Obstruction Education

[georgephillip]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

 

[georgephillip]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

He punted because he didn't want to outright say he had jack shit and be killed by the mob.

 

[georgephillip]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Congress should follow the obvious road map and impeach the pathological liar currently residing in the White House, as if you care as long as the liar-in-chief has a "R" behind his name.

 

[georgephillip]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

He punted because he didn't want to outright say he had jack shit and be killed by the mob.

When discussing Trump, you should be more specific when using the word "mob"

Justice Integrity Report - Home

Trump's Dirty Money

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Congress should follow the obvious road map and impeach the pathological liar currently residing in the White House, as if you care as long as the liar-in-chief has a "R" behind his name.

Such a simple question.....apparently not as simple as you are, but simple none the less.....

Yet, you're afraid to answer it: Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?



"...impeach the pathological liar ..."
What lies???

None to compare with these:
1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."


2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

October 7 2008, in the second presidential debate: "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table"




The first is an attack on America, the second, on all of Western Civilization.





Answer the question, dunce.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

He punted because he didn't want to outright say he had jack shit and be killed by the mob.

When discussing Trump, you should be more specific when using the word "mob"

Justice Integrity Report - Home

Trump's Dirty Money

Bet you voted for this, real crim:inality

Just a few (25) of the scandals, lies, and criminal activity of Hillary Clinton.




1. Travelgate: After their election, the Clintons fired the White House Travel Office...which had served 7 administrations, and turned it over to their pals. As part of this, they brought bogus corruption charges against the civil servants therein.

The individuals were cleared on all counts.

The Independent Council found that Hillary lied when she claimed she wasn't behind the scam. “The overwhelming evidence establishes that she played a role in the decision to fire the employees. … Thus, her statement to the contrary under oath was factually false.”


a. " Hillary described Travelgate with cool indifference as, “perhaps worthy of a two-or-three-week life span, instead, in a partisan political climate, it became the first manifestation of an obsession for investigation that persisted into the millennium.” But for Billy Dale, it wasn’t a partisan manifestation. It was the termination of a thirty-plus-year career, and a fight for his freedom. If convicted, he faced a maximum of twenty years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/17/h...-the-white-house-travel-office/#ixzz43pSzYNB8

b. For you or I that would mean a perjury charge and criminal record for trying to destroy an innocent American who had served honorably under eight administrations and lying about it. For Hillary it meant a future as the junior New York Senator and then President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State." Ibid.

2. @ 0:58 Hillary's pal Vince Foster was involved in several of the Clinton scandals. When he was found dead: was that why Hillary had Foster's files ransacked before investigators could view them?

WASHINGTON, July 26— A Secret Service officer today flatly contradicted the White House account of the night of Vincent W. Foster Jr.'s death, telling the Senate Whitewater panel that he had seen Hillary Rodham Clinton's top aide remove files from Mr. Foster's office. The aide vehemently denied doing it.

Testifying under oath before the special Senate committee investigating Whitewater, the officer, Henry P. O'Neill, said that on July 20, 1993, several hours after Mr. Foster's body was found in a Virginia park, he saw Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff, Margaret A. Williams, carrying two handfuls of folders from Mr. Foster's office." 2 Conflicting Accounts on Files From White House Aide's Office

3. @ 1:47 To see how a President Hillary would 'rule,' take a look at her methods when Bill put her in charge of the earlier attempt at a take-over of healthcare: " WASHINGTON, Dec. 1— A Federal district judge said today that he intended to impose sanctions on Clinton Administration officials for their "misconduct" in a court case involving the disclosure of documents from Hillary Rodham Clinton's task force on health care..... "The court understands plaintiffs' frustration with the defendants' misconduct during the course of this litigation, and the court intends to impose sanctions." Misconduct Found on Clinton Health Plan

The Kremlin would be proud!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. @4:07 Whitewater....15 Clinton pals were convicted of 40 federal crimes.

5. @4:35 Cattlegate...."... computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader.

The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account,...." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr940527.htm

a. "....guided through the risky trades by James Blair, a friend and top lawyer for one of Arkansas' most powerful companies, Tyson Foods Inc." Business | Hillary Clinton Invested $1,000, Netted $100,000 Through Trading | Seattle Times Newspaper

b. "....Tyson was everything shed been taught to despise at Wellesley and Yale, a greedy capitalist who hated labor unions and had no compunction about polluting Mother Earth for financial gain. Yet she allowed Blair, Big Daddys right-hand man, to manage her financial affairs. Second, assuming the speculation in Marshalls Magazine is correct, she was the conduit for a bribe." Democrook: Hillary Clinton

The odds that Hillary did that honestly have been computed at 1 in 31 trillion. That was small potatoes compared to the deals Bill and Hillary appear to have cut with foreign governments. Enormous sums went directly into Bill’s pockets for doing speeches or to the scammy Clinton Foundation and next thing you know, the State Department was doing favors for those shady deep pocketed donors. Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. @5:38 Raw naked power: Filegate. The Clintons illegally obtained FBI files on potential political enemies. "... in 1996 when it was discovered that the Clinton White House illegally obtained FBI files on adversaries, and used them to smear them, continues to this day. Strangely, although Mrs. Clinton is the principal defendant, and although there is sworn testimony, obtained during earlier discovery that Mrs. Clinton was the mastermind of this illegal scheme, the Court has never granted Plaintiffs requests to depose her —.... civil lawsuit which seeks to hold her accountable for illegally violating the privacy rights of American citizens she and her husband Bill Clinton viewed as political adversaries during their administration in the 1990s." Hillary Clinton tries to escape from on-going Filegate case

a. "It was also during this Filegate case that it was learned that President Clinton, on the advice of his top political adviser, James Carville, had illegally released Privacy Act protected information from White House files to smear Kathleen Willey, a woman who was a material witness in the impeachment proceedings, as she was also sexually harassed by the “philanderer in chief” while working for him in the White House."
Proof Hillary isn't fit to be president - WND - WND

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. @ 6:35 Chinagate. Foreign countries funneled millions into Clinton's campaign. ".... Hillary then masterminded a scheme whereby the Clinton-Gore presidential campaign of 1996 took bribes from communist Chinese banks and their government to bankroll the president’s and the Democratic Party’s re-election efforts ."
Proof Hillary isn't fit to be president - WND - WND

a. "When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, Chinese missiles were greatly limited in terms of their range and accuracy. But as journalist Richard Poe noted in 2003, “Thanks to Bill Clinton, China can now hit any city in the USA, using state-of-the-art, solid-fueled missiles with dead-accurate, computerized guidance systems and multiple warheads.”.... "'We like your president. We want to see him reelected,' former Chinese intelligence chief General Ji Shengde told Chinagate bagman Johnny Chung.

"Indeed, Chinese intelligence organized a massive covert operation aimed at tilting the 1996 election Clinton’s way.

"Clinton’s top campaign contributors for 1992 were Chinese agents; his top donors in 1996 were U.S. defense contractors selling missile technology to China.

"Clinton recieved funding directly from known or suspected Chinese intelligence agents, among them James and Mochtar Riady who own the Indonesian Lippo Group; John Huang; Charlie Trie; Ted Sioeng; Maria Hsia; Wang Jun and others." Discover the Networks | Bill Clinton

b. "Agents for the Chinese government and military funneled millions into President Clinton’s re-election campaign, the Clinton Legal Defense Fund and the DNC.

The DOJ reported “A pattern of events suggests a level of knowledge within the White House–including the President’s and First Lady’s offices–concerning the injection of foreign funds into the reelection effort.” Hillary Clinton A Career Criminal Video | LYBIO.NET Discover New Reading Content.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. @6:35 ChinaGate Against campaign finance law, China donated to Bill Clinton's campaign so as to influence US policies. Agents for the Chinese government, and the military, funneled millions into Clinton's campaign.

DoJ: ...knowledge within the President's and First Lady's Offices...concerning the injection of foreign funds in the reelection effort.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. @7:10 Using the IRS against political enemies....a Democrat tactic. A senior IRS official admitted that Clinton opponents were singled out for audit....including Bill Clinton's female accusers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. @ 7:45 PardonGate He issued pardons to 450 individuals including cocaine traffickers, terrorists and kidnappers. Several pardons directly benefitted Hillary Clinton, with ties to her NYSenate bid. Marc Rich was actually a fugitive on the run at the time...on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List....while his wife donated thousands to Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign, the Clinton Legal Defense Fund and the DNC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. @12:00 As Senator....introduced three minor bills which became law in seven years. That includes naming a post office.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12. @12:33 Enthusiastically voted for the Iraq War

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. @13:10 "....prosecutors revealed Monday that the mastermind of Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s “shadow campaign” also funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to aid Mrs. Clinton’s bid for the White House.

Jeffrey E. Thompson’s scheme included diverting more than $608,000 in illicit funds to a New York marketing executive, Troy White, who organized “street teams” to raise Mrs. Clinton’s visibility in urban areas during her Democratic primary battle against Barack Obama.

.....from February to May 2008, Thompson used two firms to disburse $608,750 in “excessive and unreported contributions to pay for campaign services in coordination with and in support of a federal political candidate for president of the United States and the federal and the candidate’s authorized committee.” That candidate was Mrs. Clinton." Hillary Clinton campaign received funds from Jeffrey Thompson

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. @ 13:39 " State Department spokeswoman can't name Hillary Clinton's diplomatic achievements ... and neither can Hillary Clinton!
· Jen Psaki, the State Department's chief spokesperson, seemed blindsided by a question about Clinton's accomplishments

· A CNN panel erupted into laughter when Psaki's gaffe was shown

· Clinton herself couldn't articulate what she was 'most proud of' during her time as America's top diplomat when asked just weeks ago

Read more: State Department spokeswoman can't name Hillary Clinton's diplomatic achievements ... and neither could Hillary Clinton | Daily Mail Online

Not one achievement in her 4years collecting a salary from the taxpayers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15. @ 14:33 " The State Department misplaced and lost some $6 billion due to the improper filing of contracts during the past six years, mainly during the tenure of former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, according to a newly released Inspector General report." State Dept. misplaced $6B under Hillary Clinton: IG report

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16. @ 14:48 " Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists" Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists
Even though FBI, DoJ and CIA had requested it, so they could pursue group.Result was kidnapping of 300 Nigerian school girls.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. @ 14:58 A special investigator for the State Department found that with Hillary in charge, the following investigations were blocked or called off:
a) Sexual assaults by state dept security officials in Beirut
b) "Endemic" use of prostitutes by Hillary's security detail
c.) Drug use by state dept contractors in Baghdad
d) Solicitation of child male prostitutes by US ambassador in Belgium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. @16:10 Benghazi cover-up
Hillary testified that she had submitted all documents related to the inquiry. 20 months later....41 new documents were found....including changes to Susan Rice's talking points.
More documents are being withheld.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. "State Dept. Promises to Release Clinton Emails on Day That Literally Doesn’t Exist" State Dept. Promises to Release Clinton Emails on Day That Literally Doesn’t Exist
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20. This, from the Mexican paper...the NYTimes:

"In April 2012, representatives from Qatar were apparently hoping to get “five minutes” with former President Bill Clinton while in New York to present him with a $1 million check for his foundation as a birthday gift from the previous year.


While it is unclear whether that meeting ever took place, the offer,mentioned in one of thousands of hacked Clinton campaign emailsreleased by WikiLeaks last week, was an example of the complex ethical issues the Clinton Foundation faced in managing relationships with foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. It also raised questions about whether the foundation had fully followed procedures it had voluntarily agreed to in order to avoid those very issues."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/us/politics/wikileaks-bill-clinton-foundation.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

"FBI Director: Clinton Gave Non-Cleared People Access to Classified Information
Comey says between two and 10 individuals without clearances had access to server

Hillary Clinton gave people without a security clearance access to her private server that contained classified information, FBI director James Comey told a congressional panel on Thursday.

The FBI director said between two and 10 individuals without clearances had access to the server, including Clinton’s attorneys who sorted her emails before they were turned over to the State Department."
Clinton Gave Non-Cleared Individuals Access to Classified Info




There are several laws that make it a criminal offense knowingly to reveal or mishandle classified information. The main one, 18 USC 1924 reads:

Whoever being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.


Clinton also has to worry about government rules for handling secrets. In December 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13526, which renewed the long-running rules for classifying information and the penalties for revealing it.

Under that order, agency heads like Clinton are responsible for keeping secrets safe throughout their departments. And all officers of the government can be suspended, fired or have their security clearance revoked if they “knowingly, willfully, or negligently” disclosed secrets or broke the rules in any other way.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(b)

Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally


18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so;

Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years



18 U.S. Code § 1515 - Definitions for certain provisions; general provision





(b)

As used in section 1505, the term “corruptly” means acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information.


I see 25 years in an orange jumpsuit for Bill's wife.

 

[Bush92]

"FBI Director: Clinton Gave Non-Cleared People Access to Classified Information
Comey says between two and 10 individuals without clearances had access to server

Hillary Clinton gave people without a security clearance access to her private server that contained classified information, FBI director James Comey told a congressional panel on Thursday.

The FBI director said between two and 10 individuals without clearances had access to the server, including Clinton’s attorneys who sorted her emails before they were turned over to the State Department."
Clinton Gave Non-Cleared Individuals Access to Classified Info




There are several laws that make it a criminal offense knowingly to reveal or mishandle classified information. The main one, 18 USC 1924 reads:

Whoever being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.


Clinton also has to worry about government rules for handling secrets. In December 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13526, which renewed the long-running rules for classifying information and the penalties for revealing it.

Under that order, agency heads like Clinton are responsible for keeping secrets safe throughout their departments. And all officers of the government can be suspended, fired or have their security clearance revoked if they “knowingly, willfully, or negligently” disclosed secrets or broke the rules in any other way.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(b)

Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally


18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so;

Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years



18 U.S. Code § 1515 - Definitions for certain provisions; general provision





(b)

As used in section 1505, the term “corruptly” means acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information.


I see 25 years in an orange jumpsuit for Bill's wife.

But...she’s a Democrat so liberal media protected her.

 

[Bush92]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

He punted because he didn't want to outright say he had jack shit and be killed by the mob.

When discussing Trump, you should be more specific when using the word "mob"

Justice Integrity Report - Home

Trump's Dirty Money

Bet you voted for this, real crim:inality

Just a few (25) of the scandals, lies, and criminal activity of Hillary Clinton.




1. Travelgate: After their election, the Clintons fired the White House Travel Office...which had served 7 administrations, and turned it over to their pals. As part of this, they brought bogus corruption charges against the civil servants therein.

The individuals were cleared on all counts.

The Independent Council found that Hillary lied when she claimed she wasn't behind the scam. “The overwhelming evidence establishes that she played a role in the decision to fire the employees. … Thus, her statement to the contrary under oath was factually false.”


a. " Hillary described Travelgate with cool indifference as, “perhaps worthy of a two-or-three-week life span, instead, in a partisan political climate, it became the first manifestation of an obsession for investigation that persisted into the millennium.” But for Billy Dale, it wasn’t a partisan manifestation. It was the termination of a thirty-plus-year career, and a fight for his freedom. If convicted, he faced a maximum of twenty years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/17/h...-the-white-house-travel-office/#ixzz43pSzYNB8

b. For you or I that would mean a perjury charge and criminal record for trying to destroy an innocent American who had served honorably under eight administrations and lying about it. For Hillary it meant a future as the junior New York Senator and then President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State." Ibid.

2. @ 0:58 Hillary's pal Vince Foster was involved in several of the Clinton scandals. When he was found dead: was that why Hillary had Foster's files ransacked before investigators could view them?

WASHINGTON, July 26— A Secret Service officer today flatly contradicted the White House account of the night of Vincent W. Foster Jr.'s death, telling the Senate Whitewater panel that he had seen Hillary Rodham Clinton's top aide remove files from Mr. Foster's office. The aide vehemently denied doing it.

Testifying under oath before the special Senate committee investigating Whitewater, the officer, Henry P. O'Neill, said that on July 20, 1993, several hours after Mr. Foster's body was found in a Virginia park, he saw Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff, Margaret A. Williams, carrying two handfuls of folders from Mr. Foster's office." 2 Conflicting Accounts on Files From White House Aide's Office

3. @ 1:47 To see how a President Hillary would 'rule,' take a look at her methods when Bill put her in charge of the earlier attempt at a take-over of healthcare: " WASHINGTON, Dec. 1— A Federal district judge said today that he intended to impose sanctions on Clinton Administration officials for their "misconduct" in a court case involving the disclosure of documents from Hillary Rodham Clinton's task force on health care..... "The court understands plaintiffs' frustration with the defendants' misconduct during the course of this litigation, and the court intends to impose sanctions." Misconduct Found on Clinton Health Plan

The Kremlin would be proud!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. @4:07 Whitewater....15 Clinton pals were convicted of 40 federal crimes.

5. @4:35 Cattlegate...."... computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader.

The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account,...." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr940527.htm

a. "....guided through the risky trades by James Blair, a friend and top lawyer for one of Arkansas' most powerful companies, Tyson Foods Inc." Business | Hillary Clinton Invested $1,000, Netted $100,000 Through Trading | Seattle Times Newspaper

b. "....Tyson was everything shed been taught to despise at Wellesley and Yale, a greedy capitalist who hated labor unions and had no compunction about polluting Mother Earth for financial gain. Yet she allowed Blair, Big Daddys right-hand man, to manage her financial affairs. Second, assuming the speculation in Marshalls Magazine is correct, she was the conduit for a bribe." Democrook: Hillary Clinton

The odds that Hillary did that honestly have been computed at 1 in 31 trillion. That was small potatoes compared to the deals Bill and Hillary appear to have cut with foreign governments. Enormous sums went directly into Bill’s pockets for doing speeches or to the scammy Clinton Foundation and next thing you know, the State Department was doing favors for those shady deep pocketed donors. Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. @5:38 Raw naked power: Filegate. The Clintons illegally obtained FBI files on potential political enemies. "... in 1996 when it was discovered that the Clinton White House illegally obtained FBI files on adversaries, and used them to smear them, continues to this day. Strangely, although Mrs. Clinton is the principal defendant, and although there is sworn testimony, obtained during earlier discovery that Mrs. Clinton was the mastermind of this illegal scheme, the Court has never granted Plaintiffs requests to depose her —.... civil lawsuit which seeks to hold her accountable for illegally violating the privacy rights of American citizens she and her husband Bill Clinton viewed as political adversaries during their administration in the 1990s." Hillary Clinton tries to escape from on-going Filegate case

a. "It was also during this Filegate case that it was learned that President Clinton, on the advice of his top political adviser, James Carville, had illegally released Privacy Act protected information from White House files to smear Kathleen Willey, a woman who was a material witness in the impeachment proceedings, as she was also sexually harassed by the “philanderer in chief” while working for him in the White House."
Proof Hillary isn't fit to be president - WND - WND

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. @ 6:35 Chinagate. Foreign countries funneled millions into Clinton's campaign. ".... Hillary then masterminded a scheme whereby the Clinton-Gore presidential campaign of 1996 took bribes from communist Chinese banks and their government to bankroll the president’s and the Democratic Party’s re-election efforts ."
Proof Hillary isn't fit to be president - WND - WND

a. "When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, Chinese missiles were greatly limited in terms of their range and accuracy. But as journalist Richard Poe noted in 2003, “Thanks to Bill Clinton, China can now hit any city in the USA, using state-of-the-art, solid-fueled missiles with dead-accurate, computerized guidance systems and multiple warheads.”.... "'We like your president. We want to see him reelected,' former Chinese intelligence chief General Ji Shengde told Chinagate bagman Johnny Chung.

"Indeed, Chinese intelligence organized a massive covert operation aimed at tilting the 1996 election Clinton’s way.

"Clinton’s top campaign contributors for 1992 were Chinese agents; his top donors in 1996 were U.S. defense contractors selling missile technology to China.

"Clinton recieved funding directly from known or suspected Chinese intelligence agents, among them James and Mochtar Riady who own the Indonesian Lippo Group; John Huang; Charlie Trie; Ted Sioeng; Maria Hsia; Wang Jun and others." Discover the Networks | Bill Clinton

b. "Agents for the Chinese government and military funneled millions into President Clinton’s re-election campaign, the Clinton Legal Defense Fund and the DNC.

The DOJ reported “A pattern of events suggests a level of knowledge within the White House–including the President’s and First Lady’s offices–concerning the injection of foreign funds into the reelection effort.” Hillary Clinton A Career Criminal Video | LYBIO.NET Discover New Reading Content.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. @6:35 ChinaGate Against campaign finance law, China donated to Bill Clinton's campaign so as to influence US policies. Agents for the Chinese government, and the military, funneled millions into Clinton's campaign.

DoJ: ...knowledge within the President's and First Lady's Offices...concerning the injection of foreign funds in the reelection effort.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. @7:10 Using the IRS against political enemies....a Democrat tactic. A senior IRS official admitted that Clinton opponents were singled out for audit....including Bill Clinton's female accusers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. @ 7:45 PardonGate He issued pardons to 450 individuals including cocaine traffickers, terrorists and kidnappers. Several pardons directly benefitted Hillary Clinton, with ties to her NYSenate bid. Marc Rich was actually a fugitive on the run at the time...on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List....while his wife donated thousands to Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign, the Clinton Legal Defense Fund and the DNC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. @12:00 As Senator....introduced three minor bills which became law in seven years. That includes naming a post office.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12. @12:33 Enthusiastically voted for the Iraq War

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. @13:10 "....prosecutors revealed Monday that the mastermind of Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s “shadow campaign” also funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to aid Mrs. Clinton’s bid for the White House.

Jeffrey E. Thompson’s scheme included diverting more than $608,000 in illicit funds to a New York marketing executive, Troy White, who organized “street teams” to raise Mrs. Clinton’s visibility in urban areas during her Democratic primary battle against Barack Obama.

.....from February to May 2008, Thompson used two firms to disburse $608,750 in “excessive and unreported contributions to pay for campaign services in coordination with and in support of a federal political candidate for president of the United States and the federal and the candidate’s authorized committee.” That candidate was Mrs. Clinton." Hillary Clinton campaign received funds from Jeffrey Thompson

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. @ 13:39 " State Department spokeswoman can't name Hillary Clinton's diplomatic achievements ... and neither can Hillary Clinton!
· Jen Psaki, the State Department's chief spokesperson, seemed blindsided by a question about Clinton's accomplishments

· A CNN panel erupted into laughter when Psaki's gaffe was shown

· Clinton herself couldn't articulate what she was 'most proud of' during her time as America's top diplomat when asked just weeks ago

Read more: State Department spokeswoman can't name Hillary Clinton's diplomatic achievements ... and neither could Hillary Clinton | Daily Mail Online

Not one achievement in her 4years collecting a salary from the taxpayers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15. @ 14:33 " The State Department misplaced and lost some $6 billion due to the improper filing of contracts during the past six years, mainly during the tenure of former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, according to a newly released Inspector General report." State Dept. misplaced $6B under Hillary Clinton: IG report

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16. @ 14:48 " Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists" Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists
Even though FBI, DoJ and CIA had requested it, so they could pursue group.Result was kidnapping of 300 Nigerian school girls.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. @ 14:58 A special investigator for the State Department found that with Hillary in charge, the following investigations were blocked or called off:
a) Sexual assaults by state dept security officials in Beirut
b) "Endemic" use of prostitutes by Hillary's security detail
c.) Drug use by state dept contractors in Baghdad
d) Solicitation of child male prostitutes by US ambassador in Belgium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. @16:10 Benghazi cover-up
Hillary testified that she had submitted all documents related to the inquiry. 20 months later....41 new documents were found....including changes to Susan Rice's talking points.
More documents are being withheld.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. "State Dept. Promises to Release Clinton Emails on Day That Literally Doesn’t Exist" State Dept. Promises to Release Clinton Emails on Day That Literally Doesn’t Exist
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20. This, from the Mexican paper...the NYTimes:

"In April 2012, representatives from Qatar were apparently hoping to get “five minutes” with former President Bill Clinton while in New York to present him with a $1 million check for his foundation as a birthday gift from the previous year.


While it is unclear whether that meeting ever took place, the offer,mentioned in one of thousands of hacked Clinton campaign emailsreleased by WikiLeaks last week, was an example of the complex ethical issues the Clinton Foundation faced in managing relationships with foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. It also raised questions about whether the foundation had fully followed procedures it had voluntarily agreed to in order to avoid those very issues."

Email About Qatari Offer Shows Thorny Ethical Issues Clinton Foundation Faced

Anyone who voted for Clinton has a weak mind and is easily manipulated. Just the type of citizens Hitler and Stalin liked. Sheep.

 

[Bush92]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

He punted because he didn't want to outright say he had jack shit and be killed by the mob.

When discussing Trump, you should be more specific when using the word "mob"

Justice Integrity Report - Home

Trump's Dirty Money

Another juvenile post.

 

[Bush92]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Congress should follow the obvious road map and impeach the pathological liar currently residing in the White House, as if you care as long as the liar-in-chief has a "R" behind his name.

I suggest the look for it on the back of a cereal box, that’s the only place you can find a map like that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If not for Hillary's slovenly and cavalier manner of handling classified communications, those who directed the attacks on Benghazi, and the commensurate deaths of Americans, would not have known about how defenseless the consulate was.


"Hillary Clinton’s Email Was Probably Hacked, Experts Say
When the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said on Tuesday that his investigators had no “direct evidence” that Hillary Clinton’s email account had been “successfully hacked,” both private experts and federal investigators immediately understood his meaning: It very likely had been breached, but the intruders were far too skilled to leave evidence of their work."
Hillary Clinton’s Email Was Probably Hacked, Experts Say

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Congress should follow the obvious road map and impeach the pathological liar currently residing in the White House, as if you care as long as the liar-in-chief has a "R" behind his name.

Yeah, knock yourself out with impeaching him on the grounds of, "He's guilty because we hate him and just KNOW he is!"

 

[Cecilie1200]

Wow! The best hopes and prayers of the Democrats simply became another dry hole. Attaboy, Mueller! There are some pretty interesting conspiracy theories possible as to why Mueller did what he did….and it sure isn’t because he is ‘honorable.’
Rats and sinking ships comes to mind.



1.Although Mueller could have simply copied the posts we on the Right penned two years ago, still, it is invigorating to watch the tearing and ripping by the poor, poor, jilted Leftists/Democrat/Liberals as we ram the hoax back down their lying throats…..and use Mueller’s report to do it!



Today, in a pause from the reveling, the schadenfreude, and mocking, this thread will focus on two points….
a. the actual meaning of obstruction of justice, and
b.proof that both Hillary and Obama are clearly and evidently guilty of same.exactly what the phrase means: obstruction of justice.

I guarantee it.





2. First the dry part, then the fun part. The elements required for a conviction on an obstruction of justice charge require prosecutors to prove the following elements:

1. There was a pending federal judicial proceeding
2. The defendant knew of the proceeding; and
3. The defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding. Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw

Mueller could not do so, and therefore, as much as this disreputable servant of the Left wished, could not indict, and had no expectation of a conviction of obstruction of justice.

Pay special attention to item 3. The word ‘intent’ is key and it will prove so later.

Trump railed against the proceedings, and did tweet his vehemence…..just as any innocent man would. There is nothing corrupt about complaining.





3.“But regardless of the specific section of federal law (1501 through 1521) cited in a particular case, the prosecution need not prove any actual obstruction -- the defendant's attempt to obstruct is enough. The element of intent, which is central to such cases, is also usually the most difficult to prove; although memos, phone calls, and recorded conversations may be used as evidence to establish this.” Obstruction of Justice - FindLaw


Saying mean things, tweeting, berating Mueller, Sessions, whoever, does not constitute corrupt intent. Obstruction of Justice requires the prosecutor to show exactly what this particular charge requires.

Mueller couldn’t, as much as he wished he could.

That can be seen in the language of his report.




4.For comparison, here is Comey stating why he could not indict Hillary Clinton:

“Now let me tell you what we found:
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System


Comey was lying through his teeth to allow Hillary to skate.

I’ll explain why, next.

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

He punted because he didn't want to outright say he had jack shit and be killed by the mob.

When discussing Trump, you should be more specific when using the word "mob"

Justice Integrity Report - Home

Trump's Dirty Money

When addressing me, you should be careful to speak as a logical adult who's not suffering from mental problems.

 

[georgephillip]

How do you spin Mueller's conclusion?

Read the Mueller Report: Searchable Document and Index (Vol. II, P. 182)

"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.

"At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state1.

"Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

Mueller Report is a referral and a road map for impeachment

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Congress should follow the obvious road map and impeach the pathological liar currently residing in the White House, as if you care as long as the liar-in-chief has a "R" behind his name.

Such a simple question.....apparently not as simple as you are, but simple none the less.....

Yet, you're afraid to answer it: Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?



"...impeach the pathological liar ..."
What lies???

None to compare with these:
1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."


2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

October 7 2008, in the second presidential debate: "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table"




The first is an attack on America, the second, on all of Western Civilization.





Answer the question, dunce.

...impeach the pathological liar ..."
What lies???

None to compare with these:
1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."


2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

You should really be on your knees (even more frequently) in fervent thanks to Obama and Hillary for delivering your latest racist messiah

Who will be impeached shortly and make all rancid Republicans long for the days of Tricky Dick.

Maybe you should all move to Russia?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

Mueller's 'conclusion' was that he failed in this mission, to depose a duly elected American President.

You're blaming Mueller for Trump's timidity/guilty conscience?

depose - Google Search

"Testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.
"every affidavit shall state which of the facts deposed to are within the deponent's knowledge"
synonyms: swear, testify, attest, undertake, assert, declare, profess, aver, submit, claim; More"

Inside Trump's refusal to testify in the Mueller probe

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?


Take all the time you need.

Congress should follow the obvious road map and impeach the pathological liar currently residing in the White House, as if you care as long as the liar-in-chief has a "R" behind his name.

Such a simple question.....apparently not as simple as you are, but simple none the less.....

Yet, you're afraid to answer it: Now, focus like a laser, you dope......what did the disreputable Mueller conclude?



"...impeach the pathological liar ..."
What lies???

None to compare with these:
1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."


2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

October 7 2008, in the second presidential debate: "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table"




The first is an attack on America, the second, on all of Western Civilization.





Answer the question, dunce.

...impeach the pathological liar ..."
What lies???

None to compare with these:
1. Obama told illegal aliens to go and vote, saying "When you vote, you're a citizen yourself."


2. After promising that Iran would never get nuclear weapons, Obama guaranteed them nukes.

You should really be on your knees (even more frequently) in fervent thanks to Obama and Hillary for delivering your latest racist messiah

Who will be impeached shortly and make all rancid Republicans long for the days of Tricky Dick.

Maybe you should all move to Russia?

Okay, I'm over the extra-large graphics and the extra-extra-small intelligence.

FLUSH!

 

[PoliticalChic]

"At one point during the hearing, the FBI director acknowledged that Clinton’s attorneys did not hold security clearances when the former secretary of state asked them to sort through her emails to determine which messages to turn over to the State Department and which ones to delete.

Comey also said he was unsure whether Clinton’s IT aide Bryan Pagliano had a security clearance, but believed between two and 10 individuals without clearances had access to Clinton’s server.

The revelation came during a tense exchange between Comey and Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah). The FBI director hedged when Chaffetz asked whether Clinton’s non-cleared attorneys ever read her classified emails.

"I don’t know the answer to that," said Comey. "I don’t know whether they read them at the time."

Chaffetz pressed the FBI director on the question of access.

"Did Hillary Clinton give non-cleared people access to classified information?" asked Chaffetz.

"Yes," said Comey, before adding that he did not see evidence of criminal intent."
Clinton Gave Non-Cleared Individuals Access to Classified Info




Unlike the legal basis for obstruction of justice, which requires intent......the laws that Hillary broke do NOT require intent in order for guilt to be proven.