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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

zipplewrath

(16,698 posts)
7. I'm always struck
Tue Mar 8, 2016, 01:50 PM
Mar 2016

These articles are always written by people with neither a legal background, nor any experience in dealing with classified materials.

That she was careless is almost a given, which is kinda strange considering how paranoid she can be. Her tendencies would have gotten her chastised if she hadn't been Sec. State. But since she wasn't, little will come of it now. There is little if anything here that anyone is going to try to prosecute. Her lawyers can dig up just enough evidence to establish that some people would not have classified the information in that context. Right, wrong or indifferent, that makes for an extremely weak case, especially in the context of a trial which would immediately be characterized as a political witch hunt.

And even if she had tried diligently, I can tell you right now, she would have failed to never have sent/forwarded/received emails that contained classified information. And her lawyers would have little trouble establishing this by the most cursory review of existing State Department emails. They could pick almost any high official and find just enough mistakes to establish that this happens.

Now, if she can't establish that she actually had "approval" from some place to use her privately held server for official business, THEN she'd be in some trouble. But no one has tried to suggest that. So that's her "get out of jail free" card. She never should have been given approval because of EXACTLY what they are now finding. And that doesn't even address the records retention part of all of this, which ALSO should have prevented her from using a private email server. And this all should have been well known considering how much trouble the Bush administration got into for using the GOP email system. But none the less, she apparently got the approval to use the private system and so she's covered.

I know, the FBI and immunity and all of that. I also remember how Rove was going to be "frogged marched" right out of the White House because of a lot worse stuff. There is nothing here except the political circus and the wishes of those who'd like to see her take a fall.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

IBD Article About Hillary's E-mail [View all] chwaliszewski Mar 2016 OP
What a load of horseshit sharp_stick Mar 2016 #1
No, that's not precisely it. Jarqui Mar 2016 #8
The National Review and a 7 month old Reuters story sharp_stick Mar 2016 #9
does "upgrade reading material" = freeper, criticizing Democrat candidates? Jeffersons Ghost Mar 2016 #10
No sharp_stick Mar 2016 #12
How old the Reuters story is has little to do with it's substance. Jarqui Mar 2016 #23
Get off the ad hominem attacks. "Presumed classified" was in Obama's 10/09 Presidential Order. leveymg Mar 2016 #26
One example: Jarqui Mar 2016 #29
Kind of goes against common sense, doesn't it? randome Mar 2016 #2
Kickin' with gusto! Faux pas Mar 2016 #3
Another thread like this got a hide. WhiteTara Mar 2016 #4
Why would it get a hide? What's everybody so afraid of? nt clarice Mar 2016 #11
IBD is a right wing source WhiteTara Mar 2016 #14
Did IBD make the whole story up? nt clarice Mar 2016 #15
see post 5 WhiteTara Mar 2016 #16
Yes, I read it. If they made the whole thing up.....they could be sued....correct? nt clarice Mar 2016 #17
Legally there is a difference zipplewrath Mar 2016 #20
I was just wondering if IBD made it all up... clarice Mar 2016 #25
They deduced it zipplewrath Mar 2016 #27
Are there specific points that you think are untrue? nt clarice Mar 2016 #28
Correct?nt clarice Mar 2016 #18
IBD is a right wing nut case source Gothmog Mar 2016 #5
That's right ! Never believe any source unless... clarice Mar 2016 #13
"Birkenstock catalog" ProudToBeBlueInRhody Mar 2016 #21
It was a joke.nt clarice Mar 2016 #24
Welcome to DU. Glad you're here. snagglepuss Mar 2016 #6
I'm always struck zipplewrath Mar 2016 #7
She certainly has proven that she knows how to dodge a bullet. Good for her. clarice Mar 2016 #19
gdp joeybee12 Mar 2016 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»IBD Article About Hillary...»Reply #7