Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fedora

They decided early on that claiming “lack of intent” was the only way they cojuld cover up Hillary’s crimes.


8 posted on 06/25/2018 9:26:22 PM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either satire or opinion. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: BenLurkin

The charges of mishandling classified info, destroying evidence after receiving a subpeona, and falsifying information against a presidential candidate should not be mitigated by lack of intent. How do you smash phone if you have no intent to destroying evidence?

When Comey exhonerated hillary all by himself, commentators said that “excessive handling” of classified info was indictable intent or no.


12 posted on 06/25/2018 9:33:41 PM PDT by morphing libertarian ( Build Kate's Wall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: BenLurkin

“They decided early on that claiming “lack of intent” was the only way they could cover up Hillary’s crimes.”

The private server of Hillary was intent to commit crimes. The classified information on the server was multiple felonies, each one a new felony. In the real world of real honest prosecution the only thing to be negotiated is how long do you go to jail.

Comey is a conspirator in a criminal act of obstruction of justice. He needs to go to jail along with Hillary and many of her cohorts.


25 posted on 06/25/2018 10:37:13 PM PDT by cpdiii (cane cutter, deckhand, roughneck, geologist, pilot, pharmacist, THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson