|
Absolutely, and if she didn't then she wouldn't have lied so generously through her entire account of what actually happened.
I'm watching Comey take questions on Capitol Hill right now, and he said he came to his decision based on finding no "criminal negligence or intent." Apparently, he acknowledges that what she did was illegal yet she didn't intend to do it. Ignorance of the law has never given anyone amnesty.
It seems as if he thinks it works this way:
Negligent: You are going 60mph in a 40mph speed zone, but your claim is that you were in a rush to work.
Not negligent: You are going 60mph in a 40mph speed zone, but your claim is that you didn't know it was wrong.
|
As he said, though, you can't compare petty crimes to this situation. There's no doubt Hillary Clinton lied, and that's something everyone should consider when they vote, but her lying at that point in time really plays no part into the investigation on her. I guess I view it as whether or not the penalties for her carelessness rises to criminal charges, or whether she (should have) simply faced repercussions within her job. If you mishandle money at your job, you won't be criminally charged, but you may lose your job, get suspended, docked pay, or whatever. I very much dislike Hillary Clinton, but I don't believe based on what I know that she should be indicted.
|
She mishandled classified information. Her Top Secret security clearance ought to be revoked thus making her ineligible to run as President of the United States.
Do that in my line of work and you'd be looking at being charged + disciplinary action.
|
I agree that a repercussion lile that should be considered. I also think that any government official should be held to a much higher standard since they have much more power and affect the lives of many. So her carelessness shouldn't be tolerated, nor should the carelessness of any politician.