LETTERS (Continued from page 8)
sity” to deny right-wing knuckleheads the vote? Ssshhh. Is that the sound of wind whistling through the empty branches of his neural network? Of course, if there’s any vote-denying going on, look to North Carolina, Kansas, and the other Republican-led states busy disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of primarily black and brown voters on the pretext of voter fraud, which would indeed be a terrible crime if any evidence could be produced that it actually existed. Cotty Chubb Montecito (Editor’s note: We don’t get that those on your side of the political spectrum seem to believe that every law-abiding Constitution-respecting citizen who owns a gun is just a powder keg away from becoming a suicide bomber, yet every ne’erdo-well voter with an “X” at the ready is an upstanding Constitution-loving citizen who’d never commit voter fraud. Ah well, it really isn’t the ne’er-do-well voter most of us worry about; it’s the ne’erdo-well vote collector, isn’t it? Many of us are baffled why anyone would be against a one-day or one-weekend vote with a purple inkwell close at hand at the polling place. Why do we now need months – people are already voting in the November election – to hold elections? We’d really like to know why offering a 24-hour period or even a long weekend to potential voters isn’t enough. And what the objection could possibly be to ensuring that the person who voted is qualified to vote, and that he or she has voted only once. On another subject: “BoJo the Toff” (former London mayor Boris Johnson) and “the weasel Farage” (recently steppeddown head of the UK Independence party Nigel Farage)? Is that your level of conversation? Really? – J.B.)
That’s the Spirit
Thank you so much for Steve Libowitz’s “Weekly Spirituality” column. He is bringing attention to some local activities involving spirituality that are of great value to our entire community. Good job, well done! Bob Ornstein Montecito
Hillary’s Exit
Remember the scene in The Wizard of Oz where Dorothy figures out what to do with the red shoes? She defeated the wicked witch, who evaporated leaving her black robe and pointed hat on the ground. That is the scene I see with Hillary Clinton. The FBI gave Trump the red shoes and he will know how to use them. In fact, he would be well-advised to wear red shoes and offer this explanation. Can’t you just see him rubbing his shoes, saying something like “Crooked Hillary will disappear”? The statement released by the FBI
22 MONTECITO JOURNAL
set the stage. Cameras are ready, everyone is in place… silence on the stage, roll the cameras. The director of the FBI, Mr. James Comey, told the world Hillary and her staff were extremely negligent. For undisclosed reasons, however, he decided not to ask the Department of Justice, with a Lynch mob in control, to do anything about it. Why ask a dead man to say grace? All Lynch would do is stall and delay, with Obama’s help, and pass the matter beyond the soon-tobe-elected Ms Clinton. A dead end. Better to give the tools to the candidate and others. Now the law. Listening to Mr. Comey, something smells bad. What is this “clear evidence of intent” Comey told us was lacking? I served once as chief trial deputy of a large district attorney office. He must know that for every infraction and crime, there is a defined intent or state of mind. In Common Criminal law you have Specific Intent, General Intent, and substitutes for intent. One is gross negligence. In Specific intent, the defendant must have specifically intended the crime and its consequences. In General intent, the defendant simply must have intended to do what he or she did, even without thinking about the wrong. Substitutes come in a variety of words and concepts. In administrative law, bureaucrats have created others. Point is, the word “intent” tells you little. The United States has one law that covers the disclosure of classified information. It is 18 U.S. Code 798. It does not use a common law definition of intent, but one of the administrative concepts. It adopts, “knowingly and willingly” as the state of mind. This is like general intent. All the attorney has to prove is that you did it (i.e., creating an unsecured server and putting and taking classified information therein). The only defense is that the one disclosing did it by mistake or accident. If you are found guilty of “knowingly and willingly” doing the deed, you can be fined (no limit) and put in jail for 10 years. The U.S. has many other statutes that touch on the subject. For example, look at 18 USC 1905, which talks about propriety rights. It is also as a general type intent. Simply publishing, divulging, or disclosing is all it takes. Others include executive orders, the Espionage Act of 1917, The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. Point is, our federal law is specific on this subject. Our enforcement is not, which is why Congress, the president, and others leak information without fear. I could not find one statute that required a “Clear Intent” as stated by Mr. Comey.
Most of the news sources say the FBI was relying on Executive Order 13526, and 18 U.S.C. 793(f). Again, something smells very bad. First, Executive Order 13526 is a long discussion of what is and is not classified stuff. When talking about punishment, it adopts the language of U.S.C. 798 above. It specifically says the “knowingly and willfully” form of intent is not “Clear Intent.” Section 793(f) is another of the ”other statutes” which attempts to cover specific acts. It in no way takes away from 798, which is the primary punishment law. Point is, the FBI director is misleading the nation. Randolph Siple Carpinteria
Careless is as Careless Does
Just what we need, a president who is “extremely careless.” First we show the world how progressive we are and elect a black president. So now, we have to have our first woman president. So long as she is a she, that is all that matters. Baa! (When are we going to show the world how intelligent we are and get our heads out of our behinds?) Robert Miller Santa Barbara (Editor’s note: At this point, what difference would it make? – J.B.)
Search for the Best
Incredibly, in light of the evidence presented by Mr. Comey, the FBI found no cause to recommend the indictment of Hillary Clinton for her failure to protect classified nation-
al security information. But fortunately for America, Mr. Comey has constructed an impregnable Bill of Particulars describing Mrs. Clinton’s many criminal acts and delivered it to the Trump campaign, and to the American voters. The facts presented by Mr. Comey pose, in my mind, three unanswered, but critical, questions: First: How effectively will Republican Party and Trump campaign leadership represent the FBI findings to the American electorate to prove that Mrs. Clinton is unfit to be president? Next: How attentively will American voters in both parties listen to the Trump campaign’s message? The governance that America receives for the next decade depends upon their attentiveness. Finally: In their haste to elect “The First Woman President”, why can’t the Democrats select a female candidate who is actually worthy of the office? Without doubt, there are many more qualified and more honest candidates within the Democrat party. Is Hillary Clinton really the best that the Democrats (and the United States) can provide? In my mind, the facts clearly point to “No.” Rick Reeves Santa Barbara (Editor’s note: Actually, despite her seedy record, putting Hillary Clinton forward as the party’s candidate makes a lot of sense if you are a Democrat. She will protect her Wall Street clients, her overpaid and over-compensated government union employees, her welfare recipient voter base, and the academic establishment. All at the expense of what was once proudly referred to as
The best little paper in America (Covering the best little community anywhere!) Publisher Timothy Lennon Buckley Editor At Large Kelly Mahan • Managing Editor James Luksic • Design/Production Trent Watanabe Associate Editor Bob Hazard
Advertising Manager/Sales Susan Brooks • Advertising Specialist Tanis Nelson Office Manager / Ad Sales Christine Merrick • Proofreading Helen Buckley • Arts/Entertainment/Calendar/ Music Steven Libowitz • Columns Erin Graffy, Scott Craig, Julia Rodgers • Gossip Thedim Fiste, Richard Mineards • History Hattie Beresford • Humor Ernie Witham, Grace Rachow Photography/Our Town Joanne A. Calitri • Society Lynda Millner Travel Jerry Dunn • Sportsman Dr. John Burk • Trail Talk Lynn P. Kirst Medical Advice Dr. Gary Bradley, Dr. Anthony Allina Published by Montecito Journal Inc., James Buckley, President PRINTED BY NPCP INC., SANTA BARBARA, CA Montecito Journal is compiled, compounded, calibrated, cogitated over, and coughed up every Wednesday by an exacting agglomeration of excitable (and often exemplary) expert edifiers at 1206 Coast Village Circle, Suite D, Montecito, CA 93108. How to reach us: Editorial: (805) 565-1860; Sue Brooks: ext. 4; Christine Merrick: ext. 3; Classified: ext. 3; FAX: (805) 969-6654; Letters to Editor: Montecito Journal, 1206 Coast Village Circle, Suite D, Montecito, CA 93108; E-MAIL: news@montecitojournal.net
• The Voice of the Village •
14 – 21 July 2016