Emailgate & Inequality Before The Law

by JASmius



A violation of the law is a violation of the law; that's part of the concept of equality before the law.  But mens rea - the motivations of the accused that created the mindset under which s/he decided to commit the crime in question - is supposed to be figured into the justice equation in determining the severity of the punishment for the "crime".

It will be of no surprise to anybody that between Hillary Rodham Clinton and U.S. Marine Major Jason Brezler, that principle is being stood on its head:

A U.S. Marine who sent a classified document from his personal email account is facing discharge from the corps, even though the email was intended as an urgent warning that lives were at stake in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, the Daily Beast reported.

In the investigation, two [Obamunist hack] generals have ruled against Marine Reserves Major Jason Brezler, who has been deployed four times between Afghanistan and Iraq, even though mistakes were found in the testimony and the 451-page Board of Inquiry transcript had 1,548 sections marked "[inaudible]."

Brezler had received notice from a colleague about Sarwar Jan, a narcotics and arms trafficker and conspirator with the Taliban who had resurfaced. He is also a protégé of an accused drug lord with connections to then-Afghan president, Hamid Karzi, but had been pushed from his post as a district police chief by Brezler and Marine Major Andrew Terrell.

But in 2012, Brezler received an email from Terrell to his Yahoo account saying, "IMPORTANT: SARWAR JAN IS BACK!!!" He was requesting a paper that had been written on Jan which may have proved useful.

Brezler immediately sent the paper giving no thought to its classification, according to the Daily Beast.

"I just reacted the same way that I would in a gunfight; the same way I would at a fire," he said in court papers. "I just immediately reacted." [emphases added]

Did Major Brezler send classified information "in the clear"?  Yes.  Is he denying he did so?  No.  Why did he do so?  To try and warn his comrades of an imminent attack in order to try and save their lives.  Did he essentially break the equivalent law Hillary Clinton did (one count versus tens of thousand of them, but still...)?  Yes.  Did he do so for a mitigatingly noble purpose?  Yes.  Should that get his sentence reduced?  Hell, yes.  Will it?  Probably not.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton broke the equivalent law tens of thousandfolds more as part of the usual La Clinton Nostra criminal conspiracy out of her ongoing imperious belief that the law doesn't apply to royalty like herself and in an effort to keep secrets from what she and Democrats see as the REAL enemy: Not the Russians, not the ChiComms, not the Iranians, not the North Koreans, not the Cubans, not the Islamic State, not al Qaeda, etc.; the Republicans.  And she will never even see the inside of a courtroom for it.

The moral of the story?  Hillary Clinton is a member of the "right" tribe, and Major Brezler is a member of the "wrong" tribe.  And it really does pay to be of the former over the latter.