Not the laws. It did violate the technical requirements of the NARA records retention policy as it existed at the time.
When you consider how much effort is put into trying to dig up dirt on presidential candidates, the fact that this is what they run with says a lot. If they can’t find anything worse than this, than she’s pretty damned clean.
I’m a lukewarm Hillary supporter but a strong left-leaner (i.e. if she runs, I’ll probably vote for her while holding my nose), and the email thing does bother me. It’s very Clintony. Arrogant, high-handed, rules-don’t-apply-to-me.
I mean, I’d be fired if I conducted work business on my personal email, and a lot less than national security depends on my job.
.
Wow! Color me impressed! You are officially on my not-too-bad list.
Yeah, anyone with half a brain will cross the aisles once in a while. I voted Schwarzenegger over Davis* and there were several Dems I just could not support for Prez.
But Hilary will be a good president.
- in retrospect, perhaps not my best choice, but Grey Davis?!?
There is no way in hell I would ever vote for Clinton. That being said this email thing is stupid. It’s a non issue and I personally don’t think it’s a big deal at all. I’d rather Hillary opposition focus on substantive issues.
The GOP hate machine wouldnt know a substantive issue if it bit them in the butt (which substantive issues often do). They’d just rather make up crap UL, like Obamas Birth Cert and him being a closet Muslim. See, the GOP know it cant win the General Election, so their best tactic is to preach to the choir and get the Tea Partiers all riled up and donating- and voting in local elections.
This: Any Democratic president will be “divisive” in this sense, because the Republicans, at this point, cannot govern, only obstruct. If Saint Francis was the Democratic president, they’d hate him.
And: This! Absolutely correct. The Republican Party has lost touch with reality, and can only make sit up (or exaggerate trivial shit) in order to rouse the morons at the very bottom of the barrel. They’ve raced straight to the bottom, and that is their own reward and punishment.
(One might also mention voter suppression, and fantasies about constitutional nullification. Oh Moon, of Alabama, we now must say goodbye…)
Like a lot of others here, I’m lukewarm about Clinton, but I’m highly likely to vote for whoever gets the Democratic nomination. I understand that Secretaries of State using personal email was a common practice and not against the law when Clinton did it. I still think the practice is awful for a number of reasons. I wish Clinton had broken with this precedent and conducted all her business through an official email account. The fact that she didn’t is a negative, but not enough to make me pull the lever for any of the likely Republican nominees.
I disagree with Procrustus, though. I think this will be added to the list of scandals that won’t die, and will be repeatedly trotted out by everyone still screaming about Benghazi.
That’s an interesting thought, about polarizing and electability. I think it can safely be said that Obama polarized people to a huge degree. In my neck of the woods, so did GWB. So I’m not sure if that keeps someone from being elected or depending which direction the polarization is strongest actually helps them.
Sorry I didn’t check everybody’s posting history before I presumed anyone might be delighted. 
Ok, got it. You think there’s “manufactured outrage” over the email thing. Even if I’d seen that previous comment/thread, I wouldn’t necessarily think an acknowledgement of manufactured outrage precludes a certain amount of delight from those who dislike or (as in your case) oppose Clinton.
Any particular reason you felt compelled to “correct” my presumption, especially since you stop short of actually saying you’re NOT delighted?!
I’ve stayed out of this up til now because, Meh. Whatever. Her using an email service outside of the officially designated ones is nice fodder for conspiracy theorists and opponents who want to accuse her of dodging and throwing up obstacles to official requests for emails.
IMO, they are probably correct and I would believe it of any politician, not just the ones on the other side.
But with the latest information that she has administrative and probably physical control of the email server, it’s looking more like she really did have something to hide. Or a level of paranoia that puts her right up there with the CT crowd.
Well, you see, when Hillary fell on her head and couldn’t testify about Benghazi, which was of course completely honest and of purest intentions, she also forgot to set up her government email account and instead opted to buy her own server to store (and erase) official emails.
Done, of course, with the purest of intentions.
She will make a fine, fine president. Nixon would be proud.
I’ll admit to not having followed the email story closely and my understanding of it is that she’s done nothing or not much wrong.
I think that the people who really, really dislike her are desperately fishing for something, anything, to paint her badly with. This email business seems like a real stretch to me; a very small potato. If this is all they’ve got, I almost kinda feel sorry for them.
If she’s the candidate, I will vote for her.
I don’t have a say in this since I’m not American, but just as an opinion I’d support Hillary over any Republican because we (UK) seem to follow your lead like a little puppy dog and in general I’d prefer us follow a Democrat than a Republican.
(An aside - are Dem and Pub the appropriate shortenings? Dem and Rep doesn’t seem right because of the HoR).
Still, what is the actual scandal? I can’t see one. Apparently senior Republicans did it too and I can’t see any scandal there either.
It’s not as if personal email can’t be investigated and even deleted emails recovered so nobody would be able to hide anything this way. Or the cops have been lying to us when they investigate murders and child porn charges and the like.
It’s like you are some sort of prophet, or something. 
I hereby move that instead of adding “-gate” to the end of every scandal, we now start adding “-ghazi”.
… Deflateghazi
… Emailghazi
… NSAghazi
and so on.
They’re pretty much acceptable. There isn’t any hidden antagonism in them. They’re just breezy abbreviations. Agreed that “Rep” is ambiguous.
Both are OK buy fergawdssake dont use “Democrat party” some poster went off on a spittle laced tirade against me for using that. (even tho I have party cred)
Yes.
I felt compelled to correct your presumption because I am not delighted. I would love to see the country reject Mrs. Clinton as a presidential candidate because they reject her preferred policies. I do NOT want to see her rejected for reasons that amount to belief in voodoo.
Hilary did testify about Benghazi. It’s on video, even. But who cares because the whole Benghazi thing is swiftboating bullshit.
It’s not like she forgot about something important, like, say, selling arms to Iran or anything.
I’ll vote for her if Warren doesn’t run. I’m not impressed with this stunt but it doesn’t change anything. If she’d used the government email, the Republicans would be whining about some other dumb shit.