Of course she was, how else was she going to finance another Presidential bid. She lost the first one, because Hussein had better Chicago machine tricks. This time, she was prepared. And Democrats love to work together, like a House of Evil. Their house is not divided. Kerry, CLinton, and Hussein were all in it, after all.

It is. I’m one of the many who link back to these kind of posts, hoping to spread the word.

What was her intent in designing the entire system?

I agree with those who think she was selling information. She was using her server as a drop-box where “hackers” could snag it in exchange for contributions to the Clinton Foundation.

About 15 minutes.

http://www.hoover.org/research/libertarian-hillary-clinton-and-fbi

The DoJ and FBI are bad jokes. They’re insulting us to our faces.

“Saucier had a secret clearance and knew that the photos depicted classified material and that he was not authorized to take them. He retained these photos and failed to deliver them to any officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it.”

Was anything marked classified? That’s Clinton’s excuse.

Clinton had a higher level clearance; TS/SCI. Also the Secretary of State is an original classification authority. Which means it was her responsibility to recognize classified information when it isn’t marked. And she knew she was not authorized to put classified information on her private, unsecure unclassified email system. Yet she retained this information and failed to deliver them to any officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it.

Also, the email server is itself a crime.
“Kel McClanahan, another national security lawyer, said the FBI had not pursued an important line of inquiry: whether Clinton violated the law merely by setting up private servers and diverting government records. Someone who “conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates or destroys” government records can face a fine and up to three years in prison. The Justice Department has sent defendants to prison for such a crime, McClanahan said.

“The thrust of this law is to prevent people from depriving the government of the use it gets from public records, and that is exactly what happened here,” McClanahan said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article88042162.html#storylink=cpy”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

“18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.”

Pretzal logic of Hollow Men is no logic at all.

But by trying to “reconcile [Comey’s] reputation for integrity with the grating illogic of his Clinton decision” all Krauthammer succeeds in doing is demonstrating he had no integrity to begin with.

Integrity would demand that he follow the facts, not make ridiculous rewrites of a law on the books, not make ridiculous claims about “gross negligence” laws being unconstitutional (state laws about “gross negligence” still have to comply with the Constitution, and and they do) and more importantly he should be concerned about the damage Clinton did to the security of the United States. And this wouldn’t just involve the classified emails. If you read the statute particularly paragraph (f) there’s not a word in there about classified information. And then let the chips fall where they may.

But what was Comey concerned about, according to Krauthammer? Politics. His legacy.

“…He did not want the FBI director to end up as the arbiter of the 2016 presidential election. If Clinton were not a presumptive presidential nominee but simply a retired secretary of state, he might well have made a different recommendation.

…You knock out of the race the most likely next president – and she ultimately gets acquitted! Imagine how Comey goes down in history under those circumstances.”

These are not the concerns of a man with integrity. These are the concerns of a man who sticks his finger in the air to find out which way the wind is blowing, and then bend with the prevailing breeze. Krauthammer’s attempted explanation, while not perhaps a defense, still demonstrates that Comey’s recommendation is indefensible.

And Clinton should have also been charged with anticipatory obstruction of justice, BTW.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519

“Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

Clinton knew Congress was investigating Benghazi before she left office. She definitely concealed her records by keeping them on a secret server. And she definitely destroyed documents when she deleted what she claims were personal emails, and then wiped her server, knowing that Congress had requested all Benghazi related emails. But then, we know she hadn’t handed over work related emails.

And it’s important to know that it wasn’t just the ongoing Congressional investigation she needed to contemplate. If she destroyed documents to impede any future investigation it’s a crime to conceal, destroy, etc., any records. Such as, say, this FBI investigation.