Hillary's Email Scandal: Were Laws Broken?

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State sparked controversy and led to an FBI investigation. While Clinton claimed her use of the server complied with federal laws and State Department regulations, some experts, officials, and members of Congress argued that it violated federal law, specifically regarding the unauthorised removal and retention of classified documents.

The FBI investigation concluded that Clinton's server did not contain any emails that were clearly marked as classified. However, federal agencies retroactively determined that some emails contained information that should have been deemed classified. The investigation also found that Clinton was extremely careless in her handling of sensitive information.

Ultimately, the FBI decided not to recommend criminal charges, stating that Clinton's actions did not warrant prosecution as they did not find evidence of criminal intent. However, the controversy surrounding Clinton's email usage remained a significant issue during the 2016 presidential election, where she was the Democratic nominee.

Did Clinton violate federal law?

During her time as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton used a private email server for official public communications instead of official State Department email accounts. This led to an FBI investigation, which concluded that Clinton's server did not contain any emails that were clearly marked as classified. However, federal agencies determined retrospectively that 100 emails contained information that should have been deemed classified when they were sent.

Some experts, officials, and members of Congress argued that Clinton's use of a private email system and server violated federal law, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 1924, which relates to the unauthorised removal and retention of classified documents or materials. Clinton, on the other hand, claimed that her use of a private email server complied with federal laws and State Department regulations, and that previous secretaries of state had also maintained personal email accounts.

The FBI investigation found that Clinton had been extremely careless but recommended against filing charges because there was no evidence of criminal intent, which is the historical standard for pursuing prosecution. FBI Director James Comey stated that Clinton's actions did not warrant criminal charges, but that they may have violated the law. He added that Clinton's actions did not justify prosecution because law enforcement officials weigh a number of factors before bringing charges, including the context of a person's actions and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

The investigation concluded that Clinton's use of a private email server violated State Department policies that were in place at the time. However, the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General released a report in 2018 supporting the decision not to prosecute Clinton, finding no evidence of political bias.

Did Clinton violate State Department protocols and procedures?

During her tenure as United States Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton used a private email server for official communications instead of using official State Department email accounts. This drew controversy, with some experts, officials, and members of Congress contending that Clinton's actions violated federal law and State Department protocols, procedures, and regulations governing record-keeping.

Clinton's use of a private email system and server was deemed a violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1924, which concerns the unauthorised removal and retention of classified documents or materials. However, Clinton claimed that her use of a private server complied with federal laws and State Department regulations, and that previous secretaries of state had maintained personal email accounts.

A years-long FBI investigation concluded that Clinton's server did not contain any emails that were clearly marked as classified. However, it was determined that 100 emails contained information that should have been deemed classified when they were sent, and a further 2,093 were retroactively designated as confidential by the State Department.

The State Department's Office of the Inspector General also released a report in May 2016 about the Department's email practices, including Clinton's. The report stated that Clinton did not comply with the Department's policies, which were implemented according to the Federal Records Act. It also stated that Clinton did not seek approval from State Department staff for her use of a private email server, and that if she had, her setup would have been declined due to security risks.

Clinton's use of a private server was also criticised by the State Department's inspector general for not being "an appropriate method" of document preservation and for not following department policies that aim to comply with federal record laws.

In conclusion, while the FBI investigation determined that Clinton's use of a private email server did not warrant criminal charges, it did highlight violations of State Department protocols and procedures.

Did Clinton violate regulations governing recordkeeping?

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as United States Secretary of State drew controversy and led to questions about whether she had violated regulations governing recordkeeping.

The Federal Records Act (FRA) requires federal officials to preserve their work records and submit them to the National Archives when they leave government. The Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978, which amended the FRA in 2014, established that any individual creating presidential records must not use non-official electronic messaging accounts unless they copy an official account or forward a complete copy of the record to an official messaging account.

Clinton exclusively used a private email server and domain throughout her time as Secretary of State. She claimed that her use complied with federal laws and State Department regulations, and that former secretaries of state had also maintained personal email accounts. However, Clinton was the only secretary of state to use a private server.

The State Department's Inspector General criticized Clinton's use of private email for department business, concluding that it was not an appropriate method of document preservation and did not follow department policies that aim to comply with federal record laws. The Inspector General was unable to find evidence that Clinton had sought approval from the State Department staff for her use of a private email server.

Clinton and her aides initially stated that she had provided all work-related emails to the State Department and that only emails of a personal nature had been deleted. However, it was later revealed that Clinton had withheld almost 32,000 emails deemed to be of a personal nature.

Clinton has said that she believed she was preserving her work records by emailing her colleagues on their work emails, assuming that these would be captured by government retention procedures. However, the State Department's Inspector General later stated that this was not an appropriate way to preserve government records.

In conclusion, while there was no evidence that Clinton intentionally tried to harm the interests of the United States, her use of a private email server did raise questions about her compliance with regulations governing recordkeeping.

Did Clinton's use of a private server violate State Department IT procedures?

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as United States Secretary of State drew controversy and violated State Department security guidelines.

Clinton's use of mobile devices to conduct official business on her personal email account and private server was against department security guidelines. She did not seek approval from senior information officers, who would have refused the request due to security risks.

Clinton's use of a private email server was also a violation of federal law, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials.

A years-long FBI investigation determined that Clinton's server did not contain any emails that were clearly marked classified. However, federal agencies retrospectively determined that 100 emails contained information that should have been deemed classified at the time they were sent.

Clinton's actions were deemed "extremely careless" by FBI director James Comey, who recommended against filing charges as Clinton did not act with criminal intent.

Did Clinton's use of a private server violate the Espionage Act?

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State drew controversy and sparked an FBI investigation. While the FBI found "evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information", it was decided that Clinton would not face criminal charges as it was concluded that she did not act with criminal intent.

Clinton's use of a private email server may have violated the Espionage Act, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 793 Subsection F, which states:

> "Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

The key issue is whether Clinton acted with "gross negligence" in allowing classified information to be removed from its proper place of custody. The FBI investigation found that Clinton and her aides were ""extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information", but ultimately concluded that there was no criminal intent.

It is important to note that the decision not to prosecute Clinton was based on the lack of clear criminal intent and the context of her actions, as well as how similar situations have been handled in the past.

Frequently asked questions