Her emails contained the location of North Korea’s nuclear facilities, transcripts of conversations between foreign intelligence agents, and the names of undercover CIA operatives whose lives could be endangered if revealed.
So both Clinton and Martin are guilty of jeopardizing national security, but only Martin will be prosecuted."
The difference is that, while we know both of them knew their information was classified, “some animals are more equal than others”. In the real world, you don’t have to prove intent based on a confession. We all know whether Hillary intended to mishandle classified material when she set up that scheme to avoid open records laws. Corrupt politicians disgust me, especially when their life’s goal is to grow up to be tyrants.
Hillary is banking on getting away with it all. She's put all her chips on the next two weeks. If she wins this she is in the clear forever If she DOESN'T however...
Her sins are threatened as never before. There is nothing... NOTHING... she won't do to be declared the victor. And I suspect there is nothing that Obama won't do, either.
We are in a very, very dangerous time.
That ought to be corrected to “are currently endangered or are assumed to be dead”.
I generally am not a fan of a typical liberal retort about “oligarchy” but I have to admit the evidence for that is mounting.
Also:
Thank you.
I am very worried about our police officers, as are many others. My husband was a retired officer when he died a few years back. I am so glad he retired (late eighties/early 90s) when he did.
I have no connection to former officer Tensing. Just that he was a police officer and probably really was terribly frightened that afternoon. There but for the grace of God, might have gone my husband....
I hope other people still remember former officer Tensing. I hope is has not been abandoned by the community. Probably he hasn’t, but I don’t read in the newspapers or see online where anyone cares.
This is scary.
Well, Gregg, let me explain something to you...
As Americans today we live in a country where if you break the law you will receive special rewards and privileges, as long you are a powerful democrat, or, as in the case with people who are in the country illegally, as long as you promise to vote for democrats.
If you obey the law and try to play by the rules? Well, then you are called a racist, deplorable, desperate, basement dweller, etc.
In today’s America, if you are a decent law abiding citizen who expects the law to apply apply to everyone equally - and thinks that politicians should live by the same rules as everyone else - well, then you are a chump
A distinction without a difference. Except for the fee, of course.
What’s really appalling is that “intent” is not an element of the crime of which Hillary should have been charged. Most crimes do require the showing a requisite mental state or mens rea, but not this one.
Apparently the legislature so wanted to deter the behavior that it removed that roadblock from prosecution.
Comey makes me sick.
She gas a vagina allegedly that’’s the difference it makes ...
Democrats are LAW-LESS because Republicans are BALL-LESS!!!!
A Hillary Clinton administration would set a precedent for women and the presidency. However, there is no legal precedent for people other than her to be able to do what she does and to always get away with it.
The difference is: WHAT DIFFERENCE, at this point, does it make??? Laws are for the little people.
It’s all about all the dirt the Clinton’s have amassed on oh so many people.
Why is the legal standard for Hillary different than the one for you and me?
We are advertized as a government of laws, not men. It means that regardless of your status, the law applies to you as it does to everyone else. But that FBI fiasco, on live television, proved we are a country of men, not laws.
It’s colored everything and proved the lies: Land of the free? Try buying a toilet that uses too much water. Try choosing to be self insured, health care wise. Try saving the rain water off your roof (in many parts of the country).
Don’t make me laugh. The U.S. today has nothing more in common with what the founding fathers created than Hitler’s Germany ad with the Germany of the 19th century.
I quit kidding myself about 10 years ago. Look at the american people. Look at their forms of entertainment, their crime levels, their respect for the unborn, their active involvement of the affairs of other countries.
We are no longer the good guys. We are, quite literally, lying to ourselves, just as the German People did in 1936.
And all that that implies.
James Comey is a traitor to the people of The United States.
He will go down in history next to Benedict Arnold.
James Comey is a greedy coward.
Regarding a Presidential pardon ...
Gerald Ford famously pardoned Richard Nixon even though no criminal conviction had been obtained. There was never a vote to impeach by the entire House, only a vote by a subcommittee, so technically there weren’t even any charges filed against Nixon. It was a “just in case” pardon.
But the country was ready to put the Nixon episode into the rear view mirror. Years of hateful press and a citizenry angry over Vietnam helped drive the decision to let Ford’s pardon stand, unchallenged. Time to move on.
However, can a pardon be issued without an actual crime to forgive? Can a pardon be issued just to alleviate suspicion? That sounds fishy to me.
Maybe it was actually a blessing that Comey chose not to press charges against Hillary. Once we install a new AG (Christie? Judge Jeanine?), a new FBI director (Sheriff Clarke?), and squadron of new US Attornies, then let’s see how Hillary’s little game plays out! If Obummer tries to pardon her for suspicious activity, just say no.
Legally, the big difference is this: Martin admitted he knew the documents were classified and admitted that what he did was wrong and illegal. Game over.
That legal difference is, in principle, irrelevant to "charge or not." Admission eliminates the need for a trial, that's all.
The reason Clinton isn't prosecuted is that she is above the law. Simple.