Please explain to me Hillary’s “crime”

I am serious here. I am willing to examine evidence and will certainly base an opinion on that evidence. What is this terrible crime that Hillary committed (this time)?

At first it was Whitewater (where she and Bill lost a lot of money in an investment). No one could exactly explain to me what the terrible crime was there. Then there was Vince Foster’s suicide (who was a friend of the Clintons). Once more, no one could tell me exactly why Hillary was to blame for that. Then there were the millions spent investigating Benghazi (which, while tragic, seems to have been caused by the GOP’s cutting of the embassy’s security budget). hillary-clintons-little-email-fussI begged over and over for someone to tell me what the crime was there as well, and after many investigations, even the Republicans in Congress had to admit there was nothing.

Now there’s the email “scandal.”

Seriously, explain it to me. I’m a lawyer; I can understand big words.

And if you can, please explain why these emails, which were not distributed, stolen, or leaked, make a scandal while the 22 million emails deleted by the Bush administration while on a Republican server is not.

Apparently, from what I have read, Hillary had a private server for her emails, in the same way the previous (Republican) Secretaries of State did, and actually did better than they did, because hers were all on a personal server she controlled to prevent leaks. The policy changed after she left the position and apparently the GOP wants to hold her to the new standards that didn’t apply to her, hoping to entrap her in a loophole.  The Republican head of the FBI did an investigation and concluded that there was no crime here.


So please, seriously, those of you Hillary haters out there (because it always seems to come from people who didn’t like her anyway and never from anyone neutral): Explain it to me.

Remember that I supported Bernie in the primaries. I didn’t want Hillary as my candidate — I don’t like political dynasties (whether Bushes or Clintons), I don’t really trust what she says, and with the exception of women’s issues (on which she is great) I don’t think she really stands for anything given how she changes her position based on the polls.  I’m no “Hillary lover” so don’t call me that.

I am a facts lover. I like truth. Sometimes that means the politicians I support do bad things and I admit it, and sometimes that means the politicians I don’t like do good things and I admit it.

So. Give me some facts. Tell me why I am wrong.


7 thoughts on “Please explain to me Hillary’s “crime”

  1. Haters aren’t relying on facts, so you’re asking the impossible. I understand why people don’t like her. She’s evasive and cold sometimes, and some find that off-putting in women, though they allow it in men. But an intermittent lack of personal charm isn’t a crime (that I know of).


  2. Just by having a personal server for official emails she was violating the laws for federal employees at that time. Having classified material on an unclassified server is also illegal. Every federal employee gets annual training outlining these regulations and has to sign that they accept the conditions. Yes, previous officials used private servers–but the rules were different then. There were reasons why the regulations changed. And even before the change, you could not have classified material on a government-run unclassified system. If classified material got sent to an unclassified server, the IT folks had to go in and purge all the data immediately. And the machine was usually taken off the network until that was done.

    I have been a computer security officer at a Federally funded facility (so I’ve had to teach those rules), but way before that I had inappropriate material sent to me by mistake (they typoed on the intended recipient). The procedure was to notify security and stand guard over the machine until they arrived. The person who sent the email did receive disciplinary action (don’t know what it was, since I didn’t have need to know).

    Classified documents (physical copies) are printed on specially marked paper, and required to be logged in and out of a secure safe. They are never to be left unattended outside the safe. And federal employees/contractors are not allowed to take our regular computers out of the country–instead they are issued temporary machines that are sanitized.

    I don’t know why you say no info was stolen or leaked. Several intelligence officials have said that some of it was. Another requirement that I haven’t seen any comment on is that the system administrator should hold an appropriate level clearance to be allowed to work on a machine with that level of material–no one has mentioned if her private IT person had a security clearance. I am NOT a Hillary-hater (but not a fan either–I supported Bernie), but an ordinary person who did what she did would already be in jail. Yes, it’s a technicality compared to other conspiracy charges, but it is a law that hundreds of thousands of feds have to abide by. And yes, some of those feds have gone to jail for similar violations. Even so, it’s not bad enough to make me consider voting for Trump (IMHO he should also be in jail, for different reasons).


    • From the FBI report, the server was not supposed to have confidential/secret material on it at all. Any that did appear (and some did) was by accident, not by design. According to the report, no one has ever been prosecuted for accidents–at least, not the kind that had no consequences. They always required intent, and there was none here.

      So when you say “an ordinary person who did what she did would already be in jail,” it’s hard to take you seriously.


      • That Executive order specifically mentions “negligence” (lack of intent) is also a violation. It makes it clear it applies with or without intent. I’m not saying I agree with the law, just that it was not complied with.


  3. Can causing the creation of Fox News, and making Ann Coulter famous be considered crimes?

    Hmm. Well, I’m out of ideas.

    But, I will say this, both Clintons have a long and storied struggle with ethics and honesty. That isn’t a criminal matter as much as a credibility one. Much like a magistrate will be less likely to believe a litigant or witness caught lying. And that is where many voters are at this point.

    It’s not an accident one poll showed 13% of those polled, would rather a comet hit the Earth and kill us all than have either candidate elected.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s