Replies

I stand corrected, after reading title 18 USC 793(f) of the Espionage Act, which does read:

“(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.”

The law does require “negligence” and does carry a 10 year imprisonment and fine or both.

I also read Title 18 USC 793 section (c) that does state:

“(c) Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter;”

That Hillary Clinton also violated that section as well.

Still, it does look like the most she can get is ten (10 Years. I wonder if that is for each violation or for all the violations combined? If it is for each violation of the Espionage Act under Title 18 USC 793 et seq. then she may be looking at many more years than suspected.

Just my opinion.

I'm no law expert either, but since the law speaks of distinct items, multiple charges may be justified in Hillary's case. It's possible hundreds and possibly thousands of documents, sketches, photographs, maps, lists, ..., were “negligently” kept in a very unsecured form. We may even discover one day that many are even in the possession of foreign governments.

Certainly Hillary Clinton, having more than once publicly demonstrated her lack of expertise in the world of data storage/security, is by no stretch of the imagination qualified to sign off on any system of electronic data/document storage or security.

And by her own admission she is at least guilty of negligence, if not far worse, IMO.