Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The Ground Under Clinton Continues to Crumble

Politically, Clinton has lost the final argument in her public arsenal—that she did not recognize top-secret data unless it was marked as top secret.

Hillary Clinton/InstagramHillary Clinton/InstagramThis has not been a good week for Hillary Clinton. She prevailed over Sen. Bernie Sanders in the Iowa Democratic presidential caucuses by less than four-tenths of one percent of all votes cast, after having led him in polls in Iowa at one time by 40 percentage points. In her statement to supporters, standing in front of her gaunt and listless looking husband, she was not able to mouth the word "victory" or any of its standard variants. She could barely hide her contempt for the Iowa Democrats who deserted her.

Sanders isn't even a Democrat. According to official Senate records, he is an "Independent Socialist" who votes to organize the Senate with the Democrats, and sits on the Senate floor with them. Clinton, of course, is the heiress to the mightiest Democratic political apparatus in the land. Hence the question: What do the Iowa Democrats know that caused thousands of them to flee from her?

They know she is a crook.

On the Friday before Monday's caucuses, the State Department, which Clinton headed in President Obama's first term, revealed that it discovered 22 top-secret emails on the private computer server to which Clinton diverted all her governmental email traffic. This acknowledgement marks a radical departure from previous State Department pronouncements and is a direct repudiation of Clinton's repeated assertions.

She has repeatedly asserted that she neither sent nor received anything "marked classified" using her private email server. The State Department, until last Friday, has backed that up by claiming that while the substance of at least 1,300 of her emails was confidential, secret or top secret, they were not "marked" as such when she dealt with them.

These are word games. First, under the law, nothing is "marked classified." The markings are "confidential" or "secret" or "top secret," and Clinton knows this. Second, under the law, it is not the markings on the email headers that make the contents state secrets; it is the vulnerability of the contents of the emails to impair the government's national security mission that rationally characterizes them as secrets. Clinton knows this because she signed an oath on Jan. 22, 2009, recognizing that state secrets retain their secrecy status whether "marked or unmarked" by any of the secrecy designations. She knows as well that, under the law, the secretary of state is charged with knowing state secrets when she comes upon them.

Yet, in order to further Clinton's deceptive narrative, the State Department has consistently claimed that it retroactively marked at least 1,300 emails as state secrets. It did this until last Friday.

Last Friday, the State Department revealed that 22 emails it found on Clinton's private server were in fact top secret, and were in fact marked top secret, and were in fact sent to or received from President Obama. This is a revelation that substantially undermines Clinton's political arguments and is catastrophic to her legal position.

Politically, Clinton has lost the final argument in her public arsenal—that she did not recognize top-secret data unless it was marked as top secret. She has also lost the ability to claim, as she has repeatedly, that she neither sent nor received anything marked classified, as meaningless as that phrase is.

Legally, the ground under Clinton continues to crumble. The more she denies, the more she admits. How can that be? That is so because her denials are essentially an admission of ignorance, forgetfulness, or negligence, and, under the law, these are not defenses to the failure to safeguard state secrets entrusted to the secretary of state. They are, instead, recognition of that failure.

Late Monday afternoon, before the Iowa caucuses convened and after Clinton's political folks had lobbied their former colleagues at the State Department to re-characterize what they found and revealed late last week, the State Department reversed itself and claimed that the 22 emails were not "marked" top secret. It was too little and too late. The cat was out of the bag and Iowa Democrats knew it. Few really believed that the State Department would state publicly that the 22 emails were top secret and then state publicly that they were not, without a political motivation and irrespective of the truth. All this is infuriating to the FBI, which perceives these word games as mocking its fidelity to the rule of law.

Sanders' presence in the Democratic primaries will continue to give Democrats who mistrust Clinton a safe political haven. But he is not Clinton's real worry. Her real worry is an FBI committed to the rule of law and determined to fortify national security by gathering the evidence of her mishandling state secrets.

Let's be as blunt about this as the FBI will be: Causing state secrets to reside in a nonsecure, nongovernmental venue, whether done intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage.

And there is more. When asked about the consequences of Clinton's brazen exposure of state secrets to anyone who knows how to hack into a nonsecure computer, an intelligence operative winced as if in pain when he remarked that the nation's then chief diplomat surely compromised the "sources, methods, and lives" of her colleagues. Even Democrats who see Clinton as a symbol of their long-time wish for a progressive female in the Oval Office are beginning to recognize that anyone who has jeopardized American lives for political gain is unworthy of their votes, unworthy of their trust, and unworthy of public office.

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO | DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

Photo Credit: Hillary Clinton/Instagram

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written nine books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. 

Media Contact Reprint Requests

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Rockabilly||

    LOL!!!!! x Infinity !!!

  • AlmightyJB||

    I came here to say that. Dem Dynasties ie Kennedy and Clinton are above the law.

  • Jack Strawb||

    But no mention of the Bush dynasty as above the law?

    Hack.

  • Hank Phillips||

    I came to reason looking for info on the Libertarian hopefuls stumping in Texas. Everyone here is so busy licking the blacking off antichoice Republican machine infiltrators boots (and now drying them off with their hair) that I learn nothing. I've been voting libertarian in 71 consecutive elections and all I find are whining infiltrators from all five looter parties hoping to drum up sympathy for their whipped curs. What about my yaller dawg? dammit!

  • EndTheGOP||

    "Even Democrats who see Clinton as a symbol of their long-time wish for a progressive female in the Oval Office are beginning to recognize that anyone who has jeopardized American lives for political gain is unworthy of their votes, unworthy of their trust, and unworthy of public office."

    Judge -- I gotta believe you're wrong on this one. Democrats/socialists/progressives don't really care how they win as long as they win.

    Also, Obama will NEVER allow anyone to prosecute the heir to his third term.

    Plus the republicans are going to be so divided after the GOP finally decides a nominee that I bet 20% of republicans won't even bother going to the polls. If Trump gets the nomination the RINOs will stay home and if a Rubio gets the nod Trump's supporters will stay home.

    IT'S ALL OVER FOLKS! And the socialists won.

  • bvandyke||

    "Last Friday, the State Department revealed that 22 emails it found on Clinton's private server were in fact top secret, and were in fact marked top secret, and were in fact sent to or received from President Obama. "

    This right here is why nothing will happen because it implicates the POTUS also and makes him guilty just like Her Kanklness.

  • Loki||

    This right here is why nothing will happen because it implicates the POTUS

    Unfortunately you're probably right. The justice department will not do anything with FBI's findings. Maybe after Chocolate Nixon is out of office, and if Shrillary doesn't get elected they'll do something, but I doubt it.

  • MSimon||

    If he didn't know about the private server?

  • MarcK||

    Let me get this right, the President sent documents noted at "Top Secret" to an email address that did not end in .gov! This is truly astounding! Why would anyone inside of government send government secret documents to anyone not using a .gov email address!

  • Suicidy||

    Time to finally ramp things up for Obama's treason trial.

  • Passive Fist||

    I think it's bigger than that. I personally believe that server was created to run ops in Libya off government servers and clear of FOIA request with full support of the administration and congress. Not necessarily the FBI though. So, how much of a patriot is Comey? Will he try and bring down two branches of government?

  • TimMullins||

    You're probably right on track with that assessment. Obama won't allow anything to happen to Hillary, simply because it will come out in the media just how far down that hole the rabbit went. The president would then become implicated, and it doesn't take too much thought to realize why she was using a private server for her email. Especially one that was kept hidden where it's doubtful that the authorities would find it before she could get somebody to it so they could yank the drive, and toss it in the East River. Which is probably the exact location at this time anyway.

    The DNS numbers point to a lower Manhattan location for that server, so it was not stashed in her home. More than likely it was hiding in the offices for that foundation of the Clinton's. I believe that it's located somewhere near the Rockefeller Center. I still haven't heard anything about how much more expensive it is to maintain a static IP address like this, as opposed to using a private email ACCOUNT like the press reported that Powell and Rice used. There's more than one huge difference there. One of the reasons she feels immune, is due to the lackluster attitude the majority of the press is applying to this story.

  • Rich||

    Her real worry is an FBI committed to the rule of law

    What if she had a real ace in the hole?

  • Drake||

    Her real worry should be Benghazi.

    Her emails included Stevens' travel and security plans. Then he died in a very well coordinated and planned attack when he happened to be in a jerk-water town far from the embassy. Only need one more scrap of evidence to pin the whole thing on her carelessness with classified information.

  • WTF||

    What difference at this point does it make?

  • jmg09||

    Dude, that was like 2 years ago.

  • Cyto||

    The Benghazi movie doesn't mention Clinton or Obama in any way, but anybody who watches that movie will be primed and ready to hear an anti-Clinton message based on their bizarre cover-up after the fact.

    If I'm running against her, I save that for the end and then I go full-tilt with a super-PAC ad campaign laying out the weird "it was a youtube video with a couple of hundred hits that caused this spontaneous riot" cover story. Of course the punch line is her "What difference, at this point, does it make?" rejoinder. Spooky close-zoom on the TV screen of that with ominous music. Boom, she's done.

    I might even have a super-PAC buy up time during September to play the 13 hours on prime time cable TV, if they won't play it themselves. You could probably get a block on most cable networks for reasonably cheap - and you can sell ads yourself if you wanted too. Or you could find a way to "sponsor" it to be free on all of the streaming services, if it isn't already available in the free block by then. The more people know about the events on the ground, the easier the issue is to use as a hammer.

  • Drake||

    If the GOP was smart (they aren't), they would be getting ready to destroy her in September and October with that kind of stuff.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    What's scary is the commentariat has consistantly come up with far better ads against her than her supposed opponents.

    Another one- run pictures of some unsavory foreign leader and list human rights violations from Amnesty or the US government, then pull back to show they were shaking Hillary's hand and then list their donations to the Clinton Foundation.

  • soflarider||

    Let's be fair though. Her current opposition is Bernie. He's not going to run with that issue and there's no point in any Republican running that now. I'm quite sure you'll see some more effective ads in the general election, if she makes it that far.

  • dchang0||

    True. The Republicans are keeping their powder dry. No sense in blowing money now when there's still a huge Republican field of candidates.

  • Migrant Log Chipper||

    I think you have a point...she's a patholgical liar, everyone knows it and agitprop by team red would be effective.

  • Cyto||

    Who she is covers the ace in the hole. With 25 years of national-level power and a political organization that covers all 50 states at all levels of government, the Clintons are formidable powers that are not to be treated lightly. Most federal prosecutors have some level of political ambition, even if it is to be appointed to a judgeship. I doubt very seriously if any of them have any intention of poking that hornets nest. Unless you have a slam-dunk high-level case that can prevail against a judge appointed by Bill or one of their cronies, you'd be a fool to take the case to court. Anything less than a total victory with a serious jail term - one that survives all of the appeals - would be career suicide.

    Of course, if you were able to dismantle the Clinton machine, you'd be a hero of the right and be able to write your ticket to the house or senate. You'd never go farther than that though... the negatives are way, way too high for crossover appeal.

  • Rich||

    With 25 years of national-level power and a political organization that covers all 50 states at all levels of government, the Clintons are formidable powers that are not to be treated lightly.

    So, *every last one* in this vast left-wing conspiracy buys into the "meh" about Hillary's bullshit?

  • Cyto||

    They don't have to. If an evil (R) attacks one of their own, they'll circle the wagons. Particularly if they depend on a large network of politicians and contributors who are affiliated with the Clintons for decades. Nobody in the group has to be a true believer. They just have to believe that others in the group will act as if they are true believers.

    There's a ton of loyalty out there that is truly earned - not ideological. The Clintons have raised a ton of money for other people and have helped thousands of candidates and judges get where they are. With a couple of decades for those folks to move up in government, they are a very powerful cadre.

  • Loki||

    The Clintons have raised a ton of money for other people and have helped thousands of candidates and judges get where they are.

    Pretty much this. All those people know who they owe their careers and fortunes to, and they're not about to derail that gravy train. Even the ones who know she's the biggest crook to ever seek the presidency won't do anything to jeopardize their own careers. Everyone has their price, and the Clintons have enough money and influence to buy anyone.

  • Technomad||

    Not necessarily. Remember the non-event when a bunch of Republicans' FBI files apparently walked over to the Executive Office Building? I'd bet a lot that quite a few Democrats' files took that same trip...and since then, the Clintons have had blackmail material on a lot of people in their own party. The straight party-line vote to acquit Bubba the Rapist by the Donkeys might have been predicated on warnings of "If we go down, we're taking as many of you with us as we can!"

    The Clintons do not strike me as being above that sort of shenanigans, not for a second. And they do have loyalists, as pointed out elsewhere, that would happily feed them information about potential dissidents from the "Hare Clinton, Hare Clinton, Clinton Clinton, Hare Hare" party line.

  • Illocust||

    If you took her down before you sealed up the primaries you'd be a hero to the left too. Bernie fans already call her a liar. If you take the option of her becoming the candidate, then they won't have to waffle anymore.

  • Cyto||

    Except I don't think Bernie is electable. Probably not even against Trump. (wow, did I really just write that?)

    He has principles and a core ideology that makes him predictable. That part is great. But the hard-core class warfare stuff that appeals to the far left is the same thing that will doom him with the rest of the electorate. The green party types aren't as completely isolated as us libertarians, but they are pretty far off of the beaten path.

    Plus you have to believe that the D establishment will start to worry about the atheist Jew angle at some point if he starts to really threaten to win the nomination. That might really gin up turnout among Christians, even the Democrat moderates. I don't know if we are ready for a semi-openly atheist president.

  • Illocust||

    The far left makes up a good chunk of the media, though (the rest mostly made up by establishment left types). As far as careers go in politics, doing a favor for the far left will get you a lot of positive press. The establishment left will abandon Hillary in the same way they did when Obama beat her. Bernie may not win, but the good feels will already be cemented by the time they figure that out.

  • Hank Phillips||

    beaten whipped, clubbed, tricked, conned, suckered, looted, enslaved, robbed, taxed, regulated, shot (justifiably), nannied, betrayed path.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    "Politically, Clinton has lost the final argument in her public arsenal—that she did not recognize top-secret data unless it was marked as top secret. "

    Yes. And nothing else will happen.

  • WTF||

    Laws are for the little people!

  • dchang0||

    If she is not indicted and found guilty and/or she is elected President, the fact that "laws are for the little people" will be so obviously in effect in the USA that we will all know we have passed some critical tipping point. Even her supporters will sense that her win(s) mean that America has gone from the rule of law to "might makes right," and that will kick off the massive arms race between all the political tribes to dominate and crush their opponents. The Democrats would take full advantage of a Hillary win and sprint for the finish line, using every dirty trick in the book to solidify their lead.

    It will be open pandemonium. It would not surprise me if we saw fistfights on the floor of the Senate someday within a generation if Hillary were to get away scot free.

  • Hank Phillips||

    You really should at least glance over the Constitution, especially Article 6, and the "shall not be questioned" Lysander Spooner was so fond of quoting...

  • Cyto||

    The media bulwark is still in place, at least at the top. Sanders was on Today yesterday morning, and Matt Lauer went after him like he was almost a Republican. The only questions they asked him were horserace questions of the "if you don't really win the next primary by a wide margin, isn't that a victory for Hillary?" variety. (and yes, that was pretty much a direct quote)

    They even interrupted him a couple of times when he tried to steer away from silly "can I get you to whine about the Iowa caucuses" questions and toward is vision for the country - as if he were evading the tough questions when he said the results are what they are and we are moving on.

    Lauer has been on the Clinton team for pretty much his entire career, so it shouldn't be terribly surprising. But with Sanders being a Paul-esque kook who has no chance of winning the election, I'm surprised they are working so hard to keep him down.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Sanders is a kook, but who else is there for the dem primary voters to turn to? O'Malley? Do they even know who he is?

  • Strelnikov||

    He dropped out.

  • SugarFree||

    The faster she ties off Sanders the more times she can spend running against the GOP nom.

    I think Sanders is as nutty as squirrel shit, but at least he's not a Dem puppet. They must be applying enormous pressure on him to bow out.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Your money has paid for that bulwark since 1971 (assuming you were in long pants then). Read about Nixon's anti-libertarian law and weep. South American banana republics all copied it and now have as many as 32 communist, socialist, populist and bolivarian looter parties all subsidized by tax collectors with guns. THAT's exporting democracy!

  • UnCivilServant||

    So the Judge still sends articles to reason. I haven't seen one in a while (doesn't mean it wasn't there, just that I didn't see it)

  • commodious spittoon||

    The Judge is just asking questions.

  • ||

    just 2. is he feeling ill? has he been reading the comments?

  • Drake||

    She's a crook in many ways. At the root of it all was her and Bill's intention to make themselves rich by peddling influence. They brought in hundreds of $millions while she was Sec State auctioning off access and favors. To hide it all, she refused to use the protected government email and set up one she controlled instead.

    When her handlers scrubbed that server of 30,000 "personal emails" they were obviously looking to hide any evidence of their bribery schemes. But, they happened to miss her carelessness with classified information.

  • Cyto||

    I don't know why this hasn't gotten any traction. The uranium deal really looks like a quid-pro-quo on the face of it. But nobody seems very interested in it, outside of Drudge-Limbaugh fanatics. Superficially it looks like Iran-Contra level scandal, only for personal profit rather than for a national security agenda.

  • Drake||

    Past scandals like Teapot Dome seem so minor and quaint these days. They would barely elicit a passing headline now, much less prosecution and jail time for a Cabinet Member.

  • ||

    Look, she had permission from the Secretary of State. Isn't that enough???

    God, you people are vicious right wing sexists.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Is that all you got? I've been called far worse, by far more skilled insult-mongers.

    Up your game, Old Man.

  • ||

    OK, you're a micropenised duct-tape-wrapped gerbil.

  • UnCivilServant||

    inventive, but all it did was raise an eyebrow, not ire or bemusement.

  • ||

    Look it's early, OK? I'M OLD.

  • ||

    How about "you're a micropenised duct-tape-wrapped gerbil who enjoys living in Sean Penn's arse"

  • ||

    Better, yes.

  • Rich||

    I admit to watching the Dem "Town Hall" last night.

    Clinton spoke about looking in her inbox first thing each morning for an inspirational message from some minister -- no pickup on her email woes from Anderson Cooper or the audience.

    She actually spoke the line "no executive is too big to jail" -- ditto.

  • d3x / dt3||

    She made certain not to say "no one."

  • Rich||

    Yep. The context was "no bank is too big to fail".

    I must say, though, she is very good at thinking on her feet. The stuff she (apparently) generated on the fly in response to some, um, unusual questions was pretty amazing.

  • Rich||

    Oh, another thing about Hillary's performance.

    She spent a fair amount of time passionately beating up the Republicans for *doing anything it takes to get elected*.

    Pretty nauseating.

  • Loki||

    She actually spoke the line "no executive is too big to jail"

    I wonder if maybe that was meant to be a subtle reminder to Obumbles (who was most likely watching) that if she goes down, she'll take him with her?

  • straffinrun||

    I'm waiting for the movie to be made. Who would you choose to play Hillary?

  • Rich||

    Hilary Duff.

  • Strelnikov||

    Or Duffman.

  • ATXChappy||

    Duffman is too charismatic, I'd prefer Surly Duff.

    "Hey, Surly only looks out for one guy ... Surly!"

  • Tejicano||

    A hyena? Well, not sure they could find one ugly enough...

  • straffinrun||

    Have to bulk up its hind legs.

  • Tejicano||

    Bah, you could cover that with wardrobe. But you have to admit that the sexual practices & anatomy of hyena females are pretty much spot on.

  • ||

    Owen Wilson

  • Drake||

    Winner - they just need fit him with a prosthetic fat ass.

  • ||

    Who was the actress who played Mom in Doctor Detroit?

    Second choice is the actress who plays Mac's mom on Sunny.

  • straffinrun||

    Answers like this and I'll cast your mom.

  • ||

    My mom is a sweet old Jewish lady with a thick Baltimore accent. Wouldn't work.

  • straffinrun||

    Sweet old Jewish lady? Have Monica play Hillary and you won't need a body double for the BJ scene.

  • FreeRadical||

    straffinrun for the win!

  • sarcasmic||

    Amy Schumer

  • John||

    I like that idea but you know as well as I do Hillary will be played by someone like Merryl Streep giving an Oscar nominated performance as America's most heroic woman.

  • sarcasmic||

    I'm not sure Streep would work. After all, she already played the Iron Lady. To play both Thatcher and Clinton would cause a tear in the fabric of space-time.

  • John||

    Okay. Ellen Degeneris in her break out dramatic role.

  • Suicidy||

    If she gains 40 pounds.

  • Long Woodchippers||

    Lena Dunham - but it would take a lot of makeup to make her as attractive as Hillary.

  • sarcasmic||

    Ouch

  • jmg09||

    I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...twice.

  • AlmightyJB||

    John Malcovich

  • Loki||

    Winner winner, chicken dinner. That's got my vote.

    Although John's probably right above re: Meryl Streep (or someone like her) in an Oscar nominated performance. *barf*

  • Strelnikov||

    Too feminine.

  • Copernicus would chip||

    Harvey Firestein

  • Strelnikov||

    Brian Dennehy.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    Larry David. He's got real talent!

  • buybuydandavis||

    Palpatine.

  • soflarider||

    Oprah!

  • JayWye||

    Roseanne Barr.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Well, when a Clinton does it, that means it is not illegal.

  • John||

    Serious question, name a single national level politician in the last hundred years who is known to have engaged in as much illegal conduct as Hillary Clinton. I am trying to think of any. Maybe Spiro Agnew. I think he was nailed for taking bribes but I don't know the details of it. Things like Watergate, Iran Contra and Teapot Dome are amazingly benign compared to this. I am really stumped.

  • Rich||

    Hey, I hope that question gets asked in the Democrat "Debate" tonight!

  • John||

    Every single time she sent an email or read an email with classified information in it and didn't immediately report it to the DOS security managers, she committed a felony. And every time she told her subordinates to do the same she engaged in a conspiracy to commit a felony. If she were an ordinary contractor or GS employee, she would never see the light of day again.

    Think about it, imagine if it was revealed that some SES in the Pentagon ran his own private server and never even had a government email account and that server was riddled with classified and and SAP information. It would be the biggest national security scandal since Richard Hansen and the guy would be sitting in solitary awaiting trial without bail.

  • Loki||

    if it was revealed that some SES in the Pentagon ran his own private server and never even had a government email account and that server was riddled with classified and and SAP information... the guy would be sitting in solitary awaiting trial without bail.

    This X 1,000,000

    I've said it before, but it bears repeating. I've worked on a Top Secret, SAP program before. They take that shit very, VERY seriously. I have no doubt in my mind that if I had done what she did, I'd be in a dark hole in a federal maximum security "pound me in the ass" prison, probably for the rest of my life. Hell, I might even be shipped off to Gitmo if it could be shown that my actions had aided terrorists.

    Hell, if I had even asked on my first day after being cleared if I could even have the option of using my own private email system for all electronic correspondence, they would have laughed in my face, and I probably would have been debriefed, stripped of my clearance, and barred from ever working on TS/ SAP programs ever again.

    But rules are for little people.

  • John||

    Anyone who has ever had a security clearance has to understand how bad this is. It is just mind boggling what she did.

  • Drake||

    Yep - I sent encrypted, coded, top secret messages over radio nets. If I had so much as kept one original message instead of burning it, I would have been jailed for years.

  • Tejicano||

    Well Hell, I'm sure it will be. Just not by anybody actually in attendance at the debate.

  • Tejicano||

    If the conspiracy theory about the CIA taking out JFK due to his mis-handling of foreign affairs was true I wonder just what fundamental changes have happened in the US intel community over the past 60 years which would stay their hand now.

  • John||

    If Hillary gets away with this and is elected President, she will think and probably rightly, that she is completely above the law and in no danger of ever being held accountable, even politically for a crime no matter how serious. That won't end well for the country.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Or, she'll be assassinated by a Muslim extremist or whichever group the Praetorian thinks is the most significant threat to the country.

  • John||

    This is how the national security laws are applied to the little people

    http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/09/.....t-nsa-fbi/

    That anyone defends this woman is just sickening.

  • Lee G||

    The apostates are always the most harshly dealt with.

    The government's treatment of these employees was a warning to anyone who might cross the NSA and its aspirations.

  • Hank Phillips||

    GOP infiltrators here whining abt Hillary kicking sand in their candidates's faces makes me giggle. Like I care whether the klan beats the commies or vice-versa.

  • Abe Froman||

    I think she should be asked at every campaign appearance, "Will you use your own private e-mail server for your correspondence if you're elected president next November?"

  • DontLoseYourHead||

    The answer is very simple:

    HILLARY FOR PRISON 2016!

  • Loki||

    I saw that on a bumper sticker the other day. Made me laugh.

  • Hank Phillips||

    I remember GOP butthurt stickers whining WHO ELECTED HER?

  • A Frayed Knot||

    Causing state secrets to reside in a nonsecure, nongovernmental venue, whether done intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage.

    Hmm, so that makes Snowden guilty of espionage, no?

  • John||

    Snowden was guilty of espionage. There is no denying that.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Yep. The argument for Snowden has always been that his status as a whistleblower and the fact that he was spying for his people against a rogue government justifies his espionage, not that he didn't actually do it. But Hillary was just trying to cover up her own dirty dealings.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Reporting a crime is espionage. Lt Calley would be a hero if some dirty traitorous spy hadn't snitched him off for gunning down women and children for Dick Nixon and 'Murrica!

  • ||

    How can that be?

    Because we are no longer a constitutional republic of limited enumerated powers. We are a nation of men. And is chaos, arrogance, hubris, pettiness, and other nasty things that entails from being a nation of men.

    I've been trying to pinpoint when exactly we should say that happened. I would say the SCOTUS case that said that the pigs do not have a duty to protect citizens. I think this is important because this case, IMHO, breaches the social contract that is the constitution. I give up my unlimited power to do violence in exchange for security from the state. When the State no longer has to live up to that term, the contract is breached and I may now resort to whatever violence necessary to protect me, my family, and my property.

  • sarcasmic||

    I've been trying to pinpoint when exactly we should say that happened.

    Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798.

  • Strelnikov||

    1/20/09.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    January 20, 1933 - the swearing in of FDR.

    Once FDR became president, all liberty was lost.

  • dchang0||

    I used to think FDR was the tipping point when it comes to US Presidents, but it may have been Woodrow Wilson before him or even Abraham Lincoln (peaceful secession should be a right--basically the right to freely associate/dissociate with whomever one likes writ large).

    As for laws/regulations, the Sedition Act is a good suggestion.

  • Hank Phillips||

    FDR became president because the Republican party claimed prohibition with guns made America prosperous and Herbert Hoover believed it. He believed it to the point of sending IRS agents with guns to go through individual and corporate income tax returns and confiscating bank accounts to enforce God's Own Prohibitionism until every bank in These States closed. TR and Wilson both called for open inspection of corporate income tax returns before Hoover, with bad financial results. The Libertarian Party party wants to deport that income tax right back into the communist manifesto, where it came from.

  • sarcasmic||

    Perhaps the whiskey tax and rebellion of 1791.

  • Sevo||

    Where's commie kid to tell us her transgressions are no worse than a journalist with the wrong credential?

  • the other Jim||

    "Hence the question: What do the Iowa Democrats know that caused thousands of them to flee from her?

    They know she is a crook."

    I would like to believe that, because it would imply a certain level of integrity among the motivated Dem voters who turn out for the caucuses and primaries. But I am pretty sure the Bernie voters mostly dislike Clinton because she's not really, authentically progressive like Bernie is. I doubt they care about her emails. After all, Bernie himself said he was sick of hearing about them.

    These people want more government, more punitive taxation, more redistribution. If they really believed Hillary would deliver that, they'd vote for her, her treasonable email practices notwithstanding.

  • KerryW||

    ^^ This

  • dchang0||

    But did you see the video footage of Bernie supporters chanting "she's a liar, she's a liar" during her closing speech at the Iowa caucuses?

    That might be that they have chosen Bernie and would slam any of his opponents, but to call her a liar specifically out of any other possible insults (like "she's a Goldman Sachs sellout, she's a Goldman Sachs sellout") indicates they have some awareness that she is a liar and crook.

  • FreeRadical||

    I've worked with government servers and data as both a contractor and an employee of the federal government.

    To me, whether there was top-secret data on the server or not isn't very relevant. The point is, NO government or contractor correspondence is to be on insecure computers if the data or correspondence is even just proprietary or or otherwise related to projects we were working on. We went to many training sessions on this. We were told we could be fired or prosecuted for not following the rules. If I had a server in my house that I used, say, to test a piece of software I was writing, I would be summarily dismissed at the least.

    I am utterly astounded that a Secretary of State had a server in her house. And I don't care that others did it. That only makes my incredulity go exponentially higher.

  • J Mann||

    "I am utterly astounded that a Secretary of State had a server in her house."

    Typical Rethuglican lies! The server was actually located in the unsecured bathroom of a Denver apartment and run by a "mom and pop" company with some ties to the Democratic party. That's completely different!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....-held.html

  • FreeRadical||

    Fuck. If this shit doesn't take her down, then I'm going to have to start believing all of the conspiracy theories about her.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    Someone, somewhere - some "unfriendly" - has those emails. Find that person and you'll get those emails.

  • dchang0||

    I wonder if some foreign country would conveniently dump a significant portion of her emails--un-redacted--on the web just before the general election to effectively block her election for their benefit. Like say, the 22 so-damaging-they-can't-release-them emails, placed on a chat forum with a .ru extension and links to the forum emailed to all major US media outlets.

    Either that or as some commentators have suggested, they may hold the tranche of her emails for blackmailing her after she is elected POTUS.

  • Hank Phillips||

    That was a lawn jockey. Servers hold trays.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    "Hillary Clinton agrees with her predecessor that his emails, like hers, are being inappropriately subjected to over-classification. She joins his call for these emails to be released so that the public can view the contents for itself."

    Let's just release the damn emails and end this bullshit. Can't someone hack into her server NOW?

  • Hank Phillips||

    Ever visit Wikileaks? A lot of the stuff State doesn't want you looking at shows bank account confiscations and laws and treaties for same just before flash crashes in the currency and securities markets. Thugs with guns begin asset-forfeiture emptying of people's bank accounts. That leper's bell of approaching looters prompts others to move assets out of harm's way, and suddenly there's a flash crash complete with liquidity crunch. Your retirement savings are worth half as much the next morning and... CONFIDENTIAL, NO PEEKING!

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    The "convenience" argument really makes me roll my eyes. Just imagine, it's Hillary's first day at State. Now, she's not some schlub clerk who's going to be pounding keys in a basement somewhere; she's the Top Dog in this place. The IT staff probably has an entire section of people whose sole purpose is to do her IT stuff for her. All of her stuff would have been set up, and at most she would have had to think up a password for her email account. How in the hell is it more convenient to have to contract with someone to set up a server and accounts?

  • endythomas62@gmail.com||

    I've made $76,000 so far this year working online and I'm a full time student.I'm using an online business opportunity I heard about and I've made such great money.It's really user friendly and I'm just so happy that I found out about it.

    ➜➜➜➜➜➜ http://www.Wage90.com

  • Strelnikov||

    Whoring?

  • Wolf 359||

    Maintaining Hilary's private email server. Anybody can do it!

  • MSimon||

    If Clinton had a private server some one in government aided the routing. Who?

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    The IT guy who worked for the 2008 campaign.

  • blondrealist||

    Seems that lots of Hillary supporters are gushing about today's news that Rice and Powell received classified emails on private accounts.

    Here's a link - and be sure to read some of the comments - they're quite funny. Hillary fans seem to thing the investigation is (or should be) over -- because "they" did it too!

    http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo.....-emails-on

  • Strelnikov||

    Yet, she repeated these same defenses on Stephanie's Sunday morning show.

    The sad truth is that if she is the D nominee she will automatically have the loyalty of the vast majority of Dems. Any D can expect to get between 42 and 45% of the popular vote just by being the nominee, and she will, too.

    Last: No indictment, ever, for anything. No resignations of offended FBI officials when their report, assuming there ever is one, is rejected. Anyone who says otherwise has forgotten the lessons of the earlier Clinton Administration.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    Judge Napolitano - haven't you ever heard of magic? That's how those emails jumped from the SAP government server to Hillary's toilet - magic.

  • Bodica Slayer of Woodchip||

    "Hillary Clinton agrees with her predecessor that his emails, like hers, are being inappropriately subjected to over-classification. She joins his call for these emails to be released so that the public can view the contents for itself."

    Just release Hillary Clinton's emails. She said they were "over-classified".

    Let's just end the bullshit and release the emails.

  • JayWye||

    That's just more tap-dancing by The Witch;she KNOWS the emails are too sensitive to be released,so she can safely make the demand they be released,so it makes her look "innocent" and being attacked.
    She is SO dishonest,it's criminal.

  • buybuydandavis||

    Clinton for Prison 2016

  • Adam W.||

    And yet she'd STILL be better than Trump or Cruz, or Sanders. Boy, that says a lot about the field, doesn't it?

  • JayWye||

    Better at committing crimes and treason,yes.
    Better at leading and restoring America,no.

    She should be facing a firing squad.

  • Adam W.||

    You think Trump would do a better job restoring America? Hillary would be bad, but I'll take a lying politician over a lying fascist-wannabe.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Yep. The bright side is that the LP can afford to pick anyone EXCEPT a leftover republican and do well. We doubled our reported vote count in the 2014 Senate race nationwide, and netted nearly 4% in Texas. This is probably why so many antiabortionist pariahs are trying to infiltrate the LP and do to us what they've done to Richard Nixon's Generation Of Peace GOP, Moral Majority and ku klux Tea Party fanatics.

  • TimMullins||

    Only if you're willing to buy what the media says without questioning it. Front Republican (or was) Trump isn't really my cup of tea. Too over the top. But a friend of mine who is a fan, made me sit back and listen to that Trump speech where he allegedly made all of those statements about Muslims a couple of weeks ago. And I've made it a point to find it on other sources as well since then. The guy never said anything that could even remotely be interpreted as saying what the press claims he actually said.

    They've taken it on themselves to run their own smear campaigns. They know it would be the kiss of death for a politician to sue for libel. They are also banking on the public to be either too busy, or too lazy to see if their story jibes or not. They painted Rand Paul as a kook right off the bat, with the same tactic of out of context quotes, and outright lies. Now they're after Cruz too. Look for them to give every Republican who garners any interest the same treatment.

    Learning who the majority shareholders are in a lot of the news sources tells a pretty informative tale. You should check it out.

  • Adam W.||

    And yet she'd STILL be better than Trump or Cruz, or Sanders. Boy, that says a lot about the field, doesn't it?

  • Jack Strawb||

    It's a pity Reason has gone into the tank so routinely for the far right. Its credibility on this kind of reporting is non-existent.

  • dantheserene||

    WTF are you even talking about? Clearly you have no idea, either.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Far right is antiabortion religious fanaticism. Right has nothing to do with economics. The only reason televangelists started leg-humping classical liberals in the first place was because communism, a competing religion, was even more distasteful than brainwashed birth-forcers.

  • buybuydandavis||

    "The Ground Under Clinton Continues to Crumble"

    Couldn't have happened to a more deserving person.

    When the ground crumbles, a fissure appears, and two giant scaled hands drag her to the underworld, please get in on video - I'd pay a dollar to see that.

  • JayWye||

    Hillary's claims of "ignorance, forgetfulness, or negligence" do not make her qualified for the office of President,just the opposite. Even her own aide Huma Abedin says she gets confused,and that alone should medically disqualify her for the office of President.

  • JayWye||

    it's amazing (and VERY disappointing) how many DemocRATS are willing to accept such a criminal for POTUS.

  • Alan@.4||

    The last name is Clinton, which might serve to explain, though it appears that the magic has worn thin.

  • Rational Exuberance||

    More importantly, the 22 E-mails are only the ones that are left after she already went through selecting which E-mails to release. So, there is a good chance that there were a lot more top-secret E-mails that she simply failed to hand over.

  • Alan@.4||

    The sainted Hillary in the wrong, you have got to be kidding.

  • Valentineflower||

    Nowadays life has become very hectic and troublesome. People have very limited time to live. Only occasions and festivals bring the opportunity to mix up with family, friends and our loved ones. Fresh Fruit Basket with spring Flowers are inevitably adds a sprint of illumination to the atmosphere. Just go through any Online shopping site and Send Valentine's Day Flowers to France.
    http://www.flowers2france.com/.....France.asp

  • ireneanderson0014||

    just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citroën 2CV . look here.......
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.
    ❇❇❇❇❇❇❇❇ http://www.Wage90.com

  • John P Slevin||

    Judge, Sanders is a registered D, has been for the last few months unless I missed something and he switched back.

  • Andy542||

    ❝❝My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Clik This Link inYour Browser❞❞....

    www.Workpost30.com

  • Hank Phillips||

    Here's hoping the rest of the lynch mob terrorizing Snowden, Assange et alii all asphyxiate on their own gasoline-soaked crosses! Secrets are things looter political states are ashamed of...

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online