"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
Then they better go back and pardon Benedict Arnold because he thought he was just “making conversation” with the British.
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.
Beyond that. The relevant law doesn’t require intent, only a lack of care. If intent is involved, that goes straight to espionage.
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.