3

I watched the debate and I am wondering what is going on with Hillary Clinton's 33,000 deleted e-mails.

I read and heard Donald Trump say the reasons why she deleted the e-mails are (1) there could be something she wants to hide, (2) there could be more classified e-mails than she claimed...

I also read in some reports that:

No Secretary of State has deleted such a large volume of e-mails in the history of the United States.

Relevant Questions for clarification on Topic.

  1. Which exact e-mails is she reluctant to release?

  2. Is there anything in these e-mails that could disqualify her from being President? I wasn't sure if there could be something that may tie her e-mails to a foreign entity or something applicable to cause a conflict of interest for a POTUS (Is there such a thing?)

  3. Is there any legitimacy to any of the three concerns Donald Trump expressed as to why she'd not want to share her deleted e-mail information with the American people?

Note that I tried to follow the format of this question, Donald Trump's Tax Return as much as possible. Yes, the three points were not specifically mentioned in the debate. But it was mentioned on the media in the past.

Question 1: Is this question on-topic? If so, please explain the reason why. What could be an answer to the question other than nobody knows as those deleted e-mails have not been released?

Question 2: Will the answer below considered as on-topic and helpful if it is along the lines of the following? (If I had more time, I would write the example answer as close to the existing answers as possible as I did in the question above. But, I don't see it that necessary, because it has the point I want to make.)

Considering the fact that she had lied about the situation in Bosnia in 1996 as indicated below with a link and other lies she's made so far, it is likely that she is lying about her deleted e-mails.

“I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”

2

Yes, Hillary's Emails Is a valid topic to ask a question about. It is a valid topic because it is a major point of interest in the current Presidential election.


No, Hillary's Emails is not a perfect mirror for Donald Trump's Tax Returns.

As you can see from the answers at What significance could the information in Donald Trump's tax return have to his campaign?, The information that might appear on tax returns is more limited than emails. It is limited enough that multiple people can say that it will not actually disqualify him, but the specific concerns that Hillary Clinton enumerated are things that might be revealed by a Tax return.

Emails are not so easily sorted into "Schedule A", "Schedule C", or "8283" forms. Tax returns only contain information that is related to taxes, where emails can contain literally any kind of information at all. Asking about information in unseen emails is way more broad.


No, that answer is not helpful, because it has very little to do with the emails

  • Now I see the problems. (1) Tax returns contain specific information and identifiable forms: No, it depends what information you are talking about. Trump question doesn't have any specifics either. Just vaguely asking if there is anything that could disqualify him. The answer is simple no. No. 1 and 3 question are basically same as Trump one. (2) I am not talking about her server. I am talking about the fact that she deleted 33,000 e-mails intentionally and has not released them intentionally. What's the difference between not releasing tax returns and releasing her e-mails? – Rathony Sep 29 '16 at 14:37
  • Regarding your point on the sentence that doesn't make sense, I've just edited it out as I made a grammatical mistake while focusing on making it same. Point is this. If you are interested in finding out why Trump is not releasing his tax returns, they are all over the news. If you are interested in finding out why Clinton used her private server and deleted 33K e-mails, they are all over the news. It doesn't matter whether they were specifically mentioned on the debate or not. The question can only generate partisan/politically motivated/primarily opinion-based answers. That's my point. – Rathony Sep 29 '16 at 14:43
  • @Rathony Of course tax returns contain more specific information. Do you really expect tax returns to say things like "I need some answers on these questions before I can begin my project"? – Sam I am Sep 29 '16 at 14:43
  • The core of the question is this: Are there anything that could disqualify him or her? Well, what in his tax returns or her e-mails can disqualify them? It doesn't matter how much information is contained on his tax returns or her 33K e-mails. If she had deleted a very highly-classified information or an e-mail that can prove her alleged pay-for-play arrangement with her foundation, the damage could be bigger than his tax returns. Now, I am not debating which is bigger issue. I am debating why the Trump question is on-topic? – Rathony Sep 29 '16 at 14:47
  • @Rathony Are there anything that could disqualify him or her? That question perfectly exemplifies how tax documents are different from emails. According to the answers on the Trump email question, Almost nothing that might appear in a tax return can disqualify a Candidate. Emails can contain any information at all, including information that can disqualify a candidate. – Sam I am Sep 29 '16 at 14:56
  • 1
    I don't think you understood my point. There are only three things that can disqualify a candidate.. How can any information in tax returns qualify or disqualify any candidate? You said "Emails can contain any information at all, including information that can disqualify a candidate. No!! That's why Trump question is on-topic and Clinton question is off-topic? Do you think what you are saying makes sense? You sound like you don't understand what can disqualify any candidate. Negative things can damage them, but never disqualify them. – Rathony Sep 29 '16 at 15:00
  • Emails are not so easily sorted into "Schedule A", "Schedule C", or "8283" forms. NO!! They could be sorted out to more simple categories, (1) Classified (2) Clinton Foundation (3) Non-Classified (including her personal e-mails regarding Chelsea's wedding and whatever). There could be only three important types. It might be easier to sort her e-mails out than his tax returns. That can never be the reason that makes the Hillary question broader than Trump one. – Rathony Sep 29 '16 at 15:16
-1

No Secretary of State has deleted such a large volume of e-mails in the history of the United States.

This is misleading, as emails are a relatively new innovation. Prior to 1990, it is extremely likely that no Secretary of State had sent an email. So "history of the United States" in this case is roughly twenty-five years.

Which exact e-mails is she reluctant to release?

We don't know. If we knew, then we wouldn't care nearly as much that they were deleted.

Is there anything in these e-mails that could disqualify her from being President? I wasn't sure if there could be something that may tie her e-mails to a foreign entity or something applicable to cause a conflict of interest for a POTUS (Is there such a thing?)

I would answer this similarly to how I answered the Trump taxes questions. Albeit it is slightly more possible for a disqualifying event to appear in her emails. Note the four qualification criteria:

  1. Natural born citizen. She could have stated in an email that she was not a natural born citizen. I don't see how this would appear in a tax form. More likely to be revealed in Clinton's emails than Trump's tax forms. Even though Trump is more likely not to meet this criterion (his natural born citizen status is more questionable than Clinton's).

  2. At least thirty-five years of age. Someone could reveal an incorrect age in an email or tax form, but it's extremely unlikely in Clinton's case (or Trump's). Their ages are pretty well documented to be well over thirty-five.

  3. Resident for fourteen years. This could be revealed in an email, but it is extremely unlikely to be a problem for Hillary. She was a resident while Senator and Secretary of State. That leaves only the four years since leaving the State department. But how could an email from 2012 or earlier (the deleted emails were from that period) reveal her residency status in 2013 to 2016? Much less likely for Clinton's emails than Trump's taxes.

  4. Not previously president for six or more years. It is possible that her emails reveal that Bill Clinton was just a figurehead and she was the real president from 1993 to 2001. In which case there is an argument (legally untested) that she is not eligible to be president. This is both more likely to be true in her case than Trump's and more likely to be revealed in emails than in tax forms.

The main concern here is not disqualifying information, but information that is politically negative.

Is there any legitimacy to any of the three concerns Donald Trump expressed as to why she'd not want to share her deleted e-mail information with the American people?

You only listed two concerns.

I read and heard Donald Trump say the reasons why she deleted the e-mails are (1) there could be something she wants to hide, (2) there could be more classified e-mails than she claimed...

1 seems rather obvious. If there isn't anything to hide, why has she gone to such lengths to hide them? This is an entirely legitimate criticism that Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, have used on other subjects. Turnabout is fair play.

In regards to 2, the FBI found some of the deleted emails and found additional classified material in them. That makes it legitimate to speculate that there are additional emails with classified material among the still missing emails.

In general, not releasing something makes it legitimate for people to speculate as to why. This is good and healthy, as it tends to push candidates towards revealing things rather than away. More information is often better. Consider that there was information in Nixon's tax forms in 1972 that helped in the proceedings to get him out of office.

Example answer

As written, I'd find that unrelated to the question. However, I could see it appearing as part of a longer answer if proof that Clinton lies was needed.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .