Skip to comments.NBC Hid Crucial Information That Would've Cleared Kavanaugh of Rape Allegations
Posted on 10/27/2018 5:41:13 AM PDT by ZeroToHero
NBC News purposefully hid vital information that would have supported clearing Brett Kavanaugh's rape allegations that Julie Swetnick and her attorney, Michael Avenatti, leveled against him.
(Excerpt) Read more at nnettle.com ...
Decision makers there along with Blasey-Ford, her lawyer Katz, Schumer, Feinstein and anyone involved with this must be arrested. Failure to do so is going to cause some really bad problems in the future.
Does NBC serve the public or are they simply Democrat Party hacks?
Not to mention the spys that the FBI planeted in the Trump Campaign.
Lets have all the dirty laundry out now.
The entire nbc network needs to be thrown in jail for this.
Wouldnt this be considered withholding evidence and interfering with congressional business and therefore a crime?
LOCK THEM UP!!!
18 U.S.C. § 371Conspiracy to Defraud the United States
The operative language is the so-called defraud clause, that prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States. This clause creates a separate offense from the offense clause in Section 371. Both offenses require the traditional elements of Section 371 conspiracy, including an illegal agreement, criminal intent, and proof of an overt act.
Although this language is very broad, cases rely heavily on the definition of defraud provided by the Supreme Court in two early cases, Hass v. Henkel, 216 U.S. 462 (1910), and Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S. 182 (1924). In Hass the Court stated:
The statute is broad enough in its terms to include any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of government . . . (A)ny conspiracy which is calculated to obstruct or impair its efficiency and destroy the value of its operation and reports as fair, impartial and reasonably accurate, would be to defraud the United States by depriving it of its lawful right and duty of promulgating or diffusing the information so officially acquired in the way and at the time required by law or departmental regulation.
Hass, 216 U.S. at 479-480. In Hammerschmidt, Chief Justice Taft, defined defraud as follows:
To conspire to defraud the United States means primarily to cheat the Government out of property or money, but it also means to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful governmental functions by deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest. It is not necessary that the Government shall be subjected to property or pecuniary loss by the fraud, but only that its legitimate official action and purpose shall be defeated by misrepresentation, chicane or the overreaching of those charged with carrying out the governmental intention.
Hammerschmidt, 265 U.S. at 188.
The general purpose of this part of the statute is to protect governmental functions from frustration and distortion through deceptive practices. Section 371 reaches any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing or defeating the lawful function of any department of Government. Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107, 128 (1987); see Dennis v. United States, 384 U.S. 855 (1966). The defraud part of section 371 criminalizes any willful impairment of a legitimate function of government, whether or not the improper acts or objective are criminal under another statute. United States v. Tuohey, 867 F.2d 534, 537 (9th Cir. 1989).
The word defraud in Section 371 not only reaches financial or property loss through use of a scheme or artifice to defraud but also is designed and intended to protect the integrity of the United States and its agencies, programs and policies. United States v. Burgin, 621 F.2d 1352, 1356 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1015 (1980); see United States v. Herron, 825 F.2d 50, 57-58 (5th Cir.); United States v. Winkle, 587 F.2d 705, 708 (5th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 827 (1979). Thus, proof that the United States has been defrauded under this statute does not require any showing of monetary or proprietary loss. United States v. Conover, 772 F.2d 765 (11th Cir. 1985), affd, sub. nom. Tanner v. United States, 483 U.S. 107 (1987); United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 (1975); United States v. Jacobs, 475 F.2d 270 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 821 (1973).
Time to file a complaint against every NBC station in America with the FCC.
Revoke their broadcast license. That would send a strong message.
Why cant they be nailed for Obstruction with such clear and provable facts. (Isnt it a shame we have to define facts these days?)
NBC works in unison with CNN to play the public for fools.
The fools shouldn’t buy the products that are advertised on their networks. The public is fed a daily diet of anger and hatred.
Email this to Chris Wallace.
Theres s media crut8csm ping list on fr as well.
I’m sure Sessions will get right on it.
Sessions, the ball is in your court. Do something!
The license should be revoked.
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.