He called out the Espionage Act. That's the classified information section of the Espionage Act. Is there another Espionage Act? It's called "moving the goalposts." You've just done it.
Are you really this incompetent? The Espionage Act DGAF about intent, which was the point that was made, that you skipped over.
No, he had no intent to distribute them for espionage, as even the prosecutors will tell you.
and he was explicitly warned before taking the pictures that what he was doing was illegal?
Hillary was explicitly told of her responsibilities as an Original Classification Authority, and a mere two years earlier lambasted the Bush Administration for.....conducting business over private email. So you can add naked hypocrisy to her already established corruption and negligence.
Willfully obtuse. Sailor was prosecuted for having classified information on an unauthorized device. Hillary had far, far, far more classified information stored on an unauthorized device. The math here isn't hard.
And no, her lawyers decision to withhold personal emails does not qualify as Clinton herself destroying information that is relevant to the investigation.
You mean delete thousands of emails. You're going from being willfully obtuse to being willfully stupid or dishonest - which is it? What do you think the sailor was charged with obstruction of justice for....hint, it was trying to dispose of the evidence after he realized he had screwed up.
Linking to the daily mail for citation says something about you. And it isn't flattering.
Says the AC engaging in lazy avoidance rather than address the facts. Did the government prosecute a sailor for storing classified information on an unsecured, unauthorized electronic device at the same time it was letting off a high level official for having a vastly higher amount of information on her unsecured, unauthorized server, or did it not?
Stay tuned. It's only getting started & there are an awful lot of links on the chains tying Trump & cronies with shady Russians. Even Flynn's supposed work for Turkey appears to be really a Russian front.
Ah, the "where there's smoke, there's fire" argument batshit insane Republicans have used against the Clinton's for 25 years, on everything from having state troopers running drugs through Arkansas to having Vince Foster killed. Democrats have become what they have hated.
There's more evidence to support the conspiracy theory about Obama's secret FEMA concentration camps than there is that Russia had Jack or shit to do with the election.
Did it occur to you that maybe I'm not inclined to go talking about exact clearance levels and such on the open internet where gods only know who's reading?
Nice avoidance.
I'll simply say that this wasn't some low level operational crap - I was an intelligence specialist, and did intelligence work in a building that even the rest of the intelligence folks at the site weren't allowed in without special escort.
Uh huh. Were they Original Classification Authorities? Did they also destroy evidence without authorization, or set up their own unsecured, unauthorized email servers at their homes which they used for all electronic correspondence?
Republicans have spent a billion tax payer dollars trying to find one thing Hillary is guilty of other than being a power hungry bitch.
Hand waiving. They could easily prosecute her for war crimes, obstruction of justice, and mishandling classified information. They don't because those are the things they love doing themselves.
18 U.S. Code sec. 798 - Disclosure of classified information
As if that's the only law or statute on classified information.
Your claim that there's no "intent" test in the statute is false. Yes, the law matters, but your flawed understandling of the law does not.
Cough espionage act cough. Intent is irrelevant - ask any of the whisteblowers prosecuted for mishandling classified evidence. I have yet to see any of the "nothing to see here, move along" partisans come up for an explanation for why Kristian Saucier is serving hard time for having classified information on his unsecured, unauthorized cell phone - despite zero intent to distribute them - while Hillary remains free. Despite having a vastly larger amount of classified information on her unsecured, authorized email server.
As much as the Vince Foster investigations ever "heated up", for the same reasons. Democrats have gone Full Birther since last years elections, engaging in hysterical poo-flinging rather than make legit complaints against a president they don't like, which they could easily do.
I honestly don't understand why the reversibility is such a big deal. (It reminds me of Apple fanboys raving about the superiority of rounded corners.)
Maybe because you're a twat. No checking to see if you have the plug facing the right way, you simply plug it in and you're done.
Burke preferred a monarchy restrained by a democratically elected parliament not because it was the best system, but because it protected the bourgeois from capricious monarchs, while allowing elitists to exploit and dominate the proles under such a system, much like the "Founding Fathers" in the United States.
You are decreasing the value of a country-specific license to your country, and thus making it even less likely to get one in the future.
Still confusing cause with effect. HBO managed to pull their heads out after years of Game of Thrones being the most torrented show online, and offered a streaming service that wasn't tethered to a cable subscription. They need to make their content available, in a reasonable way and reasonable price, before they can whine about "piracy".
Besides, if you refrain from downloading XYZ show/movie from bittorrent because you're holding out hope in your heart of hearts that the studio will pull its head out and distribute it in your country - how are they supposed to know? Telepathy?
What about those who pay for Netflix but aren't getting content in a timely manner (most series), see content disappear after a year (there's been a terrible purge here recently), or aren't getting the content at all?
Take your complaints to the studios demanding fees so high that Netflix would lose money by carrying their content. Any more questions?
All the right wing asshole Dems who keep whining about Sanders being an independent should come out and say they would rather have had Mitch McConnell as Majority Leader during the last two years of the Bush Administration.
Would you or would you not have rather had the Senate in Republican control during the last two years of the Bush Administration.
The same reason Powell, Rice and all the others were not prosecuted.
Yes,because Obama was also a warmongering neoliberal freakshow, and didn't want to prosecute the previous administration least he be prosecuted himself for his own war crimes and criminality.
it's kind of funny how it was blown up into a massive thing by the same people who suggested that it was OK for Petraeus to swap secrets for sex
Who was actually prosecuted for mishandling classified evidence - which just reinforced the point that Comey should be thanked by Hillbots for being her BFF, not thrown under the bus.
While the rich saw their wealth accelerate greatly under the Clinton Administration, the poor made better gains under the Clinton Administration than under almost any other of the past several decades
Due to the aforementioned Dot Com bubble, which evaporated. And poor people used to be able to get into a low-skill industry that was nevertheless unionized and paid a living wage with decent benefits....not so much after NAFTA.
You're absolutely right that the unions lost ground under Clinton. However they lost less ground under Clinton than under Reagan, either Bush, or Obama.
The biggest shaft to unions was probably the passage of Taft-Hartley, done by Republicans, but that was waaay back in the 50's. Reagan fired a union that endorsed him, and Scott Walker has been a "wonderful" union-buster in Wisconsin. But nothing in modern history comes close to NAFTA - sure Republicans will try to undercut unions with right-to-be-fired laws, but NAFTA made unions obsolete in entire sectors of the economy. And even if the factories don't move to Mexico, NAFTA allowed employers to walk into a room and tell the union, "Yes, we have all time high profits, but you're going to take massive cuts to your pay and benefits, else this plant is moving to Mexico".
We've also had an overwhelming message of how terrible organized labor is (after all, who wants a 5 day work week, paid vacation, sick leave, or worker safety?)
The killer idea has been the notion that unions work to protect incompetent, lazy or criminal workers, which is nonsense as it's predicated on the idea that Bob is just dying to do his own work plus Steve's, if Steve starts slacking off and not doing his job. People simply are not built that way, unless it's in an abusive Biff Tannen/George McFly situation, which can just as easily happen at a non-union shop.
Moving them to Thomson was supposed to at least clear out Gitmo for it's full shutdown.
C&P since this point was already addressed: The problem with Gitmo was not that it was in Cuba, the problem with Gitmo is that it was an unconstitutional suspension of basic civil rights. One that Obama wanted to move, not end.
Obama started military trials for the remaining detainees in Guantanamo, but wanted to have them face trial in the States instead with military trials or civilian trials, but Republicans blocked him every time on this through budget bills.
Deja vu: this Obamabot talking point was debunked 18 ways till Sunday waaaay back in 2009. Republicans were utterly irrelevant as they had 40 votes in the Senate, and Obama no more needed a separate bill to move detainees out Gitmo than Bush needed a bill to bring them in. Furthermore, nothing stopped Obama from sending an Article III judge to Gitmo to hold civilian trials there.
Why people keep complaining that Obama was "obstructed" when he himself said he would have been considered a Republican in the 80's is anyone's guess.
Yes, the horrors of having professional drivers who make a living wage, don't have to pay for maintenance on the cars they drive, and who carry hundreds of thousands in passenger insurance as opposed to the $25,000 you can count on from your Uber driver's All State policy. Horrors, I tell you!
Broadly, I'm guessing because the sailor was still in active duty at the time and subject to more regulations thank former DoD staffer.
Nope. Mishandling classified evidence is mishandling classified evidence - just ask any whistleblower prosecuted for it, or former high level officials like Sandy Berger or David Petraeus.
BHENGHAZZZZZZIIIIIIIIII!
You going to give Trump a free pass on everything, because there's even less to the Russian conspiracy theory than there is for anything on Benghazi (aside from a CIA black site, of course) using the same reasoning? The story that Russia hacked power companies fell apart within a day, so Trump didn't really say he liked grabbing women by their private parts. Because....reasons.
My 2000 PC running Windows 10 disagrees with your 2010 Macbook Pro
No, it doesn't. Because the 2010 Macbook is going to actually be usable with modern applications as long as they're not games requiring a newer CPU or GPU.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you really this incompetent? The Espionage Act DGAF about intent, which was the point that was made, that you skipped over.
No, he had no intent to distribute them for espionage, as even the prosecutors will tell you.
Hillary was explicitly told of her responsibilities as an Original Classification Authority, and a mere two years earlier lambasted the Bush Administration for.....conducting business over private email. So you can add naked hypocrisy to her already established corruption and negligence.
Next excuse?
Willfully obtuse. Sailor was prosecuted for having classified information on an unauthorized device. Hillary had far, far, far more classified information stored on an unauthorized device. The math here isn't hard.
You mean delete thousands of emails. You're going from being willfully obtuse to being willfully stupid or dishonest - which is it? What do you think the sailor was charged with obstruction of justice for....hint, it was trying to dispose of the evidence after he realized he had screwed up.
Says the AC engaging in lazy avoidance rather than address the facts. Did the government prosecute a sailor for storing classified information on an unsecured, unauthorized electronic device at the same time it was letting off a high level official for having a vastly higher amount of information on her unsecured, unauthorized server, or did it not?
Yes or no.
Ah, the "where there's smoke, there's fire" argument batshit insane Republicans have used against the Clinton's for 25 years, on everything from having state troopers running drugs through Arkansas to having Vince Foster killed. Democrats have become what they have hated.
Pure, unadulterated nonsense, but I'll give you points for brazenness.
There's more evidence to support the conspiracy theory about Obama's secret FEMA concentration camps than there is that Russia had Jack or shit to do with the election.
Nice avoidance.
Uh huh. Were they Original Classification Authorities? Did they also destroy evidence without authorization, or set up their own unsecured, unauthorized email servers at their homes which they used for all electronic correspondence?
Hand waiving. They could easily prosecute her for war crimes, obstruction of justice, and mishandling classified information. They don't because those are the things they love doing themselves.
As if that's the only law or statute on classified information.
Cough espionage act cough. Intent is irrelevant - ask any of the whisteblowers prosecuted for mishandling classified evidence. I have yet to see any of the "nothing to see here, move along" partisans come up for an explanation for why Kristian Saucier is serving hard time for having classified information on his unsecured, unauthorized cell phone - despite zero intent to distribute them - while Hillary remains free. Despite having a vastly larger amount of classified information on her unsecured, authorized email server.
As much as the Vince Foster investigations ever "heated up", for the same reasons. Democrats have gone Full Birther since last years elections, engaging in hysterical poo-flinging rather than make legit complaints against a president they don't like, which they could easily do.
Maybe because you're a twat. No checking to see if you have the plug facing the right way, you simply plug it in and you're done.
Destabilize Russia's biggest customer, because reasons.
....of not continuing to be encircled by an alliance of hypocritical warmongers who continue to blame, threaten and sanction Russia because....the United States overthrew the government of Ukraine.
You could have said "I'm an elitist who likes to sneer at poor people and poor kids for having poor parents" and saved yourself a lot of typing.
Fixed that up a bit.
Still confusing cause with effect. HBO managed to pull their heads out after years of Game of Thrones being the most torrented show online, and offered a streaming service that wasn't tethered to a cable subscription. They need to make their content available, in a reasonable way and reasonable price, before they can whine about "piracy".
Besides, if you refrain from downloading XYZ show/movie from bittorrent because you're holding out hope in your heart of hearts that the studio will pull its head out and distribute it in your country - how are they supposed to know? Telepathy?
Take your complaints to the studios demanding fees so high that Netflix would lose money by carrying their content. Any more questions?
Yes or no, AC?
Would you or would you not have rather had the Senate in Republican control during the last two years of the Bush Administration.
Yes,because Obama was also a warmongering neoliberal freakshow, and didn't want to prosecute the previous administration least he be prosecuted himself for his own war crimes and criminality.
Who was actually prosecuted for mishandling classified evidence - which just reinforced the point that Comey should be thanked by Hillbots for being her BFF, not thrown under the bus.
Due to the aforementioned Dot Com bubble, which evaporated. And poor people used to be able to get into a low-skill industry that was nevertheless unionized and paid a living wage with decent benefits....not so much after NAFTA.
The biggest shaft to unions was probably the passage of Taft-Hartley, done by Republicans, but that was waaay back in the 50's. Reagan fired a union that endorsed him, and Scott Walker has been a "wonderful" union-buster in Wisconsin. But nothing in modern history comes close to NAFTA - sure Republicans will try to undercut unions with right-to-be-fired laws, but NAFTA made unions obsolete in entire sectors of the economy. And even if the factories don't move to Mexico, NAFTA allowed employers to walk into a room and tell the union, "Yes, we have all time high profits, but you're going to take massive cuts to your pay and benefits, else this plant is moving to Mexico".
The killer idea has been the notion that unions work to protect incompetent, lazy or criminal workers, which is nonsense as it's predicated on the idea that Bob is just dying to do his own work plus Steve's, if Steve starts slacking off and not doing his job. People simply are not built that way, unless it's in an abusive Biff Tannen/George McFly situation, which can just as easily happen at a non-union shop.
C&P since this point was already addressed: The problem with Gitmo was not that it was in Cuba, the problem with Gitmo is that it was an unconstitutional suspension of basic civil rights. One that Obama wanted to move, not end.
Deja vu: this Obamabot talking point was debunked 18 ways till Sunday waaaay back in 2009. Republicans were utterly irrelevant as they had 40 votes in the Senate, and Obama no more needed a separate bill to move detainees out Gitmo than Bush needed a bill to bring them in. Furthermore, nothing stopped Obama from sending an Article III judge to Gitmo to hold civilian trials there.
Why people keep complaining that Obama was "obstructed" when he himself said he would have been considered a Republican in the 80's is anyone's guess.
You could have said "I have anecdotes and suffer from confirmation bias" and made the same point with fewer words. Efficiency man, efficiency...
Yes, the horrors of having professional drivers who make a living wage, don't have to pay for maintenance on the cars they drive, and who carry hundreds of thousands in passenger insurance as opposed to the $25,000 you can count on from your Uber driver's All State policy. Horrors, I tell you!
Nope. Mishandling classified evidence is mishandling classified evidence - just ask any whistleblower prosecuted for it, or former high level officials like Sandy Berger or David Petraeus.
You going to give Trump a free pass on everything, because there's even less to the Russian conspiracy theory than there is for anything on Benghazi (aside from a CIA black site, of course) using the same reasoning? The story that Russia hacked power companies fell apart within a day, so Trump didn't really say he liked grabbing women by their private parts. Because....reasons.
No, it doesn't. Because the 2010 Macbook is going to actually be usable with modern applications as long as they're not games requiring a newer CPU or GPU.