The statute of limitations is 5 years on most federal crimes Hillary left office 5 years ago n Feb

[MattP]

Even if she did anything which she didn't it's to late other than to distract from everything else

[trueblue2007]

1. they can't touch her !!!

[former9thward]

2. The controversy around Clinton has involved emails and classified information.

If any crimes were committed they would probably fall under:

42 U.S.C. § 2274 (communication of restricted data)
42 U.S.C. § 2275 (receipt of restricted data)
42 U.S.C. § 2276 (tampering with restricted data)
50 U.S.C. § 783 (disclosure of classified information (with suspension until the end of any federal
employment of the accused))

The statute of limitations on those laws is 10 years.

[SunSeeker]

5. Trump violated every one of those just during his Oval Office meeting with Kislyak!

But Republicans are going after literally nothing.

[Maeve]

12. The attack on the Clinton Foundation, however....eom

[unblock]

3. Theyre not interested in a real crime anyway. Theyre hoping to get her on perjury

[exboyfil]

4. She is still exposed to perjury

and destruction of documents under subpoena. She might have had classified documents still in her possession (control) in the five year window.

As far as selling her office. You are right that, if the window is five years, she is past on the statute of limitations. I wonder if the foundation, since it continues, might also extend that statute of limitations.

March, 2015 when the documents under subpoena would be the outside window. Andrew McCarthy has proposed squeezing the IT guy for the destruction and potentially lying to the FBI.

This being said I think all of this is a waste of time now (and a distraction what is important). I do think the IT guy should have been squeezed when he destroyed documents under subpoena. That is wrong.

[Lee-Lee]

7. All those would be possible avenues they could take

If they wanted to get into the weeds the ways the documents were handled after she left office could give them multiple avenues to run down and attempt to pin things on her.

I think, as I have maintained from the get go with all the aspects of stuff around her emails and server, that it wasn’t anything she intentionally did but that the people she trusted to run these things for her and advise her badly mismanaged things that she was ultimately accountable for.

[exboyfil]

9. I agree with you

If you understand the retention rules associated with government documents, why would you ever even want to have them under your control (whether with your own server or gmail etc). I would never mix my personal and company emails together. It is simply insane even for a private business like my employer.

Also this thing about forwarding emails to home accounts to be printed. We are the f___ing most powerful/richest democracy in the world. She should have demanded that situation get fixed ASAP at State. Government emails should never have gotten out of the government system.

[Lee-Lee]

10. Add to that sending them all to private lawyers to sort out

Since there was classified information on them they can say it was;

Improperly retained by her after leaving the job and not having any active clearance.
Improperly stored by her in facilities and equipment not approved for storing classified information.
Improperly transferred to people without a clearance- the lawyers they were sent to who were to screen out the personal and work related emails.

It’s a huge can of worms that can be opened if they want to go by the letter of the law- and once again it all stems from her trust in people to properly manage these things that failed her from the start and set a chain of failures in motion that they seemed to never get in front of.

[fescuerescue]

11. Printing of emails...

I've seen this a ridiculous number times with high level people of that age group.

Their assistance prints emails for the principal to be read later. The principal then prepares hand written responses, which the assistance then transcribes. It runs across public and private and it's unique to that Demographic and it's not a technology limitation, but a preference from the principal. (I understand that Trump did the same in the Trump company. Heck he probably still does)

As a technologist myself, I shake my head every time.

[exboyfil]

13. It is how some people process information

Both my daughters and I still prefer physical textbooks. There was a paper out of Scientific American talking about how important the tactile feel is in learning to read. Note takers who use paper and pen/pencil still seem to retain it better.

Given she was a 60+ year old woman in one of the most important positions in the world, I am going to give her a break on wanting the physical copy. I think we can take the overhead given the importance of the decisions and effectiveness. Obviously it would be better to not process information this way.

What is inexcusable is that the emails could not be printed at work and stored in a diplomatic pouch. Once she was done they should have been turned over to her assistants for destruction.

To think the fate of our democracy is jeopardized by the decisions of these functionaries. Maybe the right would have found something else to hammer her with...

[dembotoz]

6. Just deflection

[procon]

8. C'mon now, a lot of out of work kangaroos are depending on a long court trial. nt

[blueinredohio]

14. Then why waste money on an investigation?