We received this email from a 40-year veteran of the federal workforce, who raises serious questions about Hillary Clinton and her emails:
Since this story broke I have been wondering why "Conversion" has not entered the discussion. In my 40 years in government service, 20 as a senior supervisor, there has been an inviolable rule. One does not use Government resources for personal benefit, and one does not use private resources for Government benefit for personal convenience.
Approved Telecommuting, as an example, normally requires accessing one's work on a Government account through a Government portal meeting Government standards, maintaining Government control of work performed. There are of course "exceptions" to any rule, with approval to be granted by the appropriate Agency Secretary.
So, perhaps Secretary Clinton was granted an exception. There is positively no benefit to the U.S. Government for anyone, much less a Cabinet Secretary to exempt themselves from the standards a common Government employee is bound to ... "opted for personal convenience as allowed by the State Department."
Really? How Imperial. What an outstanding example for those of us for whom our "personal convenience" is subordinate to the responsibilities of our service to the Government and public.
The operative concept is "at the convenience of the Government" not "for the convenience of the employee." When I was a Government employee, in particular my last position requiring 24/7 availability, I carried my personal phone/PDA, and a government issued phone/Blackberry. A government owned PC configured to government standards was issued and installed in my quarters and all official business was conducted on a network under Government control.
I am totally at a loss as to why no one seems to know what corner of Government regulations this circumstance is to be found. I do know that Government employees have been disciplined for less.
What a wonderful example for the masses, eh? I suppose I will eat cake :)