Looking at this as non-partisan as I can... if Hillary wasn't convicted for essentially doing the exact same thing (and deleting the evidence...) then I really don't see any way for Trump to be convicted either.
this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10176 readers
71 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What she did is not at all "essentially doing the exact same thing". At all. I'm not saying she's not probably guilty of some crime at some point because most of our politicians are corrupt, but you are absolutely misinformed if you think she kept hundreds of classified documents, showed them off to people, and lied to federal investigators about it.
You're right... it's worse. She covered her tracks by deleting all the data then lying about it.
I assume you have evidence of this?
you'd think if she actually did commit a crime the FBI would have actually charged and prosecuted her, considering they found the accusations so serious they essentially--unintentionally or intentionally, depending on how cynical you want to view this--interfered with a democratic election in publicly announcing they were investigating just days before the 2016 presidential election. and yet!
In May, the State Department's Office of the Inspector General released a report about the State Department's email practices, including Clinton's. In July, FBI director James Comey announced that the FBI investigation had concluded that Clinton had been "extremely careless" but recommended that no charges be filed because Clinton did not act with criminal intent, the historical standard for pursuing prosecution.[7]
A three-year State Department investigation concluded in September 2019 that 38 individuals were "culpable" in 91 instances of sending classified information that reached Clinton's email account, though it found "no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information".[15] Yet a September 2022 "Fact Checker" analysis by The Washington Post, which followed a tweet by Clinton claiming, "I had zero emails that were classified", also quotes the same 2019 State Department report as having noted, "None of the emails at issue in this review were marked as classified."[1]
No evidence of Clinton's alleged misconduct was found. Plenty of evidence of Trump's was found. That's the difference.
Maybe it's because Clinton is innocent. Maybe it's because she did a better job covering her tracks. Who knows? Regardless, you need evidence to convict someone, and I hope I speak for us all when I say the alternative is much, much worse.
She willingly hid classified documents on a private server and wiped it with BeachBit so investigators couldn’t recover the evidence. Arguably that’s worse since she could also be charged with destruction of evidence. Come on now… either BOTH Hillary and Trump should be in prison or neither of them should be in prison. Any other interpretation is being willfully partisan.
Why are even we talking about someone that was never President, is not running for President, and is not currently serving in public office?
Investigate and prosecute all criminals. That includes Trump, regardless of who else it also includes.
Arguably that’s worse since she could also be charged with destruction of evidence.
but like. she wasn't. she was investigated extensively--and that investigation probably cost her the presidency insofar as any singular thing can be blamed for her loss--and she wasn't. do you have a reasonable explanation for why she'd not be charged with these things if she was actually as damned as you're suggesting?
Because the FBI is very clearly politically motivated.
i'm... sure you recognize that this is quite literally a case where the facts disagree with your personal feelings. i also i don't really know where we can go from here if your earnest belief is the FBI was "politically motivated" into clearing Hillary Clinton when it literally said her actions did not rise to the standard of criminality and again, their investigation may be the single biggest reasons she lost the presidency.