Reader Brock Smith sums things up pretty well…

Reader Brock Smith sums things up pretty well… July 6, 2016

He writes:

Several people have reached out asking for my thoughts on Hillary and her personal server.

Here they are:

1. Director Comey is a Republican. He has given money to Republican presidential candidates in the last two elections. I do not think this has anything to do with partisan impropriety.

2. Director Comey, in stating that other people could be punished for doing the same thing Hillary did, was not saying Hillary was guilty of a crime. He was stating that she was careless with national security and should be punished administratively (I.e. Fired or clearance revoked). The problem with doing so is that she no longer works there.

She’s applied to the American people for a promotion, and the American public is very likely going to affirm it cares little for her recklessness or her boldface lying after it considers the alternative (a reckless boldface liar).

If we believe (and I do) that compromising national security–even negligently–is something no president should have on their resume before being elected, we will refuse to vote for her.

3. If you read any article about the laws Hillary allegedly broke and the article doesn’t mention Gorin v. United States, ignore the article. The FBI didn’t rewrite the law for Hillary. The court did in 1941.

In Gorin, the Supreme Court examined the Espionage Act and determined that it required “Scienter”. Essentially, a person has to have bad intent with their actions. In this instance, the hurdle is probably demonstrating that Hillary intended for other countries to steal from her servers.

Few attorneys that I’ve spoken with have felt anything exists to tackle this hurdle. I thought there was a Hail Mary chance the FBI would view setting up a private server (in a bathroom) to circumvent department surveillance and public accountability as a fulfillment of the scienter requirement. It seems to me that act had general bad intent, just not specific with regard to national security. I will restate, I think bringing a case based on those facts would have been crafty, but unlikely to succeed.

4. Most of the American people feel they don’t have a choice in this election. We can chose a narcissistic liar that believes the law only applies to little people or a narcissistic liar that believes the law only applies to little people.

It’s clear that for those who believe character matters in high office, neither Trump or Hillary will suffice.

I’ll be casting my “protest ballot” in November.

5. Don’t buy into doomsday political talk.

This is not the end of America or the United States. Neither liberty nor justice have died.

The American people will persevere and prevail as we have done for 240 years.

That’s about the  size of it.

"Late to the game, but while I agree with him that the end doesn’t justify ..."

Building Bridges of Trust vs. Winning
"I also think netflix is more evil than good, the things they have and support ..."

A reader struggles with scruples about ..."
"I am pretty sure remote cooperation is evil unless with proportionate reasons..."

A reader struggles with scruples about ..."
"Just one nit - the Dickey Amendment (the bit of law that supposedly "forbids" the ..."

Heresy of the Day: Antinomianism

Browse Our Archives