Did Trumps lawyer really just argue in court that Trump could murder someone and not be charged?

And yet, this:

Petraeus, in the end, pleaded guilty last year to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified material. No charges were brought against Broadwell.

He certainly was in danger of felony charges, but he cut a deal.


So then, what I said stands?

His deal included pleading guilty a criminal charge and house arrest.

You said:

Some were warned, others reprimanded and in one case and officer was demoted. but no one was ever charged with a crime.

The implication is that Clinton just got what everyone else gets or Patreus got screwed the way no one else ever does. I don’t believe he’s alone. I could look more up I’m sure (but that’s a low-reward activity I don’t care to do), but the bottom line is nothing happened to Clinton for something that landed at least one other person in a sentence of some kind.

All I was trying to say is that not everyone is charged with a crime. A lot of it has to do with why you do it. That said, I concede there have been people charged. Patreus is a slightly different case as you know there were politics involved.

Wait a minute. Since when haven’t politics been involved with any Clinton shenannigans?

Sorry, I was making a different point. I’ve been witness to a lot of people breaking the law with respect to classified info. I’ve never witnessed anyone being criminally charged for it. I’m not saying no one ever has or that people shouldn’t be charged, just that when considering if someone should be charged there are questions of intent. I’d say all of the instances I witnessed were cases where people did it by mistake or did it without the intention of releasing info for some nefarious reason.

I don’t think (but admit I don’t know the full scape of what happened) that Petreaus had criminal intent, rather he was a victim of politics. As far as Clinton, I’m not aware of her releasing classified info for nefarious reasons.

It’s my understanding, that at least some of the info that was classified, was done so after the fact. Are you aware of classified info that was released by Clinton that was done to leak sensitive information to benifit her personally or politically?

Don’t misunderstand, I think what she did was sloppy and deserves to be recognized as wrong, but I think Republicans and the right-wing media did exactly what the left-wing media have done with Trump, which is attacking every mistake like it’s the end of the world, which, inadvertently insulates Clinton/ Trump from the criticism they deserve because people begin to question if they are being manipulated by the other side when considering what a person, in this case Clinton/ Trump did wrong.

I mean really, tell me you don’t agree with that? Unfortunately, this is the age we live in.

So in Clinton’s case (and Trump’s) the politics helps insulate them from consequences of their mistakes (though I think this Ukraine thing may be a bridge too far), but in Petreaus’ case it worked against him as he is not a politician.

Not saying it should be this way, just how I see it.

There’s a sailor in prison TODAY for the “crime” of taking a photo of his work-station aboard one of our nuclear subs and sending it to his parents. There was nothing “classified” in the photo and no national secrets were revealed, yet he STILL is in prison.

Yep, there are examples of people doing much worse who aren’t punished and examples of people, like the sailor you point to, who are.

That said, should Clinton have been punished because the sailor you speak of was punished, or should the sailor you give as an example was punished when he should not have?

Each case should be judged on its merits, not relative to each other.

The point here is that what Hillary did was almost INFINITELY more damaging to national security than what the sailor did, yet she walks free and he’s in prison. Not surprised that you don’t understand the difference though.

I’ll ask and I’ll not expect you to back it up, but I’ll ask anyway.

Please provide some evidence? I’m genuinely interested.

She had classified information stored on an unsecured server and even the NSA believes that server was hacked by a foreign agency, which means that foreign agency now has classified information that they shouldn’t have. In other words, that classified data has been compromised due to her negligence. NOTHING that the sailor sent to his parents WAS classified so even if it was hacked, no classified information was compromised.

Ok, first, as usual, your facts are off…

You said

In reality:

Saucier admitted to taking six photos of classified areas inside the USS Alexandria in 2009 when it was in Groton and he was a 22-year-old machinist mate on the submarine. The photos showed the nuclear reactor compartment, the auxiliary steam propulsion panel and the maneuvering compartment, prosecutors said.

So no, it wasn’t just workstation.

As far as Clinton,

And you know this how?

And I suspect you’re outraged at this:

Trump routinely uses an unsecured cell phone

Oh, wait, he can do whatever he wants because he’s the President, right?

Which means your upset that Clinton broke the law, not the result, right?

Clinton is a different case. As you know there were politics involved.


In other words, we have a different problem. Or maybe things shouldn’t be classified at all…

Of course they should, but I think , given my exposure to classified info, a tendency to classify things that don’t need to be classified. But, whatever, I think there should be consistency in the process.

You hit the nail on the head here.

Clinton deserved consequences for the emails, but her tribe defended her while the conservatives sounded the same as always. Your statement applies to policy decisions too.

And no, a lot of folks here don’t agree with your assessment. Romney’s Obamacare was OK because a state did it. Tariffs are OK if you have a super good reason. I’m wondering if that would hold if Bernie or Warren are elected and double down on it in their drive to bring American jobs back to America.

You forget (conveniently) that Hillary Clinton WAS NEVER PRESIDENT! The President of the U.S. can classify or de-classify whatever he wishes. Clinton never had that authority–or anything CLOSE to it.

What that sailor was TRIED AND CONVICTED for was taking a photo of his WORK STATION and then sharing it with his parents. He never shared any photos of anything else on board his ship with anyone. None of the photos he took was of anything classified.

False. The law regarding official secrets specifically states that lack of intent makes no difference. Neglect is just as culpable as criminal intent.