Anyone who follows American politics will have heard of Hillary Clinton's email server. Rather than using an official State Department address, she chose to use a private server for her official email. Federal law requires all official email to be archived on government servers. Armchair lawyers have pointed out that it doesn't require the use of government servers to send and receive the email, but the archival requirement is clear.
This requirement was clearly violated in this case: in response to a subpoena, Hillary Clinton's private staff extracted emails from her private server and turned them over to the government. The contents of the server itself were never made available to the government, and now she has had the server erased:
Hillary Clinton wiped “clean” the private server housing emails from her tenure as secretary of state, the chairman of the House committee investigating the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi said Friday.
“While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi, said in a statement.
As Popehat tweeted:
I ask you, who among us hasn't wiped a server clean after its contents were requested by subpoena?
I naively wonder why she isn't in jail, but that's just me. Comments and views from those interested in American politics?
And the difference between what she did and what Cheney did in 06 is....what exactly? I look forward to seeing how many of the right wingers here aren't hypocrites and believe likewise that Cheney and Bush should be brought up on charges, Cheney for the same email bit and Bush of course pushed known bad intel as legit to get a way started which cost millions of lives.
Of course I bet like with most USA partisan hacks that will be 100% okay because the person had the R beside their name, just as those that screamed about Bush wiretaps had no problem with Obama expanding the program. Meet the new hypocrite, same as the old hypocrite.
No, Hairy, I argued long and loud against the invasion of Iraq. I am perfectly aware that Bush knowingly pushed a Crusade on the American people under false pretenses. And, Cheney is pretty much evil incarnate, based on his twisted legal logic and his endorsement of torture as much as anything else.
But - this discussion wasn't about the evil SOB Cheney, it's about the evil bitch Hillary.
You can, of course, begin a discussion of the evils done by the Bush administration. I don't give anyone a pass because they have an R or a D beside their names. Evil is evil.
Normally I would agree that bringing up somebody else would count as an attempted misdirection, (ie, whenever somebody talks shit about the GOP, somebody always chimes in with "The Democrats are just as bad!" to change the subject), but this is a solid, concrete example of somebody who did the same thing that Hillary did, yet nobody is rallying for anyone except Hillary to hang; this isn't just a "Somebody else is just as bad!" attempt at misdirection, this is "If its a crime, then everyone who did it should be punished".
Now, maybe this is my bias showing and I'm just arguing semantics, I'll admit that's possible, but the difference is generalization vs. concrete example. Evil is evil, yes, and evil should be punished evenly and not just the side that doesn't agree with a certain group, which is what we're seeing. Everyone clamoring for Hillary to be locked up should be clamoring for Chaney to be locked up as well. Nobody except "liberals" seems to want Bush and Chaney prosecuted as the war criminals that they are, yet the right wants what are tiny mistakes in comparison to be executed on the spot while giving "their side" a total pass.
So basically your argument is that all the denizens of the White House for the last 15 years are evil incarnate.
It wasn't just GWB and Cheney who rabidly pushing for war -- Hillary Clinton was also an Iraq Debacle Cheerleader -- her ONLY beef with GWB, is that she didn't think it was a good time to cut taxes. See here from about 11 minutes for a couple minutes -- Hillary Clinton says it's our duty to get Saddam even if the would isn't totally lined up with us, just like it was our duty to do Bosnia, but that cutting taxes puts "homeland" security at risk:
First of all calling her a bitch doesn't help your argument as it sounds like you only care about her sex, evil is enough before her name. Second while I think she'll be a shitty president...she WILL be president, if for no other reason than the Republicans have gone and been taken over by the Ayn randiates that take delight in stomping poor and blowing the rich. Hell look at who they ran last time, Mittens had so many Thurston Howell moments the other side needed only to run clips of his own rich cluelessness to win easily. Look at the pack running now...Paul (no chance), Cruz (another big mouth, no chance), Fiorina? Too much baggage, no chance, I mean things are soooo bad over there they are praying for Jeb to run, and I got better odds of winning the lotto than another Bush in the White House!
This is why I've said for years we need to get rid of the barriers that keep us from having viable third parties, because until the right gets rid of the teabaggers and Randiates they have better odds of bringing Reagan back from the dead than they do getting the big chair.