U.S. Navy Sailor Who Took Classified Photos Of Submarine Wants The 'Clinton Treatment'

Marlisa Schultz at the New York Post offers a piece on the American sailor who is on trial for taking classified photos of his submarine and is asking for the 'Clinton Treatment' in his sentencing.

WASHINGTON – A 29-year-old sailor in the U.S Navy who admitted to snapping six classified pictures of his nuclear submarine is imploring a federal court judge to treat him as leniently as Hillary Clinton.

Kristian Saucier wants to be let off with probation at his sentencing Friday, arguing that the Democratic presidential nominee is not behind bars for mishandling even more classified material.

“It will be unjust and unfair for Mr. Saucier to receive any sentence other than probation for a crime those more powerful than him will likely avoid,” his lawyer, Derrick Hogan, wrote in a recent federal court filing in Bridgeport, Conn.

Saucier took six photos in 2009 inside the nuclear attack submarine, U.S.S. Alexandria (seen in the above U.S. Navy photo), that was in port in Groton, Conn. The photos were of classified and restricted areas that included the nuclear reactor.

There’s no evidence Saucier ever passed the photos to anyone and the sailor said it was “silly” mistake by a then 22-year-old.

You can read the rest of the piece via the below link:

http://nypost.com/2016/08/15/sailor-who-took-classified-photos-wants-the-clinton-treatment/

Gross Negligence: FBI Rewrites Federal Law To Let Hillary Clinton Off The Hook

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy disagrees with the FBI's call not to recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton in a piece in National Review.

There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services. 

Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States. In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

You can read the rest of the piece via the below link:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/437479/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook