Written by guomashi   

I am not a lawyer, but I am greatly nonplussed by a couple of comments in the recent FBI statements concerning the Clinton Email issue and Federal Code section 793, subsection (f)
1)If:
"It's a felony to mishandle classified information 'intentionally or in a grossly negligent way,'"
and
"the FBI found that 110 individual emails in 52 email chains contained information that was considered classified at the time those emails were sent or received."
and
"the bureau's investigators did find ... 'they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.'"
then
how does that mean the standard of
"...OR in a grossly negligent way"
was not met?

Note that the FBI's squirming around the issue of "intent" is not supported by their reference to the law itself which says
"...intent... or.... negligent".
On the face of it, this appears to be a fix, unless someone can provide a convincing explanation and justification about how "or" comes to mean "and".
Can you?

2) The question arises as to what Clinton said in her testimony to the FBI. If she claimed, as she has publicly many, many times, that she never sent or received classified material, then she lied to the FBI in her testimony. If she did not make that claim, but rather admitted to them that she did send and receive classifed emails, then the lack of discussion of this element is appropriate. Given the silence on the part of the FBI, the only presumption that America can make is that she told the FBI the truth and routinely lies to the rest of the country. Can you disculpate her?

3) the Nishimura case involves very similar violations of federal law and resulted in trial, conviction and a sentence of 2 years probation, a $7,500 fine and loss of all security clearances and forfeiture of all personal media involved.

It appears to be obvious on the face of it that there is a fix in for Clinton.

Can you please explain how this analysis is not correct?