Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
|
Seacrest wrote: SomeGuy wrote: Don Tiny wrote: Seacrest wrote: Don Tiny wrote: From May 6th: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/05/06/hillary-clinton-is-going-to-be-exonerated-on-the-email-controversy-it-wont-matter/?tid=ss_tw... That point about her intending to break classification rules is important, because in order to have broken the law, it isn’t enough for Clinton to have had classified information in a place where it was possible for it to be hacked. She would have had to intentionally given classified information to someone without authorization to have it, like David Petraeus did when he showed classified documents to his mistress (and then lied to the FBI about it, by the way). ...Not true. My wife works with classified info almost daily. She can be charged with a crime if she doesn't follow explicit rules when transferring info by mail, or by email. Nobody said there weren't any rules ... the point the guy was making as I read it is that being a sloppy or aloof asswipe doesn't mean jail time, only willfully and purposefully (and ultimately, in court, provably) sharing it with people not allowed to see it. Gross negligence, DT. 18 U.S. Code § 793 subsection F "Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."For all the whizz-bang lawyers on here....does gross negligence mean that it doesn't matter whether she meant to or not just that, at the very least, Clinton is incompetent, stupid, lazy and criminally negligent? And thus should be persecuted for her crimes? Is your favorite, lovable humble internet troll on the mark? Or is Clinton just a doddering old lady that suffers from MS, paranoia and other mental disorders and thus shouldn't be held accountable because she didn't know what she was doing? Attaboy doing the work and doing your own research.  How the fuck is copying and pasting a portion of a federal statute immediately followed by wondering what a pivotal word actually means to indicate "doing your own research"? Is your earlier offhanded anecdote about your wife "doing your own research"? Doing my own actual research at different times during the day brought me, amongst other things, to a couple of Supreme Court cases, including 'Gorin vs. US' [1941] (later cited in NY Times vs. US [1971] re: the Pentagon Papers) wherein the Supreme Court indicated, with respect to espionage laws, that the accused needed to have clearly acted with intent to harm the US to meet the standard required to levy punishment ... The defendant must have "intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation."I also skimmed over this evaluation from the Office of the Inspector General that, while not speaking directly about this case, did inform me of the oft-cited but rarely 'proven' chestnut about how behind the government IT systems are, including one note that as recently as 2004 the State Department (the actual fucking State Department!) didn't have any sort of email system in place ... ffs Colin Powell was sending shit with a personal gmail account. It also mentioned that this damnable Clinton personal email server was (a) set up in 2001 and (b) basically done by Bill Clinton (who knew that was in the skillset?), which while it doesn't in any way excuse her continuing to use that setup does, however, give some degree of both reasonable and relatable indication why she did what she did, i.e., familiarity and convenience and not purely because of some feeling that she was Queen Shit of Fuck Island and could do whatever because reasons. There was quite a bit of other stuff that I read, a lot of it probably crap, but it's essentially midnight and I'm done with this for today ... if you want to know more, you can always do your own research.
_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George
|
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
