Posted on 05/12/2017 2:02:01 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
FBI agents angered at FBI director's lenient handling of email probe!
The surprise firing of James Comey was triggered by the ousted FBI director's recent comments on why he chose not to seek the prosecution of Hillary Clinton for using an unsecure email server, according to White House and Trump administration officials.
President Trump was angered by Comey's assertion that Clinton had no criminal intent when she mishandled highly classified information on her private server, said officials familiar with the president's thinking.
..
"Federal law is clear regarding classified materials: intent is not relevant [to mishandling classified information]," the White House official said.
{..snip..}
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
Those big bucks you refer to were distributed that night on the famous “tarmac” meeting.
Clinton brought the cold cash , Lynch told Comey what to do.
Comey was also involved deeply in that Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson fiasco, anybody remember that?
Also Comey knee deep in Clinton foundation associates.
He’s a criminal smiling that evil smile he practiced all day in front of the mirror while smirking at how he had everybody on his payroll.
\
The law on espionage is very clear.
Intent is not necessary for conviction.
I remember my instructors teaching me about Communications Security.
“We don’t care if you accidentally divulge classified information. We will purposefully throw you into prison for doing it.”
In any case, intent was not for Comey to make the final decision on. That would be for the AG to decide (or whoever the AG designated).
I believe Comey admitted that he took it upon himself to decide intent because he thought Lynch might be compromised. He took a bullet for Lynch and Hillary.
I did not intend to leave a single page of a classified message on my desk inside my secure office in the Pentagon.
Security did an overnight sweep of offices chosen at random, found the classified message on my desk and when I returned to work on Monday, I was interviewed by security and had to receive a couple hours re-training on the handling of classified material. They were not amused.
Since I had a TS clearance since 1984, I already knew the rules but unintentionally left a single page of a classified document on my desk and was threatened that if I ever did that again, my clearance would be revoked and potential charges may be filed. . .all for ONE piece of classified data (a weather forecast for a select country that would affect “things”).
Yet, hitlery and huma gets away with THOUSANDS of classified information/messages being tossed around willy-nilly over an open unsecured hacked server.
Key-rist.
Clinton had no criminal intent when she mishandled highly classified information...?
That may be correct Stumblebum BUT she still can be prosecuted for gross negligent handling of highly classified material...you Dilbert Dumb Butt!!!!!!
Hillary’s “intent” was to keep her correspondence involving selling America to highest bidders using her SecState position secret from US....the voters, the citizens who don’t know all she knows. FOIA requests be damned.
And everybody, including Trump, knows that was her intent. It wasn’t so she had the convenience of a handy blackberry.
Comey was part of the plan just as he has been in the past, more details later perhaps.
They pee upon our feet and tell us it’s raining.
Silly me, I’d like to believe that there’s a slew of FBI agents who are furious that once again the Clintons have their own laws. I don’t think Comey was very well liked.
I’d like to think that once Trump showed up the stories were shouted.
But I dunno....I am just so surprised at all the outright in your face corruption.
Trump to Dem Media, “Okay I’ll see your Russia bluff and raise you with a Hillary Emails/Russian Uranium/Clinton Foundation Indictment”.
same with Huma
Careful. Weasels are my cousins.....................
Intent has never stopped them from prosecuting anyone else.
Clinton knew damn well she was out of bounds breaking the rules of her position.
I worked for the gov’t in a number of different roles and facilities and locations, including Pentagon; all your briefing and training will inform you and signed off - INTENT IS NOT NEEDED.
GAO, and IG.......................
Best article so far.
Bill Gertz, of course.
Even if you counted it, criminal intent does not mean intent to break the law. It means intent to take the illegal action. It doesn't rely on knowledge of the law. I won't say it never matters, but it is not the usual case that ignorance of the law is considered to form a lack of intent. I knew this the day Comey spouted it. I've never understood why even all the people criticizing him never pointed out that he misconstrued the meaning of intent to get to his result.
Yes he is. One of the few I still respect.
What? Are you serious?
Comey knows because that's what Bill and Loretta were talking about at the airport after they finished talking about their grand kids that she doesn't have.
‘If it worked for HRC, it should work for everyone.’
Comey was trying to have it both ways. His corruption ran deep:
‘[Comey] noted in July that although Clinton would not face charges, in a normal work environment, an employee doing what Clinton did would be punished.
” … this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions,” he said then.’
http://www.westernjournalism.com/fbi-director-anyone-clinton-face-big-trouble-fbi/
....They’re trying to use INTENT against President Trump’s Immigration Order...
The rules are ALWAYS different for Democrats.
They are haughty SOBs.
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.