How are Hillary Clinton AND Huma Abedin not going to prison...Warrant Release revelation...

How are they not going to prison?

A Presidential pardon would be my guess.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Isn't there something in the law books everywhere that says something to the extent of ignorance not being an excuse? Seems like I have heard that before....just not sure.

It is called ignorantia juris non excusat, meaning ignorance of law excuses no one.

In United States criminal law as long as the law is not 'overbroad' ignorance of that specific law is not an excusable reason for non-prosecution or dismissal. There are however examples of mitigation of punishment for ignorantia juris non excusat. It is not completely black and white.

This is a fairly good summation of ignorantia juris non excusat.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Except everyone has extensive training on how to handle classified information, and signed papers to that effect

a reply to: dashen

Which is where the 'overbroad' factor comes into play.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Naah, that distortion is thick. The Russian interference is the comforter that will keep a tight tuck.
Hillary possibly being connected to a pedophiles laptop containing top secret info is small potatoes in that mental arena.

It's not over with no matter what Trump said. The FOIA lawsuits are civil cases. All being tried individually. This is costing her a lot of money and has been going on for years. If the State Dept loses any of those they can seek retribution on all involved since there will be fines and also having to pay the costs of Judicial Watch and whoever else wins.

Likely no criminal charges but financially it would bury her fairly deep. Probably already is with the foundation money drying up.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Isn't there something in the law books everywhere that says something to the extent of ignorance not being an excuse? Seems like I have heard that before....just not sure.

It is called ignorantia juris non excusat, meaning ignorance of law excuses no one.

In United States criminal law as long as the law is not 'overbroad' ignorance of that specific law is not an excusable reason for non-prosecution or dismissal. There are however examples of mitigation of punishment for ignorantia juris non excusat. It is not completely black and white.

This is a fairly good summation of ignorantia juris non excusat.

Thank you very much AM! I knew I wasn't just dreaming that up but had to time to actually look for it.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
If I recall the FBI press conference correctly they could not prove there was "intent" to violate the law, so they just chalked it up to being careless.

if you accidentally kill someone or accidentally speed in your car they don't just go oh that was an accident you're free to go..
Might be a lesser charge, like manslaughter instead of pre-meditated murder but there is still a punishment.

It's obvious something else is going on here.

originally posted by: LifeMode
It's not over with no matter what Trump said. The FOIA lawsuits are civil cases. All being tried individually. This is costing her a lot of money and has been going on for years. If the State Dept loses any of those they can seek retribution on all involved since there will be fines and also having to pay the costs of Judicial Watch and whoever else wins.

Likely no criminal charges but financially it would bury her fairly deep. Probably already is with the foundation money drying up.

So this old quote may yet apply:

"We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt."

a reply to: Vasa Croe

No worries.

While I am not a legal professional I have played one on TV and have discussed this legal paradigm with some actual attorneys. Both the parties in question should not be able to plead ignorance of the law as they were both briefed, and acknowledged that were briefed, on the proper handling and maintaining of classified information. The law itself is not overbroad as can be attested by the large amount of government employees who do not mishandle classified material due to the direct nature of the laws revolving around this process.

In other words, lock her up.

originally posted by: Reverbs

originally posted by: jjkenobi
If I recall the FBI press conference correctly they could not prove there was "intent" to violate the law, so they just chalked it up to being careless.

if you accidentally kill someone or accidentally speed in your car they don't just go oh that was an accident you're free to go..
Might be a lesser charge, like manslaughter instead of pre-meditated murder but there is still a punishment.

It's obvious something else is going on here.

This is exactly my point....has to be some DEEP ties to some really high government officials for this to be as quiet as it is. This should be on every MSM headline in the US right now. With the fact this is stated in the FBI's own Warrant for the computer and STILL not have any coverage in MSM is astounding.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: LifeMode
It's not over with no matter what Trump said. The FOIA lawsuits are civil cases. All being tried individually. This is costing her a lot of money and has been going on for years. If the State Dept loses any of those they can seek retribution on all involved since there will be fines and also having to pay the costs of Judicial Watch and whoever else wins.

Likely no criminal charges but financially it would bury her fairly deep. Probably already is with the foundation money drying up.

So this old quote may yet apply:

"We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt."

I think Trump is well aware of these civil cases and the damage it will cause her and Bill. Best part for him is he does not have to do anything. Just sit back and watch it unfold and not attempt to get involved like Obama did when he was judge shopping to get it all thrown in one bag and into the trash.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because our current AG decided not to prosecute. If Obama doesnt grant Clinton a pardon I think she will go to jail when the new administration takes over.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because our current AG decided not to prosecute. If Obama doesnt grant Clinton a pardon I think she will go to jail when the new administration takes over.

I think that would be the nail in the Democratic party's coffin. If she did go to prison, the people that have supported/lied for her through this would never be able to claim they were not in the know on it.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because our current AG decided not to prosecute. If Obama doesnt grant Clinton a pardon I think she will go to jail when the new administration takes over.

I hope so, because everyone with a clearance knows you don't setup a personal server to conduct official gov business. That's just common knowledge. Especially for someone that's been working in the gov for 30+ years. She knew she was breaking the law.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because our current AG decided not to prosecute. If Obama doesnt grant Clinton a pardon I think she will go to jail when the new administration takes over.

I think that would be the nail in the Democratic party's coffin. If she did go to prison, the people that have supported/lied for her through this would never be able to claim they were not in the know on it.

I dont care if she goes to prison.. In fact, Id rather her not.. but, strip her of everything she has.. including her "reputation", money, ability to make money with her reputation/influence, "charities", EVER being in ANY public office again, etc... and her being the sole reason the Dems are fractured. Then wish her a long long life.

Don't worry Trump said he would make sure she is sent to prison, remember the debate?

Plus, he is going to drain the swamp and bring down those that are covered in the mire.

Oh, hang on, no, no he's not.

Yeah, she'll be okay.

Sadly, she won't go to jail over this. They really are above the law. Affluenza.
They are too damn rich and powerful to be treated like a commoner.
I would love to be wrong on this, but I just don't think so. There are too many cases where those with the $ get away with whatever they wish. I bet this pisses Martha Stewart off just a bit.

originally posted by: amicktd

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Because our current AG decided not to prosecute. If Obama doesnt grant Clinton a pardon I think she will go to jail when the new administration takes over.

I hope so, because everyone with a clearance knows you don't setup a personal server to conduct official gov business. That's just common knowledge. Especially for someone that's been working in the gov for 30+ years. She knew she was breaking the law.

it wasn't the LAW!!......are you incapable of reading ANYTHING other than right-wing blogs?

a reply to: network dude

Sadly, she won't go to jail over this. They really are above the law. Affluenza. They are too damn rich and powerful to be treated like a commoner.

80% of cases in recent history of mishandling classified info are not prosecuted, unless there are circumstances that prove they went above and beyond to circumvent procedures, remove info, etc. The consequences are dealt-out within the specific departments they work for.