Is destruction of evidence a crime anymore?

...Because Hillary and her people did that.

Hillary Clinton was under FBI investigation.

She and her campaign officials deleted 33,000 emails... & deleted information on hard drives (bleech bitting) ... & Smashed cell phones... & gave cell phones to FBI with no SIM cards... & smashed laptops...

All of which is VERY illegal.

Obstructing Justice... Tampering with evidence... Destruction of evidence

SO illegal. Hillary got away with it all.

Hillary got to give the FBI what SHE wanted. No raids... no confiscation... no "jackbooted thugs" raiding in the middle of the night.

Well, what about on the "other" side? When Mueller wanted to go after the Trump people?

Oh yeah... Manifort was raided in the middle of the night with armed FBI agents seizing whatever they wanted & took him into custody.

Cohen? Trump's Lawyer? Yup... same treatment. Mueller's team did a "middle of the night" raid where they seized his assets and gave no warning.

So, why exactly did Hillary get to "choose" what the FBI got... but the Trump people got raided and had their assets TAKEN without warning & without a say in the matter?

Why didn't Trump get the opportunity to delete his e-mails... to smash his cell phones? ...for his lawyer to bleech bit his hard drives and smash laptops? ...and to have the FBI turn a blind eye to all of it?

Why?

Why wasn't Hilary or any of her compatriots raided? Her lawyers raided & assets seised? Why?

Use your head folks.

Update:

UPDATE: Sorry liberals... you can't take the "snowflake" moniker. You've earned it. Every "safe space" on college campus's to house people that can't hack normal life & every time Republican speakers have been turned away because their ideas are too "hurtful" to people... liberals have DEFINITELY earned the term "snowflake."

Trying to "re-brand" it towards Republicans just shows a lack of originality.

Sorry... the "I know you are, but what am I?" defense died in the 80's

Update 2:

Let me guess... Peter Strzok, Lisa Paige, Andrew McCabe, and James Comey all agree that everything was perfectly legal and perfect in every way. They all found "NO" evidence. These insane partisans should be believed?

Riiiiiiiight. Sorry, I don't care what the clearly corrupt FBI says to try to save their tarnished reputation.

When you destroy evidence in an FBI investigation... you have committed a felony. Period.

15 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    2 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    It’s rather amazing she wasn’t indicted. But then again she was investigated by an FBI run by James Comey and his close associates Peter Struczk and Andrew McCabe.

  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    No

    Source(s):

    I am a retired police officer. I retired as a sergeant, after 29 years, from a very large department, about 12,000 officers. I was a patrol officer for 4 years in a very diverse area. I was a tactical officer in the high rise project areas of my city. We called it vertical patrol in that we walked the the stairways of the high rises most of the time. I did that for 5 years and was promoted by test to detective. I worked violent crime (homicide, sex, officer involved shootings, robbery, kidnapping, serious non property incidents) for 11 years until I was promoted to sergeant. I worked as a street supervisor, a bicycle patrol supervisor and a desk sergeant/watch commander.

    During my time as a tactical officer and a detective I was a unit representative for the police union.

    I have a B.A in English and an M.S. in Law Enforcement Administration.

  • 2 years ago

    It is still a crime. Some crimes get ignored when politically powerful people are involved.

    You will find many people that accuse the leadership of BOTH major parties of being guilty of that.

  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    Bigly criminal.

    Kind of like colluding with a foreign power to "make America great again" by selling the democratic process down the river.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 2 years ago

    Your saying she did that does not make it so. I do not believe you are in any position to know if she did anything of the sort.

  • 2 years ago

    Not really, since anything that exosts is "evidence" of something. It IS illegal to destroy something that an authorised person has legally asked for.

    But in the USA, whether the ask is legal is itself a question for courts---not the ramblings of gurleyman welfare queens like Guliani, or foreign agents like Manafrt and the Draft Dodge in Chief.

  • 2 years ago

    You need to use YOUR head and access some actual facts instead of taking Trump and FIX’s word for everything.

    For example, the 33,000 emails?

    “The FBI found no evidence that the emails were deleted deliberately to avoid the subpoena or other requests. Clinton’s team requested for the emails to be deleted months before the subpoena came. They also argued that all the emails that would be relevant to the subpoena had already been turned over to the State Department.”

    NO CRIME

    “Aides used BleachBit, a free program that deletes old files to free up computer space. There were no chemicals of any kind used to wipe the former secretary of state's private email server.

    Additionally, Clinton deleted 31,830 emails, not 33,000.”

    NO CRIME

    The FBI knows what they are doing, you know nothing.

    Update: You helped elect the biggest snowflake we’ve ever had as President. His skin starts bleeding at the slightest criticism and he reacts like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Get real!

  • It's literally impossible to comfirm people's intent unless directly expressed. Unfortunately the law anymore isn't anything but an artform for laywers

  • 2 years ago

    Political elites get a different treatment than the rest of us.

  • 2 years ago

    Destruction of evidence is not a crime. if the criminal and the DOJ are on the same team swamp.

  • 2 years ago

    In 2007, when Congress asked the Bush administration for emails surrounding the firing of eights U.S. attorneys, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales revealed that many of the emails requested could not be produced because they were sent on a non-government email server. The officials had used the private domain gwb43.com, a server run by the Republican National Committee. Two years later, it was revealed that potentially 22 million emails were deleted, which was considered by some to be a violation of the Presidential Records Act.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.