Excellent points! Comer essentially said she was a hair's breadth away from gross negligence imo. I hope to see Republicans respectfully asking all the unanswered questions and not turn this into a shit show...but I've always been a dreamer.
Excellent points! Comer essentially said she was a hair's breadth away from gross negligence imo. I hope to see Republicans respectfully asking all the unanswered questions and not turn this into a shit show...but I've always been a dreamer.His words absolutely have legal weight. The role of the executive branch is to enforce the laws, not interpret them. Gross negligence independent of intent is the threshold. Some would contend that the evidence he clearly cited meets the criteria for gross negligence. Was it lack of evidence or lack of political will to recommend indictment? Not an unreasonable question to ask although I have no faith in how congressional republicans will choose to pursue it.
Excellent points! Comer essentially said she was a hair's breadth away from gross negligence imo. I hope to see Republicans respectfully asking all the unanswered questions and not turn this into a shit show...but I've always been a dreamer.
He's a special kind of crazy. Good entertainment value though.Do you ever get dizzy?
Damn...and right on queue! You rock!So... More Benghazi, right?
Damn...and right on queue! You rock!
He's a special kind of crazy. Good entertainment value though.
All that matters is the decision. His words are just his opinion, have no legal weight.
The fact that she still has her clearance after all this is astounding to me. Don't want to pursue criminal charges? Ok. Still letting her keep her clearance after what she did, the lies, the misleading, the "extreme carelessness" and other things he said is just mind blowing. But I guess you can't be Pres and lose a clearance. There is no way she should have it right now however, no way.
I am the law!!!Of course you can. There's functionally no such thing as clearance for the president. They have access to everything as they are the source of all clearances.
Do you ever get dizzy?
I am the law!!!
She isn't President yet. No reason not to revoke her clearances now or at the very least those of her surrogates. She can always reinstate them later, right?
Oooooh! Acts of pure spite, Repubs' forte since 1994.
Report Describes Careless Handling of U.S. Secrets
Gonzales brought the notes home with him on Feb. 3, 2005, the day he moved from his post as White House counsel to his new job as the nation's chief law enforcement officer, according to the report. They were at his home or in his briefcase for an "indeterminate" amount of time, investigators said. Ultimately, Gonzales stored them in a safe outside his Justice Department office that was accessible by people who lacked the requisite security clearances to see them.
Gonzales also stored 17 other classified documents on electronic surveillance and detainee interrogation programs there. In one instance, employees searching for material related to a Freedom of Information Act request in 2006 sifted through the sensitive material in the safe "document by document," the report said.
Mishandling classified material violates Justice policies and can result in criminal charges, but prosecutors in the department's national security division declined to bring a case after reviewing the allegations and consulting with career officials, spokesman Dean Boyd said.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman John M. Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) yesterday called on Justice to "explain clearly why it declined to pursue charges against Mr. Gonzales and what actions it intends to take in response to the report."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/02/AR2008090201029.html
What in your mind is the difference between extreme carelessness and gross negligence?Dizzy right wing propaganda doesn't affect me that way.
Comey was given enormous responsibility in this matter. That's because he's shown enormous judgment, dedication & integrity over the years. He wasn't alone in making this judgement, as he pointed out, but it's rather what he, his team & federal prosecutors concluded. You know it's true.
Refusal to accept their judgement shows an arrogant & ill informed lack of it on your part. Yeh, righties will go on about like it's not over until they say it's over, which would be never, but the rest of America is moving on, glad to put it behind us.
Appropriate response. Mishandling of classified information is usually career ending and typically results in revocation of said clearances.Oooooh! Acts of pure spite, Repubs' forte since 1994.
What in your mind is the difference between extreme carelessness and gross negligence?
As the nominee, she'll have a certain level of clearance for briefings so that if she wins, she isn't blind-sided. What real purpose would it serve to remove her security clearance between now and the convention? Everyone knows what she is; everyone knows that she is merely the most egregious example of the exact same behavior that is more the rule than the exception. I'd venture to say that knowledge is worth more than making a show of revoking her security clearance and assuming we've somehow made a difference in D.C.I am the law!!!
She isn't President yet. No reason not to revoke her clearances now or at the very least those of her surrogates. She can always reinstate them later, right?
Pure politics, although I agree it is especially brazen for Gonzales. He is merely one of a whole host of elites who ethically would have to be indicted if Hillary were to be indicted.Alberto Gonzales was on Morning Joe today decrying Comey and wondering why he didn't pursue charges. I was a little surprised they chose him given his history and was a little amazed at his hypocrisy.
I assume everyone here called on him to be indicted and equally wondered about the secret machinations that led to him not being indicted. Like I said I don't believe this is as big an issue as a lot of people on this board and on the right have made it out to be.
Any opinion I offered wrt that would be ill informed & stupid. I'm simply not qualified by training, experience or sufficient information to make that judgement in this situation.
Comey is. Listen to him, not me.
What in your mind is the difference between extreme carelessness and gross negligence?
Which would certainly explain why Hillary went to such great lengths to hide them. Oh, wait.They have political weight, and weight to his credibility as FBI director. Personally I'm loving this, I'm sure Comey thought he was just throwing his party some bones in that press conference but they're going to end up nawing his hands off instead. And since there really wasn't enough to indict, the Republicans are just further shooting themselves in the foot by putting finer points on why not instead of just taking those bones Comey threw and running with them.
And I'd bet money those emails concerning classified info were discussing things already out in the public realm and not really "secret" information at all.
Also, Comey needs to specifically clarify if the "extremely careless" remark was an official determination of the investigation or just his opinion.
Appropriate response. Mishandling of classified information is usually career ending and typically results in revocation of said clearances.
I honestly want to hear your opinion. Comey articulated a position. I am questioning why he would simultaneously vindicate Clinton and use language that suggests otherwise. I am questioning the distinction between gross negligence and extreme carelessness. Uninformed as it may be, what in your mind is the distinction between the two.Any opinion I offered wrt that would be ill informed & stupid. I'm simply not qualified by training, experience or sufficient information to make that judgement in this situation.
Comey is. Listen to him, not me.
Or go for the ignorant back biting of denial. Your choice.
For your edification, I have bolded the relevant parts of his first response.I honestly want to hear your opinion. Comey articulated a position. I am questioning why he would simultaneously vindicate Clinton and use language that suggests otherwise. I am questioning the distinction between gross negligence and extreme carelessness. Uninformed as it may be, what in your mind is the distinction between the two.
Any opinion I offered wrt that would be ill informed & stupid. I'm simply not qualified by training, experience or sufficient information to make that judgement in this situation.
Comey is. Listen to him, not me.
Or go for the ignorant back biting of denial. Your choice.