When 'intent' matters and when it doesn't

When intent doesn't matter;





When it does;

Didn't matter here?

Padawanbater2 said:

My history teacher in college told us Reagan got away with it because his popularity was so high at the time

I'd imagine if something like the Iran Contra happened today, the top executive would get absolutely crucified by the opposing party

I'd like to hope anyway..

Click to expand...

The political landscape wasn't quite as polarized...as the 30 yr. shift to the right was just in it's infancy and both sides still socialized together after hours...

law is a funny thing....

Padawanbater2 said:

When intent doesn't matter;

When it does;

Click to expand...

First I would like to say that I fully support Manning, and feel he should be pardoned. However, clearly the "intent" was different in the first two cases, as they both "intended" to break the law and intentionally deliver classified information to foreign nations. Manning at least is very clear about that. He knew the consequences of his actions, and decided it was worth it to him to do what he felt was right. But he certainly had "intent" to break the law. Even the republican FBI director couldn't find that kind of intent in Hillary's actions.