Why is the legal standard for Hillary different than the one for you and me?

Hillary Clinton will never “face the dock,” as lawyers are prone to say.  But Harold T. Martin III will.

On Thursday, when federal prosecutors announced charges against Martin under the Espionage Act for mishandling classified documents, people wondered, “but what about Hillary Clinton?”

Fair question.

In principle, both did the same thing. Martin, as a National Security Agency contractor, stored classified documents in his home, which was unauthorized. Clinton, as Secretary of State, stored classified documents on her personal server in her home.  Again, unauthorized. On its face, it seems pretty much the same.

Legally, the big difference is this: Martin admitted he knew the documents were classified and admitted that what he did was wrong and illegal.  Game over.

He should have “lawyered up” before opening his mouth.  Or consulted Clinton.

Clinton admitted nothing. She insisted she did what she did for convenience, that she did not know she was breaking the law, and did not recognize that the documents as classified.

Many believe she was lying, but it is always difficult to disprove intent. Martin admitted his intent. Bad move.

Full article: Gregg Jarrett: Why is the legal standard for Hillary different than the one for you and me? | Fox News

Save

Advertisements

2 responses to “Why is the legal standard for Hillary different than the one for you and me?