Hillary's Emails v. Trump's Boxes ft. Opening Arguments
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 11. 2022
- ⚖️ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam ⚖️
Did someone get special treatment? 🚀 Go to legaleagle.link/curiositylegal to access Trump's Pardon Won't Save Steve Bannon's and Too Hot for CZcams the exclusive companion videos and get CuriosityStream & Nebula for 26% OFF!
Thanks to @OpeningArguments for the rundown!
Welcome back to LegalEagle. The most avian legal analysis on the internets.
🚀 Watch my next video early & ad-free on Nebula! legaleagle.link/watchnebula
👔 Suits by Indochino! legaleagle.link/indochino
GOT A VIDEO IDEA? TELL ME!
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Send me an email: devin@legaleagle.show
MY COURSES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Interested in LAW SCHOOL? Get my guide to law school! legaleagle.link/lawguide
Need help with COPYRIGHT? I built a course just for you! legaleagle.link/copyrightcourse
SOCIAL MEDIA & DISCUSSIONS
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Twitter: legaleagle.link/twitter
Facebook: legaleagle.link/facebook
Tik Tok: legaleagle.link/tiktok
Instagram: legaleagle.link/instagram
Reddit: legaleagle.link/reddit
Podcast: legaleagle.link/podcast
OnlyFans legaleagle.link/onlyfans
Patreon legaleagle.link/patreon
BUSINESS INQUIRIES
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Please email my agent & manager at legaleagle@standard.tv
LEGAL-ISH DISCLAIMER
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Sorry, occupational hazard: This is not legal advice, nor can I give you legal advice. I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER. Sorry! Everything here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Also, some of the links in this post may be affiliate links, meaning, at no cost to you, I will earn a small commission if you click through and make a purchase. But if you click, it really helps me make more of these videos! All non-licensed clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Special thanks:
Stock video and imagery provided by Getty Images and AP Archives
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Short links by pixelme.me (pxle.me/eagle)
Maps provided by MapTiler/Geolayers
👮♂ Lock her/him/them up?
🚀 LIMITED: Get CuriosityStream AND Nebula for 26% OFF! legaleagle.link/curiositylegal
Yes!! An Opening Arguments crossover! 👏👏Been waiting for this for a long time!
W e l l d o n e , b l e a c h , b l e a c h
Can we lock both of them up in the same cell, film them 24/7, and edit it into a reality TV show?
Exile them both to opposite corners of the Earth until everyone forgets they both exist? YES PLEASE!
Where's Trump's text messages
As someone who works in software development and has previously worked under government contracts with a security clearance, the lack of security from these people in the highest positions is both migraine inducing and... not one damn bit surprising.
I'm just going to go into a corner and cry now.
And it seemed to get worse the higher you went up the ladder.
Like, for real. Even students of a university need to use the school domain account in order to get access to the school server, library, teaching materials, certificates, etc. or to make any communication with the school staffs.
We teach kids how to type, but adults never really got taught safety on the internet or with their computer
I feel your pain
@@Nevertoleave I'd suggest it's worse? Plenty of parents preach "safety, vet, verify, and skepticism" to their kids, concerning internet information, then proceed themselves to click on "links" posted on the SM websites, without even a clue on how to read the link routing tagline...(as only one example..)
"Do as I say, not as I do..."?said Parents since the beginning of time? 😂😂
I'd almost forgotten he'd requested another nation do espionage on his political opponent
“For you, the time Trump broke this law was the most important day of your life. For Trump, it was Tuesday.”
That’s right, he was impeached by the House for this. A major crime, yet everyone on one side forgets because they don’t discuss it and sugar coat it when they do
@@erikdayne5429 laws are for poor people.
Didn’t he even try to strong arm Ukraine into doing the espionage by threatening to withdraw aid if they didn’t?
Multiple times. Impeached for doing the same with Ukraine.
It still cracks me up that you had a president that needed to be told
that injecting bleach was a bad idea
Chubbyemu has a video on one guy taking something like that…
I wish I could laugh at the prideful ignorance of some very small, but loudly destructive portion of my fellow country men and women.
@@erisgh0sted961 I know what you mean.. all of this sounds like satire, but then you realize that it is actually happening, and people are getting hurt or worse…
@@erisgh0sted961 give in to dark humor, theres nothing to do but laugh at it.
@@erisgh0sted961The trumpturds aren't a very small minority.
Not to mention that Hillary sat for 12 hours answering questions to the committee and never once took the 5th
@@willtheoct
"TrImp fortress 2: She Won't be Prosocuted for her CrImEs" 😂
Wow, she sat there for 12 hours? And Trump just screeched "I plead the fifth! The fifth!" and "mobsters plead the fifth."
@@DingDingTheCZcamsBuddy
While correct, most people that bring it up are talking about his hypocrisy. Him saying only guilty people plead the fifth...only to then plead the fifth repeatedly.
@@willtheoct It's not a crime you simpleton: This video explains why.
@@willtheoct How was Clinton involved in these wars?
If literally anyone other than Trump did even a fraction of what he's accused of they'd be in jail by now.
Right on the money. I mean we literally have audio, video, and documented PROOF that he's broken several laws. That one phone call to the GA SOS alone was him committing 3 federal felonies and 2 GA state felonies. That one thing should have a mandatory minimum sentence of 8 years.
That's just ONE!!!
They would probably be awaiting a date for termination aswell.
@@SSJ2Phenom also mueller report showing he broke the law multiple times. Also asking foreign governments to assist in an ongoing election.
You can expand this to a LOT of the political operators who helped Trump do what he did. There aren't 2 systems of Justice in America, one rich, one poor. There's like 70 systems of Justice depending on your Financial, Political, and Societal standing, as well as a bunch of other factors.
If you're poor and uncared for enough, American justice is just cops rolling up and shooting you within 12 seconds of arrival. Rich and Politically connected? After about 7 years they may get around to slapping your wrist.
I still don’t get how he’s gotten away with January 6th. He literally spent months saying the election was rigged, organized a rally the same day Congress was certifying the results, and told his supporters to go to the capitol and fight like hell. I’m not sure what I’m missing here, seems to me to be a pretty straight line with the obvious intent to try to overturn an election, which is treason.
My God, every Trump comment about Russia ages 10 times worse every day.
Ages like a fine glass of milk :)
It's aged like fine piss, if you get the reference. :P
If trump was in power Putin wouldn't of invaded. Trump would of been much more heavy handed with the Ukraine situation.
@@loowyatt6463 Are you on drugs? Dump has Putler's dick so far up his ass he stands funny.
@@loowyatt6463 Step out of that bubble dude, get some fresh air and views.
Lock every politician up when they break a law. Stop treating them different than regular citizens.
And start using the death penalty for serious crimes, like treason, sedition, and public corruption.
@@rsr789That is a TERRIBLE idea. Imagine a politician like Trump being able to EXECUTE PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH HIM. Bro.
I'm only ten minutes into the video, and it seems to me like the entire congress and their aids needs to take a course on information security --- regularly.
That's the nice thing about being the people who make the laws. No nuisance training
Congress is a legislative body of the people-- and _people_ are lazy animals.
I can't believe they let such small mistakes slide. This seems like a case of the user not knowing how technology works. Dear god.
Trump and Clinton are both technophobes, both used devices improperly, both had side-hustles that intersected with their gov. positions. The difference is Trump doesn’t see any reason the two should be separate, it’s all his grift. Clinton has at least some measure of integrity.
Yeah, I’ve been proctoring training on information security for over a decade. That shit NEVER sticks.
It's a very weird defense for Trump that if Clinton's email handling was criminal, then his own handling of classified information was not. It's an argument that falls apart for grade-schoolers.
Yep. This is like someone was like:
"You can send me in jail because you think I killed a man, there is that guy who stole a pen and didn't got arrested!"
That argument is totally invalid.
It's not a legal defense, it's a political argument, insofar as the DOJ is still an executive department that assists the president. It's right that it wouldn't matter in court, but it is important in terms of whether the executive branch is being prudent or not.
He wouldn’t pass philosophy 101 with that argument
@@guitart4909 He didn't pass school: his rich daddy paid for him to graduate.
@@VincentWeisTheThird When speaking of crimes, political arguments are irrelevant.
Phrase: "That's above my pay grade"
Meaning: "They don't pay me enough to lie"
Exactly my thought, too.
Alternatively: "they don't pay me enough for me to know the answer."
When your own spokesman is pleading the fifth, you’ve done screwed the pooch
Yeah, i found that one pretty funny, considering how many of trumps employees have quit because he refused to pay them.
@@jamesb3497 Or "I don't know the answer but I'm not stupid enough to lie."
I'm tired of hearing about her emails. Trump had four years to prosecute her regarding her emails and chose not to.
AND THEN ran off with all these documents.
I still don't know how to send preishable dairy products via USPS standard rate, so I'm baffled by the Buttery Mails.
@@DougGlendower no, it's buttery males
@@andrewh.4186literally every President and VP has done that. Did you miss the part where pence Obama and biden did it too?
@@FighteroftheNightman Yeah, I did miss the part where they made their whole campaign about the protection of top-secret documents, THEN took a whole pile of them out of office with them (everyone does this part), THEN refused to cooperate with the government, insisting they had turned over everything on several occasions but in fact didn't even turn over a significant portion, all while holding them in a not remotely secure location.
Yeah, I missed that part.
By the way, did you miss the part where everyone else cooperated with the government in getting them returned? Because I didn't.
Parents, please don't let your kids play in dumpsters!!! There may be classified information in there... or needles!!!
Think of the children!
OMFG thank y'all for reminding me to check the dumpster first for classified documents and last but definitely least; check for open needles before I allow my son to play in there.
Y'all are doing the Lord's work by saving the world via satire.
Or trash pandas!
@@DougGlendower I am now just imagining how dangerous a raccoon might be with nuclear secrets.
I mean, the actual answer is "Not at all", but... What if... 😂
@@GreaterSeraph There used to be a fairly common "what if" discussion when evolutionary biologists and/or mammalogists got together over frosty malt beverages. One of the more memorable topics was "What if primates didn't exist?" There was a particularly good case being made for raccoons. Hands, thumbs, vision. Biggest issue was that they weren't social enough.
This is why govt officials should be required to take the same training as the rest of us. I'm not even that connected to govt but im required to take security training, ethics training (bribes bad) and cyber training that they BOTH violated.
10:15 seriously? How did he not know? They should be taking this training annually like the rest of us!
His staff reminded him constantly. He didn't give a damn. It was too much bother for him. Flushing notes down the toilet was preferable to sending them to the National Archives. Paranoia perhaps? Covering his behind?
Also add some teeth to the laws for them too. If there were some repercussions 99% of these corrupt politicians would think twice when breaking the laws.
Your comment brings up an entirely different topic: Isn't about time we insisted that the people running and holding office actually understand how those offices work, why they exist, and the impact they have on the citizens? I listen to some of the speeches by the far right, did these people EVER take a civics class? Did they sleep through the entire semester? Perhaps we should institute two new Constitutional Amendments: One, a political candidate must pass the same civics examine given to a foreigner applying to become a citizen of the US and PASS with a 90% score. The second is on the day the nominating petition is turned in, every financial account the candidates name is on is automatically forwarded to the Federal Government and becomes information available to the electorate. Prove you are smart enough for the job. Prove where your money is coming from.
any higher up are supposed to. They are required, even tarp.
Imagine playing in a dumpster and you find a bunch of CLASSIFIED air force secrets.
And imagine if half the documents stated that the Air Force was a sham, air travel was a hoax, and airplanes really are strange metal birds, while the other half just said "HUNTER BIDEN" over and over again. Which was especially odd given that this was long enough ago that Hunter Biden was still in high school.
Like Jack O'Neill's home address... ;-)
And then you take them home and put them under the bed because... ?
@@jamiegagnon6390 🤣🤣🤣
@@JLF201 "Cool classified folder dude! Nobody's gonna believe me if I tell them I found this... I have to take them, then everyone will believe me!"
*Then proceeds to show off to brothers, sisters or friends and then proceed to completely forget about them or just realises they don't care.
You know, classic kid stuff.
I think it is funny he thought "she did it too" was a good defense.
Even though in fact her crime was different from his, because he wasn't technically supposed to have access to those documents anymore.
And she was supposed to have access to the documents she potentially was mishandling. Different crimes, different times.
And different levels and degrees of culpability.
Clinton never tried to suggest that anyone planted anything on her mail server either, so there's that.
And she sat before the Senate judiciary committee for twelve hours, not once did she take the 5th. She answered every single question.
The big takeaway is that holding political office should require taking a class on cyber security
That's a good way to make sure our leaders aren't too old lol
They do take it. What they need to do is be forced to pay attention and be treated even more severely than the lowest tier grunt is treated for the same infraction. The greater someone's authority the greater a standard they should be held to. It's the only way to get leaders who aren't crooked.
@@matthewgagnon9426 I feel like they should at least be quizzed afterwards to prove their attention. Everything else yes, the more power someone has the more scrutiny they should be under since a mistake coming from that high up could potentially spell disaster.
why ?
they have people for that.
Maybe a bigger takaway is to vet applicants who wish to run for office better.
I interned in state department over seas, and both my parents worked in the government with sensitive information. The differences between the two cases, is like jaywalking, vs armed robbery, with himself perpetrating the heist. The security and protocol around the stuff that was taken is insanely high, and how the documents were taken gives people who have worked under 3 administrations, panic attacks. Not to say it was complex, but it was clear theft, with intent. If he were anyone else, he and everyone associated with it, would probably end up dissapearing quietly.
Exactly, Jared didn't get that billion dollar investment from the Saudis for a book club.
@@TKUltra971 2 billion, wasn't it?
@@paulahik211 2.2 B
Yeah but in terms DOJ and what is supposed to happen they should both be prosecuted. In comparison even confidential FOUO will get you court martialed so they are doing armed robbery and the other multiple armed robbery plus grand theft. Specifically intent to that top secret spillage doesn't matter. Whether negligent or intentional all of this is basic training that all government employees and contractors are forced to take. It is cyber defense training. It is very clearly stated with examples like the one in clinton's case (almost exactly since at least 2013) to be wrong. Now trump's case is even worse and I don't think that needs to be said how much worse it is.
@@aaronmontgomery2055 Clinton was out of office by 2012. Laws were changed AFTER she left office.
Trump will always call ‘unfair’ when he’s treated fairly for his actions - it’s only fair in his mind when he’s allowed to do whatever he wants without repercussions.
That is the life philosophy of the Marquis de Sade.
It seems like they need to rewrite the law so that even unintentional mishandling of documents had penalties. You can be fired at my company if you mishandle potential phishing emails even if nothing bad happens. Shouldn't we expect some level of competence from our public servants?
The law already specifies that gross negligence is a violation and that it is punishable by a fine, imprisonment up to 10 years, or both. Comey misstated the law when he said that the FBI was not recommending prosecution because there was no evidence of intent. Intent is not a requirement. Clinton's unsecured email server violated the law. Trump probably violated the law. Biden has probably violated the law as well. People have already been imprisoned for negligently storing classified information in an improper way. They just weren't people in power like Clinton, Trump, and Biden. Which is why they did not get away with it.
Doesn't really matter here, since it was clearly intentional.
It matters because they don't seem to be applying the law equally. Besides the fact that classified documents need to be kept classified, it's not a game or at least it shouldn't be. Trump, Hilary, Biden and anyone else mishandling these documents should all have to answer for it.
There shouldn't be legal penalties, but there definitely should be consequences
@@jeremyedwards2453the entire video is about how the two cases are distinct. Trump did this to himself, and law is quite the pandora's box- you can't draw the ire of NARA and expect to walk away just because somone else saw a secret document once, or held a document once, or even if they also had to be reminded to return documents they shouldn't have. It isn't outside the norm for this to happen. Trump refused, twice, and conspired to hide boxes of documents from NARA, even going as far as to have his valet lie to his lawyers to convince them he'd returned everything he had.
Just to keep the numbers in perspective. I'm a TSgt in the USAF and have over 10,000 emails in my account. At least half of those are things that could be considered "not my mf'ing problem" but I get them anyway. So 30,000 emails for the secretary of state doesn't really seem like a lot.
Ye, at higher levels of state, emails get thrown around like rain in a monsoon. Everything needs an email, from requisition forms to distribution of assets to campaign projections to something as idiotic as that bitch/bastard from that one department causing their fourth problem this week.
I onced worked for a medical company, and as soon as I got an email account it was already littered with 10,000+ emails. Basically, every email ever addressed to my department was automatically sent to me. So yeah, 30k+ for Secretary of State is actually quite reasonable.
Yeah the boss tends to get CC’d on absolutely everything.
Sergeant in a state prison, 4270 emails in the last twelve months
I just work as a quality engineer in MedTech and apparently having a LinkedIn profile means I consented to literally every pharma and safety magazine's newsletter and "here's a 1 hour webinar we're running and we're charging you $1,000 to attend!". Some of these send out 20 emails a day EACH and I unsubscribe but somehow I get resubscribed. I have 600 emails in my spam folder just from October until now. The amount of emails makes sense especially if they're looking at everything pulled from the server.
I might have committed a crime but you can't investigate me until you investigate everybody else. It's not fair!
“Who cares if I murdered someone! Until you arrest all people who got in a fistfight, you can’t hold me accountable!” - Donald Trump’s legal defense
Real Trump legal strategy^
Clinton was investigated but it was deemed that she was innocent. She was a moron but she wasn't a criminal.
As mothers like to say, "I don't care about what that other kid did, we are talking about YOU."
Even if Clinton got preferential treatment (doubtful), that does not exonerate the Cheeto Bandito from his own misconduct. Try that kind of argument in a courtroom:
Defendant: Your honor, I found a record of somebody in the past who did something similar to what I did and that person wasn't prosecuted. Therefore, this case should be dismissed."
Judge: "This court case is based around your actions; nobody else is on trial here. If that other person is to be tried, that is another judge's business. You are on trial here, and any verdict obtained here will be based on your actions, nobody else's. Denied."
That is a part of a valid defense tho?
In law, there is a large amount of "I found a record where that was similar to my case so I should have ." This is what an argument about precedent is.
Though, the prosecute will make the exact same argument, pointing instead to cases of negligence, like those outlined in the video, or espionage. At this point a deliberation of the facts occurs and then a Jury decides which case it's more like.
@@jamalsachleben3026 It's a good point, but precedent is a little more specific than that. Precedent (usually) occurs when the case goes to appeal and the appellette judge makes a verdict espousing some legal principle. Precedent is not anything that happens in the past; it's a specific verdict made during a legal case. Whether or not someone is charged by the prosecutor is not precedent in the strict legal sense.
How can you say doubtful? Her crimes are publicly known and she was never prosecuted for it
Cheeto Bandito 😂😂😂
@@FighteroftheNightmanName a crime she committed, lol
Worked in IT for over 20 years. Desktop (software and hardware), server, network support, and the Clinton accusations just screams of every day stuff. Forgot to modify a deletion rule? No intent. Use a free utility? Any other time the government saving money would be applauded. Destruction of devices? I used to run a drill press through old phones and HDDs. (It was great for stress.) I remember when my parents told me with breathless glee that Clinton's phones had been smashed with a hammer which was "proof." (Of what I am not too sure.) Felt bad about laughing, ok I didn't, but seriously? Your PHI is on a HDDs and you want me to toss it in the trash undamaged?
None of this is criminal.
What is criminal is purposefully stealing classified documents because you think you are entitled to them. The first time around Trump tries to get Russia to hack/steal for him in order to increase his chances of being elected and the second time around everyone thinks he wouldn't ask for any less?
Clear intent and motivation.
If an E-5 was seriously in debt, swooned over various dictators, and took even one of those classified pages home with him, he would very likely spend the rest of his life in a cell. And not one of the "patriots" out there would be defending him. It's shameful.
I assume a smashed phone is proof that someone in the Clinton household was stressed out and chose to take it out on an old, unused phone. Also known as Thursday.
As they saying goes, it's not the crime, but the cover up. Trump was given so much opportunity to cooperate, they wouldn't be considering prosecution if he had.
He really could've gotten out of trouble so easily by just saying "oh shit, sorry, appears I have some documents you should come pick up asap", but that would require an ounce of humbleness that he can't even pretend to have.
Let's not overlook that there's some compelling evidence that Hillary DID try to hide some of the evidence when first investigated. Not defending Trump here - he absolutely should be sent to prison.
@@Colopty he could have even blamed someone else
"Oh yes we found the documents, someone must have taken them, I don't know who but that was very bad and I dont like it*ramblinb continues for 30 minutes*"
What gets me is that documents were handed back to the government twice! In January and again in June with Trump's lawyer making a written promise that everything was found and given back. And yet this was a lie and there was still plenty more.
Conservatives talk a huge deal about "weaponizing" the FBI. But the FBI bent way, way over backward in being lenient to Trump. Finally they acted a third time.
Worst, Trump accused her of doing it, so he can't pretend he didn't know it was wrong.
Unfortunately the people who NEED to see this video will refuse to watch it
Most of them will never even know it exists.
And they'd just call it a bunch of lies even if they did watch it.
@@gparsons320 half truths are lies.
@@kingleonidas4296 explain
If the justification for being allowed to get away with a crime is that other people have gotten away with it then our laws have already lost all meaning.
This whole "they didn't go after her!" thing is at best, the worst attempt at self defense one could conceive of in this situation, at worst is an admission of guilt; "I'm only guilty if she's also guilty" is essentially the same as saying "I'm guilty".
If she did something wrong should she be prosecuted? Absolutely.
If she did something wrong and ISN'T prosecuted, should everyone else just get a free pass to abscond with classified material? Absolutely not.
I agree that IF there was wrong doing by both parties that it's a double standard to prosecute one and not the other, but that doesn't mean we should not prosecute either of them, no it means we should prosecute them both.
At first glance, I'd agree. But when it hits so heavy on who's going to get elected to office or not, it's a substantial way of potentially manipulating who is in control of a country - it's important that opposing factions are handled in consistent fashion. ....Like, really REALLY important.
Also, the American legal system evidently leans QUITE heavily on past case history to determine what's the right course of action. It sure feels like each case should be able to stand on its own, but it consistently doesn't, and in this case... maybe it shouldn't...
@@paulpickett4522 I'd contest this too, because precedents SHOULD change if the situation requires it. And there's also a first time for everything. For instance I'm sure the first person arrested relating to hacking, probably would've loved the idea of precedent being the only factor in the decision...Cause you know, no precedent. Conversely if there's a lot of precedent for something, but its clearly bad precedent causing people to continue to get away with stuff they wouldn't otherwise, we probably should go about setting a new one. By throwing the book at the next f*cker who tries it. And than if possible, going back and getting each and everyone who were given a pass due to prior precedent at least a second look. Cause as long as statues allow it, I see no reason why we wouldn't than go back and apply it retrospectively.
I'm far less concerned with politics than I am about the law being actually effective at punishing people who victimize others in some way. Politics will always suck, and everyone on both sides sucks in any case, but doesn't mean they should get a pass at harming others. And in this case the seriousness of what's being concealed really DOES warrant the case being looked at by its own merits.
The amount is irrelevant. One is too much. They should all go to jail. But americans don't fight depots anymore, we are all submissive pussys now.
@@paulpickett4522 fair enough, but if we're to treat them with an equally weighted hand then the value of the crime matters, a totality of 3 leaked documents containing no defense or critical infrastructure data being left on an email server being cared for by an American corporation is very different than boxes and boxes and boxes of classified defense and intelligence resource information being left in a room with a known adversarial foreign agent wandering the premises.
These scenarios are not equal.
That being said, I say bar them both for life from re entering a position that has ANY access to sensitive data, as clearly neither has sound judgement on the proper care and handling of such secrets important to the safety of the United States.
So excited to see Opening Arguments Pod and Legal Eagle crossover again!
At this point, Trump could sign an affidavit swearing that water is wet, and I would have to check for myself. Dude couldn't tell the truth if he was literally getting paid for it.
The real sad fact is Trump could testify under oath and lie that water was DRY and too many people would defend and believe it! A few would drown actually trying to prove it!
Good, because water isn't wet. It makes other things wet
Me, remembering the viral "water is not wet" argument that got turned into a song and nodding along, because you really do have to check sometimes if the sky is still blue on a cloudless day.
depending on how you slice it water actually isnt wet, since something being wet would have to be soaked in water and you cant put water on water.
He got paid to put his name on Truth Social.
That's about as close as he will ever get to promoting "truth".
Anyone who randomly leaves top-secret nuclear documentation laying around should be prosecuted, I don't care who it is.
That's the most infuriating thing about high ranking politicians. If a low ranking military member was even 0.01% as careless with classified information, they would be court martialed.
...and someone who steals them, according to tRump himself, should be shot for treason. Again, his words, not mine.
Did anyone ever claim the nuclear briefcase left behind at Mar-a-Lago?
Might explain why she was asleep while Ben gazi went down during the killing of potential? witnesses
@@jewella7731
English, botski.
I haven't even watched yet, I'm just SO EXCITED that you got Opening Arguments on! I listen to all of their episodes, truly the best podcast for understanding current events
Clowns to the Left of me, Jokers to the Right, Here i am, stuck in the middle...
I love how he claims that the documents are secure. Sir, you don't have a security clearance anymore, nor do you have the Need to Know. I don't care if you have them locked in a safe, which is locked in a safe, which is locked in a safe, which is locked in a safe, which is locked behind a bank vault door, at the bottom of the Marianas Trench...if you have any way of accessing them, they aren't secured.
Trump's security clearance should have been revoked January 21, *2017* (sic)
NONE OF THE PEOPLE AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES HAVE TOP SECRET CLEARANCE.... THEY ARE LIBARIANS.....THEY CAN STEAL SHIT TO...AND DO.
He asked the FBI how he should store them. They told him, he followed their directions exactly. How about did you know obama left his papers in a furniture store? When the store closed, someone sent them to the library of Congress. Where obama was then notified and decided to take the librarian over the coals. For what? He lost those papers! I believe Clinton left his at a friend’s house, needlessly to say they are in the cosmos somewhere. somewhere. Every President receives their own set of papers from their time as President. It’s their responsibility to keep them safe. No one even knew where President Trump kept his except the secret service & FBI. They were secure. He still has clearance for anything that happened during his time as President. Like they all do! Do some research and learn how the system works.
@@traczebabe what's your source for those stories. Bc I'm pretty sure, they're not true.
@@traczebabe and it doesn't matter if trump asked the fed govt how to secure the documents. He didn't have a right to have them, they were subpoened, he refused. also top secret docs were in his closet and desk
The part that concerns me the most about the FBI raid is all the empty 'Classified' folders they found.
The...What?!
* searched news articles *
Yep, "43 empty folders with classified banners" were discovered by the FBI.
@@JakobNorthblood Best case, he hid them somewhere else. Worst case, he committed high treason and sold them off.
Good lord, that's so Orwellian. Trump definitely is taking some notes from the Ministry of Truth there.
@@majinshadow0516 It's just as scary if someone else took them. Anyone with a key to that basement room could have taken those documents.
@@majinshadow0516 wow has no one considered they were empty when he got them?!? Being a republic means we're not tribal. But honestly, if hitlery is never going to see a day in court neither should Trump.
I know the people who are so far down this hole that they really need this video won't actually listen, but I'm glad you made it anyway. May it help everyone who is fed up with their 'lost down the rabbit hole' relatives.
Lol... Gotta love them bots
If this were /r/AITA, I'd give this a rating of _Everyone Sucks Here._ Hillary flat-out should not have been conducting government work (classified or not) on unsecured, civilian-run servers... but _the people she was emailing_ should also have been like "um, no, you're asking me to send official government stuff over a channel you shouldn't even have created, I'm going to refuse and insist you use your .gov email address for my own CYA". Likewise, Trump shouldn't have had all those documents post-presidency (and, arguably, _during_ his term, being president does not actually grant you Universal Need-To-Know), but _so many failsafe procedures_ should have stopped him from taking them... but _chose not to._ ESH, not just the two of them.
Right out of school I joined DoD, and was part of review teams that went around to gov't contractors, grading them on how well they followed their documented procedures (including safeguarding classified material). I learned to be PARANOID about treating stuff with any markings from Confidential, to Secret, Top Secret and the differences between For Official Use Only (FOUO), No Foreign, Special Access Required (SAR), Special Compartmentalized Info (SCI), etc. While a lot to keep track of, it was simple to practice: whether you were Authorized, and did you Need To Know. As a private citizen, Trump and his cronies, didn't meet either criterion.
My classified material training was half a day or so of "this is what it looks like. Don't touch it. If you see it somewhere it shouldn't be, this is who you tell. If you're allowed to touch it, you will be explicitly told by one of these people." My clearance never went high enough to need more, my brother's Limited clearance was basically the same thing but they spent a full day repeating it.
I was amused when the photos of this material came out people were surprised it's really marked like in the movies instead of something more subtle. Subtle isn't the point; if you see it on the other side of the room you are supposed to be able to recognize it and take appropriate action without having to look at anything inside.
I think a lot of people are not aware of the "need to know" aspect. Just because you have the clearance does not mean you are authorized to have the documents.
@@slimmccoy8863 Clearance basically doesn't mean shit. It's all about authorization (you don't get that without clearance, but that's the only way clearance matter). To get authorization you need a reason to be able to read the documents, and go through a local authorization process. And when you seize to need to know, then the authorization stops as well.
Really, doesn't matter that I still have a clearance, as I no longer need to know anything, I can't get to know anything. There's no difference between me and anyone else. There's no difference between me and Trump, we both are not allowed to know classified info.
I worked for a federally funded Head Start preschool program. The feds made us keep all the child and family files in a locked file cabinet and sign a paper inside every time someone accessed it.
So Trump had lower standards than the feds require on confidential children files.
@@adamsbja Ugh, this reminds me of a conversation I had with a Trumpist on this subject. The guy's actual defense was, "Of course he had to read the classified document, how else was he supposed to know if it was for him or actually classified?"
Because. It. Says. CLASSIFIED. On. The. Cover.
There absolutely has been a double standard. Trump has been given *far* more leeway than anyone else has ever been given.
When your supporters are blowing Supreme court justices it happens
This
@@GreatUSTreasureHunt Can you at least try to to use reality and not FOX fantasy?!?!
@@GreatUSTreasureHunt did you even *watch* the video?
@@GreatUSTreasureHunt geez a simple no would have sufficed.
She was right about the deplorables coming out if he’s elected. Boy was she right!!
I'm just enjoying popcorn while the "thin blue line" crowd are calling for bad things to happen to the FBI.
I think that depends on how one feels about local vs federal government. And how they believe they operate.
Are you an American? Then don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.
@@rayebae6368 it really depends on whether or not if supports their specific propaganda of the day. I remember Fox news making excuses for a staten island anti-masker that technically "ran over" a local police officer (the police officer was slowly pushed onto the hood of the car while he drove away) I think it was Hannity who said "the officer wasn't hurt that bad"
@@whattheydidnttellyouwithbr2844 We already smashed the windows here, so we are throwing stones at yours instead.
Supporting patrol cops not being harassed and assaulted, is not the same as calling for highly politicized top level federal law enforcement officials being looked into…
“Don’t take legal advice from a podcast… take it from a CZcams channel” 👍
Or advice from a guy talking about CZcams channels
I was kind of wondering whether that was legal advice or irony.
Steely Irony I believe
Sarcasm, actually.
@@Moment-14 I'm so glad it is steely irony. Cast irony is so heavy and hard to maintain! 😁
This is like watching an old lady forgetting to scan the head of lettuce at the self checkout and the general manager who sees this as an opportunity to walk out with a 72” tv.
Yeah there is such a massive difference between having classified information sent to your email (which can be very easy to miss since classification rules are super complicated) and having physical files with top secret written on them in big red letters. And that's not even getting into how both of them reacted when they were caught.
Or the difference between not paying for a cable channel and pirating movies.
You win the comments
An apt comparison. I still wouldn't trust the old lady to be President, but I wouldn't trust that general manager with ANYTHING.
Ya no, she shared had classified information unsecured, president trump had classified info in a secured room. Information he was legally allowed to see.
I love it when content creators I love cross over! Opening Arguments lead me down the legal-stuff-for-laypeople rabbit hole I found this channel during
I'm imagining a revisit to this video, but it's just laughing at the implication that these cases are equal 😂
Still amazed how in depth some youtube channels go into these intensely analytical matters. Seems entirely like a professional presentation. I really am appreciative of people like this.
That's because many of them ARE professionals in the area they comment on. Those in the legal field have plenty of practice presenting information in court, so it's not hard for them to use those saw talents in these CZcams presentations.
Whats sad is that while some CZcams channels like this and Wendover Productions give more researched and nuanced information than most if not all news programs, there are countless others channels spewing just what people want to hear and ignoring all the facts that don't fit that narrative.
Well, maybe it’s due to the fact that both Andrew and Devon happens to be actual lawyers!
Sure, Devon has this CZcams channel, and Andrew is hosting two podcasts, and are a frequent guest on other podcasts, (like God Awful Movies, The Skepticrat, etc.), but they still practice law!
This fellow is very good at what he does, I strongly suggest checking his channel out, He does informative videos on all sorts of legal issues, ranging from real life court cases to funner stuff like the legal accuracy of popular media like she hulk and better call saul.
Of course, a lot of his latest content has been focused on the legal fiasco surrounding Trump, but that's not at all surprising.
*_Mishandling classified documents ??_* he STOLE them!!
_Oh, sure. Look at it the worst possible way. BUT CLINTON'S EMAILS_ !! /snark
In this case, it's about what prosecutors can prove, not necessarily what he actually did.
@@MarsJenkar They have iron clad proof. He literally admitted they were at his residence lol. He was told to return them multiple times, and he both lied about having them and later changed his defense to "I can declassify them... just by thinking about it.." 😂 He is 100% getting charged in a few months.
@@hivetech4903 The GOP believe it will be in less than a month, and I agree, the evidence is overwhelmingly against Trump at this point, his top adviser was offered limited prosecutorial immunity in exchange for his testimony, and Donald Trump has already testified he personally handled them.
He didn't actually steal them.
Stealing implies no right to something, but taking and possessing it. He had a legal right to view and possess these documents at the time, just not take them or handle them how he did. He mishandled them at the time.
It's a similar comparison of stealing vs unjust enrichment.
Not sure what they'd call it here, but the law seems pretty clear designation as *illegal removal and retention*
18 U.S. Code § 1924
Love Opening Arguments and the Puzzle In a Thunderstorm podcasts! So cool to see Andrew here.
in middle school, we were all assigned a school email, and we werent allowed to use personal emails to do any schoolwork. if 12 year olds can learn to use the right email, government officials can too.
"Who keeps this many boxes lying around honestly???!!"
Trump: OH YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT MY BOXES!!! I LOVE BOXES!!!
It's as if he's an orange tom cat wearing a human suit
@@SonsOfLorgar ????
@@SonsOfLorgar don't insult cats like that
@@RabblesTheBinx saying he likes cats as much as boxes isn't an insult, it's simply an observation
@@Gloomdrake But still putting cats on trump's level in any way may very well be an insult to all cats even if the orange fella likes his boxes (Also fyi this is a common joke "he's as bad as [blank]" "don't insult [blank] like that")
Laughed out loud at the “Nerd” photo of Andrew Torres as he embraces that description, especially in regards doing legal research which involves reading copious amounts legal filings.
Absolutely, that image put a smile on my face and lifted my mood.
How man embassies were attacked when GWB was in office? BUT BUT BUT ALL THEIR EMAILS! ☠️
Thank you for continuing to break down these complicated cases.
In the cases of Powell and the Clintons, I think we tend to forget how new email is as an everyday thing. Smart phones weren't a thing for Powell, and became a big thing after Clinton was already secretary of state. There was a whole way of doing things with pen and paper and phone calls not that long ago.
And Secretary Clinton requested a secure device and was denied one. Therefore I wouldn't be surprised if she just said to her people "I need email on my phone." and they set this thing up for her without her putting much thought into how it was being done.
that's part of why they couldn't go after Clinton, there weren't specific regs for electronic documents during her tenure as SoS.
That the Federal Records Act was amended in 2014 to provide standards for electronic records is no coincidence.
@@merphul the 2014 amendment was a direct response to clinton's emails. Then it was violated by both obama and trump aides. But obviously not hillary as she was no longer in government.
Okay so Secretary Powell did not use emails all of his information came to him in envelopes with stamps on it delivered by AIDS.
@@rogerwadell8784 If he was going to access emails directly he had to be on a computer terminal, and was probably limited to doing so while actually at work. Checking one's phone for emails throughout the day, while being anywhere , doing anything, using the same device you use for personal calls and emails wasn't the ubiquitous thing it is now. PDAs existed but also would most likely have mostly been handled by aids, etc.. And yes, office executives in general used to require executive assistants and aids to manage their communications, and those people knew the proper protocols, and it was all a formal part of the job.
The “BleachBit” talking point is so funny when it comes from conservatives. The implication being, “Oh my god she had to BLEACH all the evidence because she was so guilty!” Complete technical illiteracy.
Meanwhile I’m a person who worked in IT and had to secure-erase _everyone’s_ hard drive, even Dave from Sales, who never got an even halfway interesting email in his life.
Only thing that makes BleachBit special is that it is open source and you don’t need to pay for it. It came pre-installed with my Linux distro 😂
And it now has "Hillary Clinton's emails" as a setting to fill space with chaff.
And it probably does not anything different than executing dd if=/dev/zero bs=4k of=/dev/sdX
ITS FREE????!!!!????
It's been standard DoD "retirement" procedure for any magnetic disk for decades. Also standard procedure is physical destruction of optical discs and devices which contain solid state memory. They're so damn Boomer-brained...
@@spankyx8606 Not only it's free, but it's open source. This means anyone can submit bug fixes and new features to the developers of BleachBit for inclusion in the software.
" Dont take legal advice from a podcast. Take legal advice from a youtube channel"
Me: I cant, you're not my lawyer
Someone who got the joke!
Good to see Andrew getting to do work that isn't involving Eli :)
I was one of the first people to have a government email address when I work in the military.
At first is only geeks that had it and we did everything by the book
Then they allowed everyone to have it and know what a cluster it was. People were sending chain mail letters. And they never really understood all the ins and outs of email.
In the meantime they put someone in charge who decided they were going to clean up the system. Well there's no official way to report stuff so when I reported something and it got to that person they would try to investigate me.
And as they tried to make an example of me I made them look like fools. They even tried to get me fired over security thing that they personally put in there. I am being vague only because this was in the early to mid 1990s.
Because I was a lower ranking military person I must say I had some awesome supervisors who understood what I explained the situation and rules and stood up for me when the attacks came for me.
I'll give one example, they finally came out with a program to teach people the rules of email and the security that you need to do to protect the information etc etc.
There wasn't a program so you had to go to a drive and click on the exe file.
Three files below it, maybe four or five as we're looking at files on a dos machine, we're the passwords that were kept in an unencrypted Excel file.
Most people at the time were afraid of computers and that stuff so they only clicked on what they knew.
So I went to the proper channels to report what I found. And if you know anything about the military and any good deed goes on punished. When I got to the person on top they tried to get me for hacking into passwords. And I found out later they tried to fire me. Like I said the senior ncos I worked for had to explain to the person that it was an unencrypted file that anyone had access to and the information I gave them was to protect the system not to exploit it.
Those are the wild West days of networks and the DDN. The DDN what's the name of the military internet before they call it the military internet.
Well I've rambled a bit here but then I'm old and retired.
Oh by the way LegalEagle since this was my field, everything you said was 100% correct.
Which makes me have more confidence in all the other videos I watch of yours.
I'm probably a tad younger than you are from the sounds of it, as was in the navy at the end of the '90's, right before the turn of the millennium, but it was still almost just as bad. Only a very few people knew how to deal with that crap...
This is like Missouri Gov. Mike Parson who wants to prosecute the reporter and newspaper for telling the state about a security flaw in their website that allowed anyone to view the private details of over 100,000 state employees, including addresses and SS numbers. The newspaper notified the governors office beforehand to allow them time to correct the issue before running the story.
I believe that most people never take the time to think about the meaning of "common sense." It is literally having a similar ability to see, feel, and hear what is going on around us. But whenever we have people claiming that the rules of our senses have changed in order to get what they want, then we are in trouble.
Thank you for your service.
Thank you for your service, and for refusing to bow to persecution. Yours is yet another example of why whistleblowers' anonymity must be zealously protected.
People in the "Lock her up" camp seem to conveniently forget Ivanka Trump using personal emails to discuss government business multiple times throughout the last presidency. It's almost as if a double standard is in place.
Yeah..... "almost"
@@BroAnarchy alright, there is "definitely" double standard amongst people who blindly vote for Republican.
Ivanka didn't share highly classified information on her private email. The issue with killary is she shared classified info not that she did gov business on personal email. The video this guy put up is deisned to miss lead you.
It’s not the use of private emails that is the problem it’s the large scale storage of classified emails on a private server that is. There is no doubt Hillary stuffed up there - she broke the law but it wasn’t an intentional breaking of the law.
Lock them all up. It's simple.
We had a Home Secretary resign in disgrace after she forwarded official emails to her private email, but she was reinstated a few days later by the new PM
Excellent breakdown. Thank you!
I'd like to see a comparison between Hillary's emails and what Ivanka did with her emails on a personal server
Why?? One is an elected position with access to classified material…. The other was nothing close. And I’d be willing to bet, Iva bla wouldn’t delete and then destroy her stuff… AFTER BEING COURT ORDERED TO TURN IT OVER!!! Can’t wait to hear your excuse for this: why do you support someone that just said on national tv that ALL BLQCK PEOPLE LOOK THE SAME!!! Clinton just said this, and has done way worse… biden just told a small black child that he can steal a pumpkin or anything else he wanted!!! The people you support are very racist…. Wait… if you said people who supported President Trump were racist because they supported a supposed racist… wouldn’t this now apply to you?!? Or are you one of the “stupid” voters Harris just spoke about… and these are their words, not mine.
and the billions her hubby received.
Lmao… and the billions hunter recieved??? Pelosi recieved?? Clintons recieved??? What about ftx and the money they took from Ukraine??? We have REAL questions!!!!
@@wayne19771000 no you don't, you have right wing talking points you want to scream about
@@whocares9033 It's unlikely they would prosecute Ivanka just like they wouldn't prosecute Hillary. Who both unlike Trump did not have a year of people asking him to return said documents and did not comply when they became a private citizen. They also did not store hundreds of classified info in their private club/home.
And considering just how careless US officials are with classified information there honestly should be a multi day course to drill into most if not all of them how to handle the material again.
I used to work in the intel Community, and held a TS/SCI clearance. My biggest issue with Clinton's Email issue and the other examples you listed is that anybody else would have been punished, maybe not severely, but punished regardless. That said, there is a genuine issue with mishandling of classified information as whole, and a lot of it is in no way malicious. The vast majority is negligence
She was punished by Comey!
@@bonniehall578 Yeah... Comey effectively decided that he would punish her with negative publicity right before the election. In effect depriving her of power and the money that comes with power.
Of course that was not an official legal action. Just a little something that Comey thought was the right thing to do.
Later to likely regret that decision as he was subsequently the recipient of intended coercion by Trump to turn the FBI into the president's personal police force.
She was not punished? wait what do you mean punished? like spanking? a big NO with wagging finger? Or you mean jail, cause as we know, in the US jail system, is not about rehabilitation its about punishment.
Lets be real, like everybody in congress and goverment do have private emails, and use private communications, the whole thing with clintons "private" server is that its actually a more secure to have communications than your normal email providers...
And of like 33k emails, that were almost all personal matters, only what? 3 had classified markings? And while yes that is Negligence, its not like they were trading classified documents, they just talked about stuff that was deemed classified. Truth is that you say people would be punished, i just want to know what kind of punishment you would have choosen, since obviously 24/7 media cancelling you and making you lose a presidential election, is not enough punishment, what would you have liked for her to suffer? maybe someone to do something to her or her quitting the nomination? or idk what do you want? Whats your professional opinon as a former intel community worker, and TS/SCI cleared employee.
Because like when i see trump who has had investigations over fraud, and much worse stuff that he even settle like trump university, or all the sexual assault allegations and i dont see him punished, i feel like you might just a be a little bias, but then again, i wish we lived in a world where he had been punished for that, and that our worst worries would be to worry about clintons 3 classified emails that were mishandled didnt get punished enough
The thing is, that’s clearly not true. The Secretary of State who came before her did the same thing, as did many people in the Trump administration. None of them were even investigated, much less punished. Having a private server and using the same devices for both private and official business was essentially SOP for high-level government officials basically starting when personal email use became popular. It shouldn’t have been and hopefully everyone knows better now, but it clearly isn’t something that was seen as a problem until the 2016 election cycle.
You’re right that any random government worker would probably lose their job and their clearance (or their freedom) if they had official documents on a personal device, but not high level political appointees. The fact that there are two different standards isn’t a Hillary thing, it’s a political power thing. Saying Hillary is the only person who wouldn’t face consequences for it is just not true and obscures the real issue.
@@cockathiel5319 kinda weird that nothing you said was relevant, since I didn't say Hillary is the only person who didn't face consequences
When it comes to Hillary’s E-mails, remember that Cheney did it first. By BCC’ing all mails from GW Bush.
Trumpians accusing anyone of a double standard is rich
A company that I contract for was tasked with evaluation of data security for Hillary's email server as part of the investigation.
Her email server had better data security than the official servers.
Interesting that.
I really want this to be true but… youre just another person on the internet. Anecdotal accounts are summarily dismissed.
@@MP-db9sw I believe it. A relative of mine does netsec for the DOD, and when he first started working there, decades ago, he found appalling security practices (we're talking passwords for high-clearance accounts on post-it notes by the keyboard). He's now a private contractor, still doing netsec for them, and he says that government IT practices are still lagging behind private sector practices.
@@MP-db9sw I'm not saying that Hillary's email server had "good" data security. Just it had better data security than the official government email servers.
The thing that any IT specialist knows is that security and convenience are opposite ends of a spectrum.
It's like position and momentum in Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. The more you have of one, the less you can have of the other.
The government servers are designed for convenience. The security is adequate but it's isn't good.
Honestly, Hillary's servers just had more modern security protocols. The government servers are a few updates behind.
Whats interesting is it was Collin Powell helped her set up the server's
Oh man, no one can throw shade like a lawyer. Devin, I almost fell out of my chair with the bleach comment, good show 😂
I came here to say this . 😂
Yep, seems he did not throw any the other way, you like how wiping a hard drive involving a damp rag. Certainly no bias here.
@@salvatoreraber19 sorry reality messes with your political bias
Great clear comparative analysis!
Huh, as someone from the UK I didnt realize that Lindsey Graham has the voice of a kindly Southern grandmother.
"The response to the DoJ was incomplete" is just a polite way of saying, "they lied to highest law enforcement power in the land."
What about the 5th ammendment?
@@agsilverradio2225 What about it? At what point was anyone forced to make a self-incriminating statement?
If all documents had been returned as requested, I don't think any potential charges would have been considered at all.
It is, from my understanding, exactly because they lied about the document return being complete that the trouble arose.
It still staggers me that he was able to simply stuff these documents in boxes, throw them in the trunk, and padlock them in a basement in a private club, then sit on them for all that time doing whatever he wanted with them. Are we that careless with our secrets?
Not normally.
The problem in this case is that the legal authority concerning how to handle most such secrets stems from executive orders. The president has pretty close to carte blanche to handle non nuclear secrets in whatever way they care to.
So while there certainly wasn't anyone in the White House responsible for such secrets who would have simply allowed that to happen, they were not in a position to oversee or even object, right up until the instant that Donald Trump became a private citizen and lost that authority, by which point it was too late to do anything but wait for the DOJ to go after the issue.
He was cooperating with the National Archive.
@@LazyFaux5656 Not according to the national archive, or the courts, or anyone else involved. They told him over and over and over again to stop screwing around and hand over the damn documents. He refused to comply, metaphorically giving them the finger for over a year before they eventually threw up their hands and asked for a subpoena to force him to do what he should have done from day one.
@Heronblade86 Not from what I've read. He was compliant and stored them as they deemed acceptable.
@@Heronblade86 Regardless, nothing is going to happen to him. Nothing ever does to these elites.
My roommate doesn't think your background is real, but I do. Is it a green screen? Light googling didn't answer :(
Excellent job navigating these two cases.
The H in "But Her Emails!" is silent, so is properly pronounced like "Buttery Males."
Hilary literally sold hats with that sewn on
@@dielaughing73 That's amazing
@@dielaughing73 she sold Buttery Males merch??
My two favorite lawyers in one piece of content. Christmas clearly came early
Bring in Steve Lehto for the hat trick
I still prefer Lionel Hutz and Saul Goodman, but these guys are pretty good.
Oh that naughty old elf must be one mean bastard to give use this present so early.
@@TheRockinDonkey Don't forget Lock Picking Lawyer!
@@felironmaden1429 Right!
Thanks. I've been waiting since 2016 for someone to explain the difference between gross negligence and extreme carelessness.
Thankss Hunk for clearing things up!
Good video. I spent the first decade of my career in the IC. I've been a sysadmin on classified networks, certified TSCM auditor for SCIF qualification, and even did data collection on some classification investigations. I've seen firsthand how this stuff works, know that what Clinton did was sadly common at senior levels (and honestly unheard of triggering the kind of investigation that ensued). But what Trump did? Stealing boxes of marked classified (up to TS//SCI) and lying to investigators? It's like comparing Clinton speeding 10 miles over the limit to Trump committing a hit and run vehicular homicide. It's just absurd to try to create equivalence between them.
20mph over, but otherwise totally agree
Sadly common =/= legal
Public interest might have been better served if she was charged and found not guilty at the time.
It would now be a nothing burger and if Trump tried to make a comparison he would have to invite himself to be prosecuted.
@@ChristopherNFP Did you not watch the video? There was nothing to charge Clinton with because she didn't break any laws and she cooperated fully with the investigation. Literally no one could ever be charged for what she did. The most extreme treatment I've seen in a similar case is junior enlisted military getting a temporarily suspended clearance during the investigation and article 15 non-judicial punishment (which is unique to the UCMJ). Whereas Trump flagrantly broke numerous major laws and spent over a year lying to investigators. I never saw anything even remotely that egregious in my time. It's of comparable scope and scale to what recently landed Joshua Schulte in prison on an 80 year sentence.
@@ChristopherNFP Sadly common kinda does = legal. People jaywalk all the time, hardly anyone ever gets cited for it. People disobey the speed limit regularly, right in front of cops with radar guns, but hey if EVERYONE is doing 75, its considered "flow of traffic". Hell adultery is still on the books as a FELONY in most states and it hasnt been prosecuted in like 50 years, because everyone does it. OWOWOW EXCEPT ME HONEY, OW STOP THAT!
@Justin While I agree with everything you've said, I think it's important to point out that if any member of the broader population unknowingly breaks the law, they still get charged. Using your 10 over example, if a cop caught you doing that and you said you didn't see the sign, would they care? No. People in power need to be held to a higher standard then everyone else, not given exemptions.
You and multiple others have said this is common at senior levels, and that won't change by just constantly ignoring everyone who "didn't know".
I've been wanting a comparison of these cases by someone who knows what they're talking about for a while. Thanks LegalEagle.
Too bad he's still a partisan hack.
16:58 "...discharged for bad conduct..." For those that have been in the military, we call this the "Big Chicken Dinner (Bad Conduct Discharge)"
“Don’t take legal advice from a podcast. Take legal advice from a CZcams channel”.
Damn, shots fired…
"But look, don't take legal advice from a podcast, take legal advice from a CZcams video..." LOL
If you found them in my home I'd be now sitting in some dark place, with my fingernails missing.
Maybe not if you were a gov employee at the time. You would definitely be investigated though.
@@jawstrock2215 well then you’d be unemployed as well.
Politicians can get away with this crap, the rank and file get no such leeway.
@@Justanotherconsumer well politicians are in a special place because they are elected, not hired.
Normally such thing should guaranty nobody would vote for them ever.. and yet....
Omg, I saw the title and could NOT believe that two of my favorite podcast hosts were teaming up with one of my favorite CZcamsrs! 🤩🤩🤩 I’d love to see you on the show sometime. ❤
If you were talking about legal eagle showing up on the podcast, he has. Episodes 381: "The legal Eagle interview" and 401: " Legal Eagle Sues the Trump Administration". If you didnt already know, if you did, apologies and have a good one.
That remark about drinking bleach is epic!!
As an OA and LE fan since the beginning of each I can't believe it's taken this long for OA to show up here (and now it's time for LE to show up on OA as more than just a mention). You're both the best legal analysis in modern times, thanks for taking the time out of being a lawyer to help a non-lawyer like me understand what's going on.
Devon has made an appearance on OA about a lawsuit he was submitting. I forget the episode (and case) but can look it up
I feel like I remember him on OA to discuss Tiger King
Either way, more collaborations = more awesome content. Love both LE and OA.
He was on Opening Arguments a couple of years ago, episode 381 and 401
And ifI recall correctly they also did a fundraiser together for a political campaign back in 2020
As an avid listener to you both, I love the OA collab!
Excellent review. Thanks!
this is like a semi-truck driver swerving over three lanes of traffic and causing a huge wreck getting tried, only to blame a tiny sedan in front of him for the accident for having a single broken tail light.
Who else imagined that dad going "Oh no my son's a Soviet spy"
Senator Graham's dog whisle made my cat go moooo.
It’s also rumored his milkshakes bring all the boys to the yard
There's a legal eagle, a scowl owl, and now a nerd bird.
The guy who threw the documents in the trash could have just taken them home and burned them. If you're gonna do a stupid crime, at least do it in a way that won't leave evidence.
I would really like to see you cover the SCOTUS case of ICWA. Indigenous affairs don't get enough attention and this case about ICWA is incredibly important and will likely add more generational trauma as children are ripped from their families again. (the case is Brackeen v Haaland, and started yesterday Nov 9)
Yes, please 🙏🏽
Never mind the implications for Indigenous rights and protections generally, as evidenced by the fact that big oil is funding the white family's case.
Yes! Legal Eagle please cover this!
Lindsey Graham makes me sick. He sounds like he's threatening another January 6th...
Remember when he said that if the GOP nominated Trump they'd destroy themselves and they'd deserve it?
Yeah I think they're on their way.
Should have just nominated Jeb.
smh
@@Iris_1217 They owed Jeb too after he rigged the first of his brothers elections for them.
@@theCidisIn Yeah, I know a lot of people on the left were going on and on about "legacies" and "kingmaking" and how it set a bad precedent to nominate/elect another Bush.
Apparently everyone just completely forgot about the Kennedys.
I tend to vote blue despite being independent because I'm more socially progressive even if I'm fiscally conservative (To an extent).
I would have voted for Jeb over Hillary.
Thank you, Devin Stone, for your work, your persistence, your resilience, your understanding, and your vision. We just heard that the Senate will stay Democratic. Your work on CZcams has contributed to this victory and its ensuing stability. You are precious, your work means more than gold.
Your comment made me vomit in my mouth.
Trump was literally president for 4 whole years after campaigning on the "lock her up" line. The fact that she isn't imprisoned is on him now, nobody else. I don't give a shit about her emails, go ahead, imprison her, but then lock trump up too. Lock them both up
Trump started retaining them out of spite, I swear.
100% this
He sold the information. He was trying to get the most money before the DOJ came crashing in.
That would be incredibly petty and juvenile... I think you might be correct.
I suspect that's a generous interpretation.
My bet is his intentions were even worse.
@@eastvandb There are three scenarios, a) he kept them to brag about them, b) he kept them out of spite and pettiness, c) he sold them or handed them over to a foreign power.
It is *_recidulous_* for public servants
who are informed of their obligations regarding sensitive information when sworn-in to office
to then _let them off from their incompetence_ if they simply say "oops, it was an accident"
It needs to stop. Lock them *_all_* up.
"ridiculous"....
May as well spell it right if you're gonna italicize it......
*ridiculous
*ridiculous
@Chris Colbourne @NoriMori @David Gowers
Pretty sure the recidulous misspelling is on purpose though. Probably to emphasize that little mistakes shouldn't go uncorrected in normal situations lol.
Edit: Had a spacing issue lol, didn't catch it on my proofread. Mistake corrected!
@@sarahdysart2832 You mean the exact way that you are approaching as well?
Meh, ....thanks for the perspective.
Yeah, but "recidulous"? Not trying to be a snob, everyone has a moment for typos or whoops. It wasn't intended as mean spirited. Just makes a person wonder how many times you encounter a word in this life and not understand it's spelling. Words mean things, and I agreed with what he was saying.....but it was a shame to have your verbal fly down in an otherwise concise statement.
Sigh, anyways throw your opinion on that pile over there with mine and the rest. Be well.
Bro it's so sad, mark my words. This country I love will fall because politics has turned Into a gladiator ring instead of a round table of cooperation.