The Clinton Thread II

[Matt]

Depends on the protocol. I still question if they would have been this lenient if she wasn't who she is. They can always find laws.

No, it doesn't.

Protocol is not law. You are confusing protocol with duty. One may have a legal duty to do something. A police officer has a legal duty to assist someone who is being stabbed in most jurisdictions. Failure to do so makes him an accessory. That is a legal duty. It is defined by statute.

Protocols are not the same as legal duties. Protocols are guidelines.

The distinction is remedies.

Violation of a legally mandated duty is a violation of the law, it is subject to criminal charges (the remedy).

Violation of protocol is a violation of an internal regulation. At worst is subjects you to termination or internal discipline...not deprivation of your liberty through incarceration.

Chaseter and Lex are operating under an erroneous belief as to how the law works. The law is not "I think she did the wrong thing so they should prosecute her and if they don't it is corrupt."

To prosecute someone there must be:

1) Guilty mind & guilty act (otherwise no crime has taken place in the eyes of the law)

and

2) AN ACTUAL LAW PROHIBITING THE CONDUCT, be it a common law (judicially created) or a statutory law.

Even if we accept that Clinton had the requisite intent (and she didn't), there was, at the time, no statutory law that specifically prohibited her behavior. Emails were a grey area. Laws do not work retroactively. Congress may have since updated the law. It wasn't illegal when Clinton did it. Being as they were a grey area AT THE TIME, any ambiguity is, legally, read in Clinton's favor. This is the Rule of Lenity. Any ambiguous statute is read in favor of the Defendant. If the law was grey on emails at the time, under the Rule of Lenity that basically means there was no law regarding emails. As such, she did nothing illegal.

 

[Thundercrack85]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook

Interesting read.

Basically if she was anyone else she would be in prison.

 

[Matt]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook

Interesting read.

That "interesting read" misconstrues gross negligence. It is a political puff piece designed to paint Clinton in a damning light. McCarthy should know better. Gross negligence is a term of art. It is something that is shocking to the conscience. Having emails forwarded to a private server is not shocking to the conscience. Gross negligence would be, as I said in my other post, Clinton doing lines of blow with Putin and then telling Putin state secrets. Gross negligence is something that no reasonable person, under any circumstance, would do unless they just have a complete disregard for life, safety, etc.

 

[Thundercrack85]

That "interesting read" misconstrues gross negligence. It is a political puff piece designed to paint Clinton in a damning light. McCarthy should know better. Gross negligence is a term of art. It is something that is shocking to the conscience. Having emails forwarded to a private server is not shocking to the conscience. Gross negligence would be, as I said in my other post, Clinton doing lines of blow with Putin and then telling Putin state secrets. Gross negligence is something that no reasonable person, under any circumstance, would do unless they just have a complete disregard for life, safety, etc.

Sharing and transmitting classified state documents improperly isn't gross negligence? I mean, I am not a lawyer, but that seems pretty damn negligent to me. I mean, that would probably get me fired at my job if not sued, and that's company business, not state secrets.

 

[Matt]

Basically gross negligence is a step beyond carelessness or indifference but a step just short of malice, evil, etc. I cannot think of any legal scholar who would say forwarding an email to a private address is grossly negligent behavior. Especially considering it was the common practice.

To establish gross negligence you use a reasonable person standard. But a reasonable person standard does not look at the behavior of an average person (so the whole "I would get fired if I do it" argument doesn't fly). It looks at the behavior of a reasonable person in same or similar conditions. One way to establish that is how others in similar positions behave (for example, in a medical malpractice case, how do other doctors behave in such a situation?).

With the Secretary of State that is a bit hard. But we KNOW Madeline Albright, Condi Rice and Colin Powell did the same exact thing with their emails. It is hard to say that no reasonable Secretary of State would do so, when her three predecessors (and the only other SecStates in the digital era) did the same thing.

 

[Legendver2]

Matt's a lawyer? For some reason, I think that's pretty sick

 

[Thundercrack85]

He's the Hype's legal counsel.

 

[Schlosser85]

I prefer the term "consigliere".

 

[Marvolo]

I prefer the term "consigliere".

Who I am, WHO I AM, who am I, who am I is a question for the ages. That’s one we are all searching for, to find out who I am, who’s in there, who wants to come out and say, hey, I'm hungry. Who I am is too deep and prof-, almost, you gotta go in deep and pull out the thing like with the movie with the thing came out of the stomach and up the people on the ****ing spaceship, may they rest in peace. My name is Ben Sobol... lione. Ben Soblione. I'm also known as Benny the Groins, Sammy the Snoz, Elmer the Fudd, Tubby the Tuba, and once as Miss Fillis Lavine, but that was at a party, it was years ago, I smoked a te-te-bet and I had a quc-ca-lude and suddenly, I'm in fishnets and singing show tunes. These things happen, but it has nothing to do with what I'm here with you fine gentlemen today so I apologize. That being said, I am also known to the people who know me the best, as the ****ing doctor. The second part of the question that you "axed" me is why I am here. I am here representing the Hype as its consigiligiliere...

 

[VelcroWallet]

Welp, another GOP witch hunt bites the dust.

 

[craigdbfan]

Except even the Clinton News Network is heavily focusing on this and calling out on her BS crooked scheming.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Welp, another GOP witch hunt bites the dust.

I don't know if I would say that. They did find her "extremely careless". I mean, that's not exactly something you want to be called in an FBI investigation, if you're running for president... or really any job that involves you handling sensitive information.

If there were two sane people running for president, I'd say this would pretty much disqualify one of them. Unfortunately, she is the only sane person running.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Except even the Clinton News Network is heavily focusing on this and calling out on her BS crooked scheming.

Craig, I've got to give you credit. I've never seen anyone so focused on a singular goal than you are about Trump becoming president. You willfully ignore the almost daily articles of Trump's incompetence as well as every single post by those calling out some of the downright insane things that get posted in here. And then just pop in and drop your 2 cents like it ain't no thang.

Kudos to you homie. I can't wait to write your sig confessing your undying love for Hillary for the next year.

 

[OB12]

Basically gross negligence is a step beyond carelessness or indifference but a step just short of malice, evil, etc. I cannot think of any legal scholar who would say forwarding an email to a private address is grossly negligent behavior. Especially considering it was the common practice.

To establish gross negligence you use a reasonable person standard. But a reasonable person standard does not look at the behavior of an average person (so the whole "I would get fired if I do it" argument doesn't fly). It looks at the behavior of a reasonable person in same or similar conditions. One way to establish that is how others in similar positions behave (for example, in a medical malpractice case, how do other doctors behave in such a situation?).

With the Secretary of State that is a bit hard. But we KNOW Madeline Albright, Condi Rice and Colin Powell did the same exact thing with their emails. It is hard to say that no reasonable Secretary of State would do so, when her three predecessors (and the only other SecStates in the digital era) did the same thing.

I don't post in these threads often, but I read them quite a bit. These last few pages have been pretty informative. I do have a question though, how does this incident differ from the Patreaus case?

 

[Matt]

Matt's a lawyer? For some reason, I think that's pretty sick

He's the Hype's legal counsel.

I prefer the term "consigliere".

You guys are too kind.

I don't post in these threads often, but I read them quite a bit. These last few pages have been pretty informative. I do have a question though, how does this incident differ from the Patreaus case?

A few ways:

First - Petraeus confessed to wrong doing.

Second - Petraeus intended to, and did in fact, give the documents to an actual third party. Clinton lacked the intent to transmit the documents to a third party, nor did she give them to an actual third party (as is defined by any statute).

Third - The big thing they caught Petraeus on was lying to investigators, which is also a crime.

 

[OB12]

Got it, thanks!

 

[SV Fan]

Welp, another GOP witch hunt bites the dust.

I think the big problem with the republicans is they build up something so "big" that even when something bad comes out of situation that it nowhere is as bad as the republicans state it to be that it gives that person cover for what they did and makes the Republicans look foolish

 

[chaseter]

Depends on the protocol. I still question if they would have been this lenient if she wasn't who she is. They can always find laws.

Related on the FBI's own website:

https://m.fbi.gov/#https://www.fbi....removal-and-retention-of-classified-materials

If only his last name was Clinton.

 

[chaseter]

Welp, another GOP witch hunt bites the dust.

Comey, head of FBI appointed by Obama, and Lynch, AG appointed by Obama and long time Clinton friend found no wrong doing by Hillary, the Democrat nominee for President!? Shocker...

 

[SV Fan]

Comey, head of FBI appointed by Obama...

Actually he worked the majority of his career under Bush

He also donated money to McCain and Romney

Sounds like a tried and true liberal

 

[Marvolo]

Actually he worked the majority of his career under Bush

He also donated money to McCain and Romney

Sounds like a tried and true liberal

I bet he reads Das Kapital before bed every night. The dirty liberal commie!

 

[summerteeth]

Welp, another GOP witch hunt bites the dust.

I don't think she came out of this unscathed, this makes her look woefully inept.

 

[Slushy]

 

[true316]

Hey Matt, I'm trying to understand this stuff better. What is the difference between this Navy reservist, Bryan Nishimura (who was sentenced), and Clinton? The situations seem kind of similar.

http://www.navytimes.com/story/mili...for-mishandling-classified-material/30862027/

 

[chaseter]

Actually he worked the majority of his career under Bush

He also donated money to McCain and Romney

Sounds like a tried and true liberal

That doesn't mean he can't owe people favors for advancing his career...