Posted on 06/19/2018 1:08:45 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
Despite the sprawl of Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz’s 568-page report on the Clinton-emails investigation, there is precious little discussion of the most important issue: The Justice Department and FBI’s rationale for declining to prosecute Hillary Clinton.
snip
In explaining themselves to the IG, Obama Justice Department and FBI officials contended that the make-or-break issue in the case was whether they could prove mens rea — criminal state of mind. In this instance, that involved former secretary of state Clinton’s knowledge and intent regarding the unauthorized transmission and retention of classified information. Investigators say it dawned on them at a very early stage that they could not. Hence, they urge, their decisions to allow the election calendar to impose a time limit on the investigation, to limit the amount of evidence they considered, to be less than aggressive in obtaining evidence, and to draft an exoneration of Clinton months before interviewing her (and other key witnesses), were entirely reasonable.
Yet their analysis left out the best intent evidence, namely, Clinton’s willful setting up of a private, non-secure server system for all official business.
snip
A detailed description of the grossly improper communications system Clinton established would have illustrated that she knew full well the risk she was running. A large percentage of the secretary of state’s job involves classified matters. We are not talking merely about the exchange of documents marked classified but, more commonly, constant deliberations about sensitive intelligence in classified documents, briefings, and conversations. Clinton’s willful concoction of a home-brew communications network — not a harried official’s occasional, exigent use of private email for official business, but her rogue institution of a private, non-government infrastructure for the systematic conduct of State Department business — made the non-secure transmission and storage of classified information inevitable.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
"But she had no intent to violate the federal statute against bank robbery! Why she doesn't even know the statute!
"Here is a polygraph exam demonstrating that Hillary was entirely truthful when asked to recite 18 U.S. Code § 2113 regarding bank robbery and she stated she couldn't.
"Yes, she knowingly robbed the bank but she certainly did not intend to violate the federal statute against bank robbery. How could she when she couldn't even recite the statute?"
JUDGE DEEPSTATE: "Yes, yes, I agree with that. Case dismissed for lack of intent. The defendant is free to be president. By the way, just so you know, I would love to be on the Supreme Court one day, madam."
In a world where “intent to distribute” can be established in a drug case merely by the amount of drug found in one’s possession, it strains credulity to think that they couldn’t prove intent here. I’ve yet to hear a credible argument that it would be impossible to prove intent. If anyone has one or has heard of one, I’d love to hear it.
Bump
“Yet their analysis left out the best intent evidence, namely, Clinton’s willful setting up of a private, non-secure server system for all official business.”
This is the absolute most important issue here. She INTENDED to violate the law from the get go because she planned to not have her criminal dealings recorded for posterity as required by the federal records act. She in effect did exactly what the line from the Shackspear play infers: what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive. She should be in an orange jump suit for this alone.
Beyond this action, the IG report was hyped specifically to focus everyone’s attention away from other crimes by individuals right up to Ohola including the unmasking.
It is another case of word parsing and excuses. No one is going to charge HRC with anything. why? Because she has all the money and the power. She is still running the DOJ and the FBI. Sessions is her Number 1 fan and protector. All the rest, including many on FR, are busy making excuses. Can’t get a Grand jury to charge. Can’t convict in DC. Everyone has full immunity. The newest is “CAN’T CHARGE HRC BECAUSE IT WILL LEAD TO OBAMA”. That has been the meme since the OIG Report. The OIG Report was a complete whitewash. Now they are having Blue Ribbon Panels and Hearings on the whitewash. Nothing will happen.
>>> She INTENDED to violate the law from the get go because she planned to not have her criminal dealings recorded for posterity as required by the federal records act. <<<
More importantly, Hussein Obama knew about it from the get go too.
Then they better go back and pardon Benedict Arnold because he thought he was just “making conversation” with the British.
Hilary has never had any intent that wasn’t criminal
Gosh.
I remember the first day of my communications security classes.
Here’s what the instructors told us,
“Whether you do it intentionally or unintentionally, if you give away our governments secrets, we will throw you in prison.”
I’ve never understood how Comey could decide whether or not to prosecute Hillary. The FBI only recommends. The DOJ makes the decision. That’s what I thought.
So it might as well have been me that got up there and state that Hillary wouldn’t be prosecuted.
As far as I’m concerned no decision has been made as to whether to prosecute Hillary. DOJ hasn’t spoken.
My Security training in the service was exactly the same, blueinicorn6.
The instruction was very clear, very plain, and oft repeated: makes no matter whether you intended to, or not, mishandling ANY classified material is a crime, and punishable to the maximum provisions of the law.
It was NEVER a question in my mind. NEVER.
im ww2 loose lips sink ships- death penalty was threatened to communications officers
Beyond that. The relevant law doesn’t require intent, only a lack of care. If intent is involved, that goes straight to espionage.
...and like Hillary, signed documents saying you understood this to be the case as a pre-requisite to being allowed access to the secrets.
Great metaphor!
The Clintons are so jaded with a long history of blatant crimes, including sending Sandy Berger to collect similar documents they thought they could get away with it again.
The law in question does not require intent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.