Ponderable

What if I wrote this:

"For me as a white man, it's really nice to just go out with other white men sometimes," ... "I have to do so much less translation. When you're white around black people, you have to explain every little thing, even with people who are perfectly nice and well-meaning."
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Why would he be either? I'm glad he did not lie here:

Click to expand...


He testified in a House subcommittee there was no chargeable criminal activity. You stated
"Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges"

Did he lie or was he being unreasonable? I can't think of another option except you are disavowing your own post.
 
Andy Dukes said:
He testified in a House subcommittee there was no chargeable criminal activity. You stated
"Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges"

Did he lie or was he being unreasonable? I can't think of another option except you are disavowing your own post.
Click to expand...
Why would I disavow Comey's own words. There is only one liar in the video. What Comey said is, "To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Why would I disavow Comey's own words. There is only one liar in the video. What Comey said is, "To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."
Click to expand...


But I was discussing your words not his. You made a statement about criminality. Comey stated “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”. That seems to be in direct opposition to your post that "Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges"

How can both be true?

2/3
 
Andy Dukes said:
But I was discussing your words not his. You made a statement about criminality. Comey stated “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”. That seems to be in direct opposition to your post that "Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges"

How can both be true?

2/3
Click to expand...
My words, "Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges" are based on Comey's words: "To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."
 
Last edited:
Andy Dukes said:
But I was discussing your words not his. You made a statement about criminality. Comey stated “our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”. That seems to be in direct opposition to your post that "Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges"

How can both be true?

2/3
Click to expand...

If the Department of Justice charges Clinton for committing a felony, they would be charging her for violating 18 U.S.C. 793(f), which states:

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed . . . Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(emphasis added)

In criminal law, unless strict liability applies, a statute can require four distinct mental states (“mens rea”) to commit a crime: (i) purpose, (ii) knowledge, (iii) recklessness, and (iv) criminal/gross negligence.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
My words, "Reasonable folks know that Comey laid out a case for Criminal charges" are based on Comey's words: "To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now."
Click to expand...
Administrative sanctions are not the same as criminal activity. You stated "Comey laid a case for criminal charges",
 
Bruddah IZ said:
If the Department of Justice charges Clinton for committing a felony, they would be charging her for violating 18 U.S.C. 793(f), which states:

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed . . . Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(emphasis added)

In criminal law, unless strict liability applies, a statute can require four distinct mental states (“mens rea”) to commit a crime: (i) purpose, (ii) knowledge, (iii) recklessness, and (iv) criminal/gross negligence.
Click to expand...
This looks like you are seeing your error and are disavowing your previous post.

2/3
 
I would like to welcome Mr. Dukes to the forum.
I have always been a huge fan of the Dukes. I knew about Bo and Luke, and its a huge honor to have their little brother rabble rous'n the forums in true reb fashion.
Did Bo and Luke ever let you drive the General Lee?

 
Bernie Sanders said:
I would like to welcome Mr. Dukes to the forum.
I have always been a huge fan of the Dukes. I knew about Bo and Luke, and its a huge honor to have their little brother rabble rous'n the forums in true reb fashion.
Did Bo and Luke ever let you drive the General Lee?

Click to expand...
I am older than them and they were named Duke not Dukes. Thanks for the welcome but I have over a decade here under my alias. Just time to leave pretense behind.

AD who once was known as 2/3.
 
Andy Dukes said:
I am older than them and they were named Duke not Dukes. Thanks for the welcome but I have over a decade here under my alias. Just time to leave pretense behind.

AD who once was known as 2/3.
Click to expand...
Older brother it is. My apologies, Mr. Dukes.
The General Lee. Did you ever get to drive it?

You almost had me until I remembered its the "Dukes of Hazzard", not the "Duke of Hazzard"
Welcome aboard big Bro!
 
If the Department of Justice charges Clinton for committing a felony, they would be charging her for violating 18 U.S.C. 793(f), which states:

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed . . . Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(emphasis added)

In criminal law, unless strict liability applies, a statute can require four distinct mental states (“mens rea”) to commit a crime: (i) purpose, (ii) knowledge, (iii) recklessness, and (iv) criminal/gross negligence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top