Hillary Clinton: Snopes And The Law

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server for official and personal business during her time as secretary of state has sparked intense political and legal scrutiny. While Clinton asserted that her actions were lawful and driven by convenience, critics have alleged that she mishandled classified information and violated federal records statutes. The controversy surrounding Clinton's email practices has led to accusations of wrongdoing, with some claiming that she broke the law and should be prosecuted. However, others have argued that while her conduct may have been discouraged, it did not constitute a legal breach. The issue has been further complicated by the subsequent destruction of emails and electronic devices, as well as Clinton's responses during interviews and investigations.

Hillary Clinton's private email server

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state sparked intense political and legal scrutiny. The controversy centred on whether her decision to use a personal email account and server for government business complied with federal laws and State Department rules.

Clinton asserted that her choice was driven by "convenience" and fell within legal boundaries. However, critics pointed out that while it wasn't explicitly prohibited, using a private server for official communication was strongly discouraged by various guidelines and regulations. These included the Foreign Affairs Manual, the Code of Federal Regulations, and the Federal Records statute. Additionally, a 2011 Presidential Memorandum called on state agency heads, including Clinton, to improve their management of official records.

The primary concern regarding Clinton's private server was the handling of classified information. Strict laws govern the access and storage of such sensitive government information. While Clinton maintained that she was unaware of the classification of certain emails at the time, the State Department's review of 30,000 Clinton emails revealed that at least 671 contained classified information. This discrepancy fuelled accusations of mishandling classified information and sparked an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Counterintelligence Division.

The controversy also led to speculation about potential legal consequences for Clinton. Former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey initially opined that Clinton's actions disqualified her from holding public office under U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2071. However, legal analysts refuted this claim, and Mukasey later retracted his statement. Legal experts instead pointed to the potential applicability of other statutes, such as 18 U.S.C. § 1924 (Unauthorized Removal and Retention of Classified Documents or Materials) and the Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. § 793 Subsection F).

Despite the intense scrutiny and ongoing investigations, the political ramifications of the private server controversy were significant, particularly with the Iowa Caucuses approaching. The final determination of any legal wrongdoing rested with the FBI and the Obama Administration Justice Department.

Classified information

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server for official and personal business while serving as Secretary of State under President Obama sparked a political and legal controversy. The issue first came to light during a U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee investigation into her conduct and knowledge of the Libyan embassy attack in Benghazi.

Clinton's use of a private server was revealed to be in violation of strict laws governing the handling, accessing, and storage of classified government information. This led to an active investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Counterintelligence Division into her allegedly unlawful use of a private server. The central probe into her conduct surrounds her handling of classified information.

Clinton's primary defence has been that she was unaware of the classification status of the emails at the time they were sent or received. However, according to the State Department's review of 30,000 Clinton emails, at least 671 emails sent or received by Clinton contained classified information. This directly contradicts Clinton's statement, "I am confident that I have never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received."

The FBI is also investigating whether Clinton committed 'gross negligence' under the Espionage Act for failing to keep national defence information safe. Notably, the information does not need to be marked as classified to violate the statute, as confirmed by an anonymous intelligence community source.

Clinton has maintained that her use of a private server was permitted by State Department IT procedures and that the 'classified information' in question was not classified at the time but was later upgraded by agencies. However, defence attorney Edward MacMahon Jr. has disputed this defence, stating that "the fact that something's not marked or that the person may not know that it was classified would not be relevant at all in a prosecution under the Espionage Act."

Disqualification from holding office

The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution contains a disqualification clause, which states that:

> No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

This clause was established after the Civil War to prevent members of the Confederacy from resuming power. It has been interpreted to mean that public office holders who have taken an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then engage in insurrection or rebellion against the U.S., or who give aid or comfort to enemies of the U.S., are prohibited from serving in public office.

In August 2015, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey claimed that Hillary Clinton was disqualified from holding office due to her use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State. Mukasey cited U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2071, which establishes the concealment or destruction of government records as a crime, and stipulates that public officeholders who violate the code shall be "disqualified from holding any office under the United States". However, legal experts, including Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law, and former Rutgers Law School professor Seth Barrett Tillman, disagreed with Mukasey's assertion, stating that a statute cannot legally disqualify someone from eligibility for the presidency if they possess the constitutional qualifications. Bipartisan legal analysts agreed that Mukasey's claim was not plausible, and he retracted his statement a few days later.

Clinton's use of a private email server while at the State Department has been the subject of a House Select Committee investigation and an active investigation by the FBI's Counterintelligence Division. The central probe into her conduct surrounds her handling of classified information, as strict laws govern the accessing and storage of classified government information. As of November 2015, the FBI was also looking into whether Clinton committed 'gross negligence' under the Espionage Act for failure to keep national defense information safe.

Destruction of devices and emails

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server for official communications during her tenure as Secretary of State sparked controversy and led to an FBI investigation. While no charges were filed, the investigation revealed instances of email and device destruction that have been scrutinized.

Destruction of Devices

During the FBI investigation, it was discovered that two of Clinton's old mobile phones had been physically destroyed by a senior aide, Justin Cooper. Cooper recalled two instances where he either broke the devices in half or hit them with a hammer. Additionally, the FBI found that Clinton's tech support aide, Jason Cooper (no relation to Justin Cooper), had hammered two old Clinton phones that were out of service. However, there was no evidence that this was done in response to a subpoena.

Destruction of Emails

The controversy surrounding the destruction of emails centres around the deletion of approximately 30,000 emails deemed personal by Clinton and her team. This occurred after a subpoena was issued by the House Select Committee on Benghazi in March 2015, requesting emails related to the 2012 Benghazi attack.

Clinton's lawyers delivered 12 boxes of printed emails to the State Department in December 2014, withholding almost 32,000 emails deemed personal. In March 2015, the existence of Clinton's private email server became public knowledge, and the Select Committee on Benghazi issued a subpoena for Benghazi-related emails.

In December 2014, Clinton had instructed her team to change the server's retention period to 60 days, allowing for the automatic deletion of older personal emails. However, the technician responsible for carrying out this task failed to do so at the time. Following the March 2015 subpoena, a conference call took place between Clinton's attorneys and the technician, during which the latter had an "oh shit moment" upon realizing his previous oversight. Soon after, between March 25 and 31, the technician used BleachBit, a free utility, to erase the personal emails.

The destruction of emails during an ongoing government investigation has raised questions about potential violations of legal and record-keeping standards. While Clinton maintained that her use of a private server was permitted and that she had turned over all relevant emails, critics argued that the deletion of emails under subpoena amounted to obstruction of justice.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 27(e), addresses the failure to preserve electronically stored information, stating that courts may impose fines, penalties, or adverse rulings if electronically stored information is lost due to a party's failure to take reasonable steps to preserve it. Additionally, 18 U.S. Code § 1519 prohibits the destruction, alteration, or concealment of records with the intent to impede or obstruct an investigation.

While Clinton's actions may have violated these provisions, the FBI concluded that there was no criminal intent, and no charges were filed. However, the destruction of devices and emails has remained a contentious issue, with ongoing debates about the legality and ethical implications of Clinton's actions.

Potential obstruction of justice

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server for official and personal business while serving as Secretary of State has been a subject of scrutiny. The controversy surrounding her email practices centres on the potential mishandling of classified information and the subsequent deletion of emails, which may constitute obstruction of justice.

Obstruction of justice is a broad term encompassing various offences that interfere with the justice system, particularly the work of prosecutors, investigators, and government officials. It can include acts such as perjury, witness tampering, destruction of evidence, and making false statements.

In the case of Clinton's emails, the concern is that she may have knowingly sent, received, or stored classified information on a private, non-governmental server. This is a violation of strict laws governing the handling of classified government information. While Clinton has defended herself by claiming she was unaware of the classification of the emails at the time, experts argue that the classification markings are irrelevant in a prosecution under the Espionage Act.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Counterintelligence Division launched an investigation into Clinton's use of a private server, examining whether she unlawfully handled classified information. The FBI's investigation also extended to Clinton's aides, including Huma Abedin, with the discovery of potentially relevant emails on a laptop used by Abedin and her estranged husband, Anthony Weiner.

The potential consequences of Clinton's actions are significant. If charged and convicted of obstruction of justice, she could face imprisonment of up to 20 years, effectively ending her political career. However, it is important to note that the investigations were ongoing as of November 2015, and the outcome of these investigations is unclear.

Frequently asked questions