Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/12/2017 2:02:01 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
To: ForYourChildren

""Federal law is clear regarding classified materials: intent is not relevant [to mishandling classified information]," the White House official said."

Somebody at the WH gets it. Comey doesn't get it.

Intent is not needed.



2 posted on 05/12/2017 2:03:05 PM PDT by ForYourChildren (Christian Education [ RomanRoadsMedia.com - Classical Christian Approach to Homeschool ])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Trump and the FBI agents have it right.
The statute does not require intent to be violated, only gross mishandling of classified information.


3 posted on 05/12/2017 2:05:19 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

They’re trying to use INTENT against President Trump’s Immigration Order.


4 posted on 05/12/2017 2:06:16 PM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren
This has been a very strange day. McCaster said something about Palestine “self determination”, he should be fired.
7 posted on 05/12/2017 2:07:55 PM PDT by cowboyusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Weasel-Face Comey.

Weasel Weasel Weasel


8 posted on 05/12/2017 2:08:25 PM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Even if it was ignorance of the law (which I doubt), everyone knows that is no excuse.


9 posted on 05/12/2017 2:09:46 PM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

If it worked for HRC, it should work for everyone. Seems to me that a precedent has been set. “Gee, Mr. GMan, my intent was not rob that bank” should be enough to let a bank robber off the hook.


10 posted on 05/12/2017 2:11:26 PM PDT by JayElBee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Intent is a part of the criteria to consider, but it is not the only aspect.

A drunk driver that kills somebody may not have “intended” to do so, but should have known of the risks involved with their drunk driving.

Intent does not alone determine criminality, but it factors into the case.

A lawyer, former first lady, former Senator, and now Secretary of State, sets up private system to handle classified electronic communication.

Can hardly claim no intent to violate rules and advisories, more likely intended to avoid rules and consequences.

That is what a reasonable person could conclude.


11 posted on 05/12/2017 2:13:12 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Bill Gertz is a good journalist.


17 posted on 05/12/2017 2:18:59 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Sure intent is irrelevant. But ... for the heck of it ... let’s look at Comey’s reasoning. How does Comey really know Hillary had no mischievous intent?


19 posted on 05/12/2017 2:22:30 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

“Intent” was deliberately left out of the original legislation due to the very serious national security ramifications that could result from carelessness with classified material.

Suppose a government official who has a Top Secret clearance takes a file out of the office (illegally, but with no “intent” to cause harm to our country) in order to study it at home. Suppose, further, that she accidentally leaves her briefcase, which contains the file, at a coffee shop. Someone then might pick it up and, while innocently looking for the name and address of the owner, realize that he has something that could be very valuable to one of our enemies. Perhaps the file contains a list of American spies in Russia. Or, it might be battle plans for one of our engagements in the Middle East. Or, whatever. The person who found it has no security clearance, and the situation has now become extremely dangerous and serious for our nation.

A scenario such as this, or, perhaps, a more modern one involving cell phones and computers, is exactly why “intent” to do harm is not required. Even some democrats might be smart enough to understand this.


20 posted on 05/12/2017 2:24:12 PM PDT by TruthShallSetYouFree (If Hillary's last name were anything but Clinton, she'd already be behind bars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

The law on espionage is very clear.

Intent is not necessary for conviction.

I remember my instructors teaching me about Communications Security.

“We don’t care if you accidentally divulge classified information. We will purposefully throw you into prison for doing it.”


22 posted on 05/12/2017 2:26:18 PM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

In any case, intent was not for Comey to make the final decision on. That would be for the AG to decide (or whoever the AG designated).

I believe Comey admitted that he took it upon himself to decide intent because he thought Lynch might be compromised. He took a bullet for Lynch and Hillary.


23 posted on 05/12/2017 2:26:53 PM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Trump to Dem Media, “Okay I’ll see your Russia bluff and raise you with a Hillary Emails/Russian Uranium/Clinton Foundation Indictment”.


27 posted on 05/12/2017 2:31:42 PM PDT by vigilence (Vigilence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

same with Huma

http://twitchy.com/sd-3133/2017/05/03/nothing-to-see-here-comey-gives-absurd-reason-for-not-prosecuting-huma-abedin/


28 posted on 05/12/2017 2:31:51 PM PDT by Stopthethreat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Intent has never stopped them from prosecuting anyone else.


30 posted on 05/12/2017 2:32:54 PM PDT by Lurkinanloomin (Natural Born Citizen Means Born Here Of Citizen Parents - Know Islam, No Peace -No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Clinton knew damn well she was out of bounds breaking the rules of her position.


31 posted on 05/12/2017 2:33:26 PM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

I worked for the gov’t in a number of different roles and facilities and locations, including Pentagon; all your briefing and training will inform you and signed off - INTENT IS NOT NEEDED.


32 posted on 05/12/2017 2:33:28 PM PDT by ForYourChildren (Christian Education [ RomanRoadsMedia.com - Classical Christian Approach to Homeschool ])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren

Best article so far.

Bill Gertz, of course.


34 posted on 05/12/2017 2:34:13 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (The Washington Post is Jeff Bezos' Fake News unregulated SuperPAC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ForYourChildren
It's not just that intent is not needed, it's that criminal intent does not mean what Comey used it to mean in order to give her a pass.

Even if you counted it, criminal intent does not mean intent to break the law. It means intent to take the illegal action. It doesn't rely on knowledge of the law. I won't say it never matters, but it is not the usual case that ignorance of the law is considered to form a lack of intent. I knew this the day Comey spouted it. I've never understood why even all the people criticizing him never pointed out that he misconstrued the meaning of intent to get to his result.

36 posted on 05/12/2017 2:37:58 PM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson