Posted on 06/25/2018 9:00:35 PM PDT by bitt
Within the Inspector General report into how the DOJ and FBI handled the Clinton email investigation, on Page #164, footnote #124 the outline is laid bare for all to witness. The Clinton classified email investigation was structured to deliver a predetermined outcome.
John Spiropoulos delivers the first video in a series of reports on the Department of Justice Inspector General’s review into the investigation of Hillary Clinton. This segment focuses on DOJ’s legal interpretation that virtually assured Clinton would not be prosecuted. And that, as the IG reports states, the FBI and DOJ knew that “by September 2015″…
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
p
Shocked!
“Page #164, footnote #124”
Ok.
Post it.
Paging Capt. Renault, paging Capt. Renault...
The farkin private server setup WAS the intent
They decided early on that claiming “lack of intent” was the only way they cojuld cover up Hillary’s crimes.
Bleach bit after the subpoena of the emails proves intent
124
The legal framework for the Midyear investigation and the basis for the decision not to recommend or pursue prosecution of former Secretary Clinton or her staff are described in Chapters Two and Seven, respectively. Even though Section 793(f)(1) does not require intent, prosecutors told us that the Department has interpreted the provision to require that the person accused of having removed or delivered classified information in violation of this provision possess knowledge that the information is classified. In addition, based on the legislative history of Section 793(f)(1), the prosecutors determined that conduct must be “so gross as to almost suggest deliberate intention,” be “criminally reckless,” or fall “just a little short of willful” to meet the “gross negligence” standard.
The charges of mishandling classified info, destroying evidence after receiving a subpeona, and falsifying information against a presidential candidate should not be mitigated by lack of intent. How do you smash phone if you have no intent to destroying evidence?
When Comey exhonerated hillary all by himself, commentators said that “excessive handling” of classified info was indictable intent or no.
What freakin’ criminals.
It is so obvious it is the most frustrating thing since the Warren report, probably worse..
And yet, despite displayed political bias by half the staff members conducting the mid-year investigation, the IG determined that the prosecutorial decisions made by the DOJ prosecutors never were shown to be outside of appropriate parameters and therefore unaffected by bias in evidence.
The Prosecutors never had the FBI referrals of crimes because the parameters outlined in this footnote made “crime” an virtually unreachable standard.
I didn’t see anything. Did you see anything, Loretta?
No, James, I didn’t see anything in this matter.
Okay, I’ll close it.
My private video of her at Spago tells the story of intent. Because of investigations, she was afraid of using email. Email, why would I want to use email? Can you imagine?
It wasn’t her lack of intent. It was that fact that she didn’t give a shyt.
.
‘It didn’t affect anything, though.’
Toothless IG.
Swamp protecting the Swamp.
.
can you pass me a hammer please?
its a sure way to munch a hard drive or a phone!
The IG put his statement that Hillary violated the espionage act in a footnote where he hoped no one would read it?
That conclusion should have had its own section in the report.
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.