The irony of Clinton having possibly violated the same law that she has used to (wrongly) advocate for the prosecution of whistleblowers is maddening, and moreover, the fact that she will likely escape prosecution is a horrible indictment of our democracy.

She probably won't if Trump is elected.

A lot of people are saying there's no way she gets indicted before the election. However, if Trump is elected, he's already said he's going to indict her and send her to prison. Therefore, I if you want to see her indicted, you're probably going to have to vote for Trump.

I expect Obama would pardon her if necessary. Worth noting that Bill Clinton pardoned John Deutch for something remarkably similar when he left office.

I have no doubt he said this, but can you recall when and or link to him stating this? Interesting

He said it when he was on a Town Hall with Hannity on Fox:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na7EKNUkKYM

His language was pretty measured. He didn't say he would be prosecute her, but used the phrase, "We'd have to look into it."

At best Trump can appoint a US Attorney General who will promise to try to indict.

/best/most/ - can't edit any more.

This is very true. But you aren't the Secretary of State. I'm sure there are people at a high enough level at wherever you work now that the normal rules don't apply to them. That's the nature of any organization. C-level executives, military generals and high level politicians can all decide not to follow certain rules if they choose, especially when it comes to IT policy. I'm not saying that what Clinton did was right or good, but this kind of thing does happen at a large number of organizations. It should not be surprising that an internationally famous figure would be treated differently than a mid level employee.

Power has privileges. I'm not surprised by her ability to get away with this.

It happens. I don't like it, and I don't respect people who think the rules do not apply to them.

David Petraeus, Director of the CIA, lost his job and had to plead guilty to a misdemeanor for inappropriately sharing classified information.

Well, why aren't they? Somehow I don't believe she sat there and edited her sendmail.cf by hand. She delegates the task, it gets done crapily, then it works so why change it.

I'm currently working with a major health care center - top of the line everything - and they hand me my upcoming appointment schedule printed from "myfreecalendars.com" because their IT people haven't gotten printing working in their new scheduling program, and frankly they just need to get shit done. I'm sure it's a HIPPA violation, but frankly I'm not going to complain because I need to get shit done too.

> I'm sure it's a HIPPA violation, but frankly I'm not going to complain because I need to get shit done too.

I'm sorry, but how is "I'm to busy to follow the law" a valid excuse?