[frank ballenger]

A few months ago Sessions said he has no basis to do anything about Hillary because he sees no obvious evidence of wrongdoing(!!!!) and now these guys can’t see any bias against Trump in hundreds of pages of blather against him.

My eye doctor has appointment openings if they want to get new glasses.

[Cheerio]

Has sessions even bothered to read the ESPIONAGE STATUTE?

Hillary Clinton and the FBI have learned much from the Alger Hiss case. The American public will not be able to read a transcript of Hillary Clinton's interview with the FBI, because the bureau did not transcribe it. Furthermore, Mrs. Clinton was also not placed under oath during the three-and-a-half-hour interview. When Mrs. Clinton wasn't placed under oath, she could not be charged with lying to the FBI, as Alger Hiss was eventually charged with and convicted of.

There doesn't seem to be a race against the clock for the Trump DOJ to charge Mrs. Clinton with espionage. Alger Hiss escaped prosecution under the Espionage Act of 1917 due to the statute of limitations having expired. Also, there was no appetite by the DOJ to charge the former senior State Department official and Democrat lawyer. Although federal statute USC 3282 provides for a five-year statute of limitation for the vast majority of federal crimes, this statute of limitations does not necessarily stand in the case of espionage prosecution. It is generally agreed by legal scholars that acts of espionage can be prosecuted for at least ten years after the alleged act.

I wish Congressman Trey Gowdy could give Attorney General Sessions a lesson on Spoliation of Evidence, with which attorneys fresh out of law school are familiar. Hillary Clinton's deletion of 30,000 emails is a classic case. When parties fail to produce relevant evidence within their span of control, evidence they are otherwise naturally expected to possess, the U.S. legal system allows and even mandates that unfavorable presumptions be drawn against them. So when some item of relevant evidence – whether documents, physical objects, or data relevant to an ongoing legal matter – is destroyed, discarded, or modified in some way, the U.S. legal system allows us to presume that the missing evidence was unfavorable to that party and allows us to draw conclusions accordingly. The classic junior high school excuse, "the dog ate my homework," isn't valid under the law when the disappearance is suspicious.

FURTHER......

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Nothing about INTENT in this particular section of 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Zip,Zero,Nada.