It doesn't negate it, but it's like saying she could go to trial tomorrow if she's willing to forgo her right to counsel or to give up a jury trial or to cross-examine witnesses. It's not in the normal range of trade-offs.
-
"It does matter whether it should have been classified. " Your exact words.
OK. Thanks. Now point to me in that quote where the subject is "she," Reality Winner.
-
-
Who are we talking about.? Not some other joe blow.
-
Well, you DO know that the *government* charged her, right? They just some other joe blow? Golly is this so difficult?
-
For you apparently it is. For me it's black and white. For the gov, according to you, it is, if they over charged her. Pretty simple to me she broke 798.Should be charged with that and any other codes she broke.Trial,And if found guilty . Punished according to presiding judge.
-
"And if found guilty." WOWWEEEE, you're coming along nicely. By end of day you might have your head halfway out of your arse. Now then. How does her guilt or innocence get determined?
-
Where have i stated other wise about her being tried. That's just a formality considering she has admitted to releasing the document. Pretty open shut case to me. If you would learn to read you would of seen the word TRIAL in my last tweet. I'm done with your BS. Good day
-
"Pretty open shut case to me." As I said, the guy who used to be in charge of the entire classification system disagrees with you. The two cases he has consulted on previously, the defendant largely got off. I'll take his expertise over your, uh, painful ignorance.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.