# If Hillary Clinton is found guilty of a felony, but it doesn't affect popularity, does it matter? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 18, 2015, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155 "2015-08-18T06:27:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/21 "2015-08-19T14:03:24Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > Ah. [Yes and no](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917). The last successful update was 1961. There have been attempts to amend it since then. It just keeps its title. Still, the general consensus seems to be that Hillary and/or her staff may have broken the law regarding the handling of classified documents. I read one article (from a few weeks ago) where the inspectors had found an e-mail where the “Classified” notices had been removed. Apparently, this is a really big no-no, like possible felony big. ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/22 "2015-08-19T15:07:41Z")
> [@Diceman](#): > > Still, the general consensus seems to be that Hillary and/or her staff may have broken the law regarding the handling of classified documents. I read one article (from a few weeks ago) where the inspectors had found an e-mail where the “Classified” notices had been removed. Apparently, this is a really big no-no, like possible felony big. One difference between the Clinton case and most of what people here know about is the level of the people involved. Most if not all of us who have experience in classification issues aren’t folks high enough up to declassify documents, and I suspect most of us aren’t able to classify documents. Anyone can and should refer documents to a classifying official if we think it might be classified, but we don’t ourselves have the power to classify information. I am just assuming this, based on my experience handling classified documents. Before we assume that a document was mishandled, we need to make sure that it wasn’t handled by someone who has the authority to declassify a document. There are detailed procedures, but we don’t know who or what happened. If classification markings were removed from an email without going through the proper procedures that would clearly be a significant legal matter. But if the person doing so had the authority to do so, that changes the calculus. And one more time since it is often ignored in the public discussion, nothing covered here depends on what email system was used. Clinton, and I suspect virtually every high official in Government, runs the risk of discussing material that someone else might, after a close reading, decide is classified. If they used unclassified Government email, that wouldn’t change things. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/23 "2015-08-19T15:11:19Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > It is very hard to find sources online that aren’t frothing partisan rambling, but the consensus seems to be that she might be found to have violated the [Espionage Act of 1917](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793#e). Seems to me that the person who sent her classified materials, if that occurred, violated the act more than she did. Would I be guilty if someone sent me an email with classified material? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/24 "2015-08-19T15:11:44Z")
Has anyone discussed the possibility that Clinton was using her home server system to deliberately leak secrets? that would have explained the recent Chinese and Russian hacks of the IRS, HS security sites. Clinton may well have exposed the CIA network as well. It reminds me aof the (Bill Clinton) incident, where Loral Corp. was allowed to give satellite launch details to China, in return for campaign contributions. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/25 "2015-08-19T15:14:39Z")
AFAICT if Hillary were a convicted felon, she could still be elected and serve as President. Is there a law somewhere that says a person convicted of a felony related to security and classified documents can’t be given a clearance? IOW she would still be President, she just couldn’t see any top secret documents. Practically, that would mean she couldn’t conduct any foreign policy, but legally? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/26 "2015-08-19T15:31:28Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Has anyone discussed the possibility that Clinton was using her home server system to deliberately leak secrets? that would have explained the recent Chinese and Russian hacks of the IRS, HS security sites. Clinton may well have exposed the CIA network as well. It reminds me aof the (Bill Clinton) incident, where Loral Corp. was allowed to give satellite launch details to China, in return for campaign contributions. It would explain a lot. It’s really obvious that she’s trying to hide something. Look at her recent attempt to joke about wiping the server. “With a cloth or something?” :rolleyes: We know she’s not that stupid. She knows what “wiping a server” means. There’s so much smoke, you’d think the building was on fire. Speaking of which, part of me is surprised they didn’t destroy the server before turning it over. “Sorry, but fires happen, ya know.” Of course, if they did, they’d be facing an obstruction of justice charge. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/27 "2015-08-19T15:46:07Z")
Well, so much for GQ. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/28 "2015-08-19T16:07:25Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Has anyone discussed the possibility that Clinton was using her home server system to deliberately leak secrets? that would have explained the recent Chinese and Russian hacks of the IRS, HS security sites. Clinton may well have exposed the CIA network as well. It reminds me aof the (Bill Clinton) incident, where Loral Corp. was allowed to give satellite launch details to China, in return for campaign contributions. _Anyone_? There are people online who believe that she killed an ambassador. So, yeah, there is likely somebody who has discussed the possibility that Clinton deliberately committed treason. Now, is there evidence of it? Not that I can find. But, please, as this is GQ, please provide a cite for your assertion, or at least some facts to support this absurd claim that the Secretary of State was deliberately leaking classified information. At this time, all that is being alleged is that she kept classified information on a server that was separate from the government’s encrypted system. There isn’t (to my knowledge) even an allegation that any of this classified information was accessed by anyone who didn’t have the authority to see it. It’s not a matter of her leaking secrets; it’s a matter of her “negligently” storing them. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/29 "2015-08-19T16:07:47Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Well, so much for GQ. Sorry. I forgot what forum I was in. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/30 "2015-08-19T16:14:15Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > _Anyone_? There are people online who believe that she killed an ambassador. So, yeah, there is likely somebody who has discussed the possibility that Clinton deliberately committed treason. > > Now, is there evidence of it? Not that I can find. But, please, as this is GQ, please provide a cite for your assertion, or at least some facts to support this absurd claim that the Secretary of State was deliberately leaking classified information. > > At this time, all that is being alleged is that she kept classified information on a server that was separate from the government’s encrypted system. There isn’t (to my knowledge) even an allegation that any of this classified information was accessed by anyone who didn’t have the authority to see it. It’s not a matter of her leaking secrets; it’s a matter of her “negligently” storing them. You ask for evidence-when (she) admits that she "wiped’ the server (destroyed evidence). Please tell me, why would someone who did nothing wrong, destroy evidence that would tend to prove her innocence? ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/31 "2015-08-19T16:16:07Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > You ask for evidence-when (she) admits that she "wiped’ the server (destroyed evidence). Please tell me, why would someone who did nothing wrong, destroy evidence that would tend to prove her innocence? Maybe she wasn’t comfortable with potentially classified materials being stored there and decided she better delete it so it couldn’t be hacked by hostile governments. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/32 "2015-08-19T17:40:45Z")
> [@rbroome](#): > > . First, information must be properly marked by a relevant government official when it is created. Second, all information must be handled in accordance with it’s markings. According to what I have read, none of the information in the Clinton emails were marked classified. So she is correct and didn’t do anything wrong from a security aspect in that regard. As for information that should have been marked but wasn’t, it is up to the federal employee who created the email to have marked it correctly. Right. \*\*No classified data was transmitted. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/33 "2015-08-19T17:42:30Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > You ask for evidence-when (she) admits that she "wiped’ the server (destroyed evidence). Please tell me, why would someone who did nothing wrong, destroy evidence that would tend to prove her innocence? Cite, please, that she “ **admits** ” that she “wiped the server”. From what I find, she [denies](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/18/hillary-clinton-wont-say-if-her-server-was-wiped/) that she did such a thing. [QUOTE=The Washington Post] Democratic president candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said repeatedly Tuesday that she did not know if her e-mail server, which was turned over to the FBI last week, had been wiped clean of data. [/QUOTE] The person claiming that she wiped the server clean is Rep. Tracy Gowdy, the Republican congressman who chairs the committee that is investigating the Benghazi attack. Now, to be clear, I am not saying that the server was or was not wiped clean. I truly don’t know. But I take issue with your assertion that she has admitted to it. And, as **Procrustus** has noted, there may be another explanation for it being done. To make a giant leap between “wiped clean the server” to “was leaking classified documents” is huge, and rank speculation unsupported by evidence. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/34 "2015-08-19T18:01:56Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Right. \*\*No classified data was transmitted. \*\* Classified data which has had valid classification marking stripped is still classified. Just improperly handled. Which, if done intentionally, is itself a federal felony. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/35 "2015-08-19T18:05:37Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Classified data which has had valid classification marking stripped is still classified. Just improperly handled. Which, if done intentionally, is itself a federal felony. But no one is saying that. There are saying that some of the data _should_ have been classified. Thereby- it _wasn’t_ classified. ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/36 "2015-08-19T21:16:44Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Classified data which has had valid classification marking stripped is still classified. Just improperly handled. Which, if done intentionally, is itself a federal felony. Absolutely. And if Clinton stripped off the markings, that would be bad. If she simply repeated/forwarded an email containing information without markings and without a very good reason to believe that she should have known the information was classified, then she would not have done anything wrong. Can anyone articulate a reason why Clinton would _intentionally_ put classified information on an unclassified email server? I can imagine her being careless (I have seen a few people be careless regarding classified information), but can anyone propose a reason why she would intentionally do so? ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/37 "2015-08-19T22:07:05Z")
> [@rbroome](#): > > Absolutely. And if Clinton stripped off the markings, that would be bad. But doesn’t she, as Secretary of State, have the [power](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/us/politics/no-classified-emails-by-clinton-some-experts-are-skeptical.html?_r=0) to determine if something is classified? [QUOTE=The NY Times] Steven Aftergood, who directs the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists…noted that as secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton was the top classification authority for the entire State Department, with broad discretion to determine which department documents were classified and which were not. “There’s zero chance that she’ll be charged with unauthorized retention of classified information, because she decides what’s classified,” he said. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=rbroome] Can anyone articulate a reason why Clinton would _intentionally_ put classified information on an unclassified email server? I can imagine her being careless (I have seen a few people be careless regarding classified information), but can anyone propose a reason why she would intentionally do so? [/QUOTE] The proposed reason, per comments in this thread, is that she was leaking secrets. [QUOTE=Ralph124c] Has anyone discussed the possibility that Clinton was using her home server system to deliberately leak secrets? [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Diceman] It would explain a lot. [/QUOTE] In other words, Hillary Clinton is a foreign spy. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/38 "2015-08-19T22:28:40Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Is there a law somewhere that says a person convicted of a felony related to security and classified documents can’t be given a clearance? IOW she would still be President, she just couldn’t see any top secret documents. Practically, that would mean she couldn’t conduct any foreign policy, but legally? The President doesn’t have a security clearance, and doesn’t need one. They can view any secret document just by ordering it handed over. Anyone who classifies documents is doing so under the delegated authority of the President. The President is the source of their authority to classify documents, and so you can’t classify a document so secret that not even the President is allowed to see it. In practice there are secrets that the CIA director would resign over rather than hand over to the president…the details of the identities of foreign spies, for instance. But if that happens the President fires the official and hires a new one, with the advice and consent of the Senate if necessary. There is no situation where an official can point to the security clearance stamped on a document and say, “You’re not authorized to see this, Mr. President”. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/39 "2015-08-19T23:12:41Z")
> [@rbroome](#): > > Can anyone articulate a reason why Clinton would _intentionally_ put classified information on an unclassified email server? Dealing with classified information in accordance with all the rules can be a serious pain in the ass. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2015, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155/40 "2015-08-20T01:32:59Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Classified data which has had valid classification marking stripped is still classified. Just improperly handled. Which, if done intentionally, is itself a federal felony. What’s the specific law that then-Secretary Clinton would have broken? Keeping in mind that the Secretary of State is the official who determines what State Department information is and is not classified. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-hillary-clinton-is-found-guilty-of-a-felony-but-it-doesnt-affect-popularity-does-it-matter/728155.md?page=3)