Hillary's E-Mail (Breaking News: Smoking Gun Officially Announced)

@Tiger in NC we will have to agree to disagree. He laid out very clearly ALL the things that they found on her and any and everyone of them would land you or I in the slammer. You don't have to believe it, you don't have to acknowledge it. It is however very very true. Where you work or what organization you are employed by currently has absolutely no bearing on the facts. She walked because she is a clinton.

 

But this wasn't accidental, it was very deliberate.

 

only if it is a deliberate effort on behalf of the individual to undermine the security of the US. if not, then it is a careless mistake that would require inter-office discipline much like what Comey described during his congressional testimony.

No. No, you haven't. In fact, Comey specifically stated that the reason he was not bringing charges is because there was NO legal precedence for it. Your previous case law is irrelevant.

Which is only a crime if it is intentional.

Nope....I said all along that what she did was reckless and careless but wasn't criminal.

Bull crap. I haven't talked about GWB in years. I'm trying my best to forget he was ever elected.

 

Fair enough. But did you listen to Comey's congressional testimony?

 

No, was sick to my stomach after the first press conference. I didn't need to hear him explain why he let her walk.

 

listen to it when you get time....he explains all of the things you have brought up and details why he reached the conclusions that he did

 

what I don't get is the difference between "gross negligence" (illegal) and "extreme carelessness" (not?) just as asked by chaffetz went unanswered.

and what is going to happen to the 300 other persons that were complicit?

 

A lot of the agents involved in the criminal investigation know the true story. Hopefully one or more of them will write a book someday

 

some here don't seem to understand the difference.

I agree that it was deliberate. I'd also guess that it was careless and not nefarious.

 

you know, those are legal terms so I will not pretend to be able to give you an exact answer. That said, I took it to mean that Gross Negligence would be something closer to intentional while having no safeguards in place, while Extreme Carelessness would imply that the person has no intent and did have some safeguards in place. This is very obviously my layman's definition.

As to the other 300 people I understood they would not be charged either. As he said during the congressional testimony, Clinton and her team were extremely careless but didn't reach the point of gross negligence.