binary solo said:
Of course it was done deliberately. But it was a private, secure server. It wasn't like she was using Facebook messenger. It has nothing to do with being tech savvy. The issue is whether she believed using her private secure e-mail was legit. And it seems at the time she believed it was. Doing something like this that only results in a technical breach of the rules, but does not actually cause any harm to anyone should not be treated as a politically hanging offence. Ergo she should not be subject to criminal proceedings for what she did. Another question is whether she lied to investigators or under oath. That's a maybe. The FBI could have chosen to try to prosecute her there, and that is a legit reason to prosecute even if she committed no criminal sin with the emails. But it seems the assessed the chances of success and decided securing a conviction was unlikely, therefore she wasn't charged for lying / perjury. Now people can and probably will debate this point sharply. But whatever noise happens on the internet it's not going to actually achieve anything. In terms of the election, most people already made their mind up as to whether this whole thing will determine their vote before the FBI announced anything. Some people were probably waiting until a decision on prosecution was formally announced, but ultimately, now that there is no prosecution people are going to decide who to vote for on other factors. |
I'm sorry but why would anyone in such a government position be sending documents to their personal email irrespective of how secure one thinks that server is?
