The Hill: Gross Negligence Is Not A Defense (emails)

[amborin]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/275870-former-ag-on-clinton-emails-gross-negligence-is-not-a

......Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton has no excuse for using a private email server while serving as secretary of State.

“Hillary Clinton put classified information on a server that was not secure,” Michael Mukasey said on Fox Business Network. "She caused it to be put there.

“Going further, if it’s information that relates to national defense, whether she acted with gross negligence is not a defense. In fact, that’s the standard under the law. That’s a felony.”

President Obama on Sunday said Clinton had not jeopardized national security with her technology habits at State.

“There’s a carelessness in terms of managing emails that she has owned and that she has recognized, but I also think it’s important to keep this in perspective,” he said on "Fox News Sunday." "This is somebody that has served her country for four years as secretary of State and has done an outstanding job.”

Mukasey on Monday said Obama’s analysis of Clinton’s email decisions had not strengthened her case.

“He didn’t really do her any favors by saying she was negligent,” he said on "Cavuto Coast to Coast." "I think he was trying to appeal to what he thought is people’s misunderstanding of the law.

“I’d like for somebody to ask his press secretary whether he’s getting regular briefings on the investigation,” added Mukasey.

Obama....believes his former secretary of state did not intentionally endanger national security in her handling of classified information. But he also says he's not trying to influence his administration's investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server.

snip

"She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy," he said of Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination.....

snip

Each time he weighs in, it raises legal experts' eyebrows and roils political adversaries. Republicans this week have suggested Obama is signaling prosecutors to go easy, and using a different standard for Clinton that has been applied to other administration officials investigated for mishandling information

snip

"It does raise concerns for prosecutors," said Peter Henning, a law professor at Wayne State University and a former federal prosecutor. "If it's a close case, how am I to judge whether to pursue charges when the president has said he doesn't think there's anything there? I don't think it will prejudice any decision but it certainly gives the appearance of that."

snip

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_CLINTON_EMAILS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-04-12-17-52-06

one problem here is that HRC did not need to intentionally mishandle the emails.....being unintentionally careless
entails culpability

[cherokeeprogressive]

1. Neither is it a qualification for the most important job in the world. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. No! No! No! It wasn't "negligence"! It was a "Hard Choices" to not play by the rules.

And, gaining more "experience" at CYA.

[Myrina]

3. That's what they tell us at work ...

.... clicking on the link & introducing ransomeware into the company, whether you meant to or not, is still causing a fucktastrophe. We were advised of company Information Security policies and told in detail what NOT to do when we started here.

If IT policies apply to normal working schmucks, they should apply to national security servers, too.

[NWCorona]

4. A very good point!

[reformist2]

5. Like it or not, Hillary fans, Obama kinda threw Hillary under the bus.

[NWCorona]

6. This is why I think that Obama interview was very telling

He's not gonna save Hillary.

[Stallion]

7. Oh Gawd! Another Layman on FOX NEWS Who can't Distinguish Between Negligence and Gross Negligence

also the Government has the burden not Clinton

[FreakinDJ]

8. Wow

[COLGATE4]

9. It's not a question of it being a Defense.

To the contrary, the legal standard for a conviction is proving that she committed gross negligence. And, although that term is frequently bandied about by laypersons when discussing this case it in actuality has a very specific and carefully defined meaning. Negligence and Gross Negligence are two very different animals, Gross Negligence is often defined as 'wanton and wilfull misconduct or depraved indifference'. Not at all an easy thing to prove since it's so difficult to show. In other words, the Government would need to prove that Hillary not only did what is generally agreed with the e-mails but prove that she did so in wanton and wilfull violation or with depraved indifference". I for one don't see it happening, not the least because I don't see a Federal Prosecutor trying to prove that in court.

[Lone_Wolf]

10. At the very least, it shows she's incompetent

the FBI will find out if it's more than incompetence.

[DebDoo]

11. ^^