Ninja Scooter
Member
So you want fines and punishments dished out based on "feels" even when there isn't sufficient proof? Is the OP Roger Goodel?
Why wasn't Clinton fined for the private server.
- Thread starter Proelite
- Start date
- Status
Is that documented anywhere?
Also, the State Dept was aware of it. The OIG report was explicit about that fact.
whaaat! Sarcasm! Rabble rabble rabble
By policy she broke the law?
Clinton used her own email, which is seen as unprofessional and misguided despite not being illegal.
Despite not being illegal, its a really easy target to look at and claim as evidence she is corrupt and/or unfit for office, and fuel for a lot of people who don't like her regardless to dislike her even more. The more it is brought up the more it devolves into an issue people don't really know anything about other than it looks and feels bad on her record.
sturgboski
Member
Its a much more well thought out and put together argument than yours.
Even more so when most previous Secretaries of State did the same, hell even Sarah Palin did (essentially its not just Hillary or democrats, but republicans as well). However, when one political party spends 30 some odd years attacking one specific family, everything is assumed to be "bigger than Watergate" as their current standard bearer proclaims.
DragonSworne
Banned
Yep, she should have used a google account, right?
Team Alucard
Banned
Because the FBI couldn't prove intent.
Just policy. Not law.
Reverend Funk
Comfy Penetration
I'm still absolutely amazed that this is the best scandal they could come up with for Clinton
Necrophage
Member
When it comes to the handling of classified information, the consequences are basically universal. Transferring classified information over a non-approved, unsecured network is a punishable offense.
The law you refer to was passed after she left office. During her time, we went from Wild West to Recommendations, as far as electronic documents are concerned.
If she had broken the law during her tenure, Comey would definitely have recommended for the DOJ to go after her. But as he wrote in an internal note, it wasn't even a close call.
So in response to the OP, because she hasn't been found to be guilty of breaking the law.
The end (for now).
that might not be true. you don't need to hack them if she's using her private email server while she was in other countries. it's possible someone intercepted her communications.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system
sturgboski
Member
Hmm, ok so then should we put Powell and Rice on trial with Clinton as well?
I'm sure there is something in the FAM about it. It was secured. The intent wasn't malicious.
Orbis Tabula
Member
I'm wondering why you jumped from the FBI's "possible" to your own estimation of "there's a good chance"
The State Department's I.T. discouraged it, and the written law was at the time imprecise.
As I said, she broke no law. But the idea some NeoGAFfers like to tout that she was just ignorant is funny and sad.
So in every case in which improperly marked classified information is emailed, everyone on the email chain is punished?
What, exactly, in Huma's communication with Clinton could turn up that would lead to impeachment?
DragonSworne
Banned
The FBI already has all the deleted emails, don't they?
radios shipping overview
Member
semantics. I'll edit it if it helps you focus on the point.
Why? She did nothing wrong. There was no rule or law against what she did.
Necrophage
Member
I'm at work so I don't have time to link the article, but FBI.gov has a debriefing on the findings from the original investigation. They confirmed the the network was unsecured, but stated her intent wasn't to release the information to parties without the proper clearance.
Orbis Tabula
Member
It's possible to flip a coin and have it land on its side, I wouldn't call that a good chance, though. I think that's a more significant distinction than you're admitting.
If something has a good chance of happening, it's reasonable to assume it did. We only know it's possible, but we have no evidence that it happened. Which makes it silly to assume it did.
No there are a bunch of e-mails she deleted because they were "personal" and not related to her job as SoS, these e-mails were deleted before any request made by the FBI for anything.
Necrophage
Member
Especially in circumstances involving the UCMJ and DoD, yes.
You mean the one that says no charges? Pretty sure Comey himself said it wasn't even close, too.
Henry Jones Jr
Member
Its a little of a mix of not breaking the law and the fact that she has money and power.
Charges don't get brought against people with money and power unless that are 100% sure they can secure a conviction. So if there is any legal wiggle room for someone surrounded by lawyers and money, they will not bring the charges.
Other people in this country are changed with crimes that maybe they didn't technically comment, but what they did was close enough to breaking the law. These people usually end up just taking a lesser plea because they don't have the money or power to fight.
Edit: And no, I am not saying she should have been charged. I am saying that the legal system is much more oppressive to the lower and middle class.
Charges don't get brought against people with money and power unless that are 100% sure they can secure a conviction. So if there is any legal wiggle room for someone surrounded by lawyers and money, they will not bring the charges.
Other people in this country are changed with crimes that maybe they didn't technically comment, but what they did was close enough to breaking the law. These people usually end up just taking a lesser plea because they don't have the money or power to fight.
Edit: And no, I am not saying she should have been charged. I am saying that the legal system is much more oppressive to the lower and middle class.
Lol, sure. Everyone of them lost their clearance I bet and no one has never not been punished. It's 100% across the board all the time. Because that's how government works.
Resident_UA
Member
Fined for what exactly?!
Skellig Gra
Member
There was a policy against deleting records stating everything must be preserved.
I mean, you could just read the FBI's statement on the matter.
Chezzymann
Member
So I guess this whole email thing is a non story and just speculation unless they actually find something incriminating that she was trying to hide on those private servers,
Policy/=Law
I'm not sure what the State department could do about broken policy after she left.
Resident_UA
Member
There's a policy against browsing GAF at work. Do you think I'm going to get "fined" today?
Sure, her job was a bit more important, but at worst you can argue incompetency with regard to email use. How do you fine people for that?
Skellig Gra
Member
The post I quoted said "rule" and the policy was in effect while she was in office.
I'm sure people have gotten fired for posting on GAF at work. Not that it is relevant at all.
Resident_UA
Member
Sorry, let me edit my post:
There's a RULE against browsing GAF at work. Do you think I'm going to get "fined" today?
Sure, her job was a bit more important, but at worst you can argue incompetency with regard to email use. How do you fine people for that?
For the crime that has yet to be commited fine.
Just you wait, we'll find something apocalyptic and earth shattering at the same time, and you better belive it'll be a doosey. *keeps digging*
Resident_UA
Member
And you are right about that. You can argue that she should have been fired. But how do you "fine" somebody who doesn't even work there. You really don't see how ridiculous this sounds?
Skellig Gra
Member
Show me where I ever advocated for a fine.
Proelite
Member
Well if politicians are susceptible to being fired for mistakes and ignorant actions...
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
I really like threads where OP is mad something hasn't happened but then back peddles saying they haven't been following the matter and don't know much about it. But why wasn't she fined!!
Resident_UA
Member
How can you take any action against her when she isn't working there? The whole premise is ridiculous. The story around emails is not that Clinton was incompetent, the story is that she did something illegal.
She seems to me more qualified to handle email than 90% of people over the age of 50 that I know.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
"seems like proper punishment"
"I haven't been following this very much"
OP are you posting directly from a Trump rally?
"I haven't been following this very much"
OP are you posting directly from a Trump rally?
- Status