Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Talisker
You need an actual ruling.

Comey admitted that Hillary did the things that are spelled out in part (a) of the statute. That is beyond debate.

Because she did those things, as the FBI investigation showed, the statute applies - court ruling or no.

20 posted on 10/15/2016 2:07:16 PM PDT by Windflier (Pitchforks and torches ripen on the vine. Left too long, they become black rifles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Windflier
Because she did those things, as the FBI investigation showed, the statute applies - court ruling or no.

In reality, yes. In law, no.

It's a statute. You have to apply it. That invokes a judicial proceeding. The conviction - not just the accusation - has to be produced, or that particular statute can't be applied, by definition, because that statute references a conviction in its own definition of itself. Hillary's defense would be that simple: she rejects Comey's "opinion."

35 posted on 10/15/2016 2:20:09 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson