Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Clinton’s email issues don’t fall anywhere under the espionage act of 1917. Not sure what he’s thinking,
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
They fall under the Act, but various people or "experts" argue whether her actions are prosecutable. As to be expected, "conservatives" say they are, and "liberals" say they are not.
the Espionage act has been amended several times, and the wording is deemed by many to be too vague. It us argued that several have been convicted under the Act by stretching its language. But, nonetheless, they were found guilty and sentenced to prison terms. The point being that it was necessary to prevent future offenses.
Hillary certainly exposed classified info on an insufficiently encrypted server, rather than using the required government servers. Yet she defended prosecuting others because of the danger and precedent of careless mishandling of classified info. But she, of course, was above all that. It was not deemed important to prosecute her in order to prevent this from happening again.
When uneven application of the law openly exists, it destroys the people's confidence in government and its laws. The laws, apparently, apply to some, but not others. Greenwald points out Clinton's, and others in power, hypocrisy.
I'd like to see a debate on the subject between you and Greenwald. I would bet my money on him and that he would mop the floor with you.
Threaded Mode