Darsan, you did not even listen to the FBI. Not innocent. I am certain any reasonably competent attorney could have convicted her of several different charges a la Petraeus..
Comey did not say she was innocent or guilty. He basically said that no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges. He is the cop, and not the prosecutor. He is also a fairly hard Republican, It says a lot that he issued what amounts to a case of there-isn’t-really-much-there statement, tuned as critical as he thought he could make it.
Here is a segment of Comey’s press statement on the subject. Enjoy reading:
—"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.
As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case."
jbmlawThere is no such verdict in the U S Code nor English Common Law. Any citizen should have that basic knowledge of the law. .You obviously believe the law is so trivial that tyranny can be enacted simply by selective enforcement. If “everyone does it”, then ignore it on your side and enforce it without evidence on your enemies. Whatever happened to “liberty and justice for all”?
It always makes me laugh to watch people flip on their opinion of a cartoonist, depending on the way the wind blows. Stantis has been called everything from Hitler to Trotsky to Attila (figuratively, boys, figuratively). There are cries for him to be strung up one day, and that he’s a genius the next day, from the same people. SBenson was called a right-winger(!) a couple of days ago, by people whose posts are usually just “METOO, METOO, METOO, METOO!!!!”Lighten up, folks. Laugh at yourself once in a while. I usually disagree with SBenson, but I sometimes get a chuckle from his work, even when he’s skewering my view. Or maybe you can just go on proving the old adage, “A scholar is someone who agrees with me.”
Darsan54 Premium Member about 8 years ago
Honey Bunny – Innocent of all charges.
Weak tea cons.
jbmlaw01 about 8 years ago
Darsan, you did not even listen to the FBI. Not innocent. I am certain any reasonably competent attorney could have convicted her of several different charges a la Petraeus..
6.6TA about 8 years ago
Comey did not say she was innocent or guilty. He basically said that no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges. He is the cop, and not the prosecutor. He is also a fairly hard Republican, It says a lot that he issued what amounts to a case of there-isn’t-really-much-there statement, tuned as critical as he thought he could make it.
Here is a segment of Comey’s press statement on the subject. Enjoy reading:
—"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.
As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case."
pschearer Premium Member about 8 years ago
This morning’s thought: Hillary could be the first female Presidential wife of an impeached President to be impeached. Now that’s history-making!
Rich Hart about 8 years ago
Dear Mr. Stantis:When you attack Hillary, it can only help Trump win. Is that what you want? Suggest a cease fire until after the election.
hippogriff about 8 years ago
jbmlawThere is no such verdict in the U S Code nor English Common Law. Any citizen should have that basic knowledge of the law. .You obviously believe the law is so trivial that tyranny can be enacted simply by selective enforcement. If “everyone does it”, then ignore it on your side and enforce it without evidence on your enemies. Whatever happened to “liberty and justice for all”?
Ionizer about 8 years ago
It always makes me laugh to watch people flip on their opinion of a cartoonist, depending on the way the wind blows. Stantis has been called everything from Hitler to Trotsky to Attila (figuratively, boys, figuratively). There are cries for him to be strung up one day, and that he’s a genius the next day, from the same people. SBenson was called a right-winger(!) a couple of days ago, by people whose posts are usually just “METOO, METOO, METOO, METOO!!!!”Lighten up, folks. Laugh at yourself once in a while. I usually disagree with SBenson, but I sometimes get a chuckle from his work, even when he’s skewering my view. Or maybe you can just go on proving the old adage, “A scholar is someone who agrees with me.”
crowtoadron about 8 years ago
what difference at this point does it make?