5 ms·

Emails kinda seem tame now.

Gustomaximus 8y ago
Really? The email server in my opinion was a flagrant breach of rules. I really think she should have been charged. And junior doing this would have been. And this view elites are above the law is so wrong. The phone is possibly more damaging to security, but it's not illegal as far as I read. So stupid and arrogant. But not illegal.
- outworlder 8y ago
  What is amazing is that, in this day and age, people still think unencrypted emails are somehow secure. It shouldn't matter where the email server is. Her use of an unsecured communications device was far more critical. And yet, here we are...
- brian-armstrong 8y ago
  Can we just agree to put them both in prison?
  - beatgammit 8y ago
    Send me that petition and I'll sign. Can we just have a do-over of 2016 with both of them in prison before the primaries? I'd subscribe to that alternate reality.
  - drivingmenuts 8y ago
    > Can we just agree to put them both in prison? I keep hearing the chants of "Lock her up" but no one has pointed out any conclusive evidence that HRC should be jailed. See above for the arguments about the email server. As for Benghazi, multiple investigations by some of the most relentlessly aggressive Republicans failed to find any wrongdoing even worth charging her for. So, why put her in jail? Because you don't like her?
- matt4077 8y ago
  As you probably already know, a "rule" isn't the same a a "law". Even breaking a law doesn't usually lead to criminal prosecution because most laws are civil, not criminal. And, most salient, the relevant standard for criminal prosecution w/r/t classified information require intent. HRC obviously did not have criminal intent. Moreover, nothing actually happened: while the setup may have been risky, there's no indication it actually had any consequences (beyond those for her career). You can contrast this with the Republican attitude to Gen Patreaus, who intentionally gave classified information to his girlfriend and who was vigorously defended by the political right.
  - brian-armstrong 8y ago
    And even then, Patreaus got what you might consider to be a slap on the wrist.
- joshuamorton 8y ago
  The email thing was also not illegal. It broke policy, and a junior might have been reprimanded (and maybe even fired), but not imprisoned. And given that Clinton was no longer in the government, she couldn't be fired.
- Avshalom 8y ago
  Not to defend Clinton's use but: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Trump+admin+email+servers&t=fpas&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Trump+admin+email+servers&t=fpas&i... the Trump's phone usage is an and not an instead

Really? The email server in my opinion was a flagrant breach of rules. I really think she should have been charged. And junior doing this would have been. And this view elites are above the law is so wrong. The phone is possibly more damaging to security, but it's not illegal as far as I read. So stupid and arrogant. But not illegal.

outworlder 8y ago
What is amazing is that, in this day and age, people still think unencrypted emails are somehow secure. It shouldn't matter where the email server is. Her use of an unsecured communications device was far more critical. And yet, here we are...
brian-armstrong 8y ago
Can we just agree to put them both in prison?
- beatgammit 8y ago
  Send me that petition and I'll sign. Can we just have a do-over of 2016 with both of them in prison before the primaries? I'd subscribe to that alternate reality.
- drivingmenuts 8y ago
  > Can we just agree to put them both in prison? I keep hearing the chants of "Lock her up" but no one has pointed out any conclusive evidence that HRC should be jailed. See above for the arguments about the email server. As for Benghazi, multiple investigations by some of the most relentlessly aggressive Republicans failed to find any wrongdoing even worth charging her for. So, why put her in jail? Because you don't like her?
matt4077 8y ago
As you probably already know, a "rule" isn't the same a a "law". Even breaking a law doesn't usually lead to criminal prosecution because most laws are civil, not criminal. And, most salient, the relevant standard for criminal prosecution w/r/t classified information require intent. HRC obviously did not have criminal intent. Moreover, nothing actually happened: while the setup may have been risky, there's no indication it actually had any consequences (beyond those for her career). You can contrast this with the Republican attitude to Gen Patreaus, who intentionally gave classified information to his girlfriend and who was vigorously defended by the political right.
- brian-armstrong 8y ago
  And even then, Patreaus got what you might consider to be a slap on the wrist.
joshuamorton 8y ago
The email thing was also not illegal. It broke policy, and a junior might have been reprimanded (and maybe even fired), but not imprisoned. And given that Clinton was no longer in the government, she couldn't be fired.
Avshalom 8y ago
Not to defend Clinton's use but: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Trump+admin+email+servers&t=fpas&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Trump+admin+email+servers&t=fpas&i... the Trump's phone usage is an and not an instead