Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> the FBI didn't believe they were deleted for the purposes of avoiding the subpoena, which may be true, but that doesn't make it less of a crime.

Sorry, what now? The subpoena was for related emails. They claim they deleted unrelated emails and the FBI agrees. It’s not a crime to delete emails unrelated to a subpoena, especially when the subpoena (according to your link) did not request those emails. And doubly so when the FBI agrees those deleted emails were unrelated. So where do you see a crime in this?



You've been storing a bunch of documents for years. A court subpoenas information from you. You go on a massive file shredding campaign to destroy the documents you'd been happily storing for years. You pinky promise the court that the documents you destroyed were not subject to the subpoena. Do you believe this defense would work for you?


First, why do you believe the FBI was going only on a pinky promise? They are not famous for being friends of Hillary Clinton, and in fact disclosed (against precedent and protocol) an investigation into her while keeping secret a parallel investigation into Trump. They wouldn't take her word for anything.

Second, the documents were happily stored because they were not under the purview of her political opponents. If Republicans on the Benghazi Committee wanted those documents they could have subpoenaed those documents. But they didn't. So why are we supposed to be upset that she deleted documents that weren't under the scope of the subpoena?

Third, I notice you failed to articulate any crime, so again I ask: what was the crime? If Republicans didn't ask for unrelated into, and FBI couldn't find she deleted related info, then what unique insight do you have that she was attempting to evade a subpoena, aside from a vague hypothetical?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: