No. of Recommendations: 3
Hillary! has always been an innocent bystander her entire life.
How'd all that material get on to Anthony Weiner's laptop?
Rhetorical questions don't work for establishing criminal charges that can lead to a conviction. Your initial claim was that the DOJ could have nailed Clinton for the servers under 18 USC 1924. I'm pointing out to you why that's not true - because that section doesn't criminalize the mere possession or maintenance of classified information in an unauthorized place. It criminalizes the removal of documents or materials. And there's no evidence that Clinton did that.
Because Huma had the right tickets to have those meetings, sure. <--- Huma likely didn't have any kind of clearance above TS. And BTW it's not hard to get TS.
TS was the highest level of clearance of the information in the emails - and they weren't all from Abedin.
Except for the classified stuff. She's not allowed to destroy that.
Is that true? Again, we're not really talking about classified documents - like reports or satellite photos or things like that. These are emails where people were discussion topics and information that was classified, and thus shouldn't be done over an open channel. But I imagine that emails and memos and people's personal notes that contain classified information are destroyed pretty regularly, if not routinely - as long as they're not within the scope of public records that have to be preserved.
But even if we take that as a given, if you want to pursue a criminal prosecution against Clinton for destroying classified information, you have to prove that she willfully destroyed classified information. In the absence of any admissible evidence that the emails that were deleted contained classified information, and that she knew that the classified information was there, you're not even going to get past a motion to dismiss the charges.
The Clintons are MASTERs at blowtorching any regard for ethics or standards without actually breaking any laws. Amazing, that.
Many people that have access to really good legal counsel are very good at doing that. That's why you didn't see hordes of banking CEO's and VP's marching off to jail for causing a global economic meltdown. Anyone who's got good lawyers, and are willing to pay actual attention to what the laws require you to do (with an eye towards what they don't), can blowtorch any regard for ethics or standards without breaking any laws. Or at least, without breaking any criminal laws.
