Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
He cited two cases where there was no evidence of intent to distribute the info, and there was a case afterwards of the young submarine sailor who was prosecuted for taking photos of his ship even though there was no evidence that he intended to harm the U.S.
In all cases, there was the mishandling of classified information. Intent to distribute or harm was not necessary for prosecution. Those would be the motivation for mishandling. The negligent mishandling was the common thread. And it was all that was necessary for conviction.
Clinton dangerously mishandled classified information. Her motivation or intent were irrelevant. She put the U.S. in far greater danger than the two Naval officers that Greenwald cited, and than the young submarine sailor. And who were all convicted for their inappropriate handling of information and who had no "intent" to distribute it in any way that would harm the country.
|
In those cases you have people with access for intentionally stealing sensitive information under suspicious circumstances and in the case of the submariner obstructing justice. Again very different from some info bleeding into a non Gov system. As the FBI said they couldn’t find a single example of anyone being charged for similar.
Maybe Greenwald is just a hater?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device