theBearJewWhat a joke. She broke the law, but were not recommending any charges, however if someone else did this, they may not get away with it.
Anyone else have thoughts on what the FBI director just said?
I'm no lawyer, nor will I pretend to know anything about this law, but my guess is that proving "intent" is EXTREMELY hard and an uphill battle.
This article was extremely interesting, and was written ~3 months ago.
What stuck out to me was the following passage:
"Between 2011 and 2015, federal prosecutors disposed of 30 referrals from investigators in cases where the main proposed charge was misdemeanor mishandling of classified information, according to data obtained from the Justice Department by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Prosecution was declined in 80 percent of those cases. Of the six where charges were filed, all the defendants apparently pled guilty, the data show."
The FBI seemed to indicate they agree with this idea about the difficulty of proving intent.
"Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent
. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.
We do not see those things here."
Does this mean they shouldn't have tried? It depends who you ask.