Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > News & Current Events
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

News & Current Events Discuss DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary at the General Forum; Originally Posted by cnredd Unfortunately, your information is outdated... Changes were made to section 793 of the US code in ...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-24-2018, 04:01 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,620
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,311 Times in 9,282 Posts
Post Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
Unfortunately, your information is outdated...
Changes were made to section 793 of the US code in 1948, 1986, 1994 & 1996...Both intent AND gross negligence now apply...
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
No. It's really not.
If you actually read the article, you'll see it explicitly references the current phrasing involved...
Many commentators have criticized Comey’s decision, arguing the statute Clinton was accused of violating, 18 U.S.C. § 793(f), requires only “gross negligence,” not intent. Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy has gone so far as to say that replacing the words “gross negligence” with “intent” rewrites that statute to serve political ends.

McCarthy and others are mistaken. The issue of mens rea, or intent, is not as simple as it seems on the surface, and intent is the correct standard. Comey was right not to recommend filing charges and to base his decision on the absence of evidence that Clinton had the necessary intent.

Section 793(f) makes it a felony for any person “entrusted with… information relating to the national defense” to allow that information to be “removed from its proper place of custody” through “gross negligence.” On its face, the law does not appear to require intent, but it turns out the key phrase in 793(f) is not “gross negligence.” The key phrase is “related to the national defense.”

Section 793(f) is a subsection of the Espionage Act, a controversial statute enacted during World War I in order to combat efforts by German agents to undermine the American war effort. The Act has been amended and renumbered many times, but its core provisions have not substantively changed. The Espionage Act has only sparingly been used to file criminal charges, but when it has been used it is often in high-profile cases. Eugene Debs was jailed under the Espionage Act for anti-war activities during World War I. The Rosenbergs were charged under the Espionage Act when they sold nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union. More recently, both Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden were charged under the Espionage Act for providing classified material to WikiLeaks.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/wh...-clinton-case/

Your problem is that you think just saying "gross negligence" is all that is necessary. Legal precedent establishes that is clearly NOT the case (as previously described.

And you really need to be careful with swinging these types of accusations.
There was a LOT involved with the Clinton situation which was ridiculously reminiscent of the previous administration's problems.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
First, government information was delivered to persons NOT "in trust"...Both Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills do not have the same security clearances as the Secretary of State, yet had access to Clinton's server...HIGHLY illegal...
And Clinton personally made their accounts, right?



Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
Second, the fact that at least two parties knew (Three that we know of, actually) that this government information was being stored NOT in its "proper place of custody" constitute a conspiracy, which is illegal under section (g)...
Good gawd. You have no concern for how ridiculously far you're reaching with that one...


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
Third, "gross negligence" is prosecutable..."Intent" is NOT the only reason for prosecution...
Read the court precedent.
It's all there in black and white...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2018, 01:06 AM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 55,747
Thanks: 2,294
Thanked 36,363 Times in 20,709 Posts
Default Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
No. It's really not.
If you actually read the article, you'll see it explicitly references the current phrasing involved...
Many commentators have criticized Comey’s decision, arguing the statute Clinton was accused of violating, 18 U.S.C. § 793(f), requires only “gross negligence,” not intent. Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy has gone so far as to say that replacing the words “gross negligence” with “intent” rewrites that statute to serve political ends.

McCarthy and others are mistaken. The issue of mens rea, or intent, is not as simple as it seems on the surface, and intent is the correct standard. Comey was right not to recommend filing charges and to base his decision on the absence of evidence that Clinton had the necessary intent.

Section 793(f) makes it a felony for any person “entrusted with… information relating to the national defense” to allow that information to be “removed from its proper place of custody” through “gross negligence.” On its face, the law does not appear to require intent, but it turns out the key phrase in 793(f) is not “gross negligence.” The key phrase is “related to the national defense.”

Section 793(f) is a subsection of the Espionage Act, a controversial statute enacted during World War I in order to combat efforts by German agents to undermine the American war effort. The Act has been amended and renumbered many times, but its core provisions have not substantively changed. The Espionage Act has only sparingly been used to file criminal charges, but when it has been used it is often in high-profile cases. Eugene Debs was jailed under the Espionage Act for anti-war activities during World War I. The Rosenbergs were charged under the Espionage Act when they sold nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union. More recently, both Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden were charged under the Espionage Act for providing classified material to WikiLeaks.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/wh...-clinton-case/

Your problem is that you think just saying "gross negligence" is all that is necessary. Legal precedent establishes that is clearly NOT the case (as previously described.

And you really need to be careful with swinging these types of accusations.
There was a LOT involved with the Clinton situation which was ridiculously reminiscent of the previous administration's problems.



And Clinton personally made their accounts, right?




Good gawd. You have no concern for how ridiculously far you're reaching with that one...



Read the court precedent.
It's all there in black and white...
So critics like former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy say intent isn't required and your former US Army Judge Advocate John Ford says it is...That doesn't exactly write anything in stone...

HOWEVER...

Even if we go with "intent", saying there's no intent from a Secretary of State to...

A) ...have a private server and have ZERO communications on her actual government account

B) ...didn't say the private server even existed until YEARS after she was supposed to, BY LAW, hand over all communications when she left office, she had them in her possession as a private citizen whose security clearance had ended

B) ...have some of those communications end up on the laptop of her top aide's HUSBAND

C) ...have her own lawyers, with zero security clearances, have access to those emails (before the DoJ or FBI) and scan them for keywords to discount what is, IN THEIR OPINION AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S OPINION, what is "personal" and what's not...

D) ...deleted 33,000 emails saying they were all "personal" and just you not worry you're little oversight head about it ()

E) ...said that she used a private server so she only had to use one device...when, IN REALITY, she used multiple devices anyway

F) ...used "bleachbit" so any oversight would be tough to implement

G) ...and then destroyed the hard drive with a hammer so oversight becomes impossible to implement

H) ...had given access to her private server, which DID contain classified information, to (at least) two aides and (at least) one IT engineer with no security clearances


...and after all that, you're gonna sit there and say "Oh!!!! Comey said there's no intent so there's no intent!!!"...

This is one of those times I need to use the word "retarded"...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to cnredd For This Useful Post:
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2018, 11:29 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,620
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,311 Times in 9,282 Posts
Default Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
So critics like former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy say intent isn't required and your former US Army Judge Advocate John Ford says it is...That doesn't exactly write anything in stone...
The SCOTUS ruling was quoted.
You keep ignoring that.

My article even mentioned that only one person has ever been charged under a gross negligence theory.
Only one person has even been charged under a gross negligence theory: FBI Agent James Smith. Smith carried on a 20-year affair with a Chinese national who was suspected of spying for Beijing, and Smith would bring classified material to their trysts, behavior far more reckless than anything Clinton is accused of. But Smith was not convicted of violating 793(f). He struck a plea agreement that resulted in a conviction to the lesser charge of lying to federal agents. Smith was sentenced to three months of home confinement and served no jail time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
HOWEVER...
Even if we go with "intent", saying there's no intent from a Secretary of State to...
A) ...have a private server and have ZERO communications on her actual government account
1) This is not a demonstration of intent, but rather a presumption.
2) Again, you guys repeatedly fail to realize how many times you try to invoke standards which were completely ignored for Bush's private email server.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
B) ...didn't say the private server even existed until YEARS after she was supposed to, BY LAW, hand over all communications when she left office, she had them in her possession as a private citizen whose security clearance had ended
Has nothing to do with intent.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
B) ...have some of those communications end up on the laptop of her top aide's HUSBAND
C) ...have her own lawyers, with zero security clearances, have access to those emails (before the DoJ or FBI) and scan them for keywords to discount what is, IN THEIR OPINION AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S OPINION, what is "personal" and what's not...
D) ...deleted 33,000 emails saying they were all "personal" and just you not worry you're little oversight head about it
E) ...said that she used a private server so she only had to use one device...when, IN REALITY, she used multiple devices anyway
F) ...used "bleachbit" so any oversight would be tough to implement
G) ...and then destroyed the hard drive with a hammer so oversight becomes impossible to implement
H) ...had given access to her private server, which DID contain classified information, to (at least) two aides and (at least) one IT engineer with no security clearances
Has nothing to do with intent.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
...and after all that, you're gonna sit there and say "Oh!!!! Comey said there's no intent so there's no intent!!!"...
If you were honestly reading what I wrote, you would know I AM NOT RESTING on Comey's assessment.
I have provided the SCOTUS court ruling and other precedent.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
This is one of those times I need to use the word "retarded"...
Nice ad hominem.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2018, 05:04 PM
Dog Man's Avatar
Down Boy!
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Southern Nevada
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,247
Thanks: 6,754
Thanked 6,702 Times in 4,549 Posts
Default Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
The SCOTUS ruling was quoted.
You keep ignoring that.

My article even mentioned that only one person has ever been charged under a gross negligence theory.
Only one person has even been charged under a gross negligence theory: FBI Agent James Smith. Smith carried on a 20-year affair with a Chinese national who was suspected of spying for Beijing, and Smith would bring classified material to their trysts, behavior far more reckless than anything Clinton is accused of. But Smith was not convicted of violating 793(f). He struck a plea agreement that resulted in a conviction to the lesser charge of lying to federal agents. Smith was sentenced to three months of home confinement and served no jail time.


1) This is not a demonstration of intent, but rather a presumption.
2) Again, you guys repeatedly fail to realize how many times you try to invoke standards which were completely ignored for Bush's private email server.



Has nothing to do with intent.



Has nothing to do with intent.



If you were honestly reading what I wrote, you would know I AM NOT RESTING on Comey's assessment.
I have provided the SCOTUS court ruling and other precedent.



Nice ad hominem.
I'm sure you will give Trump all these same benefits, right? You love Hillary Waaaaay to much. She is a horrible person, and she makes Trump look like a boy scout.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-27-2018, 11:22 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,620
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,311 Times in 9,282 Posts
Post Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

The original claim of this whole thread is dumb. Some pundit makes a b.s. assessment that ignores the reality of legal scope and suddenly the right salivates at the thought of making Hillary a media circus once again.
The only relevance that Trump could drag in regarding Hillary revolves around the accusation against Trump.
If Jon is accused of murdering Mark and Joe gets on the stand, the court scope doesn't magically expand to entertaining accusations of Joe murdering Jessica.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Man View Post
I'm sure you will give Trump all these same benefits, right?
Do you have something concrete you want to point to?
Or is this just a lame "I know you are but what am I?" type retort...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Man View Post
You love Hillary Waaaaay to much.
You have no clue what I think of Hillary, primarily because you don't pay attention to what I (and others on the left) are actually saying about her.
I don't like her. But that doesn't make me automatically assume every b.s. claim people make about her.

Last election was a vote between the lesser of two evils.
But that election is now over. And some right-wingers never got that memo...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Man View Post
She is a horrible person, and she makes Trump look like a boy scout.
It will be fascinating to see a time when right-wingers can try to talk about Trump without immediately obfuscating onto Hillary.
She lost. Trump's in power now.
It would be the left that could conceivably have a problem getting over that, but instead it's the right who perpetually bring her up to distract from Trump.

Why are you still comparing Hillary to Trump?
It would be like me trying to fixate on Romney in 2014.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-27-2018, 12:09 PM
Dog Man's Avatar
Down Boy!
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Southern Nevada
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,247
Thanks: 6,754
Thanked 6,702 Times in 4,549 Posts
Default Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
The original claim of this whole thread is dumb. Some pundit makes a b.s. assessment that ignores the reality of legal scope and suddenly the right salivates at the thought of making Hillary a media circus once again.
The only relevance that Trump could drag in regarding Hillary revolves around the accusation against Trump.
If Jon is accused of murdering Mark and Joe gets on the stand, the court scope doesn't magically expand to entertaining accusations of Joe murdering Jessica.



Do you have something concrete you want to point to?
Or is this just a lame "I know you are but what am I?" type retort...



You have no clue what I think of Hillary, primarily because you don't pay attention to what I (and others on the left) are actually saying about her.
I don't like her. But that doesn't make me automatically assume every b.s. claim people make about her.

Last election was a vote between the lesser of two evils.
But that election is now over. And some right-wingers never got that memo...



It will be fascinating to see a time when right-wingers can try to talk about Trump without immediately obfuscating onto Hillary.
She lost. Trump's in power now.
It would be the left that could conceivably have a problem getting over that, but instead it's the right who perpetually bring her up to distract from Trump.

Why are you still comparing Hillary to Trump?
It would be like me trying to fixate on Romney in 2014.
Please forgive me for bringing up Hillary. I thought I saw her name in the thread title. And please lower your horse a tad, then maybe you will be able to see that you obfuscate just as much as the rest of us. You have probably forgotten all the times that you brought up Bush when Obama was POTUS. But that's OK, I forgive you.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 04-27-2018, 12:22 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,620
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,311 Times in 9,282 Posts
Default Re: DNC Unknowingly Suicides with Trump Suit, Opens Door for Trump to Depose Hillary

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Man View Post
Please forgive me for bringing up Hillary. I thought I saw her name in the thread title. And please lower your horse a tad, then maybe you will be able to see that you obfuscate just as much as the rest of us. You have probably forgotten all the times that you brought up Bush when Obama was POTUS. But that's OK, I forgive you.

The true parallel analogy would be what happened with Bush and "war crimes".
I and many of the other Democrats dropped it although it was still a point of complaint for others.

If you can show an example where we were talking about Obama and ___, and then I turned around and started whining about Bush's "crimes", then please do so.

Otherwise, I can appreciate hypocrisy examples being raised where it's exposed that there are different standards being used based on who is in office. THAT was the point of a lot of the examples bringing up Bush from me.
And it's done also for Obama in various threads and the points are well made. For example: College students bash Trump for sending troops to border — then learn Obama did same
I think threads like that are entirely legitimate and a reality check against the partisanship...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
depose, dnc, door, for, hillary, opens, suicides, suit, trump, unknowingly, with

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0