Hillary Clinton Deleted Emails Using Program Intended To ‘Prevent Recovery’

[OpportunityCost]

That is in direct conflict with Comey's statement.

If some lowly government employee did what Hillary did (?), we wouldn't have heard about it because there never was a valid reason to do an investigation.

Normally, with a crime like murder, there's a body, there's evidence of a crime, and we use that evidence to find out who did it and why.

The investigation into Hillary is exactly inverted from that. She has been deemed guilty by gullible, partisan saps that have tried the old "repeat it until it's true" tactic and failed miserably in the process.



The only laws she could be claimed to have broken have no punishment.



No.

Because if a lowly government employee did what she did they would have been charged and convicted and everyone would agree it is the right thing to do.

Hillary does it and Democrats go to the wall to defend behavior they know was wrong because party power. Ethics don't mean anything if you don't adhere to them when it matters.

 

[Absentglare]

The fact she actually committed a crime. You don't examine intent when someone is caught in the act of a burglary, you prosecute.

A conviction for first degree murder must delve into motive and therefore intent.

Convictions for other crimes may or may not share such a burden.

Because if a lowly government employee did what she did they would have been charged and convicted and everyone would agree it is the right thing to do.

Hillary does it and Democrats go to the wall to defend behavior they know was wrong because party power. Ethics don't mean anything if you don't adhere to them when it matters.

They would never have been caught. They didn't go from evidence of a crime (the "what") to the person responsible (the "who")- they did it in reverse. That's why the lack of a conviction is so unsurprising.

 

[OpportunityCost]

A conviction for first degree murder must delve into motive and therefore intent.

Convictions for other crimes may or may not share such a burden.



They would never have been caught. They didn't go from evidence of a crime (the "what") to the person responsible (the "who")- they did it in reverse. That's why the lack of a conviction is so unsurprising.

For many, many laws, the determination of intent moves towards sentencing than actual guilt. Aggravating circumstances, degrees of guilt and special circumstances all come under scrutiny when establishing mens rea, but, the actual commission of a crime comes from evidence, not intent.

As to your second part, that is your opinion. The level of evasion that came from State and HRC reeks of a cover up and attempt to evade oversight and information requests from US citizens and groups. If she wants to escape that so much, maybe she should chose another line of work.

 

[Absentglare]

For many, many laws, the determination of intent moves towards sentencing than actual guilt. Aggravating circumstances, degrees of guilt and special circumstances all come under scrutiny when establishing mens rea, but, the actual commission of a crime comes from evidence, not intent.

Red herring. We're not talking about "many, many laws," we're talking specifically about the ones she is accused of.

As to your second part, that is your opinion. The level of evasion that came from State and HRC reeks of a cover up and attempt to evade oversight and information requests from US citizens and groups. If she wants to escape that so much, maybe she should chose another line of work.

Sure, it was an attempt to evade oversight as much as when the republicans did it.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Red herring. We're not talking about "many, many laws," we're talking specifically about the ones she is accused of.

There is no intent written into the code of the law she broke which is why it is focused on so much. Comey added intent to the law to cover his actions, not explain them.

Sure, it was an attempt to evade oversight as much as when the republicans did it.

Inaccurate and not a valid excuse, and you have the gall to accuse me of partisanship. Is it wrong or isn't it? Don't evade, don't accuse the other side, just be honest.

 

[Absentglare]

There is no intent written into the code of the law she broke which is why it is focused on so much. Comey added intent to the law to cover his actions, not explain them.

There is, there is a word called "knowingly" and perhaps you should study its meaning and/or the law.

Or you are referring exclusively to the "gross negligence" charge that plainly does not qualify.

Inaccurate and not a valid excuse, and you have the gall to accuse me of partisanship. Is it wrong or isn't it? Don't evade, don't accuse the other side, just be honest.

I said it's wrong, and both sides are guilty. If you think that republicans did not use private email servers for official business, then you are sorely mistaken.

 

[Chainsaw]

Hillary deleted those emails using Bleachbit, a software designed to prevent any recovery of deleted files


Here's How Hillary Clinton Deleted Emails | The Daily Caller

Gowdy: Hillary Wasn't Indicted Over Email Scandal Because FBI Didn't Bother Asking Her About Intent - Katie Pavlich





Boy, those yoga schedules must have been pretty sensitive stuff :roll:

And those corrupt wench's launched the BleachBit, AFTER they were served with the subpoena. any one else of the 319,999,999,999 population of the country would already be behind bars. But libs and the MSM would elect and defend female Basset Hound if its last name was clinton.

 

[Iron River]

Hillary deleted those emails using Bleachbit, a software designed to prevent any recovery of deleted files.

She did that as any good steward of highly classified documents would do, , , wait, she didn't see any marking and no one told her how to tell if the documents were classified or should have been classified. They used radioactive and dangerous to handle Bleachbit technology because there were yoga e-mails that mentioned her colostomy bag making it hard for her to put her feet behind her head.

Doesn't going to such links to destroy evidence after the Congress asked for the e-mails point to intent. If you know that you committed a crime and try to hide the evidence then we assume that you had intent in the first place. Hillary certainly intended to destroy government records that belong to the country.

 

[OpportunityCost]

There is, there is a word called "knowingly" and perhaps you should study its meaning and/or the law.

Or you are referring exclusively to the "gross negligence" charge that plainly does not qualify.

When you tell someone to smash a phone with a hammer, do you think that comes under knowingly?

I said it's wrong, and both sides are guilty. If you think that republicans did not use private email servers for official business, then you are sorely mistaken.

Yet here you are making excuses and crying about both sides doing it. If you stopped making excuses and understood how much further HRC took it by comparison, I could give you some slack. Seeing as how you can't be honest with me, I have no intention of giving your hypocritical arguments any credence.

FBI: Clinton withheld 17,500 emails | Washington Examiner

FBI agents said they recovered 17,448 "unique work-related and personal" emails from Hillary Clinton's private server that were not provided by her legal team.

Agents said 81 email chains discovered in the course of their year-long probe should have been considered classified at the time they were written, contrary to Clinton's claims that everything sensitive was retroactively classified.

Clinton accessed her emails on 13 different mobile devices, raising questions about her March 2015 claim that she used a private server to consolidate all her communications on just one device.

Its never the crime, its the cover up.

 

[Slyfox696]

Because he took Hillary's word for it.

:lol:

You're reaching. Badly.

Because he attached intent to the definition of the law.

Intent has always been an element of a decision to prosecute. You should know that.

Because even he made efforts to avoid prosecuting her.

You're reaching again.

1) Im not.

I've already proven you are.

2) To cover Hillary's ass

And this is why people don't take partisans seriously. Rather than admitting the facts just don't support the narrative you want them to support, you go and accuse a man with a very good reputation of a pretty serious charge.

This is why reality never matches partisan conservative desires.

3) Because there are emails out there that have not been released. Even now.

Except they are not "finding" any new e-mails, any e-mails which weren't recoverable aren't going to be magically recoverable by independent watchdog groups. That's just stupid, for so many reasons.

You obviously don't understand what's going on. The Benghazi e-mails that were "found" weren't just found. Your own source CLEARLY stated they were part of a group of e-mails recovered by the FBI. This is you, once more, taking a position directly contradicted by facts.

Just give it up. You've lost.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

That is in direct conflict with Comey's statement.

If some lowly government employee did what Hillary did (?), we wouldn't have heard about it because there never was a valid reason to do an investigation.

Normally, with a crime like murder, there's a body, there's evidence of a crime, and we use that evidence to find out who did it and why.

The investigation into Hillary is exactly inverted from that. She has been deemed guilty by gullible, partisan saps that have tried the old "repeat it until it's true" tactic and failed miserably in the process.



The only laws she could be claimed to have broken have no punishment.



No.

Oh my!

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

There is, there is a word called "knowingly" and perhaps you should study its meaning and/or the law.

Or you are referring exclusively to the "gross negligence" charge that plainly does not qualify.

I



I said it's wrong, and both sides are guilty. If you think that republicans did not use private email servers for official business, then you are sorely mistaken.

If Hillary's political career does not end with this scandal, the democrats owe the surviving family members of former president Richard Nixon a big apology.

 

[Absentglare]

If Hillary's political career does not end with this scandal, the democrats owe the surviving family members of former president Richard Nixon a big apology.

Lol ? Parallels to President Nixon, who tried to cover up his actual crimes ?

 

[Absentglare]

When you tell someone to smash a phone with a hammer, do you think that comes under knowingly?

Yes, telling someone to do something generally implies some form of intent.

Yet here you are making excuses and crying about both sides doing it. If you stopped making excuses and understood how much further HRC took it by comparison, I could give you some slack. Seeing as how you can't be honest with me, I have no intention of giving your hypocritical arguments any credence.

FBI: Clinton withheld 17,500 emails | Washington Examiner

"Work related and personal" hmm, i wonder how many are "work related" and how many are "personal"- your rhetorical article doesn't specify. Could be 0 work related emails; we don't know.

We do know what Comey said: no reasonable prosecutor would bring this to trial.

I can assure you that i am both not crying and not lying. I wish i could say the same for your side.

Its never the crime, its the cover up.

What cover up ?? Her deletion of personal emails ??

 

[Chainsaw]

She relied on the Jonathan Gruber strategy. She knew average Americans are too stupid and/or apathetic to care and she knew the MSM would lie and defend her. And it is working.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Lol ? Parallels to President Nixon, who tried to cover up his actual crimes ?

Then can I assume that you agree that Hillary has went through great lengths to attempt to cover up her and Bubba's actual crimes?

 

[bubbabgone]

There is, there is a word called "knowingly" and perhaps you should study its meaning and/or the law.

Or you are referring exclusively to the "gross negligence" charge that plainly does not qualify.



I said it's wrong, and both sides are guilty. If you think that republicans did not use private email servers for official business, then you are sorely mistaken.

Tell ya what, when any of those other Republicans run for POTUS and have the same corrupt baggage as your girl, you can post the evidence here and I'll agree they shouldn't be President.

But, anyway, back to the topic at hand.

"According to provisions contained in the Model Penal Code, an individual is deemed to have acted knowingly in regard to a material element of an offense when: in the event that such element involves the nature of his or her conduct or the circumstances attendant thereto, he or she is aware that the conduct is of such nature or that those circumstances exist; if the element relates to a result of the person's conduct, he or she is conscious of the fact that it is substantially certain that the conduct will precipitate such a result.
When the term knowingly is used in an indictment, it signifies that the defendant knew what he or she was going to do and, subject to such knowledge, engaged in the act for which he or she was charged."

Would signing an affadavit that training and guidance on handling classified information had been received, and subsequently denying such training took place be an indication of awareness, consciousness, of conduct?
IOW, "knowing"?

And if lying about such a thing isn't enough, what would it take for you to accept she knew what she was doing was wrong. A confession?

 

[bubbabgone]

Yes, telling someone to do something generally implies some form of intent.



"Work related and personal" hmm, i wonder how many are "work related" and how many are "personal"- your rhetorical article doesn't specify. Could be 0 work related emails; we don't know.

We do know what Comey said: no reasonable prosecutor would bring this to trial.

I can assure you that i am both not crying and not lying. I wish i could say the same for your side.


What cover up ?? Her deletion of personal emails ??

There were at least 30 deleted emails about Benghazi.

[video]http://m.wsj.net/video/20160831/083116opinionbenghazi/083116opinionbenghazi_v2_ec664k.mp4[/video]

So unless you're going to suggest she was making vacation plans you'd have to say they were work-related emails, right?

 

[OpportunityCost]

Yes, telling someone to do something generally implies some form of intent.



"Work related and personal" hmm, i wonder how many are "work related" and how many are "personal"- your rhetorical article doesn't specify. Could be 0 work related emails; we don't know.

We do know what Comey said: no reasonable prosecutor would bring this to trial.

I can assure you that i am both not crying and not lying. I wish i could say the same for your side.



What cover up ?? Her deletion of personal emails ??

There you go, assuming again. If you don't want to archive your email, don't be a public official answerable to oversight, its part of your job.

 

[OpportunityCost]

:lol:

You're reaching. Badly.
Intent has always been an element of a decision to prosecute. You should know that.
You're reaching again.

Intent is part of the decision to prosecute insomuch as it determines the degree of guilt after accumulating evidence of guilt. It determines sentencing far more than it determines whether a crime is committed. In other words the difference between manslaughter and Murder 2, not whether you shot someone or not.

I've already proven you are.
And this is why people don't take partisans seriously. Rather than admitting the facts just don't support the narrative you want them to support, you go and accuse a man with a very good reputation of a pretty serious charge.

The reasons for declining to prosecute were based in politics, not law.

This is why reality never matches partisan conservative desires.
Except they are not "finding" any new e-mails, any e-mails which weren't recoverable aren't going to be magically recoverable by independent watchdog groups. That's just stupid, for so many reasons.

You obviously don't understand what's going on. The Benghazi e-mails that were "found" weren't just found. Your own source CLEARLY stated they were part of a group of e-mails recovered by the FBI. This is you, once more, taking a position directly contradicted by facts.

Just give it up. You've lost.

Ya I know, there cant possibly be any more emails: FBI: Clinton withheld 17,500 emails | Washington Examiner

FBI agents said they recovered 17,448 "unique work-related and personal" emails from Hillary Clinton's private server that were not provided by her legal team.

The revelation came in notes released Friday by the FBI related to the investigation of Clinton's email system.

Agents said 81 email chains discovered in the course of their year-long probe should have been considered classified at the time they were written, contrary to Clinton's claims that everything sensitive was retroactively classified.

I know that doesn't prove intent to hide the emails right?
What Hillary Clinton Said About Email in 2000 - ABC News

"As much as I’ve been investigated and all of that, you know, why would I —- I don’t even want -— why would I ever want to do e-mail?" she's seen on tape telling Peter Paul on home video captured at a fundraiser.

"Can you imagine?" she said.

Yeah, why would she? She attempted to evade oversight and freedom of information act requests. That is your intent. She didn't obey e-mail rules because she had no intention of being answerable to things every public official is answerable to.

 

[Absentglare]

She relied on the Jonathan Gruber strategy. She knew average Americans are too stupid and/or apathetic to care and she knew the MSM would lie and defend her. And it is working.

I could just the same say that her opponents are employing the same strategy. They knew that average Americans are too stupid and/or gullible and they knew that these Americans would hold it against her even if it were unequivocally proven that she did not commit any crime.

And it's working.

 

[Absentglare]

Then can I assume that you agree that Hillary has went through great lengths to attempt to cover up her and Bubba's actual crimes?

What crimes ? Being a democrat ?

Being in the GOP ****slinging machine's crosshairs ?

 

[Absentglare]

Tell ya what, when any of those other Republicans run for POTUS and have the same corrupt baggage as your girl, you can post the evidence here and I'll agree they shouldn't be President.

Thank you for admitting that you simply want to throw her in prison for the "crime" of running for president with a D next to her name.

Would signing an affadavit that training and guidance on handling classified information had been received, and subsequently denying such training took place be an indication of awareness, consciousness, of conduct?
IOW, "knowing"?

And if lying about such a thing isn't enough, what would it take for you to accept she knew what she was doing was wrong. A confession?

The guidelines don't say that using the letter 'c' automagically makes something classified. Try to focus. Let the emotions calm so that blood flows into the prefrontal cortex. What do you think she actually did "knowingly" that was wrong ?

There were at least 30 deleted emails about Benghazi.

[video]http://m.wsj.net/video/20160831/083116opinionbenghazi/083116opinionbenghazi_v2_ec664k.mp4[/video]

So unless you're going to suggest she was making vacation plans you'd have to say they were work-related emails, right?

No. Have you ever received an email with "Benghazi" in it ? I have, the conservative delusion complex has been harping on it for years.

 

[Absentglare]

There you go, assuming again. If you don't want to archive your email, don't be a public official answerable to oversight, its part of your job.

That would be the thing that i claim republicans did in the same manner. They used private email for business.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

What crimes ? Being a democrat ?

Being in the GOP ****slinging machine's crosshairs ?

I am not in the GOP and you are not discussing Hillary's email scandal in an intellectually honest manner. Hillary's crimes are quite obvious. Sending and receiving classified emails on a private email server is a crime. Deleting classified emails that she was under legal obligation to turn over is a crime. Ever heard of obstruction of justice?