It's Begun
Apr 28, 2017 15:04:26 #
https://www.google.com/amp/freebeacon.com/issues/congress-seeks-prosecution-clinton-private-server-companys-obstruction-investigations/amp/
This is the tip of the iceberg. Everything gained here through discovery becomes admissible evidence against Hillary.
For example, discovery will show Hillary's server's to be non-secure and non-government approved.
That goes directly to espionage and on multiple counts because every time she sent or forwarded any material to any non-secure/non-gov. approved device, such as Weiner's laptop, it becomes a separate count of espionage.
This opens the door for further discovery against Clinton and each new item opens the door not only against her, but also against other D.C. people as links are established.
Our liberal posters will deny deny deny to no avail.
Finally, at the advent of this investigation: it's on.
This is the tip of the iceberg. Everything gained here through discovery becomes admissible evidence against Hillary.
For example, discovery will show Hillary's server's to be non-secure and non-government approved.
That goes directly to espionage and on multiple counts because every time she sent or forwarded any material to any non-secure/non-gov. approved device, such as Weiner's laptop, it becomes a separate count of espionage.
This opens the door for further discovery against Clinton and each new item opens the door not only against her, but also against other D.C. people as links are established.
Our liberal posters will deny deny deny to no avail.
Finally, at the advent of this investigation: it's on.
Apr 28, 2017 15:10:53 #
Docadhoc wrote:
Why even bother to investigate hell we spent millions on investigations and not one trial.I'm beginning to think this is all show.
Apr 28, 2017 15:53:13 #
vernon wrote:
Why even bother to investigate hell we spent millions on investigations and not one trial.I'm beginning to think this is all show.
That is because we had a corrupt Justice Department headed by Loretta Lynch, as well as a corrupt FBI Director in James Comey. Lynch is gone, and Comey needs to be gone.
If you read the full story, the owner of this company thumbed his nose as subpoena's from congressional committees. Not a smart thing to do with a new guy in charge of the Justice Department. I think that his prosecution will set an example for others.
Apr 28, 2017 16:02:35 #
Docadhoc wrote:
Frankly, if people would rid themselves of the idea of prosecuting her for "espionage" and actually utilize the correct US Code, it would be winnable. The following has resulted in multiple convictions.
18 USC 793
(d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, t***smits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or t***smitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, t***smit or cause to be communicated, delivered or t***smitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;
(f)Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Apr 28, 2017 16:02:50 #
Docadhoc wrote:
There is no conviction without proof of intent. Fuhgeddaboddit!
Apr 28, 2017 16:07:48 #
MarvinSussman wrote:
There is no conviction without proof of intent. Fuhgeddaboddit!
Depending on usage of the correct US Code for possible prosecution.
Apr 28, 2017 16:35:20 #
MarvinSussman wrote:
There is no conviction without proof of intent. Fuhgeddaboddit!
Go back and read the law, intent is not required.
Apr 28, 2017 16:56:43 #
AuntiE wrote:
Frankly, if people would rid themselves of the ide... (show quote)
That Hillary committed espionage is beyond question. It.opens the door for discovery and discovery will open the door to further charges..
It has to start somewhere and building on this rock is the foundation.
Apr 28, 2017 16:58:41 #
MarvinSussman wrote:
There is no conviction without proof of intent. Fuhgeddaboddit!
Incorrect again. Even unintentional.espionage is espionage.
Apr 28, 2017 17:03:13 #
Docadhoc wrote:
I wonder how many underlings will get squeezed before one sings?
The only thing is that half of Washington is c*********d and they do not want that exposed.
Apr 28, 2017 17:05:30 #
MarvinSussman wrote:
There is no conviction without proof of intent. Fuhgeddaboddit!
That's complete BS. She intended to have a private server. She intended to carry her Blackberry abroad where wh**ever was on it was exposed. She intended to hide and obstruct and lie.
Apr 28, 2017 17:15:20 #
BigMike wrote:
That's complete BS. She intended to have a private server. She intended to carry her Blackberry abroad where wh**ever was on it was exposed. She intended to hide and obstruct and lie.
No intent is required, simply allowing classified material to be c*********d or exposed to persons not vetted to see the material is the offense. It doesn't matter what you intended, if you have such material in your possession and you do not safeguard it you are guilty.
Apr 28, 2017 18:15:44 #
[quote=BigMike]I wonder how many underlings will get squeezed before one sings?
The only thing is that half of Washington is c*********d and they do not want that exposed.
The only thing is that half of Washington is c*********d and they do not want that exposed.
Apr 28, 2017 18:17:20 #
[quote=Carol Kelly]They won't sing, because they'll 'commit suicide' by squeezing. They could also get Obama. Oh, I wish they would and Michael.
Apr 28, 2017 18:56:45 #
pafret wrote:
No intent is required, simply allowing classified material to be c*********d or exposed to persons not vetted to see the material is the offense. It doesn't matter what you intended, if you have such material in your possession and you do not safeguard it you are guilty.
No disputing that! She's guilty as sin in in both cases.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.