Fair&Balanced
Gold Member
- Apr 12, 2016
- 8,137
- 1,026
- 245
- Banned
- #61
Let's cut to the chase here. You are quoting some sections of code later on that have NO position on the egregious act that the meglomaniac perpetrated. It has NOTHING to do with sharing or knowingly transferring classified info. THose are espionage charges. THey are not relevant. USC 18 1924 is the misdemeanor version of the APPLICABLE law. It does require "intent".
So bottom line is you either believe that Secretary of Dept State was so careless, sloppy, negligence and CLUELESS that her job title would REQUIRE APPROVED SECURE methods of communications and didn't know the difference between her husband's (former PRESIDENT who ALSO KNEW this was illegal) basement server --- OR --- she completely knew when she REJECTED having the PROPER equipment installed in her office and REFUSED to carry PROPER AUTHORIZED equipment for communications and chose for her selfish convenience to WILLFULLY bypass the methods and standard practice of protecting secure information.
She went about constructing a scheme to take a pissdump on the rules when HER JOB was to set the standards to guarantee that classified information was efficiently and securely handled at State. Thus not only setting a NEW LOW in adminstrative example to her employees, but then LYING to Congress and the public about almost every detail of what she actually did.
What she actually did was to put US agents and field folks at mortal risk. And set HERSELF UP for potential blackmail by nefarious organizations and state actors that might very well compromise her ability to SERVE as President.
INTENT is not the problem. The problem is --- that Comey is correct. RARELY are these cases referred for prosecution because the agency involved does not want an average Joe/Jane grand jury hearing the sordid CLASSIFIED details of what transpired. So as Comey says -- the TRADITIONAL route is to FIRE, doc the pay, suspend or REVOKE THE CLEARANCES of the criminal.. In this case, because the PERP was the HEAD of the agency -- that kind of internal security review and proceeding was NEVER an option. Which is the PRIMARY reason why this malicious act SHOULD have been raised to the level of prosecution.
OR _---- set a new gutter level bar for expectations about consequences for mishandling classified info. Which is what YOU seem to be applauding here.
For the record -- I put in 7 years in Intelligence areas. If I was carrying any documents, I could not take a pee in a public bathroom without a hand on my briefcase. If I had - I would be sanctioned and called on the carpet. Tho THAT was inconceivable to me at the time.
Times apparently change.. And the uninformed partisan noise just grows.
You dont seem to get it.
Laws are for the Little People, not the Oligarchs.
OF course Hillary supporters do have actual brains, that is just artistic hyperbole, lol.
No seriously, they do have brains.
Essentially -- Comey hinted at that. And anyone who has worked in sensitive areas knows EXACTLY what he was inferring -- but did elaborate on..
When repeatedly asked "what would happen to an FBI employee that pulled this stunt" -- he repeatedly what I've been saying about Administrative sanctions and Review.. Problem IS -- even if others at State KNEW of this compromise -- there was virtually NO CHANCE -- that they would take THEIR BOSS into a Dept Review for sanctions.
Which is WHY -- I'm mad at Comey for not making that point clearer and MORE transparent. And why he was WRONG to suggest no investigation at DOJ. Because never has a Dept BOSS been found to pull such a dangerous and stupid act. And he set a NEW precedent to give them IMMUNITY from ANY consequences.
He was very wrong to do that.
Not to mention the re-tred power whore's HUSBAND on whose servers that crime was committed.
So I ask again. Was she (and her ethically challenged husband) REALLY that incompetent, lazy and stupid? Or was there there "mens rea"?
Like I've said, the most disgusting part is there are still people out there who believe she is qualified to be President. I'm sorry , but if you are STILL of the opinion that she is qualified to be POTUS, then you are just stupid beyond hope.
And speaking of that, I in noway believe Obama truly believes she's the most qualified candidate to EVER run for POTUS, so I must ask myself what it is that she has on him that would lead him to say that? It must be HUGE and no doubt led to the predetermined decision to not prosecute.
Is it bigger than the fact he KNEW about the server and in fact sent classified materials to it himself?