton allow the same oversight?

- When a person works for the state, he sacrifices the right to inviolability of the personal sphere, including correspondence, said Richard Khaas, President of the foreign policy of the MSNBC channel, said in a conversation with reporters of the MSNBC channel. In addition to the problem of belonging to letters, the problem of their content is also completely important, are there any information that is not subject to public?

In September 2012, the Islamists committed an attack on the US diplomacy in the Libyan city of the USA, during which the American ambassador and three of his assistants were killed. In actions or, rather, the inaction of the CIA, the Pentagon and the State Department regarding the incident there were a number of obscure points, the investigation of which was involved in the special commission of the lower house of the congress. According to the chairman of the commission, Benghazi correspondence, which Clinton transferred to the State Department, and he sent to Congress contains many gaps. Around this on CNN, a furious dispute flared up between the members of the Commission Republican Daril Issa and Democrat Adam Schiff :

“Hillary Clinton, it should be noted that it was not an exception: all the Secretary of State Teaching before her also conducted official correspondence through a personal account.” Last summer, the commission knew about this account, Clinton collaborated entirely with us, we received all the correspondence of the case. The fact that the Republicans, members of the commission, have now turned to court to demand the same correspondence from Clinton, there is a gesture of despair and evidence that they could not impose anything reprehensible on Bengraz to the Secretary of State, said Adam Shiff.

- Voluntary cooperation with the commission does not mean that Clinton gave us all relevant information. And while the attitude with her is built on a voluntary basis, she will not be anything if it turns out that she has concealed something important from us. That's why we were forced to resort to a court order: now, for the concealment of documents, Clinton will face punishment. And it is wrong that the Secretary of State was in the desire to cooperate with us: very tough negotiations with her lawyers took four months. In theory, she should have left all her official correspondence in the State Department when she resigned two years ago. But she did this only when the commission found out about her personal account, said Daryl Issa.

Laura Mekler from Wall Street Jornal, speaking on the PBS public television channel, summed up the oddities of L'Affaire Clinton: conducting correspondence, personal and official, only through a personal account; storage of correspondence on a personal server; and a two -year delay in the transfer of correspondence for the departmental purpose - the archival management of the State Department.

The same Wall Street Jornal released another information that throws a shadow at the entire Clinton family and a charity foundation, which, as it turned out, received great donations from foreign donors. Moreover, those based not only in the friendly US countries, but also in those whose reputation in Washington is far from ideal, like the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.