Posted on 01/08/2018 4:32:32 PM PST by bitt
In the Clinton-email case, her intent, regardless of her motive, was clearly criminal. The Justice Department is reviving investigations involving Hillary Clinton’s emails and the degree to which the State Department during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as secretary was put in the service of the Clinton Foundation. Good. Indeed, it is long overdue. It underscores a point we’ve tried to make repeatedly here: You don’t need a special counsel for this kind of thing; such investigations are what we have a Justice Department full of career prosecutors for. The perverse institution of the independent prosecutor should be shunned whenever possible — and its jurisdiction tightly confined in the rare necessary case. All that said, investigations involving the mishandling of classified information by officials with privileged access to it will go nowhere unless the Justice Department restores the rule of law: investigators and prosecutors applying congressional statutes, not rewriting them as dictated by their political masters.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455202/hillary-clinton-email-investigations-trump-justice-department-revives-motive-criminal-intent
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
p
Regardless, she doesn’t even have to have “intent”. Is not the fact she set up (had someone set up) an unsecure server, which put classified info outside the secure network, the crime in itself?
Oh, I’m sure she had “intent” - but I believe that’s beside the fact.
Never before has “intent” played a role in a Felony.
Set a forest in fire by negligence; your intent doesn’t matter
Kill someone in a vehicular accident, due to negligence; intent doesn’t matter
Embezzle money; intent doesn’t matter
Burglary and intent doesn’t matter, either.
Unless your last name is Clinton
The conniving money-hungry Clintons calculatedly disguised the non-profit foundation as a global do-good "charity." They then went on a fund-raising rampage.......must have been about 275 individual fund-raising issues for every social ill imaginable. That ruse got billions churning into the "charity."
How much went out of the "charity" for the intended purpose is up for discussion.
=============================
Judicial Watch and other government watchdog groups have charged that the Clinton Foundation was a pay-for-play operation that rewarded its benefactors with State Department favors. And tax dollars....all you could possibly want.
The FBI has apparently closed its espionage investigation into Clinton’s unsecured private email server (the House has reopened it), its public corruption investigation into the Clinton Foundation remains open.
Investigators reportedly continue to look into alleged “pay-for-play” schemes involving the Clinton State Department and the Clinton Foundation and its wealthy donors, as well as entities that paid the Clintons millions of dollars in speaking fees.
I agree - No surprise James Comey used to be with The Clinton Foundation.
Obviously he still was, in another form.
Either we have one set of laws for everyone, or I’m going to start kicking the snot out of the shirtheads and then claim I’m a Democrat and should get off free.
HAT TIP CHARLES ORTEL) The Clinton Foundation, by its own description, started soliciting funding for its fight against HIV and AIDS early in 2002, though its authorized charitable status didn’t change until March 2004, after the Clinton Foundation HIV/AIDS Initiative Inc. was officially recognized on March 24, 2004, in Arkansas.
Applications made to the IRS, to various states and to foreign governments for tax exemption and solicitation rights to pursue this radically different mission, are not available on the central portal operated by the Clinton Foundation, nor forthcoming, yet, from the governments concerned.
Federal tax filings for this entity for the partial year in 2004 and for 2005 aren’t available on the Clinton Foundation website, perhaps because they show substantial activities that seem to fall far outside tax-exempt purposes approved by the IRS.
One time is important. It raises felonious malfeasance to espionage.
That difference is what should have been investigated by the FBI.
Intent is important. It raises felonious malfeasance to espionage.
That difference is what should have been investigated by the FBI.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.