Tyndmyr wrote:Neglecting to do something is a wee bit different from actively doing something not permitted. One doesn't accidentally set up an email server.
But there's nothing illegal about setting up an email server.
I mean, it probably should
be illegal since its clear that Clinton seems to have set it up to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests. But... there's nothing actually illegal about that. So we can't expect the FBI to ping her on that, can we?
She's pretty obviously circumventing policy, and going to significant length to do so over a lengthy period of time.
Most people don't set up private email servers to avoid using the workplace email. It's obviously fishy as hell, and should contribute to an impression of her intent as not benign.
So the FBI goes at her from the "Classified Information" perspective. And lo and behold, according to the law, she's not acting in "gross negligence" because she's following State Department regulations. (I mean, Clinton wrote the regulations, so... for what its worth... whatever. But FBI can't ping her on this either). The few emails (that should have been classified) they found do not constitute "gross negligence" or "intent". You see, the only "extreme carelessness" that Clinton had was how she set up this email server.
...pretty sure revealing classified information is up there in bad stuff to do. Not merely against policy, but counter to law, a violation of explicitly signed NDAs, etc.
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Specifically, if there's any substance to your claim, perhaps you can point to a case where someone "further down the food chain" was prosecuted in the absence of "clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice."
Oh, of course. Scooter Libby would be an obvious example of a much lesser thing that resulted in prison time. A single forgotten phone call was taken as evidence of intent to cover up the truth, bam, jail time. For a single piece of data, not the amount we see here.
Sandy Berger would also suffice. Again, criminal conviction, massive fines, probation. Far smaller pile of data, much less evidence of intent to mishandle. But aides can be thrown under the bus conveniently, and nobody really cares.
And those are people you may have actually heard of. Folks all the way on the ground floor are going to be punished without a second thought.