Why is Hillary Clinton above the law?

[bitslice]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

As I understand it she basically removed emails classified as Confidential and Top Secret, and transferred them over to a personal email server.

The emails were previously all held on an air gapped server, and subsequently appeared to have their classification markings deliberately removed.

Now this wasn't some bimbo making her life easier, this was a deliberate action to subvert a National security system.

If I had had a fraction of the security clearance that she has and I'd removed anything from an air gapped system, then quite rightly I'd have been crucified by the FBI. Yet Comery (who has a year to go before retirement *cough* surprise), considered this merely "careless" and not worthy of prosecution.


I think it is reasonable to point out that when normal people like Bradley Manning are charged with "transmitting defense information in violation of the Espionage Act", which is exactly what Hillary did here, then the two cases should be treated the same.
There are no excuses for breaking this Act of Law, that's the whole point - you sign up to have access, you are told exactly what "Top Secret" means in words of one syllable - but if you break the conditions then you are automatically prosecuted for being a dumb ass and risking other people's lives.
Ignorance (or wilful indifference) is no excuse.


There are clearly two standards at work here.
Yes it is awkward if a potential President is caught breaking the law, but that is what systems of justice are for, to protect everyone equally. Yet these failings have been going on for a long time, it's practically a media trope that the preppy white kid can get away with rape if his father is rich or important enough.


Just think of the message that would have been sent if she were to be prosecuted - that even ultra powerful white politicians were subservient to American justice, wouldn't that have made America look like it was based on some form of morality?
Yet now, American politics just looks grubby and bent, and confirming to everyone that its laws only apply to the powerless.

[GEuser]

"You are either With Us or Against Us"

You have a choice now , errrr i think .

[CJay]

Yet now, American politics just looks grubby and bent, and confirming to everyone that its laws only apply to the powerless.

Only now?

[dferyance]

I agree with your concern over two standards. I have a little different perspective though. Prosecutors often are very quick to go after the little guy. I strongly believe in prosecutorial discretion. However, it seems it is far more often used when it is politically convenient to use for "important people" than used across the board. There are far too many cases where people have gotten prosecuted for less or other poor handling of computer equipment. The problem is not that Clinton wasn't prosecuted, but that way too much is illegal and prosecutors are happy to use this to their advantage. So it is inconsistent, but I don't see that it is good for the government to rush to charging people. Essentially Clinton got the benefit of the doubt that everyone else should have but don't.

I am very concerned with having people who have absolutely no knowledge of technology or security in power. This is far more than just Clinton but a common trend. It is a big part of today's society, someone willing to compromise security to that level for a little convenience shouldn't be in charge of anything.

[bitslice]

I am very concerned with having people who have absolutely no knowledge of technology or security in power. This is far more than just Clinton but a common trend. It is a big part of today's society, someone willing to compromise security to that level for a little convenience shouldn't be in charge of anything.

Yep, this is an issue in businesses too.
You set up a network that's really secure, everything has layered access with personnel related read/write permissions, every access is tracked, every file movement monitored.
Then in comes the Chairman, who wants dial in access to everything from his shitty home laptop that his kid downloads porn on.

These people are not the sharpest tool in the box when it comes to viruses and phishing either.


I'd imagine the Government security people were tearing their hair out over Clinton's actions.

[dr.diesel]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

 

[AntiProtonBoy]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

Oh sweet summer child, when you are connected with influential friends, you can get away with just about anything.

[AF6LJ]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

As I understand it she basically removed emails classified as Confidential and Top Secret, and transferred them over to a personal email server.

The emails were previously all held on an air gapped server, and subsequently appeared to have their classification markings deliberately removed.

Now this wasn't some bimbo making her life easier, this was a deliberate action to subvert a National security system.

If I had had a fraction of the security clearance that she has and I'd removed anything from an air gapped system, then quite rightly I'd have been crucified by the FBI. Yet Comery (who has a year to go before retirement *cough* surprise), considered this merely "careless" and not worthy of prosecution.


I think it is reasonable to point out that when normal people like Bradley Manning are charged with "transmitting defense information in violation of the Espionage Act", which is exactly what Hillary did here, then the two cases should be treated the same.
There are no excuses for breaking this Act of Law, that's the whole point - you sign up to have access, you are told exactly what "Top Secret" means in words of one syllable - but if you break the conditions then you are automatically prosecuted for being a dumb ass and risking other people's lives.
Ignorance (or wilful indifference) is no excuse.


There are clearly two standards at work here.
Yes it is awkward if a potential President is caught breaking the law, but that is what systems of justice are for, to protect everyone equally. Yet these failings have been going on for a long time, it's practically a media trope that the preppy white kid can get away with rape if his father is rich or important enough.


Just think of the message that would have been sent if she were to be prosecuted - that even ultra powerful white politicians were subservient to American justice, wouldn't that have made America look like it was based on some form of morality?
Yet now, American politics just looks grubby and bent, and confirming to everyone that its laws only apply to the powerless.

You really Don't know the answer to that?
The same reason the Queen is above the law.

[bitslice]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

 

I'm not being naive here, I know the obvious realities of the situation - I'm pointing out what your constitution is supposed to be about and what Law is supposed to stand for, so we can discuss why this has been allowed to slide so far.

Or we can do the witty cynicisms and laughing smileys thing for ten pages...


And the Queen isn't above the law, the office of the Queen/King is.
I'm guessing this is much like the provision to impeach an American President.

[nctnico]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

As I understand it she basically removed emails classified as Confidential and Top Secret, and transferred them over to a personal email server.

Bill said: "close, but no cigar" 

[CJay]

I am very concerned with having people who have absolutely no knowledge of technology or security in power. This is far more than just Clinton but a common trend. It is a big part of today's society, someone willing to compromise security to that level for a little convenience shouldn't be in charge of anything.

Yep, this is an issue in businesses too.
You set up a network that's really secure, everything has layered access with personnel related read/write permissions, every access is tracked, every file movement monitored.
Then in comes the Chairman, who wants dial in access to everything from his shitty home laptop that his kid downloads porn on.

These people are not the sharpest tool in the box when it comes to viruses and phishing either.


I'd imagine the Government security people were tearing their hair out over Clinton's actions.

Yep. This.

Secure, firewalled, backed up, access logs, internet useage monitoring, access to personal email blocked, porn filtering bought, paid for and implememnted, group policies implemented to lock down all manner of access and internal emails digitally signed and encrypted.

Passwords, not allowed to enforce complexity rules or make passwords longer than four characters 'because it's too difficult for people to remember them' so the CFO used to alternate her passwords between 'pink' and 'purple', the CEO used to use his ex wife's name 'gemma' or 'Gemma'.

Which everyone in the office knew.

Which didn't go down too well when I mentioned it in front of his new wife.

Ooops.

The last straw for my involvement with them was a 7:30PM phone call from the CEO insisting I delete all traces of an email he had sent to one of their clients because it was being cited in a court case against the company and he wanted it to go away.

Obviously I refused, in an email to the board, and terminated my involvement with them.

[AF6LJ]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

 

I'm not being naive here, I know the obvious realities of the situation - I'm pointing out what your constitution is supposed to be about and what Law is supposed to stand for, so we can discuss why this has been allowed to slide so far.

Or we can do the witty cynicisms and laughing smileys thing for ten pages...


And the Queen isn't above the law, the office of the Queen/King is.
I'm guessing this is much like the provision to impeach an American President.

I disagree the Queen and the whole Royal family is above the law in practice.
They wipe their butts with the laws of your country just like the last eight administrations have here in the US have.

[rstofer]

I would imagine she will want the launch codes on her Blackberry so she doesn't have to have someone around carrying the 'football'.  Unencrypted, of course, because security is such a bother...

It will be so much simpler...

[AF6LJ]

I would imagine she will want the launch codes on her Blackberry so she doesn't have to have someone around carrying the 'football'.  Unencrypted, of course, because security is such a bother...

It will be so much simpler...

Huma Abedin will carry around the FootBall.

[Howardlong]

I disagree the Queen and the whole Royal family is above the law in practice.

Princess Anne has notoriety for achieving at least one criminal conviction for speeding as far as I remember.

[AF6LJ]

I disagree the Queen and the whole Royal family is above the law in practice.

Princess Anne has notoriety for achieving at least one criminal conviction for speeding as far as I remember.

No doubt any fines were suspended.

[zapta]

Above the law? What are you talking about?

The FBI investigation didn't find any “gross negligence” as required by our laws, just "extremely careless”.

;-)

[edavid]

Hey OP, assuming you really want to understand this, the difference between Clinton and Manning is intent.  Manning intentionally disclosed secret documents, but Clinton had no such intention, and nothing secret was disclosed as a result of her actions.   If Manning had just copied secret documents to a drive and stuck it in her garage, she wouldn't be in jail.

[AF6LJ]

Hey OP, assuming you really want to understand this, the difference between Clinton and Manning is intent.  Manning intentionally disclosed secret documents, but Clinton had no such intention, and nothing secret was disclosed as a result of her actions.   If Manning had just copied secret documents to a drive and stuck it in her garage, she wouldn't be in jail.

I have to disagree Clinton had intent, otherwise she would have followed standard procedure and not set up the server in the first place. The server was a drop box for classified correspondence.
My how some have short memories.
Remember the Clintons selling off guidance and booster secrets to the Chinese.
I worked for Loral Corp shortly before that happened. I had friends still working there who spilled the beans. about a sale of high dollar gear to the PRC.

The real reason Clinton won't be prosecuted has to do with career damage or potential loss of life that the prosecutor will incur. If that woman gets elected this country will be in Deep, Deep shit, worse than it already is.

[CJay]

The real reason Clinton won't be prosecuted has to do with career damage or potential loss of life that the prosecutor will incur. If that woman gets elected this country will be in Deep, Deep shit, worse than it already is.

Yeah, it'd be far better to have Donny in power, he's only been accused and not been convicted of rape of minors.

So far.

[daqq]

I thought that in America, politicians were considered servants of the people?

In theory you are correct. In practice politicians view people as voting box fodder that do not exist until a few months before the elections, at which point they need to be fed a finely balanced diet of bullshit.

edit: applies to all countries world wide.

[janoc]

I have to disagree Clinton had intent, otherwise she would have followed standard procedure and not set up the server in the first place. The server was a drop box for classified correspondence.
My how some have short memories.
Remember the Clintons selling off guidance and booster secrets to the Chinese.
I worked for Loral Corp shortly before that happened. I had friends still working there who spilled the beans. about a sale of high dollar gear to the PRC.

The real reason Clinton won't be prosecuted has to do with career damage or potential loss of life that the prosecutor will incur. If that woman gets elected this country will be in Deep, Deep shit, worse than it already is.

I think the difference is whether the intent was to "simplify one's life" (Clinton) with regards to the official duties (I can imagine the secure network access is a real hassle) or whether the intent was to disclose documents to journalists and others who were not suppossed to have them (Manning).

I hope you are not going to claim that both are the same thing, intent as intent.

However, what I would expect to happen is that she and her aides that have been involved should have her security clearances cancelled after this, as an unacceptable risk. And some people who should have known better should be fired if they are still there.

She was certainly negligent and got very lucky that no classified stuff has "leaked" or was stolen. So she should be punished for negligence but not for things that could have but ultimately did not happen. It is the same difference as between negligence and negligent homicide. The former is not a crime but can get you fired or penalized at work, the latter gets you in jail.

[zapta]

I have to disagree Clinton had intent...

The gross negligence section of the law doesn't even require intent. It's a rigged game.

At this point, we have one clear course of correction left, not electing her.

[AF6LJ]

The real reason Clinton won't be prosecuted has to do with career damage or potential loss of life that the prosecutor will incur. If that woman gets elected this country will be in Deep, Deep shit, worse than it already is.

Yeah, it'd be far better to have Donny in power, he's only been accused and not been convicted of rape of minors.

So far.

Don't forget Bill Clinton when he was governor did rape several women, nearly all of which were settled out of court.

[Brumby]

I have to disagree Clinton had intent...

The gross negligence section of the law doesn't even require intent. It's a rigged game.

At this point, we have one clear course of correction left, not electing her.

In a two-horse race, that equates to voting for the other guy.....



My mind is drifting in this direction....