Lois lerner conspired with Justice Dept, FBI

[Uncensored2008]

The link in the OP is enough proof for me.

It should be. Judicial Watch fought a long, hard battle to extricate the small amount of information it gained. Even after winning the FOIA suit, the criminal Obama administration refused to comply - Obama is simply above the law. It took a separate order from a federal judge to force them to finally release documents - and even in this the crooks destroyed the majority of the evidence.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's "mens rea" not mens res. You're only interested in mens cock, we know.
Mens rea is not required for a federal crime. The mere fact of having committed the act is proof of guilt.
You were never a LEO. You were a cocksucker in a jailhouse in Chino once, maybe.

"Mens rea is a legal phrase used to describe the mental state a person must be in while committing a crime for it to be intentional. It can refer to a general intent to break the law or a specific, premeditated plan to commit a particular offense."

My typo was an error, you comment that Mens rea is not required for a federal crime was a stupid mistake, unlike a typo which is inadvertent.

[Note: the 's' is next to the 'a', a typo which I missed when reading over my post. I have rather large fingers on large hands, typos are common which I why I read over my writing before posting. I'm not perfect]

The issue is complicated. Yes there is some element of mens rea in federal law but it isbeing eroded.
The Mens Rea Component Within the Issue of the Over-Federalization of Crime Publications The Federalist Society

And to my original point, before you went all captious, there is no evidence that Sec. Clinton or President Obama have or had a "guilty mind" as alleged by you and other Crazy Right Wingers (CRW) and partisan hacks.

Allegations of criminal wrong doing from Solyndra to IRS to Benghazi and every other hysterical hue and cry from the CRW are nothing more than efforts to assassinate the character of Obama, Clinton and every Democrat, progressive and libeal for political purposes. It's why you have zero credibility.

What would constitute such evidence? The evidence is the administration conspired to commit an illegal act in turning over confidential information to the FBI. That is a federal crime although I do not know if mens rea is a factor there.
In any case, it is certainly evidence that demands a thorough investigation by an independent prosecutor, as the Justice Dept is implicated in the scandal. Dont you agree?

If and only if an independent prosecutor looks into the conflicts of interest of Justice Scalia, and the Supreme Court has a code of ethics imposed on them. You have Issa, not by any stretch independent, but one who has investigated all of these so called scandals upside, downside and all around, spending my tax dollars and accomplishing nothing.

We don't need more and more investigations based on lies, half-truths, rumors, innuendos for political theater.

Sorry but what does one have to do with the other? You are deflecting, indicative that you've lost this argument. The House Judiciary Committee did not put off impeachment proceedings on Nixon because Kennedy was guilty of murder at Chappaquiddick.

 

[jwoodie]

If you know it ("Obama is a crook - we all know it") then you will post probative evidence to sway those of us who don't, and convince us to consider your opinion!

I see that "probative" is your new word of the day. Did you discover it all by yourself or was it sent to you in your talking points memo?

Speaking of probative, this is an OBJECTIVE term, not a subjective "convince me" term as you mistakenly believe.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I see that "probative" is your new word of the day. Did you discover it all by yourself or was it sent to you in your talking points memo?

Speaking of probative, this is an OBJECTIVE term, not a subjective "convince me" term as you mistakenly believe.

Again, Wry and the rest of the Khmer Rouge here have utterly no interest in evidence. Their only goal is to obfuscate facts and evidence.

 

[jwoodie]

"Mens rea is a legal phrase used to describe the mental state a person must be in while committing a crime for it to be intentional. It can refer to a general intent to break the law or a specific, premeditated plan to commit a particular offense."

The test for the existence of mens rea may be:

(a) subjective, where the court must be satisfied that the accused actually had the requisite mental element present in his or her mind at the relevant time (for purposely, knowingly, recklessly etc);
(b) objective, where the requisite mens rea element is imputed to the accused, on the basis that a reasonable person would have had the mental element in the same circumstances (for negligence); or
(c) hybrid, where the test is both subjective and objective.

You are confusing mens rea with insanity. Is that your defense?

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Mens rea is a legal phrase used to describe the mental state a person must be in while committing a crime for it to be intentional. It can refer to a general intent to break the law or a specific, premeditated plan to commit a particular offense."

The test for the existence of mens rea may be:

(a) subjective, where the court must be satisfied that the accused actually had the requisite mental element present in his or her mind at the relevant time (for purposely, knowingly, recklessly etc);
(b) objective, where the requisite mens rea element is imputed to the accused, on the basis that a reasonable person would have had the mental element in the same circumstances (for negligence); or
(c) hybrid, where the test is both subjective and objective.

You are confusing mens rea with insanity. Is that your defense?

Insane, no!

Go back to my original point read the link below and take the activity:

Subjective or Objective Mens Rea

Consider, none of this has been evaluated since only allegations exist thus far. Only the trier of facts - a judge or a jury - can decide if the the actions happened as you hope they did, and Sec. Clinton's state of mind.

The common law of crime requires a union of actus reus and mens rea, i.e. an act and a guilty mind

 

[The Rabbi]

"Mens rea is a legal phrase used to describe the mental state a person must be in while committing a crime for it to be intentional. It can refer to a general intent to break the law or a specific, premeditated plan to commit a particular offense."

The test for the existence of mens rea may be:

(a) subjective, where the court must be satisfied that the accused actually had the requisite mental element present in his or her mind at the relevant time (for purposely, knowingly, recklessly etc);
(b) objective, where the requisite mens rea element is imputed to the accused, on the basis that a reasonable person would have had the mental element in the same circumstances (for negligence); or
(c) hybrid, where the test is both subjective and objective.

You are confusing mens rea with insanity. Is that your defense?

Insane, no!

Go back to my original point read the link below and take the activity:

Subjective or Objective Mens Rea

Consider, none of this has been evaluated since only allegations exist thus far. Only the trier of facts - a judge or a jury - can decide if the the actions happened as you hope they did, and Sec. Clinton's state of mind.

That would necessitate an investigation by an independent body,a gathering of facts, and a charge to a grand jury. So you're OK with that?

 

[jwoodie]

Consider, none of this has been evaluated since only allegations exist thus far. Only the trier of facts - a judge or a jury - can decide if the the actions happened as you hope they did, and Sec. Clinton's state of mind.

This is well known as a circular argument: No facts are valid without adjudication, and those who are involved refuse adjudication. Therefore, no valid facts exist. How profound!