1 posted on
06/25/2018 9:00:35 PM PDT by
bitt
To: Whenifhow; null and void; aragorn; EnigmaticAnomaly; kalee; Kale; 2ndDivisionVet; azishot; ...
2 posted on
06/25/2018 9:00:53 PM PDT by
bitt
(t\\)
To: bitt
3 posted on
06/25/2018 9:01:41 PM PDT by
fortheDeclaration
(Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
To: bitt
“Page #164, footnote #124”
Ok.
Post it.
4 posted on
06/25/2018 9:16:17 PM PDT by
ifinnegan
(Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
To: bitt
Paging Capt. Renault, paging Capt. Renault...
5 posted on
06/25/2018 9:21:21 PM PDT by
skr
(May God confound the enemy)
To: bitt
This appears to be the full paragraph partially quoted in the article: "As early as September 2015, FBI and Department officials realized that they were unlikely to find evidence of intent. Prosecutor 2 stated that within a month of first obtaining criminal process, they had seen no evidence of intent. This prosecutor told the OIG that the team realized that the case likely would lead to a declination after they had reviewed the classified information in former Secretary Clinton’s emails and heard the explanations for including that information in unclassified emails. Prosecutor 2 said that there were a number of other investigative steps they needed to take to complete their due diligence, but that by September 2015 they knew that they would need a “game changer” to be able to prove intent. " (p. 165) Footnote 124 appears on the prior page and discusses how the prosecutors had decided they would not recommend prosecution unless they could prove intent.
6 posted on
06/25/2018 9:21:58 PM PDT by
Fedora
To: bitt
It wasn’t her lack of intent. It was that fact that she didn’t give a shyt.
17 posted on
06/25/2018 9:48:42 PM PDT by
Seruzawa
(TANSTAAFL!)
To: bitt
The IG put his statement that Hillary violated the espionage act in a footnote where he hoped no one would read it?
That conclusion should have had its own section in the report.
To: bitt
"We're with her!" |
23 posted on
06/25/2018 10:06:24 PM PDT by
cynwoody
To: bitt
24 posted on
06/25/2018 10:07:27 PM PDT by
Chgogal
(Sessions recused himself for shaking an Ambassador's hand. Shameful!)
To: bitt
Yes but they thought the new boss would be same as the old boss, more or less.
Surprise! We said otherwise.
26 posted on
06/25/2018 11:16:59 PM PDT by
blackdog
To: bitt
With the logic of this report no-one could be charged with any crime.
The person under investigation just needs to say “I didn’t really mean to do it” and no-one could ever be indicted for anything.
Department of Just-Us.
27 posted on
06/26/2018 1:50:24 AM PDT by
cgbg
(Hidden behind the social justice warrior mask is corruption and sexual deviance.)
To: bitt
I don’t think the Navy sailor who took a picture of his submarine had any intent to do harm. But he served time in prison for it.
28 posted on
06/26/2018 2:05:25 AM PDT by
ImNotLying
(The Consti.tution is an instrument for the people to restrain the government...Patrick Henry)
To: bitt
do I really have to say it???
29 posted on
06/26/2018 4:11:45 AM PDT by
Chode
( WeÂ’re America, Bitch!)
To: bitt
Wasn’t there something posted way back when that indicated an employee was directed to strip the classified markers off a document when s/he said s/he could not transmit it as is? That surely documents intent on someone’s part, if not the Hildabeast herself. An indictment for that action might lead to a plea bargain.
30 posted on
06/26/2018 4:43:24 AM PDT by
NonValueAdded
(#DeplorableMe #BitterClinger #HillNO! #cishet #MyPresident #MAGA #Winning #covfefe)
To: bitt
So when was the original meeting and who attended to brain storm how to concoct this next meeting so as to invent this excuse?
To: bitt; All
33 posted on
06/26/2018 6:05:29 AM PDT by
PGalt
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson