No they weren't.
FBI reopening investigation of Hillary Clinton email server
- Thread starter Plasmatic
- Start date
No they weren't.
NightTrain
Veteran XX
that is terrifying
this is absolutely 100% wrong. in fact, some of the unreleased emails were Special Access Program info. This is stuff above Top Secret, and the only people allowed to see it are on a list specific to each program. This info is never allowed to leave the room its stored in, much less the building. Not only did clinton have it on her home machine, she also allowed Huma to have access to it, and who knows who else. Any other person would be in jail.
Kerosene31
Veteran XV
To be fair, her private server was running MS Exchange, and that barely allows authorized people to get their e-mail let alone hackers. 
StapleMammal1
Contributor
That's a good password idea. Only thing is now they require numbers in there.
Kerosene31
Veteran XV
actually, there are multiple instances of high ranking govt officials not handling classified info properly and getting minor reprimands or no reprimand at all, but all of those cases are for unintentional leaks as opposed to willful acts to leak classified info to the public. Clinton is not the only high ranking govt official that has mishandled data out of convenience, nor is that kind of mishandling of sensitive data unique to the government. It's only a story because a) its the republicans best chance at the presidency to dredge the story up and act like it is bigger than it really is...they tried it first with benghazi which was a complete joke, and got lucky to uncover the email thing and b) Thanks to Russian sponsored/led hacking of democrat-only targets as they try to meddle in our election
"Stephen Vladeck, an American University law professor and national security law expert, said it would be a stretch, based on what's now known, to think Clinton could be charged under existing statutes for her behavior. The few relevant laws on the books almost certainly weren't written with this situation in mind.
"This is an area where the government tends not to test the margins too often," Vladeck said.
It's not uncommon for workers with access to classified material to mishandle it, and by far the bulk of those cases don't attract the attention of federal prosecutors.
But when the Justice Department does pursue a case, it often relies on a statute that bars the unlawful removal and retention of classified documents. That low-level charge, meant for cases in which defendants improperly hold onto information that they know to be classified, carries a fine and maximum yearlong prison sentence and is reserved for people who have "really, really screwed up," Vladeck said.
Other, more serious laws make it a crime to knowingly disclose classified information to someone not authorized to receive it, and threaten punishment for anyone who through "gross negligence" allows national defense information to be removed from its proper place of custody.
Each case that's resulted in prosecution has unique facts, making comparisons difficult, but investigators invariably take into account questions of knowledge, potential damage to national security, who sent, received or stored the information, and whether the material was classified at the time of transmission."
Last edited:
