Negligence requires intent!

>negligence requires intent!
>regards, FBI

Apparently the FBI is now re-writing the dictionary to help Hillary.

How is "extremely careless" not synonymous with "grossly negligent"?

I'm ok with this. It sets a precedent that allows one to not be liable for carelessness, and I'm extremely careless

My next DWI I am pleading "extremely negligent "

Comey was vice president of lockheed martin and worked for HSBC. Total shill of the shadow government

He did set one hell of a legal precedent.

>Your honor, I was extremely negligent went I placed that explosive device, but I certainly never had any intent to blow up anything.
>Case dismissed!

>that allows """one"""
that allows SHILLARY

This will just lead to more FBI power under Hillary, they cut a deal after seeing Trumps low poll numbers.

You got it wrong.

No intent = no negligence.

>Defendant user, you were negligent, but since I cannot prove any intent, you were not negligent

I was going to say (((t. FBI)))

but you have a good point

It was a CRIMINAL investigation.

Negligence is not a federal crime.

It's really that simple.

careless like leaving the back door open that let literal hackers to steal classified information. No you're fucking done FBI.

>god damn officer I'm sorry im being negligent over this bag of weed in my car can you let me go?

Will it work Sup Forums?

Negligence in dealing with classified information such as potentially using it for foreign favors is not a federal crime?

I believe it's called "treason"

>Negligence is not a federal crime.

Lol, it literally is.

See pic in That's a federal criminal law.

Are you retarded?
Open a dictionary

Hey, I'm just following the FBI's reasoning here.

According to them, negligence requires intent.

I work for the DoD and if someone were to fuck around with classified shit they would be in a world of hurt. I've seen one military dude get caught emailing classified shit on accident and he got his computer access revoked, lost a rank, and probably got a fuck ton of paperwork.

So chimp out when? Are you going to stay docile again?

oy vey that's a lie

some shut up this nazi

I'm waiting to her when that sailor that took a picture in the submarine is going to get out now. I'm waiting FBI

Clinton's probably threatened his family or career. He doesn't seem the type to jump at bribes.

It pisses me off so fucking much they put this in the article, essentially saying that she is above the law.

>you win Clintons, I'll hold a press conference and say there will be no charges
>dear press, the Clintons threatened me, here's the tape I secretly recorded
>cops throw cuffs on Clintons
>frame freezes
>yellow credits roll across screen

...

>they put this in the article

Comey literally said this during the announcement.

well, he's right

Exactly. But it doesn't matter. The bosses in power decided that the law does not apply to Hillary. And there's nothing we can do about it.

Or rather, there is nothing we will do about it.

It's pretty amazing.

Pretty much every dictionary has "carelessness" as the first synonym for "negligence".

Maybe Comey was trying to tell us in code that she's guilty af?

Anyone think that Comey really wanted to indict Hillary but the powers that be came down on him hard and said "No"? His reasoning behind why they're not indicting was so unironically Orwellian that it kind of spotlights just how above the law that Hillary thinks she is.

Just my rambling thought.

Seems like there should be plenty to do about this.

How about simply pointing out that gross negligence is a fucking felony?

Because it is, so that does not make sense.

It is, unless you're a banana republic

>implying she didnt know what she was doing.
This is why you dont elecet lawyers.

Can we just DDoS the FBI website into oblivion?

And the Clinton foundation site

I'm sure you know more about the extremely vast legal code of the U.S. Federal government than the career law attorneys at the FBI. Good catch, user.

>rewinds
>freeze frame
>close up of Shillary
>"So you're probably wondering how I got here, well It's a long story"
>The Who's "Baba O'Reily" starts playing as we rewind back to her childhood growing up as a redneck in Arkansas

This is dangerous territory. Someone will use this as a defense and win.

I obviously do.

That federal criminal law could not be clearer.

Neither could the evidence that she did mistreat highly confidential secret materials.

You're missing the point. The FBI said they won't recommend indictment. That's that. There is no agency higher than the FBI to go to. It's over.

It doesn't matter that you're right and you're giving the law an intelligent reading. Nobody in power cares. Only the powerless care, and even not very many of them.

The law just doesn't apply to Hillary Clinton, or the Clintons in generally, really. It's a jagged pill to swallow, but swallow it we all will.

How slow are you, user?

>appeal to authority

What's the point anymore?

...

So if Edward snowden just sold his info instead of leaking it he would have been fine?

>There is no agency higher than the FBI to go to.
Well the DOJ is the one making the final pronouncement here.

>Appeal to authority

You commies are on a tear today.

>appeal to authority
Not an argument

/thread desu

I know.... I hit enter and then realized I'm retarded.

>Can't handle something as simple as email without committing "extreme negligence"
>This somehow makes her qualified to be president

EXPLAIN YOURSELVES, HILLARYFAGS!

#They'rewithher

>I didn't mean to do it
>also I didn't mean to delete all the evidence

never been more disgusted with our government

This is why they have been shilling Comey as "our good goy who will do the right thing" for months. They knew he would puss out.

>thinking thats fallacious

god damn this place is hilarious

...

The FBI literally said she was "extremely careless".

This is fucking synonymous with "grossly negligent".

According to the FBI's findings, she should definitely be indicted.

>Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton in secret and only admitting to it when a reporter blows the story.
>I-I'm t-totally impartial guys. I promise I'll do whatever the FBI says I should do. :^)
>See? The FBI said it wasn't a problem. No indictment.

It's a forgone conclusion at this point. The FBI was never meant to be a check and balance, but we were relying upon unelected federal cops to bring some sanity in our fucked up system. They didn't even have the shame to appoint an 'impartial' special prosecutor because of the obvious conflict of interest in the DOJ.

It is fallacious. It implies that the FBI are being honest brokers, rather than giving a dishonest reading of the law to manufacture a desired result. Where is your evidence that they are being honest? Provide it.

Until then "but they're the FBI!" is a fallacious argument.

You're right I'm glad. Now all a whistleblower has to do is put all their info somewhere insecure on accident and surely their negligence can't be prosecuted right...

your key word here is willful though

What?

How did she accidentally set up a secret server and receive and transmit classified information?

She transferred the data that she has possession of to herself.

You might not be a lawyer, so you may not understand.
The statement that negligence requires intent is something like "the sky is pink" would be to a layperson. Negligence is there to catch cases where the actor didn't intend for something to happen but it happened anyway due to them not caring to take proper care. It fills in for the intent element.

Even if a big fancy government man is saying it, it's a patently ridiculous statement.

by the way, Rudy Giuliani agrees with OP that intent is not required. He was district attorney for southern part of NY, the same position James Comey used to have so I think he knows something about the law

>Until then

is that how it works now

>I didn't mean to be grossly negligent

Under Section 793(f), the keyword isn't willful, it's "gross negligence."

You weak faggots will do nothing to challenge this.

This is the fourth time I have seen this exact wording today. Definitely people correcting the record around here. Reminder: the director of the FBI said very clearly that she broke multiple laws.

What?

The FBI finds that Hillary was "extremely careless" with classified info.
According to US federal law, that's a felony.

because ACCORDING TO THE FBI she was literally to inept to know better, and was not willfully trying to cause damage.

Dumb as fuck, I know.

Who the fuck really thought the fbi isnt a political enity?

Why are you focusing on the intent statute? Why are you not focusing on the statute OP cited, which requires only gross negligence, not willful anything? That too is a law.

>>I didn't mean to be grossly negligent
kek

This whole line of reasoning is so twisted and stupid that it's hilarious no matter how you phrase it.

that was literally her defense, and it worked, because the system is fucking rigged.

Hillary wasn't being negligent. Her subordinates were. Therefore her punishment should've been an administrative one. That's the argument I've heard. Anyone care to call it out?

>she was literally to inept to know better
That's gross negligence.
A felony when dealing with classified info.

It will never happen, but a gotcha indictment from the DOJ would be amazing

because we were breaking down the definition of gross negligence.

...

I think people are either shills or completely retarded if they don't see the point about negligence. Intent matters in some actions that could be crimes. We have these laws to try and make people give a shit about national security. If your only laws concerning top secret information were 'don't sell it to the Russians' then you've set the bar extremely low.

The information is never meant to fucking get out, and whether you meant to leak it or not doesn't change the reality that you've made the United States significantly more vulnerable to our enemies. Hillary should rot in prison.

Notice how correct the record people post tinfoil hat memes or retards. This is a petty ad homenim (personal attack) method used to try to discredit the obvious. Very dishonest, sad really.

>Hillary wasn't being negligent. Her subordinates were.
Bullshit.

She was the one who gave the orders and made the decisions. She is literally on record telling her subordinates to use unsecured servers.

The server was set up at her insistence. She failed to pursue any sort of security safeguards, and told nobody in the chain of command at the State Dept. what she was doing. What's more, she received e-mails with classified data on that unsecured server, in her custody, and told nobody. She made no effort to alert security experts about the mishandling of classified data and kept it on the unsecured server. How is that not on her?

I'm aware, but it seems they would rather dabble in philosophy and say, "can you commit a crime, if you don't know it's illegal"

It's blood boiling, I'm aware. But you can't fairly fight these people.

Except she sent classified emails too, and ordered minions to strip classified markings

#DontTrustHer

And willfulness has nothing to do with that.

Comey was appointed by Obama....this fact alone means he can't be trusted.

my brother used to be in the military doing some shitty intel job, and one day he got slammed so hard he got kicked out over a top secret document going amiss and him not knowing about it

negligence is not an excuse, she's straight up committing treason at this point.

>But you can't fairly fight these people.

A fucking child could personally demolish their argument in a court of law.

Comey just said this stupid shit today, let's see how it pans out.

Why do you hate America bro?

>There is no agency higher than the FBI to go to.
trump becomes president
>appoints AG
>indicts Hillary

Thank you for Correcting the Record. 30 pieces of silver have been deposited into your account.

It was her her intent to be cut off of the .gov .mil networks to use the unsecured .com system.

If she removes it from its rightful place to a wrongful place. She generated the classified documents on the email server. Hence the statute doesn't apply. Further the statute deals specifically with defense intelligence, not general state department affairs or general classified information.

They weren't even looking to build a case under the espionage act.

>willful, or reckless

it's literally in the definition, user.

reckless MIGHT imply you knew the consequences, and she said she didn't.

This is what lawyers do, play with words to get their client off.

was classified information in her email? yes.
is that illegal? yes.
why is a jury not deciding? politicians.

i've said it before and i'll say it again: the three branches are losing legitimacy.