Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Peacetrain

(22,881 posts)
Sat Jul 2, 2016, 07:27 PM Jul 2016

Hillary Clinton did not break any laws...

Laws have changed since the private emailer dustup... but she did not break any laws.. some may think the whole idea of having a private email system is sketchy.. but at that point in time .. it was not illegal..

42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton did not break any laws... (Original Post) Peacetrain Jul 2016 OP
Correct. Bad judgement? Yes. Criminal act? No. BlueNoMatterWho Jul 2016 #1
and i don't even know if you could call it bad judgment considering her predecessors did the same. Native Jul 2016 #26
No one other than Clinton had a home based server karynnj Jul 2016 #37
The head of a department sets retention policies... scscholar Jul 2016 #2
it does sound awful presidential when you put it that way.. bonemachine Jul 2016 #8
When Nixon said that, that was a criminal act. scscholar Jul 2016 #9
Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #3
... SidDithers Jul 2016 #4
No laws broken. Right wing BULLSHIT HYPE. Enough already. RBInMaine Jul 2016 #5
Beat me to it! Peacetrain Jul 2016 #6
Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #7
Love your name... babylonsister Jul 2016 #10
That is right mcar Jul 2016 #11
Mahalo, Peacetrain! Cha Jul 2016 #12
Hello Cha!! Peacetrain Jul 2016 #19
I don't think... quickesst Jul 2016 #13
Too many people seem to forget BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #14
Exactly!! quickesst Jul 2016 #16
A law degree does not guarantee legal behavior bonemachine Jul 2016 #21
This message was self-deleted by its author BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #22
She didn't commit any crimes. Hillary almost certainly violated the FOIA. Vote2016 Jul 2016 #15
FYI... FOIA violations are a civil matter, NOT crminal. Adrahil Jul 2016 #18
Perhaps you misunderstood the significance of my statement that Hillary commited no crimes. FOIA is Vote2016 Jul 2016 #27
AFAIK. That has not been proven. Adrahil Jul 2016 #33
Long ago the first thing I thought about all this is Yupster Jul 2016 #35
She appears to be in the clear from a criminal law perspective but the State Department is losing Vote2016 Jul 2016 #36
I think that something that has been DemonGoddess Jul 2016 #17
Nixon was a lawyer too bonemachine Jul 2016 #20
Are you simply spamming BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #23
I would say no... bonemachine Jul 2016 #24
The only way either of us is making a "fallacious argument" BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #25
ah, a semantic rabbithole bonemachine Jul 2016 #29
If you are not a lawyer, BlueMTexpat Jul 2016 #38
oh puhleeze DemonGoddess Jul 2016 #30
shit bonemachine Jul 2016 #32
Tech - this story, IRS hoax, performance of the 21st century VA, Fed employee data breach underpants Jul 2016 #28
Yes let's root for a arm of the fsb jimw81 Jul 2016 #39
No laws were broken Gothmog Jul 2016 #31
Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #34
Post removed Post removed Jul 2016 #40
seriously... 30 posts and you attack our Nominee! Peacetrain Jul 2016 #41
Hillary Clinton has done nothing deaniac21 Jul 2016 #42

Native

(5,943 posts)
26. and i don't even know if you could call it bad judgment considering her predecessors did the same.
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:33 PM
Jul 2016

When this first broke, it was mentioned that Secretaries before her had home set-ups. But by virtue of media magic, that little tidbit went unmentioned for like forever.

karynnj

(59,511 posts)
37. No one other than Clinton had a home based server
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 11:17 PM
Jul 2016

Powell used a personal email account very openly. The SD put in the line for him to connect to his computer.

What is true is that there was likely no law against doing that for the non classified email that otherwise would have been on .gov.

The problem was it was not properly archived, but that may violate guidelines and practices, but not laws. It was a terrible idea, but likely not illegal.

It did make FOIA requests impossible to do correctly, but that apparently is not a criminal action

 

scscholar

(2,902 posts)
2. The head of a department sets retention policies...
Sat Jul 2, 2016, 07:39 PM
Jul 2016

and, she was definitely head of the department! By definition, she could do no wrong.

bonemachine

(757 posts)
8. it does sound awful presidential when you put it that way..
Sat Jul 2, 2016, 07:47 PM
Jul 2016

Remind me, who was it that said "When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."?

 

scscholar

(2,902 posts)
9. When Nixon said that, that was a criminal act.
Sat Jul 2, 2016, 07:49 PM
Jul 2016

Department heads now have the authority to set retention rules.

Response to Peacetrain (Original post)

Response to SidDithers (Reply #4)

quickesst

(6,283 posts)
13. I don't think...
Sat Jul 2, 2016, 11:31 PM
Jul 2016

.... Hillary Clinton would have launched a presidential campaign had there been any doubt. That's the reason I've been laughing my ass off ever since this and the Benghazi shit began knowing that there would be much sadness and bitter tears, deservedly, when all was said and done. The Rolling Stones were wrong. You can get some satisfaction.

BlueMTexpat

(15,374 posts)
14. Too many people seem to forget
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 07:49 AM
Jul 2016

that Clinton was a highly successful and well-respected attorney in private practice herself before moving into government.

There is no way that she would knowingly do something that is illegal.

Response to bonemachine (Reply #21)

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
18. FYI... FOIA violations are a civil matter, NOT crminal.
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 08:49 AM
Jul 2016

And the resolution is in court, in the form of a lawsuit, not through the FBI.

 

Vote2016

(1,198 posts)
27. Perhaps you misunderstood the significance of my statement that Hillary commited no crimes. FOIA is
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:35 PM
Jul 2016

a law. It was certainly voilated.

Let's celebrate Hillary not getting indicted, but let's not pretend no laws were broken.

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
33. AFAIK. That has not been proven.
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 06:02 PM
Jul 2016

Until a court finds a willful violation of FOIA, I'll reserve judgement.

Yupster

(14,308 posts)
35. Long ago the first thing I thought about all this is
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 06:05 PM
Jul 2016

that the FOIA would be what gets her.

From the rumors and leaks though, it sounds like she's clear.

 

Vote2016

(1,198 posts)
36. She appears to be in the clear from a criminal law perspective but the State Department is losing
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 06:08 PM
Jul 2016

civil FOIA fights judging from the court orders.

DemonGoddess

(4,640 posts)
17. I think that something that has been
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 08:39 AM
Jul 2016

touched on a bit really is overlooked. Given that Hillary Clinton is herself an attorney, I don't see where she would've done this in a way to break laws. Something else that is almost never touched on, is the antiquated tech in government. If her tech was/is better, than what does that say? It says that budget needs aren't being met. Why? Just look at the obstructionism for the last several years from the Rethugs. Why would they approve budget reqs that could help the opposing party, even though the department in question needs it?

bonemachine

(757 posts)
24. I would say no...
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:18 PM
Jul 2016

But perhaps your definition of spamming is one that encompasses giving a similar response to two people who are making the same fallacious argument?

BlueMTexpat

(15,374 posts)
25. The only way either of us is making a "fallacious argument"
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:23 PM
Jul 2016

is if you can prove that Hillary is an attorney who has knowingly done something illegally.

We both said that her training as an attorney would have made her more mindful of NOT doing something illegally.

We were speaking specifically about Hillary Clinton. You were either speaking about Richard Nixon or a generic unethical lawyer.

But please proceed.

bonemachine

(757 posts)
29. ah, a semantic rabbithole
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:42 PM
Jul 2016

Sure, I've got a couple minutes...


[blockquote
There is no way that she would knowingly do something that is illegal


Not "make her more mindful"... A categorical statement that she would not knowingly break a law (and this is not to dive down the further rabbit hole of potential ignorance of the law). She was a successful lawer, so there is no way she would break the law.

BlueMTexpat

(15,374 posts)
38. If you are not a lawyer,
Mon Jul 4, 2016, 04:01 AM
Jul 2016

don't give up your day job to be one.

If you are a lawyer who has passed the bar and is actually practicing, I wish your clients good luck. They will need it.

In either event, I'm done with you.

bonemachine

(757 posts)
32. shit
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 06:00 PM
Jul 2016

I don't pretend to know enough to say that a crime was or wasn't committed, unlike some folks here.

That doesn't mean I have to fall for a line like 'she was the boss, so she couldn't have broken the rules' or 'she was a lawyer, so she would never have broken the law'...

underpants

(183,043 posts)
28. Tech - this story, IRS hoax, performance of the 21st century VA, Fed employee data breach
Sun Jul 3, 2016, 05:35 PM
Jul 2016

You could even go into the Wikileaks and Manning stories.

Technology in the Federal Governmant is horrible. Due directly to a lack of funding.

Response to Peacetrain (Original post)

Response to Peacetrain (Original post)

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary Clinton did not b...