Well, that would definitely be guilty as charged then
I disagree. She's not guilty (guilty, being the point of contention) of being Hillary Clinton, but the only reason I bring it up is because of your highly expressed confidence--saying definitely.
She is Hillary Clinton, but there's no guilt. The logic is similar in vein to why we should sometimes disagree with a charge of failure when someone doesn't do something. For instance, not stopping at a stop light when it's red is a failure ... a failure to stop; in that instance, one didn't stop and it's a failure; but the inverse isn't always true, as not doing something isn't necessarily a failure. I didn't look after your child this weekend, but that was not a failure on my part, as I never had the responsibility to do so.
If I commit a crime, then I'm guilty of doing what I did, but if I do something and it's not a crime, then although I did what I did, I'm not guilty of doing what I did--even though I did what I did. That doesn't invoke guilt anymore than not doing something automatically invokes a failure.