And those are just some highlights. To dumb this down a little from all the technical speech.
- Private e-mail server with classified informaiton - Illegal
- Deliberately changing report language to avoid a potential indictment - What the heck?
- Deleting 30,000 subpoena e-mails - Obstruction of Justice
- Those email were hacked. - Should we be surprised?
- Writing the exoneration for Hillary two months before the Investigation started - Are you kidding me?
- Allowing fact witnesses to be interviewed together - Good Grief!
- Making a deal that allowed the FBI to review devices, without keeping copies, and under the condition that the devices were subsequently destroyed - So no official records are now available to be used for indictments.
I tend to look at things through more liberal colo
ured (See the extra U there? Eh?) glasses, but I can't help but be more forgiving of Clinton scandals than you.
The interim report didn't tell me any key information that I would like to know on this.
I know that the buck stops with the head of the state department, but I blame state's IT department for not setting her up with the correct state department email when she assumed her position. Do you know of any resource that describes the email server setup for both her and the state department. I recall reading somewhere that her's was a Microsoft Exchange server. Would a state department system be any more secure?
Surely someone in legal must have noticed she was using her own domain and should have warned her that it was unlawful to do so.
The relevant section in the report reads:
-----------------
"Section 793(f) prohibits the mishandling of classified material through one's gross negligence. This subsection does not require a specific intent to harm national security, and even without intent, it is considered a serious crime. Other American citizens have been charged under this statute for less serious actions.
The relevant portion of Section 793(f) reads:
Whoever . . . having lawful possession or control of any document . . . relating to national defense, through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody . . . or having knowledge that same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody . . . and fails to make prompt report of such loss . . . Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
-------------------
So she would have to be grossly negligent in allowing access to her email... something like leaving her password out on a conference room table while at a foreign summit.
or
She would have to know that she had been hacked and elect to do nothing.
I hope we can agree that there was no intent on Hillary part. It seems we depart on whether we can call her actions "gross negligence" but you would have to show that AND show that someone gained access to classified documents in her email.
Yes he changed the wording, softening the charge. maybe that was a cover-up, or maybe that was just an edit - suggesting that on further reflection "gross negligence" is too strong a charge under the circumstances. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, and I think that "Gross Negligence" is too strong, so I will conclude the latter.
What was the timeline of the email deletions? After she had received the subpoena? If that were the case then I would agree it would be obstruction of justice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy#Deletion_of_emails
Here we see an account showing that work related emails were transferred to the state department systems, and the emails that were deleted were done so by a tech under the instruction of Cheryl Mills.
So the allegation is that top secret emails were deleted while under subpoena, when the reality was that they were retained elsewhere and deleted off the server where they shouldn't have been in the first place.
So, Republican investigators want it both ways - she shouldn't have emails on her own server because she could get hacked and she shouldn't take the emails off the server because that destroys evidence and is OOJ. Talk about a no win for Hillary.
She should have taken the advice of her IT guy and Lawyer. Oh wait. Do we know if they even gave her that advice? Hmm , not in the report. Oh well, throw her in jail for not being an expert on email security and the minutia of Section 793(f) while attempting to negotiate peace in the middle east.
The Benghazi thing seems to come down to Monday morning quarterbacking. Sure things should have and could have been done better, but no criminality was found.