I dont follow.....
Fair enough, my memory was a bit off. "Willfully" (which describes someone's intent) was the standard you didn't know about or were you intentionally ignoring it to prove a point or something?
2. There is more than one legal standard that applies, "Willful" is a legal standard that gets attached to the level of negligence and that particular legal standard goes a very long way to determining the punishment.
From the DOJ - "An act is done 'willfully' if done voluntarily and intentionally and with the specific intent to do something the law forbids."
910. Knowingly and Willfully
This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.www.justice.gov
Reads like intent to me.
Tell me more about those spending 10 years in jail (if any time in jail) for unintentionally mishandling classified information (hint: there aren't any).
Intent is literally the reason the FBI gave for not recommending charges for Hillary Clinton. Here is the FBI saying exactly that.
Just to put a bow on this, here is what US code says.
"Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both." (emphisis mine)
For a criminal case!? I find that hard to believe when the DOJ and US Code use them in tandem when discussing the mishandling of classified docs. When I look up "willful", intentional is in every definition and when I look up "intentional" willful is in every definition's synonyms.
I said Biden could have been charged for being in possession of documents as well, because there is no requirement for him to have intentionally done so. Gross negligence is sufficient. Whether DOJ or whomever decides to charge may (rightly or wrongly) depend on whether the DOJ think he did so on purpose....but thats not the standard prescribed by the statute as far as I can tell.
Stephen Brogan wrote a nice article on the subject for the Notre Dame Law Review back in the day.
Ah, now I see why I am confused. You are introducing a primarily civil law definition into a criminal case (potential case back in Jan.)
Your own bolded statement says willful's meaning changes based on the crime.
Literally a troll account. Some alt right account did a whole investigation on her. Easiest answer is she's used to inflame GOP'ers (as we can see above) to push the idea that "all libz thunk liek dis". She's doesn't do the performative "look at me! look at me!" that the Brooklyn dad types do. The bot account compared that Babbit bozo to Bin Laden, of course the comments are filled with the divorced dad patriots screaming at her.
I knew that pic was fake. Too pretty to be a lefty…j/k
I dont think anyone actually wanted POTUS to have the authority. Biden admit he didn't have it, Pelosi said he didn't have it. His DOE lawyers said the same. Then...all the sudden he decided it was actually OK. I warned all my friends with federal student loans (not many; most of us refinanced through our State Bank) to just go on living like this isn't happening. A few were considering making big purchases on the assumption 10-20k was getting forgiven.
this basically goes for any policy.
I know.
No, you are muddying. Since we don't know what type of classified documents Biden had. The statute you cited may not even apply. That's why I stay pointing at usc 1924.
I didn't introduce leftist to this particular conversation. I'm just pointing out that using the state legislature decision as proof that leftists fear about the current court, is unfounded is...well, not really rooted in reality.
Lol.
