By Mark Rhoads -
The key flaw in the statement by FBI Director James Comey about Mrs. Clinton is that he said they could not prove that she intended to harm national security.
But her intent is not relevant to anything because the gross negligence standard does not require proving intent.
Comey made more than an ample case to charge Mrs. Clinton with gross negligence and that is a crime the way the law is written because Congress did not want classified information to fall into the hands of enemies. She should have known that her reckless conduct would have the potential to harm the country but she did it anyway. That is why she should have been charged.
But the problem is that now the Clinton campaign will spin the statement by Comey as a "clearance" of wrong doing when it is clearly not that.
So let’s see, If I were a commie elite like Hitlery, I could drive 100 mph in a 30 mph zone and as long as the FBI can’t prove I intended to do harm its okay.
Hypocrisy
Is everyone realizing we live in a totalitarian police state. The DC organized crime lies and tries to convince us we still have a constitutional republic, but the fact is we don’t.
This goes way beyond electing her. More crooked DOJ’s, possibility of 3 more libs on the Supreme court, sale of our secrets, etc. I am so disgusted right now.
Anybody who thinks this was not a political decision is either very partisan or an absolute idiot.
Yes, Mr Rhoads, your analysis is 100% correct. It makes no difference!
We gave our country away years ago when we embraced free trade and mass immigration. Without those, the Dems wouldn’t be in the majority.
I don’t see how this woman could get a security clearance after this. It also pisses me off as an Army veteran who was a communications specialist with a Top Secret clearance. If I had mishandled classified material — even inadvertently — I would have been in deep trouble.
What don’t you understand- she is a Democrat and as long as they control the executive branch law means nothing.
“Laws, I don’t need no stinkin’ laws”