Trey Gowdy to Comey: As a Former Prosecutor, Didn't You <i>Routinely</i> Establish Intent By Citing a Defendant's Voluminous Lies Told to Cover Up Her Actions?

Trey Gowdy to Comey: As a Former Prosecutor, Didn't You Routinely Establish Intent By Citing a Defendant's Voluminous Lies Told to Cover Up Her Actions?

He makes a simple point: Prosecutors almost never have direct evidence of intent, unless a defendant kindly confesses, "Yeah, not only did I do it, I intended to do it."

Rather, intent is established through indirect evidence -- chiefly false exculpatory statements, statements designed to mislead about the facts, because the defendant knows the facts show his guilt. Thus, lies are used to show consciousness of guilt, which in turn indirectly establishes intent.

Comey's answer to this was to hem and haw and just look vaguely confused.

Near the end of the hearing, Jason Chaffetz took another run at this intent issue -- he asked, "How can you say Hillary had no intent when she obviously intended to deliver classified information into the hands of between two and ten persons not cleared to see it?" -- namely, her lawyers and the various IT people with access to these classified documents (via her unsecured, unauthorized email system).

That is plainly intent to share classified information with uncleared persons. Satisfying the "intent" standard.

Comey's response was to once again babble like a fool, and claim he could not find any "evil intent."

See that? The statute doesn't require intent, but Comey says he reads it to require intent anyway. Then Gowdy and Chaffetz prove that even by this misreading, Hillary still has intent.

Then Comey says: "Yes, but no evil intent, like to obstruct justice or deliver the information into enemy hands."

No matter what you probe Hillary did, Comey ups the ante for what he claims must be proven, then says it's not proven.

Another way to say this is that not only is Comey reading in an "intent" requirement plainly not part of the statute, but a specific intent requirement. "Intent" is merely the intent to do the thing you did. Specific intent is the intent to do the thing you did, with a specific outcome/effect in mind.

You may have intent to burn a cross, but you're not guilty of making a terroristic threat unless you have the specific intent of causing blacks or other minorities to become afraid due to your cross-burning. Otherwise, a lot of movie producers, like Quentin Tarantino or the guys who did Fletch Live, would be in jail for cross burning.

They don't go to jail, because obviously they were not burning crosses with that specific intent to produce fear in onlookers.

Comey is not just reading in a phantasmal intent requirement -- but a specific intent to mishandle classified information for the purposes of obstruction of justice or passing the information on to foreign powers.

Specific intent is intent on steroids -- very weird to read specific intent into a statute which doesn't even require vanilla intent.

Almost like he was employing motivated reasoning to get to the conclusion he favored from the start.

He has simply rewritten the statute, completely, to give Hillary another Clinton Gets Out of Jail card.

Video of Gowdy from Hot Air. When the Chaffetz video goes up, I'll post that as well.

Posted by: Ace at 03:03 PM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 1st

Posted by: mallfly SuPreme at July 07, 2016 03:04 PM (qSIlh)

2 1talics!

Posted by: mallfly SuPreme at July 07, 2016 03:04 PM (qSIlh)

3 It's them danged Eye-talicans again...

Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 03:06 PM (uiwCw)

4 What's your slant on this, ace?

Posted by: Chi at July 07, 2016 03:06 PM (oLne9)

5 I love the taste of fried Ewok.

Posted by: the Barrel at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (roFmD)

6 If you had 20 videos of Hillery telling ten different people that she was intending to break the law, some people would still insist that we didn't know if she was serious. Cackle.
By these standards, I think Hermann Goerring could have wealked

Posted by: mallfly SuPreme at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (qSIlh)

7 WALKED! not wealked

Posted by: mallfly SuPreme at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (qSIlh)

8 A whole day of italics? That's a bold move.

Posted by: Epobirs at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (IdCqF)

9 Comey's response was to once again babble like a fool, and claim he could not find any "evil intent."

Which is clear proof of Comey's guilt as an accessory.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (zc3Db)

10 I meant to do that.

Posted by: Pee Wee Hillary at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (roFmD)

11 Damn Italicans!!

Posted by: Timon at July 07, 2016 03:07 PM (396pH)

12
New thread thank heavens

Posted by: @votermom at July 07, 2016 03:08 PM (7lVbc)

13 I think most of the Repubs did a good job, especially these two.

All of the Dems boiled down to, "Why are the Repubs so mean to you and what are you going to do about all the black people shot by cops these last couple of days?"

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:08 PM (805dc)

14 Thank you for this new, slanty thread. Feels very fresh.

Posted by: Gouverneur Morris at July 07, 2016 03:08 PM (dQJCS)

15 You can thank me all for straightening you out.

Posted by: @votermom at July 07, 2016 03:08 PM (7lVbc)

16 Hello there, Ace!

Posted by: The Barrel at July 07, 2016 03:08 PM (vBeA5)

17 What does intent, evil or otherwise, have to do with gross negligence? I'm really curious, not being a lawyer and all. Somebody want to lawyersplain it to me?

Posted by: scoville unit at July 07, 2016 03:09 PM (0adl+)

18 All together now: "thank you votermom."

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:09 PM (805dc)

19 Didn't everyone assure us that Comey was a "stand up guy" and a "straight shooter" Hillary must have his FBI file from when he was the special counsel to the Whitewater committee in the Senate.

Posted by: Timon at July 07, 2016 03:10 PM (396pH)

Posted by: @votermom at July 07, 2016 03:10 PM (7lVbc)

21 James Comey has no honor. POS.

Posted by: Lester at July 07, 2016 03:10 PM (2UPXV)

22 You may have intent to burn a cross, but you're not guilty of making a terroristic threat unless you have the specific intent of causing blacks or other minorities to become afraid due to your cross-burning.

I was mostly watching but I missed that quote.

One of my favorite Clarence Thomas moments was when he slapped down his conservative brethren and said "trust me, a cross burning is terroristic", (or words to that effect).

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 07, 2016 03:10 PM (1xUj/)

23 On second thought, I think these goalposts would look better over there.

Posted by: James Comey at July 07, 2016 03:10 PM (94N0K)

24 Comments normal; home page Italican.

Peruvia has been avenged!

Posted by: andycanuck at July 07, 2016 03:11 PM (P1hwM)

25 And, this is the director of the FBI? Really?? I have no words...

Posted by: scoville unit at July 07, 2016 03:11 PM (0adl+)

26 Slash the FBI's budget by half. Or defund it entirely.

Posted by: Colorado Alex at July 07, 2016 03:12 PM (LUG6K)

27 Gowdy has been a disappointment as a congressman but before he was in congress he was a damn good prosecutor.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 07, 2016 03:12 PM (mpXpK)

28 Didn't everyone assure us that Comey was a "stand up guy" and a "straight shooter"

Posted by: Timon at July 07, 2016 03:10 PM (396pH)

Not everyone. Just the same people who assured us of that with Patrick Fitzgerald and his witchhunt of the Valerie Plame joke ... which, even though it was all a big joke, anyway, Fitzgerald knew from the start came from Armitrage and had nothing to do with the Bush White House or Scooter Libby.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 03:12 PM (zc3Db)

29 It's been posited that Comey didn't want to be the one to derail a presidential campaign. If that's the case, why not just present the DOJ with the evidence and let them decide? It's the prosecutor not the police that makes the decision to indict or not. Is it not the same at the federal level?

Posted by: Duke Lowell at July 07, 2016 03:12 PM (kTF2Z)

30 Assume Hillary loses the election - can she still be prosecuted by a new AG?

Posted by: VA GOP Sucks at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (PFy0L)

31 It was painful watching. Banana Republic here we come

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (zp+j1)

32 Some pigs are more equal

Posted by: Lauren...TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (oL4iq)

33 Mmmpfhhhg mmmghh umgh mumpf gub gub mgb.

Posted by: James Comey with Obama's cock in his mouth at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (ucB75)

34 It's dangerous to go alone! Here, take this: </i>

Posted by: Nonapod at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (CLP9I)

35 Nice, but no big deal. Comey already stated before congress that no matter what she did, she would skate.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at July 07, 2016 03:14 PM (7ZVPa)

36 You know, it would be nice if mens rea requirements were put back into statutes and regulations and arrrggghhh there goes my eye twitch again.

You know, I had no idea the FBI was allowed to determine which statutes were invalid. The more you know!

Posted by: alexthechick - I despair I despair at July 07, 2016 03:14 PM (mf5HN)

37 Pictured: Comey and his dour-faced twats.

Posted by: eleven at July 07, 2016 03:14 PM (fYChk)

38 17 What does intent, evil or otherwise, have to do with gross negligence? I'm really curious, not being a lawyer and all. Somebody want to lawyersplain it to me?
Posted by: scoville unit at July 07, 2016 03:09 PM (0adl+)
-------------

Well, I'll give it a crack, seeing as I watched almost all 4 hours. What I learned today, that that intent requirement is actually there in that Code 18 thingy or whatever it's called; we just can't see it. You have to read between the lines of actual words that are there.

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:14 PM (805dc)

39 t's been posited that Comey didn't want to be the one to derail a presidential campaign. If that's the case, why not just present the DOJ with the evidence and let them decide? It's the prosecutor not the police that makes the decision to indict or not. Is it not the same at the federal level?
Posted by: Duke Lowell at July 07, 2016 03:12 PM (kTF2Z)

There never should have been anything but a special prosecutor....but that is only for Republicans. Didn't you get the memo?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:14 PM (zp+j1)

40 "Evil intent," the new mens rea required to charge our corrupt and incompetent ruling class.

The bottom line is Comey is spinning furiously to make a slamdunk case look difficult. He all but conceded gross negligence, but he doesn't like it, therefore, that's not good enough. As you wrote, the circumstantial evidence of intent, although not the evil variety, is overwhelming.

Comey Tuesday basically told the peasants to suck it up and bow to their betters. Today he tried to wrap a transparently false rationale around it.

Make no mistake. The United States as a legitimate governmental entity is dead as a hammer.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at July 07, 2016 03:14 PM (dWDUj)

41 The fact that the FBI has a Facebook page, something I only learned the other day, does nothing to increase my faith in Comey and crew ever doing the right thing.
Is it time to hoist the blag flag, H. L. Mencken style yet? This waiting tires me.

Posted by: IP at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (Fol9S)

42 And since I already had typed all this, here's the apologies for the various walls o'text I did in the thread below:

Apologies ahoy!

In honor of the Fourth of July:

http://bit.ly/29BKi9R

Some cute kittens:

http://bit.ly/29pCVp7

Have I mentioned how much I like video games?

http://bit.ly/29r57nD

Dammit, I'm a doctor, not a piece of hotassery!

http://bit.ly/29qjVEt

Remember, training camp starts soon:

http://bit.ly/29qjKJa

Posted by: alexthechick - I despair I despair at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (mf5HN)

43 Comey is having to eat the shit sandwich that the fugly scrunt AG has dished up for him, on the explicit orders of Obama.

I hope he likes his shit sandwich. He could have avoided by doing the honorable thing by resigning. But all honor disappeared from Washington decades ago.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (mpXpK)

44 Senator: But Director Comey there is evidence she set up the separate server to avoid disclosure which would be evil intent.

Comey: Yes Senator but it was not evil evil intent.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (G6BhX)

45 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (/tuJf)

46 "She had no intent."
Yes, she did, see here, here, here, and HERE.
"Oh, well, she had no EVIL intent."

I can not wrap my hands around this bullshit. I am just mystified. I donno. Maybe it's because I've never really, TRULY been blackmailed, and/or really had my life threatened-- a la Vince Foster (we've done it before Jim. We can do it again)-- to really understand how a career law enforcement officer does such an obvious and stunning tap dance to make this shit flow up hill.

Posted by: chiefjaybob, who hates everyone at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (69cHf)

47 What a joke. What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (8ZskC)

48

Old and busted - Big Tent Party

New hotness - Big Intent Party

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (27m1/)

49 The Clintons are the only Free People in the USA....

Posted by: scrood at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (3b9U4)

50 HA!

"Make shit flow up HILL."

SWIDT!?!?!?

I crack myself up.
Another Valu Rite and Squirt, please.

Posted by: chiefjaybob, who hates everyone at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (69cHf)

51 Maurice = penis breath.

Posted by: eleven at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (fYChk)

52 All true. If 793(f) had an intent requirement, there'd be plenty of evidence of intent.

But the more salient point is that 793(f) has no intent requirement. It defines what is essentially a per se crime.

Posted by: Anti Antifa at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (5AYoI)

53 Next:

It wasn't evil-evil intent.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (WlGX+)

54 Speaking of evidence or the lack thereof, from Drudge: 'Rapid cooling' underway: Big Drop In Earth's June Temperatures According To Satellites

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Racist for Dinosaurs at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (Nwg0u)

55 But were they crime crimes ?

Posted by: Whoopi at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (gs8be)

56 I didn't have any evil intent when I lied about my income on my tax form. I just wanted to keep the money.

I wonder how well that will fly.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (8ZskC)

57 Hillary had a small bomb implanted inside my brain which she can detonate at any time.

Posted by: James Comey at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (roFmD)

58 You're goddamned right I ordered the server set up to store confidential information and to protect my criminal Clinton Foundation!!!

Posted by: Col. Hillary Jessup at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (H9MG5)

59 New hotness - Big Intent Party

New movie: Big Intent in Little China

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (zcM+Q)

60 I knew a Maurice once.

He could suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

Posted by: Paul Lynde at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (PFy0L)

61 46 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (/tuJf)

I'm not a lawyer but I know for a fact that this law was specifically crafted to lower the bar from intent to recklessness so that it would focus the mind on the person to be extremely careful in his/her job.

Come-Stain is, like Roberts, conflating and rewriting things just to suit his own purpose.

He deserves to be flogged in the public square.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (27m1/)

62 >>> What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know.

Hillary said he didn't have to "go to the park", as they say..

Posted by: IP at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (Fol9S)

63 Maurice is right!

Posted by: Larry at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (8ZskC)

64 What evil intent did Petraeus have?

Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (z/Ubi)

65 Really now - who are we to judge? Judge not lest you be judged. So don't be so judgey. Have any of you walked a mile in her Stride-Rites? No? This is why they hate us. Because of the judging.

Posted by: grammie winger, 2 Corinthians 4:8 at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (dFi94)

66 I had no evil intent when I said "just the tip."

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (WlGX+)

67 Maurice = penis breath.

Posted by: eleven at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM

That's just the pompatus of love you're smelling.

Posted by: RedMindBlueState at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (bzd8I)

68 To comment 30: Obama will pardon her regardless of the e!action (like Ford did Nixon) so it is doubtful she will ever be charged.

Posted by: Lightning at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (AP+SF)

69 That thing I did in your mouth is not the product of evil intent.

Posted by: VA GOP Sucks at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (PFy0L)

70 Why do these fools expect obedience to law from us commoners when their law breaking is on full display?

Sure, you can threaten use of force to keep us in line, but despite 50 years of leftists subversion, there is still a national history of resistance (see Athens, Tennessee), but more importantly...

we are still a nation of gun owners.

The Left is a little too pleased with their obviously superior morality, and the corruptocrats aren't going to pay any attention to data that would slow down their trough-slurping.

We are not headed to a happy place, and all the election of Trump might do is slow that down...unless he makes a full commitment to restoring law.

Posted by: Grad School Fool at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (swEzU)

71 So The FAB's "testimony" was not under oath or recorded? Inspires confidence ha?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (zp+j1)

72 46 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (/tuJf)
-------------

I heard radio interviews yesterday with two former Attorneys General (Gonzalez and Mukasey) and they are both mystified by Comey's statement from Tuesday. They both felt there was plenty there.

I guess they don't know about the reading between the lines trick.

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (805dc)

73 "30 Assume Hillary loses the election - can she still be prosecuted by a new AG?"

Trump needs to announce he will set aside any pardon or plea and prosecute her if elected. Even if he can't, just like a Democrat would do.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (dWDUj)

74 It was very apparent to me that Hillary was told to go into her interview and play dumb.

And Comey was told to take her word for everything.. every fucking thing.

The explanation he gave for when Hillary told that guy to strip the markings and send the fax unsecured was: She said she meant for him to strip the classified stuff out of the fax. Good enuff for me!

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (so+oy)

75 I think this post, interesting as it may be, misses the point. Hillz was accused of breaking a general intent crime, not a specific intent crime. Intent need not be proven.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Racist for Dinosaurs at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (Nwg0u)

76 Look, I didn't have evil intent to share classified info either.

I just wanted to get some ass from my girlfriend.

Posted by: General Petraeus at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (H9MG5)

77 So, we're still doing One Name Guy socks?

Posted by: Barry at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (WlGX+)

78 Possible upside:

In his first round of questioning Chaffetz asked if Comey had investigated whether Hillary had perjured herself before Congress. Comey said he'd need a Congressional Referral to do so.

Chaffetz said he'd have one within hours.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (1xUj/)

79 >>>One of my favorite Clarence Thomas moments was when he slapped down his conservative brethren and said "trust me, a cross burning is terroristic", (or words to that effect).

not always. Hollywood movies feature a lot of cross burnings but they don't go to jail because while they had the intent to burn a cross, they did not have the specific intent that, through that burning of that cross, blacks should be instilled with fear.

Specific intent is intent on steroids. it is the most demanding kind of mens rea -- which Comey is reading into the statute, despite it having a very weak mens rea requirement (gross negligence).

Posted by: ace at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (dciA+)

80 You know, it would be nice if mens rea requirements were put back into statutes and regulations and arrrggghhh there goes my eye twitch again.

Stab it with the heroin syringe!

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (zcM+Q)

81 No way Obama would have chosen him for FBI Director if he was honest to begin with.

No way.

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (LZEIy)

82 Know a bunch of guys who nail their wive's/girlfriend's mens rea up to trees to attract bucks during rut.

Personally ... never wanted to kill a deer quite that badly.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (JFgsl)

83 What evil intent did Petraeus have?
Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (z/Ubi)

Well he did want to the nasty with that Reserve Major ( who by the way had a Security Clearance)

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:20 PM (zp+j1)

84 I didn't have any evil intent when I lied about my income on my tax form. I just wanted to keep the money.

I wonder how well that will fly.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at July 07, 2016 03:17 PM (8ZskC)===============================================

Not well. Check tomorrow's mail.

Posted by: Bob at the IRS at July 07, 2016 03:20 PM (dFi94)

85 But first you will blow me, Maurice!

Posted by: mister ed at July 07, 2016 03:20 PM (P1hwM)

86 Just remember that Comey is an elite law enforcement officer at the pinnacle of the profession (and comes across as a dupe).

Posted by: ejo at July 07, 2016 03:20 PM (il4FI)

87 Why hasn't Hector, oops "Maurice" gotten banned yet?

Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:20 PM (z/Ubi)

88 There are only two reasons Come-stain did this.

A) Moral cowardice.
B) He's one of them.

Take your pick. The fact that he'll be speaking at the Democrat convention means (B).

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (27m1/)

89 The only Bee Gee sock left is Robin.

Haw haw!

Posted by: Barry at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (WlGX+)

90 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.

----------

Setting up the private server shows clear intent.

Negligence is typing in the first few letters of your email address only to have the wrong address pop up and you hit send before you realize it.

Posted by: SH at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (gmeXX)

91 I, for one, welcome our new nonsense blithering overlords.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Racist for Dinosaurs at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (Nwg0u)

92 Sorry it was supossed to say election

Posted by: Lightning at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (AP+SF)

93 I got mens rea last week after eating Mexican.

Posted by: joey biden at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (P1hwM)

94 Not putting an obviously guilty suspect under oath and going out of your way to not record the interview shows intent. Evil intent.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (zc3Db)

95 I did have an intent to obstruct justice.

WTF does Comey think I was hiding my e-mails for in the first place? So government watchdog groups couldn't get my cookie recipes?

The whole point of having my own private e-mail server was so that I could avoid subpoenas for my government e-mails from government watchdog groups, from congress, etc. And the whole point of that was so that I could hide the evidence of my influence peddling.

IOW, the entire point of setting up my private server was to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE.

Posted by: UNSOPHISTICATED HILLARY CLINTON at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (NnYnv)

96
Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (/tuJf)
-------------

I heard radio interviews yesterday with two former Attorneys General (Gonzalez and Mukasey) and they are both mystified by Comey's statement from Tuesday. They both felt there was plenty there.

I guess they don't know about the reading between the lines trick.

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (805dc)
---------------------

Andrew McCarthy spoke to Rush and said the same thing -- at least as much as I could stand to hear, not having a kevlar stomach.

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (pC96u)

97 The laws don't call for intent.

But the law has been dead for a whirl now so intent is the strawman.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (MlXgU)

98 Isn't it fascinating how the Federal government continuously lowers the protections for defendants, EXCEPT for ruling-class leftists?

Posted by: Tex Lovera at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (wtvvX)

99
No intent. Well, no evil intent. Well, no truly evil intent. Well, no absolutely truly evil intent. Well . . .

Fucking Hank Kimball. Attorney at Lore.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (27m1/)

100 "I hold myself in contempt, your Honor!"

Posted by: Liar, Liar at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (RrDm2)

101 I had no evil intent when I did that thing in your mouth.

Posted by: Hillary! at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (wUFzV)

102 And yet being white and breathing (actually you don't have to be breathing - just white) is intent to use your white privilege.

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (LZEIy)

103 I tend to agree with Rush. Comey, like John Iscariot Roberts, didn't want to be the guy who stood in the way of "history."

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (WlGX+)

104 The only Bee Gee sock left is Robin.

Haw haw!

Posted by: Barry at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (WlGX+)
==========================================

Does Andy count? Or does his solo career invalidate his BeeGee-hood?

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (dFi94)

105 94 I got mens rea last week after eating Mexican.
Posted by: joey biden at July 07, 2016 03:21 PM (P1hwM)

If Chris Rea joined Dire Straits . . .

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (27m1/)

106 But the law has been dead for a whirl now

We need to take the law out for a spin!

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (zcM+Q)

107 >>I think this post, interesting as it may be, misses the point. Hillz was accused of breaking a general intent crime, not a specific intent crime. Intent need not be proven.

But intent, or in this case lack of intent, is what Comey is basing his entire reasoning on. He said, in much more lawyerly fashion, that two things were required by the DOJ to make a case regardless of what the law says.

1. Gross negligence which he sort of conceded exceeded.

2. Intent to break the law.

He insisted over and over that this was FBI and DOJ practice in these situations for decades and only case was even brought but never tried where intent was not established.

That's why I was curious if anyone with real DOJ experience could confirm or refute this.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (/tuJf)

108 What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know.

Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at July 07, 2016 03:16 PM (8ZskC)

He keeps that whole "I was on the board of HSBC when they were laundering cartel money" thing off his back.

Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (uiwCw)

109 not always. Hollywood movies feature a lot of cross burnings but they don't go to jail because while they had the intent to burn a cross, they did not have the specific intent that, through that burning of that cross, blacks should be instilled with fear.

Thomas dissented and lost. I was just saying that I appreciated his perspective.

Posted by: Bandersnatch at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (1xUj/)

110 Yeah,everybody knows his reasoning is all bullshit.What can really be done about it?

Posted by: steevy at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (B48dK)

111 Don't nobody else try this shit, though.

It's...um... illegal ?

Posted by: Fine-Toothed Comey at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (gs8be)

112 I do love Gowdy and his ability to obliterate bad guys, but he's worthless in congress. I'm glad he is not in there any more, because all he did was terrific work in demolishing corrupt and evil people... and nothing comes of it.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (39g3+)

113 30
Assume Hillary loses the election - can she still be prosecuted by a new AG?

Posted by: VA GOP Sucks at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (PFy0L)

Yes, and a lot of the crimes she has committed have a ten year statute of limitations. And treason has no statute of limitations.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (mpXpK)

114 I didn't intend to do 95 mph in a 45. I just wasn't looking at the speedometer officer. So as you can see you cannot write me a ticket.

Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (z/Ubi)

115
It would be heartening to see the FBI agents who actually worked on the case resign en masse.

Pfft, who am I kidding?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (27m1/)

116 "46 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ."

If you ever speed across federal property, you will be prosecuted and no intent will have to be proved. Many federal statutes include the mens rea of negligence and recklessness. Comey acknowledged as much today, but said he could find only one Espionage Act case prosecuted under gross negligence. In other words, he was claiming some sort of precedence. This joke here is intent easily could have been proved.

Posted by: Trump poisoned my cat at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (dWDUj)

117 Off topic, but what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame? She strikes me as an insufferable twunt. I remember seeing her on AMC with that Robert Osbourne and wondering why he was not bitchslapping her into silence. Then again, I also saw him host with Drew Barrymore who was almost as twattish.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (MNZJR)

118 Clinton is getting a shitload of mileage out of those FBI files.

Wish I could get their contents and publish all of them. The shitstorm of losing hundreds of politicians and public officials would be worth it to defang her.

I'm just guessing, but that's my guess as to the key to their power. They weren't *really* rich and limitlessly powerful until after that, despite being in the oval office, and despite being crooks all along.

Also, intent has fuck-all to do with anything, and there's plenty of evidence of intent in her e-mail, and incredibly direct evidence if you include the Russian/Wikileaks release, which contains explicit directions to strip markings and send.

I can understand the provenance questions there.

But Comey has raped the law and replaced the USA as his client with the Clintons. You would need more direct evidence of that to impeach him, and I hope someone is working very hard on that.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (wB8Tg)

119 Worse.

Comey is Investigating and Adjudicating the crimes.

Kafka laughs derisively.

Posted by: garrett at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (ggrt+)

120 If there was no evil intent,
Hill can't to prison be sent.

Posted by: Johnnie Comey at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (H9MG5)

121 "63 >>> What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know."

I guess he figured that he did not want to deal with being a lefty punching bag the rest of his life.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (OD2ni)

122 Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:23 PM (dFi94)

Andy was the first to go.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (G6BhX)

123 John Roberts and I are going to be vacationing in Malta soon.

Just bought myself a new briefcase.

Posted by: Crooked James Comey at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (LZEIy)

124 Off topic, but what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 03:24 PM (MNZJR)

Nice tits and bad teeth.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (zc3Db)

125 Please forgive me, but being a simple unfrozen cavemen your sophisticated modern legal system confuses me.

It's the FBI's job to investigate and present evidence to the AG, not to decide whether or not to indict. Deciding whether or not to indict is the AG's job.

Comey declined to recommend to indict, he did not recommend to not indict.

Lynch declined to indict.

All I see is a dance around the campfire, Comey taking the blame for Lynch's not indicting.

Was Comey promised a blowjob? Or promised to be bitten?

Posted by: Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (XVTvT)

126 But if you're a college student with a penis you intend to rape. Always.

Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (z/Ubi)

127 There are only two reasons Come-stain did this.

A) Moral cowardice.
B) He's one of them.

-
This probably fits under B but Rush was speculating that the reason is that because of some unfortunate aspects of our history regarding race and morality, we simply can't hold one of the good guys, who's only crime was caring a little too much, accountable. (Paraphrase.)

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Racist for Dinosaurs at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (Nwg0u)

128 If you are drunk, doesn't that negate specific intent?

Posted by: wooga at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (WJwLp)

129 I have no evil intent in lighting up this doobie. I just intend to catch a buzz.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at July 07, 2016 03:26 PM (WlGX+)

130 One of three things is happening here. Comey is being rewarded by a large amount of cash, will be rewarded with a big promotion into the elite structure, or has been assured that he and his family will not be harmed, IF he let's the FAB off the hook.

Posted by: Soona at July 07, 2016 03:26 PM (Fmupd)

131 105 I tend to agree with Rush. Comey, like John Iscariot Roberts, didn't want to be the guy who stood in the way of "history."

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at July 07, 2016 03:22 PM (WlGX+)

Funny, they'd have made history by doing the right thing. But sadly, vermin like Matt Damon's godfather are the ones writing the history books.

Comey will have to stand before G-D and answer for this.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:26 PM (27m1/)

132 Evil Intent is probably the best Santana 'B' Side.

Posted by: garrett at July 07, 2016 03:26 PM (ggrt+)

133 What does intent, evil or otherwise, have to do with gross negligence? I'm really curious, not being a lawyer and all. Somebody want to lawyersplain it to me?
Posted by: scoville unit at July 07, 2016 03:09 PM (0adl+)

It doesn't. The point of negligence is that you acted, you know, negligently. If you act with intent, you aren't negligent.

For example, let's say someone who cannot park to save her life, like, to pick someone completely at random, me, smacks into your car because she's trying to back into a parking space and she a. can't park and II. can't see over the seat, that's negligence.

Let's say some other person who is not me in any possible way, backs her car at 20 mph into the side of an ex's vehicle because fuck that bitch, that's intent.

Insurance covers the first and not so much the second.

Posted by: alexthechick - I despair I despair at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (mf5HN)

134 There are several military guys in jail as we speak who had no intent either. Weaselzippers (I think it was them) posted a list this morning

Posted by: Lightning at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (AP+SF)

135 Andy was the first to go.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (G6BhX)
=============================================

Yes. Sad. And then the other two. I love love love the BeeGees. How can you not? Nobody snarky needs to answer that.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (dFi94)

136 Off topic, but what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?

Really bad acting on Charmed. And she did the sex with Marilyn Manson.

Posted by: WhatWhatWhat? at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (WlGX+)

137 but what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?

-
She was a witch on Charmed. It was type casting.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks, Racist for Dinosaurs at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (Nwg0u)

138 69
To comment 30: Obama will pardon her regardless of the e!action (like
Ford did Nixon) so it is doubtful she will ever be charged.

Posted by: Lightning at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (AP+SF)

Recall the post from this morning where they said some States and foreign governments were actively investigating her sham charity. He can not pardon State crimes.

Posted by: Vic We Have No Party at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (mpXpK)

139 "I guess he figured that he did not want to deal with being a lefty punching bag the rest of his life."

And yet he doesn't feel bad that Guccifer is sitting in prison. I bet he didn't care about the Benghazi video guy sitting in prison either.

Free Guccifer. He didn't intent any evil.

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (LZEIy)

140 84 What evil intent did Petraeus have?
Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:18 PM (z/Ubi)
_______________________

He was not a Democrat.

Therefore, evil intent is presumed, and does not require any actual proof.

Posted by: UNSOPHISTICATED HILLARY CLINTON at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (NnYnv)

141 No Confidence !

Posted by: Jar Jar Bimks at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (gs8be)

142 Bet he retires soon into a comfy no-show job with the Global Initiative.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez_going_Galt at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (3X3ZR)

143
"She had no intent."
Yes, she did, see here, here, here, and HERE.
"Oh, well, she had no EVIL intent."

I can not wrap my hands around this bullshit. I am just mystified.
---------------------

I'm similarly reduced to a state of pure mystification. I can't think of anything I've ever seen like this.

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (pC96u)

144 Since my boss is on vacation and I'm essentially unsupervised, I think I will go home early and prep some rifle brass.

It is my intent to make it precisely uniform in length.

Posted by: Weasel at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (6xtq3)

145 Comey did a pretty clumsy job of handling the question on standards of prosecution (i.e. one for Clinton and another for us little people) to a degree that was infuriating for most people.

Most people in my office had a comment of "boy, that went badly" or something snarky and similar.

I think that is what will resonate with most voters. The whole idea that this swamp in Washington, of which Hillary is a swamp creature, needs to be drained of this type of arrogance.

That's the mood voters are in in this election and it becomes a big win for Trump.

Except- where the fuck is Trump and the party on this. It's as if they've learned nothing from the Romney experience and how to capitalize on important issues that greatly negatively effect your opponent, instead of sitting on your hands and talking about nonsense.

Posted by: Marcus T at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (O0lVq)

146 "It would be heartening to see the FBI agents who actually worked on the case resign en masse.

Pfft, who am I kidding?"

Nice thought, but I assume they are all just clock punchers waiting for their pensions. Sorry to be so cynical.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (OD2ni)

147 Comey is so calm and quiet about this, I wonder if he's not hoping that these hearings will prove what he wanted to say but was kept from by political pressure.

As in, "OK I want to keep my job so I'll do what I'm told by my boss, but in this testimony, I'm going to straight up doom this woman as best I can."

At no point did he try to evade or lawyer up, he didn't try to use clever language, he was precise and specific in everything, honestly answering each question no matter how damning it was to him or Clinton.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (39g3+)

148 >>what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?

Her Vagina.

Posted by: garrett at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (ggrt+)

149 How would he know if she had evil intent if he didn't even interview her and, for whatever reason, the interview wasn't recorded? I'm pretty sure the transcript read along the lines of "she looked like she was poured into that pantsuit." "Her favorite rapper is Sugar Hill Gang"

Posted by: ryukyu at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (960oq)

150 This belongs in the other thread but since everyone is here - Cruz accepted an invitation from Trump to speak at the convention.

Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (a0IVu)

151 I sure hope everyone understands that all of this took place under Obama and Valerie Jarrett's watch. The White House was all okay with all of this.

Posted by: Vodka 4 the win at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (pjmt3)

152 OT: Britain will get it's 2nd female Prime Minister. Run-off election amongst all +150K Conservative party members between anti-Brexit Home Secretary Theresa May and pro-Brexit Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom

"Conservative lawmakers chose Home Secretary Theresa May and Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom on Thursday to fight a runoff contest for leadership of Britain's governing party. The winner will become the country's second female prime minister.

"May received 199 votes in a ballot of Conservative members of Parliament Thursday. Leadsom received 84. Justice Secretary Michael Gove got 46 votes and was eliminated from the race.

"Some 150,000 Conservative Party members will now vote in the leadership contest, with the result announced Sept. 9."

http://bit.ly/29kNtVC

Posted by: The Brexit Hat at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (vBeA5)

153 Right after he delivers the perjury notification, Chaffetz should send Comey a notice of his impeachment.

Posted by: Iblis at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (9221z)

154 17 What does intent, evil or otherwise, have to do with gross negligence? I'm really curious, not being a lawyer and all. Somebody want to lawyersplain it to me?
Posted by: scoville unit at July 07, 2016 03:09 PM (0adl+)

In the law, you have to prove guilty act AND guilty mind. Minor crimes somtimes rests on "strict liability" that require no proof of state of mind. Speeding is a common example. From that point criminal liability requires proof of state of mind from least to most culpable. In order negligence > gross neglidence > criminal negligence > reckless > knowing > intentional. Generally proving a more culpable state of mind proves a lesser state of mind. Usually proving a lesser state if mind will result in proof of a "lesser included offense."

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (B001q)

155 His basic statement that he didn't believe a prosecutor would build a case around what they had is true: the prosecutors are in the Holder/Lynch/Obama Justice Department. They would not build a case, they would not win if it went to trial, they would in every way fight to destroy their own case.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (39g3+)

156 This belongs in the other thread but since everyone is here - Cruz accepted an invitation from Trump to speak at the convention.
Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (a0IVu)

Link?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (zp+j1)

157 I had no idea that the FBI granted full Judge Dread powers to its Director.

Posted by: garrett at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (ggrt+)

158 152 >>what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?

Her Vagina.
Posted by: garrett at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (ggrt+)

Lips that are a 0.75 on the Angelina Jolie scale.

Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (z/Ubi)

159 What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know.

Oh, they're not done with him, either! Once you're on film at a Harry Reid party, they've got you. Forever.

Posted by: t-bird at July 07, 2016 03:30 PM (w35Hj)

160 "Off topic, but what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?"

She got impaled by a garage door in Scream. Then she got ugly.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:30 PM (OD2ni)

161 141:
Not being snarky but do you really think a state AG would bring charges either with or without a pardon?

Posted by: Lightning at July 07, 2016 03:30 PM (AP+SF)

162 We haven't had any law since 2008 and Obama sent his black panthers out to beat up old white people outside voting precincts.

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:30 PM (LZEIy)

163
There's quite a good essay at American Thinker about a soldier who resigned his commission because a superior officer refused to punish an NCO on the author's recommendation.

I can imagine it must be difficult considering the pressures. But if this country now has people who face severe political or other retribution for doing what they're supposed to do, then the nation really is truly lost.

And that is tragic, no matter who wins in November.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:30 PM (27m1/)

164 It is also my intent to hump Kate Upton's leg, but that might not actually happen.

Posted by: Weasel at July 07, 2016 03:30 PM (6xtq3)

165 160, Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (zp+j1)

I am an idiot and dont know how to link but ABC has the story on Hotair.

Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (a0IVu)

166 Since my boss is on vacation and I'm essentially unsupervised, I think I will go home early and prep some rifle brass.

It is my intent to make it precisely uniform in length.
Posted by: Weasel

And if you don't even try, that's gross negligence.

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (zcM+Q)

167 I can not wrap my hands around this bullshit. I am just mystified.

---------------------

I'm similarly reduced to a state of pure mystification. I can't think of anything I've ever seen like this.
=================================================

I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I believe there are demonic forces at work in our country.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (dFi94)

168 Evil,
I've come to tell you that she's evil,
Most definitely.
Evil.
Ornery, scandalous and evil...

Posted by: Sublime, what knows Cankles should be Doin' Time this Summertime at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (H9MG5)

169
154 This belongs in the other thread but since everyone is here - Cruz accepted an invitation from Trump to speak at the convention.
Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (a0IVu)

----------------

Good.

Posted by: Soona at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (Fmupd)

170 Let's rewrite the Constitution, and all the statutes, except this time in pencil.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (oKE6c)

171 OT: Per Cruz press release, he & Trump had "good meeting"; Cruz gets conv speaking spot; "no discussion of endorsement"

https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/751134513858809857

Posted by: The Political Hat at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (vBeA5)

172 Gun status?
Smoking.

OK what's the next step Congress?
My vote would not be for "let's hold more hearings"

I think the more appropriate response would involve an ultimatum for Obama to fire Comey and Lynch and install a special prosecutor, or be impeached.

Then follow up.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at July 07, 2016 03:32 PM (k8tEg)

173 31 It was painful watching. Banana Republic here we ~~come~~ are

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:13 PM (zp+j1)

I think we took that exit a while back.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:32 PM (72N6L)

174 to give Hillary another Clinton Gets Out of Jail card.

It's like there's some sort of exclusion principal.
We know it's not just orange suits though because she's tried those before?

Posted by: DaveA at July 07, 2016 03:32 PM (8J/Te)

175
Comey proved that he's nothing but a sackless, political flunky doing the bidding of his masters. Stupid, gutless and not fit for the office he's in

Posted by: TheQuietMan at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (493sH)

176
Look, don't blame Comey for this. He is just saying that no responsible prosecutor in Obama's Department of Justice is going to prosecute Hillary.

He is simply explaining what has been explained to him by his supervisors in the DOJ, which would be those responsible federal prosecutors who would not prosecute Hillary.

You can get angry with Comey all you want, but he is doing what is expected of him as a Federal Agent in Obama's Administration.

(This is a test. This is only a test of the Ace of Spades HQ Blog. Had this been a real comment, there would have been meaningful commentary posted.)

Posted by: Walrus Iam at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (AQXhN)

177 "She had no intent."
Yes, she did, see here, here, here, and HERE.
"Oh, well, she had no EVIL intent."

I can not wrap my hands around this bullshit. I am just mystified.
---------------------

I'm similarly reduced to a state of pure mystification. I can't think of anything I've ever seen like this.

Posted by: iforgot
****

Translation: The fix was in.

Posted by: Tilikum KAW at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (gmjUl)

178 46 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (/tuJf)

What case like this? There is no case in which a cabinet officer like the Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense or CIA director who deals daily with our national secrets sets up her own personal data server to run an off-the-books system for her government communications, including emailing national secrets.

A little bit of this is like Petreaus. Petreaus shared national secret info with his biographer who had a top secret clearance, but not cleared for that specific info. Hillary shared national secret info with her deputies who presumably have some sort of clearance, but not for what Hillary was sending and receiving. But that's only a little bit of what Hillary did.

John Deutsch had some classified info on his laptop. Hillary had some on her server. But Hillary's transgressions were so much larger in scope that Deutsch.

Comey sort of is saying that we shouldn't bring a case unless we can find a precedent case that we prosecuted before. But this is the first case of this kind.

It's complete sophistry and a sham.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (5xDis)

179 "I sure hope everyone understands that all of this took place under Obama and Valerie Jarrett's watch. The White House was all okay with all of this."

Uh duh.

Since when has the Kenyan or the Iranian cared about constitutional law or anything that wasn't part of the destruction of America?

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (LZEIy)

180 In the law, you have to prove guilty act AND guilty mind. Minor crimes somtimes rests on "strict liability" that require no proof of state of mind. Speeding is a common example. From that point criminal liability requires proof of state of mind from least to most culpable. In order negligence > gross neglidence > criminal negligence > reckless > knowing > intentional. Generally proving a more culpable state of mind proves a lesser state of mind. Usually proving a lesser state if mind will result in proof of a "lesser included offense."
Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (B001q)

*pouts* Oh sure yours is all, you know, right and interesting and explanatory and stuff. Fine.

*scribble scribble scribble*

Posted by: alexthechick - I despair I despair at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (mf5HN)

181 "I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I believe there are demonic forces at work in our country.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (dFi94) "

And I am so with you on that, grammie. 100%.

Posted by: sock_rat_eez_going_Galt at July 07, 2016 03:33 PM (3X3ZR)

182 175 Free clue:

Hillary has been exonerated and Americans no longer care about her emails.

I hope that helps.
Posted by: Maurice at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (FUs5U)

Not even close, dick-breath. Guilty as sin, free as a bird.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (27m1/)

183 OT: Cong Corrine Brown (D) indicted on fed corruption charges. To surrender later today on sealed indictment

https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/751126723798900736

Posted by: The Political Hat at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (vBeA5)

184 I am an idiot and dont know how to link but ABC has the story on Hotair.
Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (a0IVu)

OK I see that. Hope it is true

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (zp+j1)

185 Comey declined to recommend to indict, he did not recommend to not indict.
Posted by: Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer at July 07, 2016 03:25 PM (XVTvT)
--------------------

In his statement on Tuesday, Comey said, "we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case."

Is that not a recommendation not to indict? I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know the language.

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (805dc)

186 Comey: If I can't show intent, I must relent!

Gowdey: The pattern of lies shows intent.

Comey: If I can't show evil, I must, ummm... be a weasel!

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (nFdGS)

187 We haven't had any law since 2008 and Obama sent his black panthers out to beat up old white people outside voting precincts.

================================================

I was a precinct worker that night. They bussed them up from Chicago, and they stood over people as they were casting their vote. If it looked like the person voted "wrong", they body-blocked them from leaving. They also stood two abreast at the door into the election hall. I called the sherriff. The sheriff was very slow to respond.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (dFi94)

188 171

"I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you
do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I
believe there are demonic forces at work in our country."

* * *

True, but it's far worse than that. 2 Timothy 2:26. Those who do not belong to Christ via believing the Gospel of the grace of God can be and are taken captive at the Devil's will.

Pause and consider exactly what that means in our day to day lives.

Posted by: doomed at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (bGLSw)

189 155
I sure hope everyone understands that all of this took place under Obama
and Valerie Jarrett's watch. The White House was all okay with all of
this.

Posted by: Vodka 4 the win at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (pjmt3)
Yup.
No focus on obama, and what focus there was on Hillary! has shifted to Comey.

Posted by: Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (XVTvT)

190
Free Guccifer. He didn't intent any evil.
Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (LZEIy)
------------------

You know who else didn't? Every psychopath or sociopath who ever killed, stole, raped, or destroyed people or property. They lack any consciousness of evil, so problem solved, right?

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (pC96u)

191 191 Hey!

Posted by: Weasel at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (6xtq3)

192 weasel ... try humping a manniquin leg while watching Kate Upron videos. Good for partial credit.

Posted by: ScoggDog at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (JFgsl)

193 Are there any lawyer types who can either refute or support Comey's claim that the DOJ only prosecutes cases like this when there is clear intent and not just negligence? It would seem that would be an easy claim to check for those who know the DOJ.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:15 PM (/tuJf)

What case like this?

Martha Stewart. They both lied to the FBI.
One went to prison.

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (zcM+Q)

194 Hillary has been exonerated and Americans no longer care about her emails.

I hope that helps.
Posted by: Maurice at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (FUs5U)

Only in the minds of the willfully obtuse, ie: your tribe.

Say that with a little more flounce next time, K?

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (72N6L)

195 To make this easier for non-lawyers, "Evil Intent" is translated from the Latin, "-R".

Posted by: t-bird at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (w35Hj)

196 In his statement on Tuesday, Comey said, "we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case."

Is that not a recommendation not to indict? I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know the language.

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (805dc)

Hey, I'm just a caveman.

Posted by: Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (XVTvT)

197 >>>OT: Cong Corrine Brown (D) indicted on fed corruption charges. To surrender later today on sealed indictment

https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/751126723798900736

Posted by: The Political Hat at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (vBeA5)<<<

Damn, another poor politician with the wrong last name.

Posted by: Bill "Cold Cash Jefferson and Chaka Fattah at July 07, 2016 03:36 PM (H9MG5)

198 So they weren't happy about the way he did not recommend prosecuting she who shall not be named.

During a secret meeting Wednesday.

Betters: Comey ole' boy you dun screwed up..
Comey: how, I did what you told me to. I didn't recommend prosecuting.
Betters: no, you didn't but the way you laid out everything before, that's what we're talking about. What are we going to do about this??
Comey: Give me another chance, please, I'll do better during the congressional hearing, I swear.
Betters: you better get it right this time or we will__________!
Comey: thank you. I won't screw up again just don't __________, please!
------------
Hope spring eternal that this country isn't that far gone but all evidence shows otherwise. Leave me to my fantasy scenario....

Posted by: lindafell de spair-TEXIT!! at July 07, 2016 03:36 PM (xVgrA)

199 laws are for little people...

Posted by: redc1c4 at July 07, 2016 03:36 PM (7XWyA)

200 OT: IN Gov Mike Pence told state GOP leaders he would accept Trump VP spot if offered, per CNN.

https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/751025059632779265

Posted by: The Political Hat at July 07, 2016 03:36 PM (vBeA5)

201 Eugene Volokh has a good piece up about the Massachusetts stun gun case. Sometimes he will just quote legalese from court opinions, but this time he lays out the background as well as his commentary on why this was the right outcome.

http://tinyurl.com/gnqlwk9
(Washington Post)

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 03:36 PM (R+30W)

202 Comey: If I can't show evil, I must, ummm... be a weasel!

Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (nFdGS)

Awww. So close. You should've gone with weevil!

Posted by: the lesser of two weevils at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (H9MG5)

203 LEAVE HILLARY ALONE!!!!

Posted by: Huma Abadabadeen-o at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (10hEu)

204 >>It's complete sophistry and a sham.

I'm not sure if you watched the hearing but Comey referenced both those cases and completely refuted what you said. He claimed that not only did Petraeus have a significant amount of top secret information that he shared with his girlfriend who obviously did not have a security clearance he lied to the FBI about it.

And he said Deutsch had reams of information, had his security clearance pulled and was then pardoned before being prosecuted by one William Jefferson Clinton.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (/tuJf)

205
I sure hope everyone understands that all of this took place under Obama
and Valerie Jarrett's watch. The White House was all okay with all of
this.

Posted by: Vodka 4 the win at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (pjmt3)
---------------------

Blows to hell any theory that Obama hates the Clintons enough to trip her on her way to the White House.

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (pC96u)

206 Only in the minds of the willfully obtuse, ie: your tribe.

Say that with a little more flounce next time, K?

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (72N6L)

What's truly frightening is how many people actually think well not think but just brainwashed to believe what Maurie does

Posted by: TheQuietMan at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (493sH)

207 According to my attorney, Mr. Comey, all one has to magically understand is intent. The actual humping is irrelevant.

Posted by: Weasel at July 07, 2016 03:38 PM (6xtq3)

208 159 His basic statement that he didn't believe a prosecutor would build a case around what they had is true: the prosecutors are in the Holder/Lynch/Obama Justice Department. They would not build a case, they would not win if it went to trial, they would in every way fight to destroy their own case.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (39g3+)

In the case re Prop. 8 (against same-sex marriage) before Judge Fabulous, who spoke for the voters who enacted it?

Jerry Brown.

He really went all-in to defend it, more or less playing tic-tac-toe with his co-counsel while the fruits trotted out a bunch of bullshit social science ... well, bullshit. Surprisingly, he lost.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:38 PM (oKE6c)

209 I am a total horndog and have nothing against bad actresses who show tits, but Rose McG makes my penis change the channel.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 03:38 PM (MNZJR)

210 My question is when Hillary has her meetings with staff, does she actually have a chair that will drop you into a tank full of piranhas if you disappoint her?

Posted by: xnycpeasant at July 07, 2016 03:38 PM (k8tEg)

211 >>>195
Free Guccifer. He didn't intent any evil.
Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:27 PM (LZEIy)
------------------

You know who else didn't? Every psychopath or sociopath who ever killed, stole, raped, or destroyed people or property. They lack any consciousness of evil, so problem solved, right?
Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (pC96u)

____________

Means I can do *hic* anything

WOOOOO!!!!

*hic*

Posted by: Hillary -hic- at July 07, 2016 03:38 PM (10hEu)

212 "I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you
do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I
believe there are demonic forces at work in our country."

Conclusion reached late 2009.

Yeah, I believe it is which, of course, also confirms the existence of the flip side.

For the non-religious types.....

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (72N6L)

213 117.

Don't worry. We'll learn all about it in 15-20 years when they decide to retire and write a tell-all book. I'm sure it will be a big hit in the camps.

Posted by: Stu Podaso at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (94N0K)

214 He is just saying that no responsible prosecutor in Obama's Department of Justice is going to prosecute Hillary.

Exactly, he didn't say nobody could prosecute this, only that the Obama administration wouldn't. Its kind of a lawyer trick but its true.

you have to prove guilty act AND guilty mind.

I don't think that's exactly 100% accurate. As you said, lesser crimes the intent is irrelevant, and even in high crimes, doing something illegal is illegal regardless of what you intended. The intent changes the penalty, not the crime in many cases.

For example, I'm running with a knife toward someone being silly, trip, and stab them in the eyesocket, killing them. That's still homicide, just not as bad as deliberate, premeditated homicide. That's why there are categories in state laws like "negligent homicide" as I understand it.

Your intent doesn't negate the crime, it mitigates the sentencing.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (39g3+)

215 >>>Blows to hell any theory that Obama hates the Clintons enough to trip her on her way to the White House.

Yes.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (MNZJR)

216 188 OT: Cong Corrine Brown (D) indicted on fed corruption charges. To surrender later today on sealed indictment
https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/751126723798900736
Posted by: The Political Hat at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (vBeA5)

No need to specify "Democrat." If she were a Republican, they'd have skywriters out.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (oKE6c)

217 Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:34 PM (dFi94)
-------------

My gosh grammie, that must have been horrible. I'd have been terrified out of my mind.

I hope you got your wedding officiant stuff squared away now . . .

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (805dc)

218 Montessori Banana Republic.

"Ossifer, I did not INTEND to stay illegal since I was 3 yrs old. I did not INTEND to drink to the point my BOC is five times the legal limit. I did not INTEND to not get a legal driver's license. I did not INTEND to drive on the sidewalk and hit that homeless guy who is now dead and imbedded in my windshield (happened in CA). I did not INTEND to drive another 3/4 mile on sidewalks and mowing down hedges with impaled dead guy, whose legs were on trunk. I did not INTEND to get caught. So, am innocent of all charges. See ya. Party on."

"Yes, officers, I am American-Moose Limb, raised in CA, but I went to special ed or something." Shrugs. "What do you mean there is a problem with babe's texts from the Orlando incident?" "He is my bae. I am sure he did not mean or INTEND to kill all those people at the club, or say he is with isis. No INTENTION (the new get out of jail word)." Smirking and making selfies of her eyes. "What? Oh! Yeah, I knew of his stalking the place and buying ammo. I was with him! He is my bae. Is there a problem?" FBI: "Oh, no ma'am. In fact we have a jet warming up on the tarmac to take you and your entire family to Dubai for a free stay on our dime. It is you who are being racially profiled, as no one intends to massacre people in the name of a prophet. It is you who are in danger, not Americans."

I did not INTEND to just sprain (minor sprain but still not improving mood) my dang ankle gardening and make my bad mood, due to this kabuki government, worse. Beetchy. Very beetchy right now.

So, the FBI now regularly do not: have people swear under oath upon a pretty huge investigation; no longer record investigations; no longer read all required documents; no longer even have a transcript or squiggly notes with doodles. Plus no longer send the big dawg FBI Director to either witness or question the former Sec of State and now Dem candidate who will be allowed top security clearance. This after being careless and stupid with her former security clearance. I guess they never INTEND to indict Hilz.

I INTEND to vote for Trump if we are all still here in November.

Makes sense to me!

Signed,
Wylie Coyote with rocket attached to ass

Yes I am cussing like a dirt bag today. Bite moi.

I am waiting for Cummings to embrace Comey in a deep French kiss any moment now, of course after yapping about BLM. I do not want him to bite me due to rabies and/or some type of antibiotic resistant gomboo from his hideous self. The only solace I am taking from the hyperbole word salad spew from his orifice is that he is in his "twilight years"

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, Infidel Queen at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (pfYik)

219 sure hope everyone understands that all of this took place under Obama
and Valerie Jarrett's watch. The White House was all okay with all of
this.

Posted by: Vodka 4 the win at July 07, 2016 03:29 PM (pjmt3)
---------------------

Blows to hell any theory that Obama hates the Clintons enough to trip her on her way to the White House.
Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (pC96u)

Not so sure about that. The PROBLEM is that if they prosecute The FAB, they also have to prosecute all those who also sent classified info to her and received it. And THAT is the problem since FREDO is on that list. THAT has always been the unsaid issue

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (zp+j1)

220 "I can not wrap my hands around this bullshit. I am just mystified."

Let me translate for you. The entire Federal Government is guilty of Treason.

If they take Hillary down, all of congress, the courts, the military go down too.

Posted by: Birthers were right at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (LZEIy)

221 29 It's been posited that Comey didn't want to be the one to derail a presidential campaign.
Posted by: Duke Lowell at July 07, 2016 03:12 PM (kTF2Z)

We had a similar situation with George W. Bush in 2000. Bush squeaked by in a close situation, and to "heal the nation" he just let bygones be bygones as to the crimes and coverups of the Clinton administration, including Chinese payoffs and favors like relaxing missile technology export controls and numerous other apparent crimes.

But that's not a society governed by the rule of law - the rule of law must apply to all. Bush should have prosecuted any activities that were crimes, even though he only in a squeaker. It ended up only emboldening the Clintons.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (5xDis)

222 No intent. Well, no evil intent. Well, no truly evil intent. Well, no absolutely truly evil intent. Well . . .

She did not barbecue a baby and eat it with pickles.

Well, not in front of us.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (2lndx)

223 My only question is this... when is the House going to start filling up their own personal jail with perjurers? Until they are willing to do that, what is going to change?

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (3JA/M)

224 Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:35 PM (72N6L)

Maurice is a bootlicking slave who fancies himself to be one of the elite.

Hillary wipes her fat ass with the Maurices of the world and flushes them down the toilet.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (u0lmX)

225 It depends on what the definition of "gross negligence" is.

Posted by: James Comey-Clinton at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (1CroS)

226 "Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity"

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (T/5A0)

227 So is Comey claiming there is now a legal standard for telepathy? There is a reason why so little hinges on intent in such matters. The investigators and courts don't have a fantasy corps of mind readers they can consult. That would be a wildly different world than the one we have. The world in which we actually live is one where intent is completely unknowable and thus not at issue.

What if Hillary thought this private server would make Iran forsake nuclear weapons development and ISIS la down their weapons? Would it matter? No, it wouldn't, because the laws matter regardless of whether the perpetrator believes they are doing something entirely to the world's benefit. At best, such belief, genuine or claimed, might be the basis for an insanity plea but would not change the fact the laws are there to establish what must be done regardless of individual belief in what could be achieved by ignoring those laws.

Posted by: Epobirs at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (IdCqF)

228 I did not intend to do that thing that occurred in your mouth.

Posted by: "Couldn't help it" Comey at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (k8tEg)

229 I promise to issue Hillary a pardon upon my inauguration

Posted by: Trump at the debates at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (10hEu)

230
Don't worry. We'll learn all about it in 15-20
years when they decide to retire and write a tell-all book. I'm sure it
will be a big hit in the camps.

Posted by: Stu Podaso at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (94N0K)
Could you send us the books now? They don't have to be printed. Blank books would be perfectly OK, but we need 'em ... now.

Posted by: Venezuelans at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (oKE6c)

231 Well, not in front of us.

Or at least, there is no recording of it, and I haven't talked to the people who saw it.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (2lndx)

232 At any time during the period in question, were Hillary!'s fingers crossed or did she request do-overs?

Posted by: Weasel at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (6xtq3)

233 So, Comey's going to be Hill's SCOTUS pick.
Lawyer who has shone the ability to rewrite statutes to affect the desired outcome, and has now shown the ability to detect penumbras and emanations.
Yup, he'll fit right in.

Posted by: random lurker at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (+tRIN)

234 >>>232 I did not intend to do that thing that occurred in your mouth.
Posted by: "Couldn't help it" Comey at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (k8tEg)

____________

Unintended but not unwelcome

Posted by: Miss Lindsey Graham at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (10hEu)

235
I read the statutes a while ago but the mishandling of classified evidence does not say there must be intent to obstruct justice or turn over to a foreign gov.

As to the intent to have done what she did - there is a mountain of evidence. Legally, this isnt even fucking close. Consciousness of guilt up the wazoo.

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (iQIUe)

236
172
154 This belongs in the other thread but since everyone is here - Cruz accepted an invitation from Trump to speak at the convention.
Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (a0IVu)

______________________________________________________
Great news. Now if the Debbie Downers could knock it off for a while we might actually have a chance.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (DDM7c)

237 230 "Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity"
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (T/5A0)

Fakery, Bribery, Immorality.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (27m1/)

238 I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I believe there are demonic forces at work in our country.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (dFi94)

Of that, I have little doubt. There are dark forces in the world, things beyond our meager conceptions of science and reason, and they have agendas.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party, TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (HalrA)

239 @220, have no idea what Corrine has done now. 'gradulations, Corrinne. One of the Queens of the Black Caucus.

During a huge tropical storm, dumping 20" of rain in Central Fl, she had state workers removed from duty to sandbag her freaking condo. She deserves whatever she gets.

Posted by: ChristyBlinky, Infidel Queen at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (pfYik)

240 I didn't intend to bet on the losing team in the last Super Bowl. Can I get my money back?

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (7HtZB)

241 What's truly frightening is how many people actually think well not think but just brainwashed to believe what Maurie does

Posted by: TheQuietMan at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (493sH)

Very.

*picturing the army of protectors Damien had*

Same thing, IMO.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (72N6L)

242 Jeez, even I find this Comey/Lynch/Hillary/Obama fix embarrassing.

Posted by: Kangaroo Courts at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (LZEIy)

243 >>>Your intent doesn't negate the crime, it mitigates the sentencing.

no. homicide is a very well-defined series of crimes with different charges for different levels of mens rea, and some other crimes are like that, but generally crimes require intent as mens rea. There are some departtures downward (speeding -- strict liability, no mens rea requirement) and a very few departures upward (a small number of crimes require specific intent, intent to do the thing plus intent to achieve a specific effect).

mens rea is not pled or contested at sentencing, it is proven or disproven as part of the case in chief. Mens rea is an element of every crime (except for those few which have no mens rea requirement, and tend to be administrative infracitons rather than real felonies).

Posted by: ace at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (dciA+)

244 209

I agree that man is fully capable of enough raw, abysmal evil that it would not be unreasonable for the Devil to stand back, pointing, and say "Hey, I had nothing to do with that. That was all them!" It doesn't change the fact that it still says what it says, meaning both are true.

There is a through-line of evil that even atheists can detect, one that can be seen connecting and gluing things together from century to century, which cannot be explained by mere individual or even group evil. Something far higher, deeper, broader and wiser than man is at work. But you're free to believe as you wish.

Posted by: doomed at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (bGLSw)

245 Its just like all the guys blowing themselves up and shooting people, while yelling Allah Snackbar...

No clear motive... its not Islam...

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (qf6WZ)

246 @263
No. But at no time did Officer Barbrady call "Shenanigans"

Posted by: xnycpeasant at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (k8tEg)

247 Maurice at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (FUs5U)

How many different IPs are you going to use?

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (/tuJf)

248
Best reaction after Tuesday was some brilliant moron who wrote:

"Are you kidding?"
- - Efrem Zimbalist Jr.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (27m1/)

249 I set up my own personal servers, and sent hundreds or maybe thousands of classified and secret and even top secret info. over these unsecured servers, all so that I could avoid having my official government e-mails be preserved and archived as official government documents, as required by law.

But I wasn't trying to obstruct justice, just because I was trying to evade the law!

See, I had a good, non-evil, reason for wanting to evade the law as it applied to my official e-mails: I needed to hide the evidence of how I was selling my influence as Secretary of State in exchange for 6-figure speaking fees for Bill, and 7 and 8 figure "donations" to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation. (BTW, this is the same reason I was burning my daily schedules, which are also official government documents. Had to hide the trail of my meetings with "donors" to the CCFF, and my policy decisions, so nobody could connect the dots).

So you see, it was all completely innocent. I was just not sophisticated enough to understand that stripping classified markings off documents and sending them over unsecured, private e-mail servers in my bathroom was a bad thing.

Nothing more to see here, so let's just move on . . . .

Posted by: UNSOPHISTICATED HILLARY CLINTON at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (NnYnv)

250 OT: I have a mental disease, thus far undiagnosed, which at times, particularly when I'm talking to the dogs, causes me to burst into song like I were in a Braodway musical. Just now I was given to rendering the theme from Cops, "Bad boys bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?" And Siri bursts in all serious like, "What are you going to do?"

Damn buttinski robot bitch.

Posted by: Anonosaurus Wrecks at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (Nwg0u)

251
What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know.

A cushy job at the Clinton Foundation when he retires from the FBI

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (lKyWE)

252 I'm not sure if you watched the hearing but Comey referenced both those cases and completely refuted what you said. He claimed that not only did Petraeus have a significant amount of top secret information that he shared with his girlfriend who obviously did not have a security clearance he lied to the FBI about it.

And he said Deutsch had reams of information, had his security clearance pulled and was then pardoned before being prosecuted by one William Jefferson Clinton.
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:37 PM (/tuJf)

Bullshit. He did NOT refute what I said.

Running a secret server for years and years running all of your electronic government correspondence through it including thousands of classified info and in circumstances in which every knowledgeable security geek said it's a slam dunk it was hacked by our enemies is so much worse that it is not even in the same league as the small potatoes Petraeus and Deutsch did.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (5xDis)

253 Not a smidgen of intent.

Posted by: James Comebama at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (H9MG5)

254 I intend to have the winning Mega Millions ticket. Eventually.

*goes back to writing*

Posted by: Anna Puma at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (obaG8)

255 "He is just saying that no responsible prosecutor in Obama's Department of Justice is going to prosecute Hillary"

then he arrests them too. but that requires integrity and the willingness to fulfill his oath

Posted by: Grad School Fool at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (swEzU)

256 Blows to hell any theory that Obama hates the Clintons enough to trip her on her way to the White House.

It was always a stupid theory. The cause is more important than everything else for the true believer. You may hate your fellow traveler, but they're still better than the enemy and you'll do anything to help them win.

The Obamas and Clintons despise each other, but they love the leftist faith more than that, and hate conservatism even more.

That has always been obvious, and should have been clear from when Barack O'Bama chose Hillary for Secretary of State. From that position, showing the minimum of competence and ability to avoid corruption and stupidity, she should have been a shoo-in for the presidency.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (39g3+)

257 Oh. Meant @236. That damned time machine again.

Posted by: xnycpeasant at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (k8tEg)

258
Bush should have prosecuted any activities that were crimes, even though he only in a squeaker. It ended up only emboldening the Clintons.
Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (5xDis)
-------------------

Sandy Berger theft of archives?

New York Times revelation of cyber strategy against bin Laden?

No prosecution. It's not compassionate.

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (pC96u)

259 #209

Obama loves 'transforming America' more than he hates the Clintons. In spite of "Ten years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee."

Posted by: Epobirs at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (IdCqF)

260 This belongs in the other thread but since everyone is here - Cruz accepted an invitation from Trump to speak at the convention.
Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (a0IVu)

______________________________________________________
Great news. Now if the Debbie Downers could knock it off for a while we might actually have a chance.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (DDM7c)

Cruz accepted nothing from Trump. Trump could not stop him from speaking at the convention because Cruz has enough states to be placed into nomination.

This is not an act of generosity on Trump's part nor an act of acceptance on Cruz's part.

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (3JA/M)

261 233 I promise to issue Hillary a pardon upon my inauguration
Posted by: Trump at the debates at July 07, 2016 03:42 PM (10hEu)

I've semi-jocularly suggested this. He should promise to grant it, just say something like "If Hillary should ask, I promise to give her plea for a pardon the utmost consideration."

What can she say in response?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (oKE6c)

262 I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I believe there are demonic forces at work in our country.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (dFi94)

They call it 'gaslighting.'

The left does it all the time, firstly because reality is not kind to their contentions and so they *have* to distort it so they look clueful.

But also, there has been a "by any means necessary" theme in leftism that excuses just about anything someone does if they are "down for the cause," be it serial adultery, embezzlement, cavorting with crack-whores, rape, bombings, etc.

I mean, if they can handwave Bomber Ayers, they can sure as shit handwave gross negligence in handling classified information, or for that matter selling classified information or government favors, whether it be to the Chinese in the 90s or the Russians or multinationals in the last few years.

Basically, a huge swath of the American people really believe that law only applies to them provisionally, and only if they harm "the cause" with their crimes.

It's kind of no wonder everything is so mad.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (wB8Tg)

263 What did Comey get out of this? That's what I want to know.

He gets to keep his job and pension. And he probably deludes himself that he can do more good in the job than out of it.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (39g3+)

264 How many different IPs are you going to use?
Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (/tuJf)

maybe it's a rolling troll.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (zp+j1)

265 247 >>>Your intent doesn't negate the crime, it mitigates the sentencing.

no. homicide is a very well-defined series of crimes with different charges for different levels of mens rea, and some other crimes are like that, but generally crimes require intent as mens rea. There are some departtures downward (speeding -- strict liability, no mens rea requirement) and a very few departures upward (a small number of crimes require specific intent, intent to do the thing plus intent to achieve a specific effect).

mens rea is not pled or contested at sentencing, it is proven or disproven as part of the case in chief. Mens rea is an element of every crime (except for those few which have no mens rea requirement, and tend to be administrative infracitons rather than real felonies).

Posted by: ace at July 07, 2016 03:43 PM (dciA+)

Think like speeding, manslaughter (gross negligence) or something Bill is familiar with, statutory rape. Doesn't mind what or if you intend to do something, doing it is the crime.

Posted by: Jollyroger at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (t06LC)

266 Intent, schmintent. Comey should have just said, "Because I said so!"

That's all he's got: she's not being indicted because he decided she would not be indicted, not because she didn't break the law.

Posted by: Lizzy at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (NOIQH)

267 She did not barbecue a baby and eat it with pickles.

Well, not in front of us.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at July 07, 2016 03:40 PM (2lndx)

++++

I will admit to not being fond of pickles.

Posted by: Hillary Rodham! Clinton at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (R+30W)

268 "In the law, you have to prove guilty act AND guilty mind. Minor crimes somtimes rests on "strict liability" that require no proof of state of mind. Speeding is a common example. From that point criminal liability requires proof of state of mind from least to most culpable."

One exception is statutory rape. Not sure of others.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (OD2ni)

269 Speaking of debbie downer and her appears

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (zp+j1)

270 259 I intend to have the winning Mega Millions ticket. Eventually.

*goes back to writing*
Posted by: Anna Puma at July 07, 2016 03:44 PM (obaG

If you win it, buy the Horde an island and the sovereignty to go with it.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party, TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (HalrA)

271 Ask Siri if Trump will beat Hillary.

Posted by: eleven at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (fYChk)

272

If they dont follow the rules then I wont either.
Fuck this shit. Im out.

Posted by: Spaceman Spiff at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (huDLc)

273 Maurice is a bootlicking slave who fancies himself to be one of the elite.

Hillary wipes her fat ass with the Maurices of the world and flushes them down the toilet.

Posted by: Donna and V. (sans ampersands at the present time) at July 07, 2016 03:41 PM (u0lmX)

Kinda figured. :-)

I wonder what its (D)U name is?

Now, those infants are unhinged.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (72N6L)

274 one thing that is established at sentencing is "special circumstances" for making a murder death-penalty eligible, but again, murder is the outlier here.

Posted by: ace at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (dciA+)

275 "I think one tactic of demonic forces is to try to convince you that you
do not see the things that you plainly see, and vice versa. And yes, I
believe there are demonic forces at work in our country."

I'm becoming convinced that literal Satanic worship takes place at the highest levels of power.

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (7HtZB)

276 Pagliano's testimony would show that Hillary intended to set up the home brew server to house State Dept documents. He worked on her campaign and she hired him into State. She paid him off the books for the home brew, which he was required to report to State as outside income, but didn't.

On Tuesday, Comey said that the home brew had awful security protection ("worse than g-mail", his words).

Thus, Hillary intended to put classified materials in an unsecure environment.

QED

As Giuliani said, this is a lay down case, even if you want to read intent into the statute

Posted by: Ignoramus at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (r1fLd)

277 Dear Republicans in Congress...

There is no Constitutional Reason you CANNOT Impeach someone who is out of office.

One possible punishment for impeachment, is that they can never again hold public Office...

Hillary... Perjury to Congress...

Some assembly required.

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (qf6WZ)

278 Reminds me of Dr. Smith and the robutt.

Posted by: Will Robinson at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (ruxTZ)

279 And yes, I believe there are demonic forces at work in our country.

Posted by: grammie winger at July 07, 2016 03:31 PM (dFi94)

Never doubt it. I personally believe modern abortion is an updated iteration of ritualized child sacrifice going back to the Babylonians and Sumerians. I think it spiritually powers their movement.

And yes, I know how I sound, but also know the Devil couldn't tempt Christ with the world if it wasn't his to give. C.S. Lewis likened Christians to resistance fighters workingbehind enemy lines.

Posted by: troyriser at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (UWlp+)

280 Comey has some serious bags under his eyes. Must be losing sleep over something, like maybe the Clinton Crime Syndicate.

Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (HgMAr)

281
FBI ( Federal Bureau of Intent )

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (lKyWE)

282 I'm becoming convinced that literal Satanic worship takes place at the highest levels of power.

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (7HtZB)

It's called Islam.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party, TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (HalrA)

283 Let's take a poll of all reasonable prosecutors and see if there is one who says yes.

Posted by: Count de Monet at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (JO9+V)

284 >>>No matter what you probe Hillary<<<

Oh, and 230+ comments and no ones touching this?

I don't blame you, either.

Hiyyyyyooooooooooooo! **bites lower lip**

Posted by: B.J. Clinton at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (H9MG5)

285 Fanatical.
Posted by: eman at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (MQEz6)

Fanatics usually are

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (zp+j1)

286 267 Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (wB8Tg)

I give these evil fucks grudging credit. They captured the country. It took 50-100 years but dammit if they didn't actually take it over.

We laughed at them during the fluke Reagan years. Looks like they will have the last laugh.

Beyond sick at heart.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (27m1/)

287 What Maurice said!

Posted by: Larry at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (8ZskC)

288 289 Let's take a poll of all reasonable prosecutors and see if there is one who says yes.
Posted by: Count de Monet at July 07, 2016 03:48 PM (JO9+V)

What the hell is this, Trident Sugarless Litigation?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (27m1/)

289 It was intent. Just not *evil* intent, sez Comey.

Jeebus. He was squirming and stammering like a loon toward the end.

Chaffetz was awesome.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (1ZOkK)

290 Comey's incoherent, nonsensical babbling is the sort of nonsense that someone says when they do something utterly indefensible and they're caught, but can't say, yeah I know that was indefensible but I did it anyway.

Because obviously he can't walk-up to CONgress and say "Lynch told me to broom this because Bill and JugEars told her to broom this, so, I broomed it. Suck-it, wingnutz, 'cause you ain't gonna do nothin' 'bout it anyway."

That would, at least, be honest and honorable. But that's in short supply these days and utterly nonexistent among the left for pretty-much my entire life.

Posted by: DocJ at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (NYS7S)

291 Intent can also be determined by the accused's knowledge and expertise regard to the charges. In Hillary's case Comey is providing her the status of an unknowledgeable layperson rather than the status of a person with expertise in that arena who knew or should have known of the law.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (G6BhX)

292 So, when the Duchess of Chappaqua tells her attorneys, the ones without a security clearance, to wipe her emails with a cloth, she didn't evilly intend to do that.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Posted by: Hank at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (02iLm)

293
Think like speeding, manslaughter (gross negligence) or something Bill is familiar with, statutory rape. Doesn't mind what or if you intend to do something, doing it is the crime.

Right: most crimes, intent is irrelevant, or at most affects the charges or sentencing. Saying it has no bearing in crime is not accurate at all.

I think what they're trying to say is that if you (for example) accidentally send a classified document to your grandmother instead of the CIA chief, that's going to be treated differently than deliberately sending documents to the Chinese for cash, when it comes to deciding to prosecute or not.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (39g3+)

294 Never doubt it. I personally believe modern abortion is an updated iteration of ritualized child sacrifice going back to the Babylonians and Sumerians. I think it spiritually powers their movement.

And yes, I know how I sound, but also know the Devil couldn't tempt Christ with the world if it wasn't his to give. C.S. Lewis likened Christians to resistance fighters workingbehind enemy lines.

Posted by: troyriser at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (UWlp+)

It doesn't as much power their movement as it saps the power from ours. The cause of good is on the side of life, and the cause of evil is on the side of death. Destroying life weakens us. It does not empower them, death has no power of its own. It only grows stronger by weakening life.

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party, TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (HalrA)

295 >>Pagliano's testimony would show that Hillary intended to set up the home brew server to house State Dept documents.

Look, Hillary had he aides moving classified docs/information from the secured network to her email system - essentially forwarding her the docs/info she needed to do her freakin' job for *four years*. This was not a one-time oopsie, she set up her staff to break the law (likely) daily. She was definitely breaking records keeping laws daily if she put her daily schedule in the 'burn bag.'
Daily.
Smells like intent to me.

Posted by: Lizzy at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (NOIQH)

296 He gets to keep his job and pension. And he probably deludes himself that he can do more good in the job than out of it.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (39g3+)

When is he planning on starting doing good?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (oKE6c)

297 Univ. Of Texas Professors Sue To Block Campus-Carry Law Because They Teach Gay Rights And Abortion

The Texas Tribune reports that Jennifer Lynn Glass, Lisa Moore and Mia Carter claim the law will chill speech in their courses that touch emotional issues like gay rights and abortion a variation of another professors claim that campus carry will lead to grade inflation.

Weasel Zippers

Funny Shit

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (zp+j1)

298 I have a dumb question. The FBI is investigating this crime. The FBI doesn't prosecute crime. That is a job for the District attorney, right?

So the FBI has clearly shown she violated, repeatedly, the law. Isn't that all he should say? It is up to the prosecutor (the attorney general) to decide whether to prosecute the crime. Why is he giving the excuse that, well, no prosecutor would ever prosecute this. Why is he even discussing intent? Shouldn't he just present the facts of the case to the prosecutors?

In which case, is he just protecting Loretta Lynch from this decision?

Posted by: George Orwell's Ghost at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (mBzJW)

299 >>Bullshit. He did NOT refute what I said.

Yea, actually he did. You may disagree with him but he made the case that based on the evidence they found, we all know lots was deleted but you can't take that to court, Hillary had less classified stuff than either Petraeus or Deutsch.

And Petraeus lied to the FBI which Deutsch was given a pardon by Clinton after he was stripped of his security clearance and before he could finish negotiating with the DOJ.

I think its a ridiculous standard. She was clearly trying to evade FOIA requests by setting up a private server and passing classified information but I'm just trying to understand if what he claimed was real. Has the DOJ always relied on intent to break the law when trying intelligence cases.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (/tuJf)

300 Do you wingnuts have any idea how hard it is to sit in a room with an 800 lb. gorilla and pretend like you don't see it?

Posted by: Guy Comey at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (8ZskC)

301 Teddy Kennedy intended to leave Mary Jo in the submerged Oldsmobile.

But his intent wasn't evil.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (1ZOkK)

302 In Hillary's case Comey is providing her the status of an unknowledgeable layperson rather than the status of a person with expertise in that arena who knew or should have known of the law.
Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (G6BhX)

LOL...He pretty much called her a fuckin idiot...not that the MSM will report it

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (zp+j1)

303 "I wonder what its (D)U name is?

Now, those infants are unhinged."

Wow. I forgot all about that place. Those people were nuts.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (OD2ni)

304 I didn't watch the whole thing, but did anyone ask how, given the scope of responsibilities of Secretary of State, could Clinton reasonably think she wouldn't be handling any classified material in her private email? If she wasn't getting anything classified, even at the lowest levels, she obviously wasn't doing her job.

I might almost give that she didn't 'intend' to break the law on handling classified material. She intended to violate the Federal Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act, and was feloniously grossly negligent with respect to handling classified material in furtherance of those crimes.

Posted by: Daedalus Mugged at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (oPogG)

305 Yes of course she posted the names of CIA assets on Google

But, you see, Google is not Evil.

Posted by: Bigbys Cellphone at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (TaJ8L)

306 Hillary Clinton 2016: incompetent, careless, and criminal... But not an EVIL criminal.

Posted by: wooga at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (WJwLp)

307 We laughed at them during the fluke Reagan years. Looks like they will have the last laugh

Because we went from "those guys are stupid and worthless, nobody will listen to them" to "well I've got a job to do, I don't have time to fight this" to "well we can't win so why try?"

When your outlook is that your end goal is so noble and pure that any cost is worth achieving it -- like the founding fathers, or the hard left zealot -- then you don't stop no matter what until you win or die.

When your outlook is a pragmatic "well I'll do it if I have a reasonable chance of success" you're easily defeated.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (39g3+)

308 281 Posted by: Ignoramus at July 07, 2016 03:47 PM (r1fLd)

She set up the unsecured environments in the first place. Four or more of them. That alone is the smoking gun of intent.

But we're not arguing the facts. We're merely sifting through the wreckage of dereliction of duty and willful misconduct on the part of Come-stain.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (27m1/)

309 >>>Comey's incoherent, nonsensical babbling is the sort
of nonsense that someone says when they do something utterly
indefensible and they're caught, but can't say, yeah I know that was
indefensible but I did it anyway.
Posted by: DocJ at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (NYS7S)
<<<

Mr. Comey, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic
things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent
response were you even close to anything that could be considered a
rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having
listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your
soul.

Posted by: "Principal" Chaffetz channeling Billy Madison at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (H9MG5)

310 What I find amazing is that the FBI did not even investigate WHO actually was taking Classified material from the Classified to Unclass systems...

He stated as much.

They only investigated if Hillary and her top 5 people did.

Thus, they could never know if it was done BY DIRECTION... which as pervasive as it was, is likely.

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (qf6WZ)

311 Man I love Gowdy.
Hope he runs for higher office in the future.

Posted by: Matt at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (nUtZ9)

312 Comey called Hillary "unsophisticated" when dealing with secret government e-mails.

But she's not evilly unsophisticated.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (1ZOkK)

313
Boy, Chris Klein, Ace's old nemesis has cleaned up his act: hit bottom, sobered up, married a woman not in show biz, having a baby.

When is Ace going to make us grandparents???

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (iQIUe)

314 Teddy Kennedy intended to leave Mary Jo in the submerged Oldsmobile.

But his intent wasn't evil.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (1ZOkK)

That comes under the "Wino" Clause of 1880

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (zp+j1)

315 Ace: "He has simply rewritten the statute, completely, to give Hillary another Clinton Gets Out of Jail card."

And he set it up so that nothing - absolutely nothing - could get her for perjury.

Didn't directly interview Clinton or attend interview.
Didn't speak to agents interviewing Clinton.
Didn't record interview.
Didn't transcribe interview.
Tied up ALL loose ends between what Clinton said at interview and what was accumulated over 18 months worth of interviews/investigation with others on a holiday weekend with enough time left over to prepare a press statement.

Horse hockey. How the hell could anyone get her for perjury? And who believes he would as a follow up considering he is ignoring - nay, rewriting - plain law?

He colluded. He is enabling a criminal. Trump should promise to fire Comey on day one of his Presidency and promise to clean out the FBI, maybe declare that his new budget for the agency is going to be chopped due to poor performance and taxpayers not getting its money's worth.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (1CroS)

316 Those 800 lb. gorillas, they smell bad, make a lot of noise and they don't stay on one place.

Posted by: Guy Comey at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (8ZskC)

317 307 Teddy Kennedy intended to leave Mary Jo in the submerged Oldsmobile.

But his intent wasn't evil.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (1ZOkK)

He told her to conserve the pocket of air. Jeanne Dixon found out during a seance.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (27m1/)

318 I need a nap. Let one of the Dems ask questions.

Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (HgMAr)

319 I think what they're trying to say is that if you (for example) accidentally send a classified document to your grandmother instead of the CIA chief, that's going to be treated differently than deliberately sending documents to the Chinese for cash, when it comes to deciding to prosecute or not.

And, unless your last name is Clinton, your ass is going to jail for both.

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (zcM+Q)

320 Her 3 and 1/2 hour testimony was neither under oath or recorded.

Posted by: steevy at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (B48dK)

321 Wouldn't the intent he seems to be requiring raise the level of her actions to something more like espionage? So , is he really saying their is nothing actionable short of a specific intent to transfer the information to unauthorized persons in an effort to harm the united states?

That seems to leave a gaping hole in the united state's ability to protect its classified information.

Posted by: Brian at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (K84+K)

322 Mega-Millions Shopping List:

20 AR-15s
20,000 rounds
1,500 six-packs
20 barrels bourbon
Jet pack
Bunker
5 LandRovers
Winona Ryder
Can of spam
Twizzlers
500 rolls TP
Sriracha cashews
York Peppermint Patty

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (MNZJR)

323 I didn't intend to green-light "Cop Rock." Can I have my job back, please?

Posted by: Guy who got fired for green-lighting "Cop Rock" at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (7HtZB)

324 No, there was no intent to set up a private server to handle classified emails. She thought that box in her bathroom closet was a Depends dispenser.

Posted by: James "Integrity" Comey at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (k8tEg)

325 I didn't intend to blow my load in that teenage girl's ass.

Posted by: Roman Polanski at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (OD2ni)

326 297 Intent can also be determined by the accused's knowledge and expertise regard to the charges. In Hillary's case Comey is providing her the status of an unknowledgeable layperson rather than the status of a person with expertise in that arena who knew or should have known of the law.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 03:49 PM (G6BhX)

++++

He dodged the question by calling Hillary an idiot.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (R+30W)

327 What the law knows about consciousless or intent could fill a postcard. If there were any consistency with the intent stuff then attempted murder would warrant the same exact punishment as murder. THe luck that a round didn't go off (even though the would-be shooter clearly intended to kill the victim) would be irrelevant. The fact that a shooter couldn't shoot for shit and hit a leg instead of the head he was aiming at would put the "intent" as murder, saved only by the incompetence of the criminal.

Lawyers like to make fancy arguments for intent and states of consciousness but what they end up with is just making a mockery of the idea of a conscious being and making a mockery of the INTENT of there actually being "law".

Again, that said, intent has nothing to do with Shrillay's situation, anyway.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (zc3Db)

328 >>>No matter what you probe Hillary
.............

Absolutely no female bodies were inspected in the course of this investigation.

Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (HgMAr)

329 Didn't directly interview Clinton or attend interview.
Didn't speak to agents interviewing Clinton.
Didn't record interview.
Didn't transcribe interview.
Tied up ALL loose ends between what Clinton said at interview and what was accumulated over 18 months worth of interviews/investigation with others on a holiday weekend with enough time left over to prepare a press statement.

Then how did Comey know WHAT she said?

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (zcM+Q)

330
More Yangs. Less Comeys.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (27m1/)

331 So the FBI has clearly shown she violated, repeatedly, the law. Isn't that all he should say? It is up to the prosecutor (the attorney general) to decide whether to prosecute the crime.

I think the dynamic of law enforcement always includes an attempt to build a case that a prosecutor will take and win with, not just gathering evidence. He may very well have been told that they would not prosecute, but was informed to not say that outright. I don't know.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (39g3+)

332 He dodged the question by calling Hillary an idiot.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 03:55 PM (R+30W)

Yup, but as i said the MSM and all lefties will ignore that.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (zp+j1)

333 Mr. Comey, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic
things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent
response were you even close to anything that could be considered a
rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having
listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your
soul.

Posted by: "Principal" Chaffetz channeling Billy Madison at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (H9MG5)
Less is more.
"That's it? THAT'S your story?"

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (oKE6c)

334 Did you all see the article from Fox News yesterday about Epstein?

"Billionaire sex offender Epstein once claimed he co-founded the Clinton Foundation"

It doesn't take much to connect the dots.

"President Clinton reached this conclusion during a
month long trip to Africa with Mr. Epstein, which Mr. Epstein hosted."

Month long.

There is also an article that Epstein got his money from an illegal pyramid scheme to begin with. One guy went to prison and wouldn't rat Epstein out years ago but now the guy is out of prison and is talking.

So Clinton and Epstein were/are partners. Selling favors for donations? Blackmail?

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (LZEIy)

335 I'm courious as to the presumption on the line of thought that Comney didn't want to derail a presidential ellection.

Hillary isn't the OFFICIAL nominee yet. She's the presumptive nominee and won't be official until after the Democratic convention. Until then, the Dems could still pull their support for her and nominate someone else.

Right?

They could easly try and do what the republicans are trying to do with Trump, and find an alternate way to nominate another candidate. Given that the evidence against her is pretty damning, you would think that this would be fairly easy to do, especially if she was actually charged.

But the excuse is "Well, she's a Presidential candidate, and we should let the people decide".

She's not the official candidate yet. So the desire to protect her under those grounds MAKES NO DAMN SENSE TO BEGIN WITH, when there's plenty of time for the Democrats to find another candidate to run.

Posted by: Dr. Mr. Badman at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (cfjq1)

336
Thus, they could never know if it was done BY DIRECTION... which as pervasive as it was, is likely.

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (qf6WZ)

Except that there's an email chain between the FAB and a minion in which she directs him to strip headers and send the document unsecure because the secure fax was down.

Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (uiwCw)

337 Those 800 lb. gorillas, they smell bad, make a lot of noise and they don't stay on one place.

Posted by: Guy Comey at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (8ZskC)

They're not so bad once you spend some intimate time with them.

Posted by: Clarence Beeks at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (JO9+V)

338 "327 When a bite of a reality sandwich tastes like shit it's not the fault of the sandwich. Move on already.
Posted by: Maurice"

Move on? Interesting choice of words.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (OD2ni)

339 Then how did Comey know WHAT she said?

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (zcM+Q)

He took a wild guess as to what her intentions were. And concluded they weren't evil.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (1ZOkK)

340 He claimed that not only did Petraeus have a significant amount of top secret information that he shared with his girlfriend who obviously did not have a security clearance he lied to the FBI about it.
_______________________

Petraeus' girlfriend did have a security clearance.

Also, Hillary Clinton lied repeatedly to the public, congress, and probably also to the FBI (although we don't know the latter for sure, because Comey won't tell us what she said).

But if lies were what Comey needed to prove Hillary's "evil intent" (which is not a legal standard for mens rea anywhere), he had plenty of them.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (NnYnv)

341 Man I love Gowdy.
Hope he runs for higher office in the future.
Posted by: Matt at July 07, 2016 03:52 PM (nUtZ9)

*****

Why, one name guy? Sure, he uses his mouth purtier than a $20 whore, but he never follows through with action and results.

Posted by: ManWithNoParty at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (V2+JX)

342 327 When a bite of a reality sandwich tastes like shit it's not the fault of the sandwich. Move on already.
Posted by: Maurice at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (F6oye)

When someone in your family dies a slow painful death, please heed your own advice. M'kay?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (27m1/)

343 Let's see:
- everyone, including Clinton, acknowledged that emails were deleted. Comey specifically noted that the deleted emails were both more numerous than previously reported and included substantial amounts of official, "work related" emails (as shown by emails recovered though other people's email accounts)
- the lengthy list of facts uncovered by the investigation do not match statements given by Clinton regarding the content, classified, nature, and volume of emails deleted. Of course, non of these statements are under oath because, for nearly the entire course of the investigation, Clinton and her subordinate refused to cooperate and provide any official testimony. Over the past 6-12 months, Clinton also ceased making any unofficial comments about the investigation and stopped doing any media appearances that might expose her to questions.
- within the recovered emails, Clinton directly stated that, disputed issues involving hers and others using her private server emails being redirected to spam and other concerns related to security, she refused to use a government account because she did not want certain emails to become part of official or public records.
- her statements about using this account for the convenience of using a single device were proven false (she used multiple devices and accounts) and several of the device she used have not been permitted for official use due to security concerns.

But yeah, sure, lying about facts under investigation, deleting evidence, refusing to cooperate with an investigation, and taking deliberate action to not only delete records but wipe drives and destroy hardware requested during the course of an investigation doesn't show any intent at all.

Just a simple misunderstanding. No harm done.

And all those other people currently being prosecuted under the same statute for far less are completely separate issues.

Posted by: Damiano at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (71OEY)

344 If her intent was not evil - why would she lie about things?

Posted by: An Observation at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (Ib1C7)

345 I might almost give that she didn't 'intend' to break the law on handling classified material. She intended to violate the Federal Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act, and was feloniously grossly negligent with respect to handling classified material in furtherance of those crimes.
Posted by: Daedalus Mugged at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (oPogG)

I might buy that excuse that she was negligent the first time she passed national secrets back and forth on her server, like Week One in her time in office.

But what about Week Two? or Week Fifty-Two? Or Week Two Hundred?

You can't say she is incapable of recognizing government secrets. She was a Senator on the Foreign Relations Committee. And then was Secretary of State for years. She knows what is and what is not supposed to be confidential.

Don't confuse "purpose" with "intent." Her purpose may well have been to avoid the inconvenient federal record-keeping sunshine laws. But that is different from the intent required. When she saw what she must certainly have known were national secrets passing through her server and she knowingly continued to operate it and pass more secrets through it week after week after week, that clearly satisfies the "intent" to mishandle national secrets.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (5xDis)

346 ruz accepted nothing from Trump. Trump could not stop him from speaking
at the convention because Cruz has enough states to be placed into
nomination.

This is not an act of generosity on Trump's part nor an act of acceptance on Cruz's part.

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (3JA/M)

Good lord; it's in his (Cruz's) own words.

Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (a0IVu)

347 Except that there's an email chain between the FAB and a minion in which she directs him to strip headers and send the document unsecure because the secure fax was down.
Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (uiwCw)

Has that been brought up yet or addressed?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (zp+j1)

348 Do you wingnuts have any idea how hard it is to sit in a room with an 800 lb. gorilla and pretend like you don't see it?
-------------------------------

Hah! I have these reocurring day dreams where I have been arrested, and undergoing an interview with law enforcement, and I'm thinking of all the things I want to say, and practicing (for dramatic effect) all the things I would say. Of course, being in restraints, the only thing I can say is, "I want a lawyer."

Ok, that might be too much information.

Posted by: Walrus Iam at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (AQXhN)

349 They did not recover everything Clinton destroyed/deleted. She wd not go to such great lengths to do so and then hide the fact unless there was something really criminal. Even if the DOJ did not prosecute cases of negligence, the fact that this whole incident is so effing shady and that she lied her fat butt off and that it was a huge amount of documents, they would prosecute but for the fact that it is a Clinton.

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (iQIUe)

350 "More Yangs. Less Comeys.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton"

Eee Plabe Neesta

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (OD2ni)

351 326 Her 3 and 1/2 hour testimony was neither under oath or recorded.
Posted by: steevy at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (B48dK)

So ... a total waste of time. A circle jerk on the taxpayers' dime.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (oKE6c)

352 345 Those 800 lb. gorillas, they smell bad, make a lot of noise and they don't stay on one place.

Posted by: Guy Comey at July 07, 2016 03:53 PM (8ZskC)

They're not so bad once you spend some intimate time with them.
Posted by: Clarence Beeks at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (JO9+V)

:golf clap:

Posted by: Guy who got fired for green-lighting at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (7HtZB)

353 Her 3 and 1/2 hour testimony was neither under oath or recorded.

Posted by: steevy at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (B48dK)
.............

Make that 2 hours. I'm sure she spent at least 90 minutes in the bathroom.

Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (HgMAr)

354 Mega-Millions Shopping List:

Is Wynona Ryder for sale? And if so, how much does a ball gag cost, because you're gonna want one.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (39g3+)

355
Sadly, Gowdy and Chaffetz excoriations are a bit too late and will do very little good.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (27m1/)

356 This is not an act of generosity on Trump's part nor an act of acceptance on Cruz's part.

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 03:45 PM (3JA/M)

Good lord; it's in his (Cruz's) own words.
Posted by: IC

Go ahead. Prove intent.
-Comey

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (zcM+Q)

357 This IS all very interesting, and it needs to be discussed, but two obvious things strike me.

(1) Comey pulled the same type of matador and cape stunt that Roberts did - contorting any normal, commonsense reading of the law to fit a desired outcome.

(2) When the discussion in the public sphere turns to "well, there was gross negligence, but maybe/probably there wasn't intent, etc." people start to snooze, we lose. We're right in the Democrats' "I don't care about your Goddamn e-mails, let's move on" wheelhouse.

Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (U3LtS)

358 Jim Comey, one of the brightest our goverment has to offer.

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (Yo9Lf)

359 357 "More Yangs. Less Comeys.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton"

Eee Plabe Neesta
Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (OD2ni)

Did you intend to speak the holy words?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (27m1/)

360
Your intent doesn't negate the crime, it mitigates the sentencing.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 03:39 PM (39g3+)

Nope. State of mind is almost always an element of the offense. And the more culpable the state of mind for criminal conduct the more serious the crime as defined by law. Usually. So, for instance, an assault done knowingly that causes bodily injury (minor) is a misdemeanor. An assault intended to cause serious bodily injury but causes only minor injury is a felony. You are right that the sentencing is more severe in one than the other. But they are distinctly different crimes with different elements that must be proven. State of mind is just one of the elements to be proven.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (B001q)

361 354
Except that there's an email chain between the FAB and a minion in which
she directs him to strip headers and send the document unsecure because
the secure fax was down.

Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (uiwCw)

Has that been brought up yet or addressed?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (zp+j1)

Yes.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (1ZOkK)

362 "Then how did Comey know WHAT she said?

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT"

I told him over bloody mary's the next morning. Hic.

Posted by: Hillary at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (OD2ni)

363 This IS all very interesting, and it needs to be discussed, but two obvious things strike me.

(1) Comey pulled the same type of matador and cape stunt that Roberts did - contorting any normal, commonsense reading of the law to fit a desired outcome.

(2) When the discussion in the public sphere turns to "well, there was gross negligence, but maybe/probably there wasn't intent, etc." people start to snooze, we lose. We're right in the Democrats' "I don't care about your Goddamn e-mails, let's move on" wheelhouse.
Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (U3LtS)

Yup I mentioned this yesterday. And those are our 2 biggest loses and betrayals in the last 7 1/2 years

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (zp+j1)

364 In any case the FBI will always make the case and then put it before the Attorney General/US Attorney to prosecute. That's their job, to investigate not to prosecute the case in Court.

Posted by: Ben H at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (gJEsZ)

365 Speaking of two different sets of laws, this is terrifying:

http://detne.ws/29ozEVt

No arrests even though license plates are known.

What do you bet if 40 Tea Partiers did this at a Democrats house, the result and press treatment would be the same?

AHAHAHAHAHAHA I'm so funny.

Posted by: alexthechick - I despair I despair at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (mf5HN)

366 Yes.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (1ZOkK)

And how did Comey respond?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (zp+j1)

367 >>>Pagliano's testimony would show that Hillary intended to set up the home brew server to house State Dept documents.

Look,
Hillary had he aides moving classified docs/information from the
secured network to her email system - essentially forwarding her the
docs/info she needed to do her freakin' job for *four years*. This was
not a one-time oopsie, she set up her staff to break the law (likely)
daily. She was definitely breaking records keeping laws daily if she put
her daily schedule in the 'burn bag.'
Daily.
Smells like intent to me.

Posted by: Lizzy at July 07, 2016 03:50 PM (NOIQH)<<<

In one of Chaffetz's (or maybe Gowdy's) last questions they were asking about the email from Cankles herself asking one of her aides to remove the headers when she was having trouble sending an email to her system.

Comestain seriously said, while looking around the ether of the chamber to try to find an answer that might fly, "well, gee, there are ways to do that without actually sending the confidential info..."
Then Chaffetz or Gowdy said, "well, that's not what happened, right? You found it was sent with the classified info?"
Comestain, after again hemming and hawing, had to admit it was. HOW IS THAT NOT FUCKING INTENT! EEEEVIL, HONEST AND TRULY AGAINST THE LAW INTENT!!!

Posted by: SMOD, take me away at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (H9MG5)

368
Time to pause for station identification and to feed the kittehs, but mostly to feed the kittehs.

BBS.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (27m1/)

369 Kaiser Soze was wrong. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled wasn't convincing people he doesn't exist. It was convincing people he's a laughable guy in red tights and pitchfork, or Linda Blair vomiting Campbell's on priests, or that fraud Anton LaVey.

Satan masquerades as an angel of LIGHT...goodness, ethics, morality. So it is no wonder his ministers transform themselves into ministers of light as well. 2 Corinthians 11:14-15. That "light" takes many, many forms which are actually antichrist. It's all around you, every day...damnable evil that's apparently good...always where you least expect it.

+1 on the observation above that abortion is a rite or ritual. It absolutely is, but not merely the way Limbaugh calls it the Left's sacrament.

Posted by: doomed at July 07, 2016 04:01 PM (bGLSw)

370 Criminal defense lawyers are going to have a field day with Comey's testimony.

Nobody is ever going to be convicted under this statute ever again, since prosecutors must now produce direct evidence of the accused's "evil intent" to make their case.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:01 PM (NnYnv)

371 The beloved liberal concept of "hate crimes" is based entirely on the accused's intent.

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 04:01 PM (7HtZB)

372 360 Her 3 and 1/2 hour testimony was neither under oath or recorded.

Posted by: steevy at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (B48dK)
.............

Make that 2 hours. I'm sure she spent at least 90 minutes in the bathroom.
Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (HgMAr)

..............

Make that 15 minutes. After all of the various lawyers introduced themselves and argued about the ground rules, I'm sure there was only about 15 minutes left and she spent the entire time speaking about yoga and wedding dresses, knowing no one dare would dare challenge her or cut her off while speaking.

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 04:01 PM (5xDis)

373 "We laughed at them during the fluke Reagan years. Looks like they will have the last laugh"

The biggest security mistake this country made was to play silly COINTELPRO pranks on these people instead of dealing with them permanently.

What COINTELPRO did effectively was to deflate the Klan for a while (until they called off the ops), and to scare off people flirting with leftist movements. What COINTELPRO did not do was to efficiently deal with leftism.

None of the hardcore Left should have been making any noise by 1975

Posted by: Grad School Fool at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (swEzU)

374 This is all theater.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (MlXgU)

375 Has that been brought up yet or addressed?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 03:58 PM (zp+j1)

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/ presidential-races/265210-email-clinton- asked-adviser-to-send-secure-fax- by-email

Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (uiwCw)

376
And how did Comey respond?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (zp+j1)

He shucked and jived.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (1ZOkK)

377 Selling information to the enemy = evil intent
Keeping public goverment information from the public = not evil

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (Yo9Lf)

378 354
Except that there's an email chain between the FAB and a minion in which
she directs him to strip headers and send the document unsecure because
the secure fax was down.

Posted by: Country Singer at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM (uiwCw)

Has that been brought up yet or addressed?

Posted by: Nevergiveup

+++++

Blam! Case closed.

I would add too the issue of clearance by her attorney Kendall to hold a thumb drive in his office. If that was an issue, then they kind of knew the law, eh?

Comey must have a good reason for being made to look as crooked as Hillary in this mess.

Posted by: oddnot frets not but sighs at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (g1MTt)

379 State of mind is almost always an element of the offense. And the more culpable the state of mind for criminal conduct the more serious the crime as defined by law.

Which is what I just said. Intent adjusts the crime and sentencing, it is not irrelevant to the crime, it is taken into account.

I think the takeaway from this for anti-Hillary types should be: "The FBI said that she's guilty but they couldn't build a strong enough case."

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (39g3+)

380 "379 The beloved liberal concept of "hate crimes" is based entirely on the accused's intent."

And the accused's skin color.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (OD2ni)

381 382
This is all theater.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (MlXgU)

All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.

Posted by: Ghost of Shakespeare at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (HalrA)

382 rickb223 TEXIT: "Then how did Comey know WHAT she said?"

He wants no direct responsibility. He is cowering. He intentionally doesn't want to know or wants to know just enough to provide escape hatches for the Defense. And the lack of record denies critical review of facts.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (1CroS)

383 3.5 hours of testimony? Based on what I heard today Clinton and the agents who "interviewed" her probably played checkers while drinking cheap vodka until they thought they had spent enough time behind closed doors to seem legit. Kind of like on House of Cards when Frank and the republican met behind doors to discuss defeating ICO.

Which, by the way, does anyone else ever feel like our elected leaders watch that show and think "hey, i could probably get away with something like that." I'd bet a hot sandwich that Moochelle watches that show and fancies herself a real-life Claire.

Posted by: Eli Cash at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (a+WIL)

384 >>
I might almost give that she didn't 'intend' to break the law on handling classified material.

Nope. Remember this? https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/751062496069509120

Recall that Sid Blumenthal was emailing Hillary highly classified NSA intel.

Also, it's likely she was sharing classified docs with Blumenthal to assist his consulting business, and get his advice on Libya, as well as passing classified info to Bill at the foundation (IIRC, one of her aides sent a classified doc to Bill's assistant to assist with his presentation prep).

Hillary merged State with the Clinton Foundation. They needed to share info in order to do this, classified doc handling laws be damned.

Posted by: Lizzy at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (NOIQH)

385 Comey must have a good reason for being made to look as crooked as Hillary in this mess.

Posted by: oddnot frets not but sighs at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (g1MTt)

Not wanting to be the next Vince Foster?

Posted by: Cato the Rebel Without a Party, TEXIT at July 07, 2016 04:04 PM (HalrA)

386 Wow. I forgot all about that place. Those people were nuts.
Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:51 PM (OD2ni)

I'm on a couple of sites that watch it for the comedic content, .... and it's plentiful. Eventually though, the sewage gets to you and you have to back away from it.

I first found it in 2004 and was shell-shocked. Mind-boggling stuff.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Staring at the Lake in the rain at July 07, 2016 04:04 PM (72N6L)

387
*unblinking reptilian smirk*

Posted by: John Koskinen, also not in PMITA prison at July 07, 2016 04:04 PM (2WoCi)

388 "Evil intent". Hmmm. So if I'm driving drunk and kill someone, I'm not guilty of vehicular homicide unless I *meant* to kill someone. Got it.

Posted by: Brown Line at July 07, 2016 04:04 PM (zcbZo)

389
what exactly is Rose McGowan's claim to fame?

Her Vagina.

Posted by: garrett at July 07, 2016 03:28 PM (ggrt+)
_________________________________

Wow,, me too....

*hic*

Posted by: Hillary Clinton at July 07, 2016 04:05 PM (HSmrB)

390 >>Petraeus' girlfriend did have a security clearance.

True. But only clearance for issues she was cleared for not for any and all top secret information. She had no clearance for the information Petraeus shared with her. I should have been more clear.

>>Also, Hillary Clinton lied repeatedly to the public, congress, and probably also to the FBI (although we don't know the latter for sure, because Comey won't tell us what she said).

And that came up today. Specifically lying to Congress and that is what the new referral is all about. But Comey claimed she did no lie to the FBI. I'm not sure how we ever prove that one.

>>But if lies were what Comey needed to prove Hillary's "evil intent" (which is not a legal standard for mens rea anywhere), he had plenty of them

Nope. As he said right out of the gate today, the FBI does not act nor does it even consider stuff unless a specific criminal referral is made to them. Again, that's why Chaffetz said he would be sending a referral about lying to Congress asap. It may be a dumb process but he was pretty clear that the FBI never looks at stuff without a specific referral.

If they investigated politicians for lying to the public every single politician since the dawn of time would be under investigation. That's what elections are for.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (/tuJf)

391 Who is this Maurice troll?

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (1ZOkK)

392 Nope. State of mind is almost always an element of the offense.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 03:59 PM (B001q)

So getaway drivers are only liable for the getaway part and bear no responsibility for any of the acts committed while the perpetrators were out of the car (and even out of sight)?

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (zc3Db)

393 Geez, reading about this stuff still makes my blood boil.

Not to defend Comey, after all he is the head of the freaking F-B-I, one might could understand his motivation not to pursue charges. After some digging around, I get the impression that if, IF, he pulled on this string, the FBI would be forced to go after half the government, elected and bureaucratic. Not to mention the way that Clinton liabilities oddly find themselves among the dearly departed.

I could think of worse things for the FBI to do, but pretending a crime did not occur isn't one of them.

Posted by: Shinjinrui at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (4SznG)

394 342---She's not the official candidate yet. So the desire to protect her under those grounds MAKES NO DAMN SENSE TO BEGIN WITH, when there's plenty of time for the Democrats to find another candidate to run.
Posted by: Dr. Mr. Badman at July 07, 2016 03:56 PM
------------------------------
If Clinton goes down --- and losing the WH is a fate worse than death for her --- she will bring a whole lot of other people down, including the Obamassiah.
And Slow Joe. (You think she doesn't have a file on him?)

No, they have to circle the wagons around the Bitch.

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (T/5A0)

395 Then Chaffetz or Gowdy said, "well, that's not what happened, right? You found it was sent with the classified info?"
Comestain,
after again hemming and hawing, had to admit it was. HOW IS THAT NOT
FUCKING INTENT! EEEEVIL, HONEST AND TRULY AGAINST THE LAW INTENT!!!

Posted by: SMOD, take me away at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (H9MG5)

How is that not direct evidence that Comey was playing Clinton's defense attorney?POS.

Posted by: Mimzey at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (aRUb8)

396 I diddent INTEND to be speeding, officer. My mind was elsewhere for a bit. I wuz thinking about my grandchildren.

Posted by: the littl shyning man at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (9LrS3)

397 Are we talking Evil Sith Lord powers to muttle Comey's mind? That kind of Evil Intent?

Posted by: Paladin at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (+Wvn3)

398 >>>"Evil intent". Hmmm. So if I'm driving drunk and
kill someone, I'm not guilty of vehicular homicide unless I *meant* to
kill someone. Got it.

Posted by: Brown Line at July 07, 2016 04:04 PM (zcbZo)<<<

Are you an illegal alien, or a Kennedy. Then you're not guilty.
Anyone else... GUILTY!!!

Posted by: some animals are more equal than others at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (H9MG5)

399 384
And how did Comey respond?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at July 07, 2016 04:00 PM (zp+j1)

He shucked and jived.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:02 PM (1ZOkK)
----------------

He said something like what she actually told them to do was to change the wording of the classified info to make it unclassified. Which makes no sense because if you're sending a classified email to the SoS, there is a good reason for the classification. If they could send it as an unclassified email, I would think they would do that.

Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (805dc)

400 so, there's piss all over the country's leg, but it's really acid rain from global warming due to Republicans.
Have I got that right?
And what train platform am I supposed to report to, and how many bags am I allowed to carry?
Is it true that I will get a loaf of bread and some marmalade if I bring a friend?

Posted by: barbarausa at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (h3IJ6)

401
Because I'm such a nice person, I will waive winning the MegaMillions and take the PowerBall instead.

My list

pay bills
buy new car & truck
buy house
buy second beach house
obtain the max # of rescue dogs allowed
maybe throw in some rescue kitties, too
buy a shit load of dog and cat toys and treats
must have a pool so dogs can swim
need lots of pool floaties/mattresses for the dogs
take alot of vacations

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (iQIUe)

402 405
I diddent INTEND to be speeding, officer. My mind was elsewhere for a bit. I wuz thinking about my grandchildren.

Posted by: the littl shyning man at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (9LrS3)

I didn't intend to rob that bank. I was just thinking about paying my bills, and one thing lead to another...

Posted by: A future of excuses at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (HalrA)

403 376 Kaiser Soze was wrong. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled wasn't convincing people he doesn't exist. It was convincing people he's a laughable guy in red tights and pitchfork, or Linda Blair vomiting Campbell's on priests, or that fraud Anton LaVey.

Posted by: doomed at July 07, 2016 04:01 PM (bGLSw)

One great episode of "The X-Files" had Mulder & Scully investigating a Bible-thumpin' church thinking that the fire & brimstone preacher was killing members of a mainline, "modern" church. It turned out that the nice, tolerant minister of the "modern" church was actually a demon in disguise. Mulder remarks that the Devil isn't a monster with horns & hooves, but a nice man that tells you what you want to hear.

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 04:08 PM (7HtZB)

404 If I get drunk on sacramental wine and then kill someone while driving drunk, that's not "evil" intent.

Posted by: strategic Corporal USMC at July 07, 2016 04:08 PM (CSaCX)

405 It was not my intent to squirt on that blue dress.

Posted by: Bill Clinton at July 07, 2016 04:08 PM (DrC22)

406 >>>How is that not direct evidence that Comey was playing Clinton's defense attorney?POS.

Posted by: Mimzey at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (aRUb

<<<

Seriously. Even we can see that!

Posted by: Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder, and Helen Keller at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (H9MG5)

407 She had confidential emails on her system, Comey doesn't know if they read them.
Can anyone verify this jack ass has a drop over common sense?

I wasn't going to start drinking because it's so hot, but they sure are making that hard not to do.

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (Yo9Lf)

408 Nope. As he said right out of the gate today, the FBI does not act nor does it even consider stuff unless a specific criminal referral is made to them. Again, that's why Chaffetz said he would be sending a referral about lying to Congress asap. It may be a dumb process but he was pretty clear that the FBI never looks at stuff without a specific referral.

Srsly? Who referred the FBI for the Orlando shooting? That was a state matter.

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (zcM+Q)

409 400 Who is this Maurice troll?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (1ZOkK)

Some people call him the Space Cowboy

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (7HtZB)

410 Under your homeowners policies there is of course exclusions for intentional acts. Unfortunately there is precedent in some jurisdictions to cover liability claims for injuries occurring as a result of an assault by the an insured under the policy. Simply by establishing that 'they didn't intend on killing the guy when he struck him in the head. '

Legal logic is anything but logical.

Posted by: Joe Hallenbeck at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (G6BhX)

411 Whatever was said today, it's done. The Hildebeast skated one more time.

It's over.

Posted by: Soona at July 07, 2016 04:10 PM (Fmupd)

412 Speaking of intent, I watched a show last night called Life and Death Row.

Young guy in Texas runs from the cops in an SUV. High speed chase. He crashes over a median strip to avoid them once. He tries to do it again and swerves and hits and kills an officer laying down strips to blow his tires out. Some thought it was deliberate, the judge was not so sure, she thought he could have just been trying to evade the cops again.

It 's more complex, but bottom line is, he's taking a dirt nap now after an evening on the Huntsville gurney.

Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 04:10 PM (U3LtS)

413 Lois Lerner intended to go after the Tea Parties. But her intent wasn't evil.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:10 PM (1ZOkK)

414 418 400 Who is this Maurice troll?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (1ZOkK)

Some people call him the Space Cowboy

Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (7HtZB)

Some call him the gangster of love....

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (qf6WZ)

415
Because I'm such a nice person, I will waive winning the MegaMillions and take the PowerBall instead.

My list

pay bills
buy new car & truck
buy house
buy second beach house
obtain the max # of rescue dogs allowed
maybe throw in some rescue kitties, too
buy a shit load of dog and cat toys and treats
must have a pool so dogs can swim
need lots of pool floaties/mattresses for the dogs
take alot of vacations
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (iQIUe)
-----------------------

Evil intent is all that counts -- and I detect evil.

Posted by: Lois Lerner at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (pC96u)

416 Bruce you will need two pools 1 for cats 1 for dogs, oh and 1 for yourself. Oh wait that makes three.

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (Yo9Lf)

417 >>>He said something like what she actually told them
to do was to change the wording of the classified info to make it
unclassified. Which makes no sense because if you're sending a
classified email to the SoS, there is a good reason for the
classification. If they could send it as an unclassified email, I would
think they would do that.
Posted by: bluebell at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (805dc)<<<

He said that's what it could maybe, possibly, in some way mean... but he painfully, grudgingly admitted they didn't do that. It was still sent with the classified info.

EEEEEVIL BLACK RIFLE SMOKING GUN LEVEL INTENT!!!

Posted by: Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder, and Helen Keller at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (H9MG5)

418 One exception is statutory rape. Not sure of others.
Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 03:46 PM (OD2ni)

You are correct. It is one of the most serious strict liability crimes; the theory being that it is on the older participant to ascertain the true facts or to exercise caution if unsure. I think in this day and age it is unfair, but it is what it is.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (B001q)

419 328 Mega-Millions Shopping List:

20 AR-15s
20,000 rounds
1,500 six-packs
20 barrels bourbon
Jet pack
Bunker
5 LandRovers
Winona Ryder
Can of spam
Twizzlers
500 rolls TP
Sriracha cashews
York Peppermint Patty
Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 03:54 PM (MNZJR)

If you are bringing Miss Ryder, you need to add feminine products from the private, clean, and healthy catagories.

And cotton balls, 20,000 rolls of TP, and 2000 cartons of cigs.

Posted by: Cactus of Liberty at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (MlXgU)

420 Good lord; it's in his (Cruz's) own words.

__________

I believe I was discussing political skills on the previous thread?

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 04:11 PM (oKE6c)

421 "Not wanting to be the next Vince Foster?"

Then why take the job in the first place?

If you are not that strong of a person why pick a job that requires you to have a bold, righteous and fearless nature?

It's like all these excuses for Comey. He's a big boy. He has the country's ear.

We have soldiers buried or maimed and he's making a mockery of them by this soviet style justice system.

Posted by: The media Suxs at July 07, 2016 04:12 PM (LZEIy)

422 Don't confuse "purpose" with "intent." Her purpose may well have been to avoid the inconvenient federal record-keeping sunshine laws. But that is different from the intent required. When she saw what she must certainly have known were national secrets passing through her server and she knowingly continued to operate it and pass more secrets through it week after week after week, that clearly satisfies the "intent" to mishandle national secrets.
___________________

Yes, but it's Comey who is conflating the two with his new "evil intent" standard. He is saying that a deliberate intent to mishandle classified docs is not enough; there must be an EVIL intent.

Apparently, under the Comey standard, unless Hillary intended to bring down the U.S. government by sending thousands of classified and secret and top secret docs through her unsecured private e-mail servers, then it's all good.

The fact that she was doing it, deliberately, simply to evade the requirements of the Federal Records Act and the FOIA, so that she could hide the evidence of her illegal influence peddling, is hunky dory, according to Comey.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:12 PM (NnYnv)

423 Maybe I missed this in the hearing, but did anyone ask who, specifically, "interviewed" Hillary since it wasn't Comey himself? It might make sense to know who they were and whether the Clintons had gotten to them prior to the "interview". Especially given that there is no transcript of what was said.

Posted by: Eli Cash at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (a+WIL)

424 I hope Trump has hired somebody to make ads out of this shit.

Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (HgMAr)

425 Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:12 PM (NnYnv)

Damn.... the case of the Sailor who took pictures in the Sub and is being prosecuted???

I'd SOOOOO be using that if I was his Lawyer...

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (qf6WZ)

426 Out: Chewbacca Defense
In: No evil intent

Serial Killer: Sure, I murdered a dozen people, dismembered their corpses, and ate them. There was no evil intent. I was saving them from a lifestyle abhorrent to Cthulu and ate them because all that work made me hungry! I was saving the world from the wrath of Cthulu! I'm a hero!

Posted by: Damiano at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (71OEY)

427
Posted by: Maurice at July 07, 2016 04:05 PM (F6oye)

Its not the same nowdays numbnuts.With the internet and dedicated news channels information disseminates much differently

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (lKyWE)

428 >>Srsly? Who referred the FBI for the Orlando shooting? That was a state matter.

No idea. I was pretty stunned to hear him say that. But he did state it, emphatically.

Chaffetz even went so far as to ask him if they can prove that she lied to Congress would that show intent to hide her actions and Comey said maybe.

So he knew that she had likely made false claims to Congress and if she did then that quite possibly would have shown intent but they didn't act because Congress did not ask them to act.

I'm just curious if this is really how the FBI has always acted or if Comey is just making this shit up on the fly.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (/tuJf)

429 eman,

one more untoward comment you make merely because someone opposes trump, and you are banned permanently.

Last warning. I've fucking had it. Get your spastic emotional incontinence under control or get the fuck out.

Posted by: ace at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (dciA+)

430 Did Jim Comey and John Roberts go to the same law school?

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (Yo9Lf)

431 Only one can of Spam?

Posted by: wth at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (HgMAr)

432 Good lord; it's in his (Cruz's) own words.

Posted by: IC at July 07, 2016 03:57 PM (a0IVu)

So Cruz "accepted nothing" was not accurate... what is accurate is that no matter how polite Cruz was about the meeting with Trump and no matter how diplomatically he couched it, Trump actually cannot keep Cruz from speaking at the convention. Under current rules, anyone who has a majority of delegates in 8 states is eligible to have their name placed in nomination and is allowed time to speak.

This was not a magnanimous gesture on Trump's part... in fact, he has said in the past few weeks that he intended to block anyone from speaking who did not endorse him. Trump could not follow through with that in this instance because he has no control over the rules of the convention.

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (3JA/M)

433 422 Lois Lerner intended to go after the Tea Parties. But her intent wasn't evil.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:10 PM (1ZOkK)

How can preventing citizens from destroying the counterrevolution be evil? QED.

/s

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (27m1/)

434 Am I too fat?
Are you just not that in to me?
What's wrong with me, James?
I don't get it, why can't I get indicted?

Posted by: Ham Sandwich at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (LZEIy)

435 Bump de bump

My LIFE for you!

Bumpity bump

Posted by: Trashcan Comey at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (LVswa)

436 >>>Is Wynona Ryder for sale? And if so, how much does a ball gag cost, because you're gonna want one.

Is she really annoying? Maybe I just tell her I am casting an indie film and she is a mute girl who gets motorboated relentlessly by a crazy man. Kind of a Blake Snake Moan but less talky and more boobly. But tasteful and artistic. Maybe I buy two jet packs and fork out for dinner somewhere.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (MNZJR)

437 439 Did Jim Comey and John Roberts go to the same law school?
Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (Yo9Lf)

The one advertised on the back of a matchbook cover?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (27m1/)

438 I'm just curious if this is really how the FBI has always acted or if Comey is just making this shit up on the fly.

On. The. Fly.

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (zcM+Q)

439
So getaway drivers are only liable for the getaway part and bear no responsibility for any of the acts committed while the perpetrators were out of the car (and even out of sight)?
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (zc3Db)

Nope. Then you are a co-conspirator. Knowingly aiding, abetting or encouraging the criminal act of another.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (B001q)

440 I'll bet Comey went home and hit the Makers Mark hard.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (1ZOkK)

441 Posted by: Damiano at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (71OEY)

Those people I killed??? They were polluting the atmosphere with CO2! I was doing GOOD!

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (qf6WZ)

442 Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 04:10 PM (U3LtS)
=============

He was always knocking up his gfs and when they had their back turned, he was on top of their 15 year old sisters, screwing them. No shite.

I dont believe the evading the story. There were more facts that indicated he was trying to hit the officer.

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (iQIUe)

443 I didn't intend to rob that bank. I was just thinking about paying my bills, and one thing lead to another...

Posted by: A future of excuses at July 07, 2016 04:07 PM (HalrA)

That's exactly what we thought!

Posted by: Going In Style - Burns, Carney and Strasberg at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (JO9+V)

444 So Comey just kept changing the definition of "intent" as He went along?They should have demanded His resignation...

Posted by: donna at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (O2RFr)

445 And the accused's skin color.

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 04:03 PM (OD2ni)
And that of the victim.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (oKE6c)

446 >>>Did Jim Comey and John Roberts go to the same law school?

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:14 PM (Yo9Lf)<<<

They were great at our law firm.

Posted by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (H9MG5)

447 421 Speaking of intent, I watched a show last night called Life and Death Row.

Young guy in Texas runs from the cops in an SUV. High speed chase. He crashes over a median strip to avoid them once. He tries to do it again and swerves and hits and kills an officer laying down strips to blow his tires out. Some thought it was deliberate, the judge was not so sure, she thought he could have just been trying to evade the cops again.

It 's more complex, but bottom line is, he's taking a dirt nap now after an evening on the Huntsville gurney.

Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 04:10 PM (U3LtS)

++++

Sounds like the felony murder rule. If you are intentionally committing a felony and someone is killed during your crime, saying that you didn't intend to kill is not a defense. You intended to commit a crime, someone died, you still get the murder conviction.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (R+30W)

448 "And what train platform am I supposed to report to, and how many bags am I allowed to carry?
Is it true that I will get a loaf of bread and some marmalade if I bring a friend?"

Depends on whether your ticket is punched for re-education or for disposal.

Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (U3LtS)

449 Comey should have gone home and hit the samurai sword hard, falling on it.

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:17 PM (Yo9Lf)

450 Nope. Then you are a co-conspirator. Knowingly aiding, abetting or encouraging the criminal act of another.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (B001q)
Wait - knowingly? WTF?

Posted by: Dr. Samuel Mudd at July 07, 2016 04:17 PM (oKE6c)

451 "449 I'll bet Comey went home and hit the Makers Mark hard."

That's funny. So did I. Hic.

Posted by: Hillary at July 07, 2016 04:17 PM (OD2ni)

452 449 I'll bet Comey went home and hit the Makers Mark hard.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (1ZOkK)
--------------
"Fridelity, Baverty, Impegrinny!"
*hic*

Posted by: Margarita DeVille at July 07, 2016 04:17 PM (T/5A0)

453 I would have ended the hearing
You have no business being the head of the FBI

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:18 PM (Yo9Lf)

454 O/T, but why is Apple IOS blocking me from accessing the site linked in the headline at the right? Re traffic stop & CCW, blog.beretta.com.

And when will they block ace.mu.nu?

Will it be before or after they round me up, confiscate the old 30-30, and ship me to the camp?

Posted by: the littl shyning man at July 07, 2016 04:18 PM (9LrS3)

455 Damn.... the case of the Sailor who took pictures in the Sub and is being prosecuted???

I'd SOOOOO be using that if I was his Lawyer...
Posted by: Don Q.

Is the sailor's last name Clinton?
If not, #NoStanding or #EvilIntent

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 04:18 PM (zcM+Q)

456 Sounds like the felony murder rule. If you are
intentionally committing a felony and someone is killed during your
crime, saying that you didn't intend to kill is not a defense. You
intended to commit a crime, someone died, you still get the murder
conviction.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 04:16 PM (R+30W)
I always liked the felony murder doctrine. Think of the bullshit it obviates: there's no point in co-conspirators pointing the finger at each other ("I didn't pull the trigger - he did!"), in hopes of getting off because who did what exactly is unclear.
Under the felony murder doctrine, they can ALL get rung up, with no need to figure out who did exactly what.

Sadly, I believe a number of states no longer have the felony murder doctrine.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 04:20 PM (oKE6c)

457 If our NCO son had mishandled ONE e-mail, we'd be visiting him in Leavenworth.

Unless we had the last name of Clinton.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:20 PM (1ZOkK)

458
You know, it would be nice if mens rea requirements were put back into
statutes and regulations and arrrggghhh there goes my eye twitch again.

Stab it with the heroin syringe!

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 03:19 PM (zcM+Q)

There has been talk over the last several years about the need for mens rea reform in the face of out of control proliferation of laws that make more and more common place things illegal. See here: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/09/the-pressing-need-for-mens-rea-reform

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 04:21 PM (3JA/M)

459 Comey, resign today and end this farce.

You sold your soul to the Clintons.

They own you, bitch.

Forever.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at July 07, 2016 04:21 PM (4AVeu)

460 Death penalty cases are a breed all their own. Generally, courts consider mitigating and aggravating factors at sentencing. These factors can be defined by statute or left to the discretion of the court. For instance, committing a crime while under parole is usually an automatic aggrevator. Using a deadly weapon during the commission of a crime is another one.

Death penalty is way to complicated to explain in this short format.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (B001q)

461 Comey should have worn Monica Lewinsky's blue dress today when he testified.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (4AVeu)

462 Nope. Then you are a co-conspirator. Knowingly aiding, abetting or encouraging the criminal act of another.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:15 PM (B001q)

You can't "knowingly" aid or abet an act that you don't even know is going on.

No. The law plays fast and loose (and inconsistently) with the concept of intent and liability.

As I wrote above, if intent actually meant anything then attempted murder would warrant the same exact punishment as murder. The attempted murderer is just as big a threat to society and did not fall short of murder due to any act of his own.

Intent is clearly warranted for consideration in some crimes but for many crimes intent doesn't matter. When someone proves himself a threat to society - whether intentionally or not - and commits an act that deprives others of their rights and property, then any sane person would say that he needs to be held fully liable for that act, whether he had intent or it was just the result of happenstance. Why should the victim suffer the consequences of the happenstance but not the perpetrator?

This is all why normal people hate the silliness of most insanity defenses, and especially the offensive category of "temporary insanity". I mean, really ...

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (zc3Db)

463 This is right out of the "depends what the meaning of is is" Clinton playbook.

Mincing words and verbal gymnastics.

Again, I knew the rules when I was an E-5 with a TS clearance.

Posted by: Cheri at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (oiNtH)

464 Unless we had the last name of Clinton.

These days, can't you just identify as a Clinton?

Posted by: bathroom loophole at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (2WoCi)

465 Posted by: Dr. Samuel Mudd at July 07, 2016 04:17 PM (oKE6c)

Dr. Mudd was wronged, no question. In fairness, the authorities didn't know how far or deep the conspiracy went--they certainly thought it went farther--at least initially--than a famous,charismatic actor and a handful of starstruck misfits.

Posted by: troyriser at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (UWlp+)

466 Well if Comey really is investigating the CGI he should be able to find plenty of intent.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 04:23 PM (/tuJf)

467 >>Srsly? Who referred the FBI for the Orlando shooting? That was a state matter.
.....

I recall something about the DOJ or White House (BIRM) jumping in to see it it was a "hate crime".

Huh... Investigation of a "hate crime" right out of the gate. Doesn't that presume evil intent that we've now established is pretty much impossible to demonstrate despite all evidence?

Posted by: Damiano at July 07, 2016 04:23 PM (71OEY)

468 432 Maybe I missed this in the hearing, but did anyone ask who, specifically, "interviewed" Hillary since it wasn't Comey himself? It might make sense to know who they were and whether the Clintons had gotten to them prior to the "interview". Especially given that there is no transcript of what was said.

Posted by: Eli Cash at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (a+WIL)

++++

Do we even know that she didn't take the 5th? Maybe that was the extent of the interview. Three hours of the FBI asking questions and then Hillary responding with the 5th.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 04:23 PM (R+30W)

469 466 If our NCO son had mishandled ONE e-mail, we'd be visiting him in Leavenworth.

Unless we had the last name of Clinton.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:20 PM (1ZOkK)

Ex Wife's Navy Career was destroyed for ONE thing being destroyed, but not documented correctly. Even with multiple witnesses saying it was destroyed... once it was discovered missing.

But that was 25 years or so ago... and apparently we gave a shit about security back then.

Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 04:23 PM (qf6WZ)

470 Drunk drivers don't usually intend to kill anyone. But if they have 6 shots of JD, then drive home, and on the way kill someone, guess what....they get arrested.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at July 07, 2016 04:23 PM (0LHZx)

471 "Srsly? Who referred the FBI for the Orlando shooting? That was a state matter. "

They needed someone to make sure the missus got away.

Posted by: navybrat at July 07, 2016 04:23 PM (w7KSn)

472 Ozone?

Posted by: davidt at July 07, 2016 04:24 PM (XVTvT)

473 If our NCO son had mishandled ONE e-mail, we'd be visiting him in Leavenworth.

Unless we had the last name of Clinton.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:20 PM (1ZOkK)

Or Kennedy... there is a reason that the Constitution bans title of nobility.

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 04:24 PM (3JA/M)

474
Guys, geez...come on. She's just a girl, and isn't pophisticated enough to understand all that legal 'top secret' gobbledegook.

That's why hubby had to intervene with the AG on her behalf.

Posted by: Sticky Wicket at July 07, 2016 04:24 PM (3Q3yu)

475 "He was always knocking up his gfs and when they had their back turned, he was on top of their 15 year old sisters, screwing them. No shite.

I dont believe the evading the story. There were more facts that indicated he was trying to hit the officer."

It sounds like you've heard/know more than was on the show. He did seem like a bad dude in every way.

On camera, his little girl said, "Daddy killed a policeman, but Mommy told me it was the policeman's fault."

Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 04:24 PM (U3LtS)

476
This is all why normal people hate the silliness of most insanity defenses, and especially the offensive category of "temporary insanity". I mean, really ...

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:22 PM (zc3Db)

Hey, it worked for me.....

Helps to have Democrat friends in government too.

Posted by: Zombie Daniel Sickles at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (dJec7)

477
They prosecuted a guy in Florida for releasing balloons on valentines day near aprotectednature reserve.The ballons drifted into the reserve and he is now a convicted felon.His defense was he never intentended for the ballons to drift into the reserve

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (lKyWE)

478 #303

Do these nitwits truly believe the sole threat to them is somebody who spontaneously decide in the middle of a lecture to start shoot at the lecturer?

There isn't much evidence of such things happening much, if ever. Every incident that comes to mind required the shooter to be intent on the deed well in advance, meaning they aren't going to care about being forbidden to bring a gun on campus. Which means those who feel under threat have only the hope the wouldbe shooter screws up and fails to successfully hide his weapon from detection. Meanwhile, nobody else who might intervene is equipped to confront the shooter.

Posted by: Epobirs at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (IdCqF)

479 Srsly? Who referred the FBI for the Orlando shooting? That was a state matter.
.....

I recall something about the DOJ or White House (BIRM) jumping in to see it it was a "hate crime".

Huh... Investigation of a "hate crime" right out of the gate. Doesn't that presume evil intent that we've now established is pretty much impossible to demonstrate despite all evidence?

My point, since the FBI needs a referral, and Orlando was a state crime, ONLY the state had jurisdiction to refer to the FBI.

Posted by: rickb223 TEXIT at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (zcM+Q)

480 Anon Y. Mous: "You intended to commit a crime, someone died, you still get the murder conviction."

Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who or why.

Posted by: Lord Comey of DC Swamp Castle at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (1CroS)

481 454 O/T, but why is Apple IOS blocking me from accessing the site linked in the headline at the right? Re traffic stop & CCW, blog.beretta.com.

___

I dunno. I just tried going there with my apple device and no issues.

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at July 07, 2016 04:26 PM (0LHZx)

482 Wait - knowingly? WTF?
Posted by: Dr. Samuel Mudd at July 07, 2016 04:17 PM (oKE6c)

Yes. Basically means you are aware of the circumstsances and aware of the consequences of your actions.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:26 PM (B001q)

483 Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:26 PM (Yo9Lf)

484 "470 Drunk drivers don't usually intend to kill anyone. But if they have 6 shots of JD, then drive home, and on the way kill someone, guess what....they get arrested.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo"

No intent to kill, but they did intend to engage in dangerous behavior which results in death. That is why they usually charge with manslaughter instead of murder. Unless your last name is Kennedy...

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 04:27 PM (OD2ni)

485 483 Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.

GOOD ONE....

Posted by: donna at July 07, 2016 04:27 PM (O2RFr)

486 483
Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.

Posted by: Skip at July 07, 2016 04:26 PM (Yo9Lf)

Seriously? They should be keeping their damned mouths shut.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:27 PM (1ZOkK)

487 It's is apparent that the side(i.e. R or D) that can dish out the most pain gets the 'truth' they desire.

Now, as is , perfectly obvious from 7+ years of the Reign of Asshole and his D-Cartel, the D's can dish out the pain--it is the ONE thing they do extraordinarily well! Hence the D's control THE narrative. ...mainly because to oppose the 'truth' the D's desire is more pain than most individuals can deal with...

Not be to get all wet and gooey but the R's delivered a few rebuttals and a little pain today ---rightfully---on the POS calling himself the head of the FBI....Comey may be something but he is not the head of anything that a Free Republic can call an FBI.

God knows the R's need more righteous PAIN MAKERS..to force out THE objective truth.

Posted by: malignantly aggrieved and economically useless at July 07, 2016 04:27 PM (Q9LJ2)

488 481 454 O/T, but why is Apple IOS blocking me from accessing the site linked in the headline at the right? Re traffic stop & CCW, blog.beretta.com.

___

I dunno. I just tried going there with my apple device and no issues.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at July 07, 2016 04:26 PM (0LHZx)

No issue here either. Iphone, using Safari.

Posted by: buzzion at July 07, 2016 04:27 PM (z/Ubi)

489 >>Except that there's an email chain between the FAB and a minion in which
she directs him to strip headers and send the document unsecure because
the secure fax was down.

Was that wrong of me?

Posted by: Hillary Clinton goes Costanza at July 07, 2016 04:28 PM (ggrt+)

490 Once the "Come is a fucking 'tard" thing is done, the next line of attack needs to be...

Fine, Hillary isn't a crook, but she is obviously a fucking imbecile who can't figure out a simple security protocol. She can't figure out what is and isn't classified, but she'll be the one deciding when to push "the button"?

Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at July 07, 2016 04:28 PM (0LHZx)

491 Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (/tuJf)
___________________

And Hillary's aides, off-books IT guy, her lawyers, hackers, and a lot of other people who were able to read the classified and secret info contained in her e-mails also didn't have adequate security clearances, but that didn't matter in her case.

And Comey didn't say Hillary didn't lie to the FBI. At least, that's not what I heard him say. He said he had not "parsed" Hillary's statements closely enough to know if she had lied to the FBI or not. In fact, Comey gave me the impression that he really didn't care one way or another if Hillary had lied to the FBI agents in her interview.

As for the referral from congress, I wasn't saying that the FBI should have prosecuted Hillary for perjury in her congressional testimony, I was saying that if Comey's "evil intent" standard requires evidence of lying (which is what Comey claimed showed Petraeus' "evil intent"), then Comey had plenty of evidence of Hillary's lies (such as the false statements she made to congress).

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:28 PM (NnYnv)

492
NOOD.

BANHAMMERING!

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at July 07, 2016 04:28 PM (27m1/)

493 Ok, maybe it's 2 or 3 cans of Spam and the Twizzlers really depends on whether I ate before going shopping. And I don't want to creep out Winona by looking like I bought several thousand dollars worth of feminine hygiene products for her before I've even swooped in on my jet pack with my Peter Gabriel pumping in from the custom boombox.

Posted by: Banana Splits Guy at July 07, 2016 04:29 PM (MNZJR)

494 They prosecuted a guy in Florida for releasing
balloons on valentines day near a protected nature reserve.The ballons
drifted into the reserve and he is now a convicted felon.His defense was
he never intentended for the ballons to drift into the reserve

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (lKyWE)

Now THIS is the shit we've got to stop. Muslim terrorists can wait; we've got to stop these goddamned balloon releasers. And on Valentine's Day? He was probably doing it for someone of the opposite sex. That makes it a hate crime.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 04:29 PM (oKE6c)

495 No intent to kill, but they did intend to engage in dangerous behavior which results in death. That is why they usually charge with manslaughter instead of murder. Unless your last name is Kennedy...

Posted by: Benji Carver at July 07, 2016 04:27 PM (OD2ni)

Not at all. They intended to get drunk. Then, once drunk and robbed of their faculties they got in the car and drove. By the whole "intent" argument" you can't prove that they INTENDED to get drunk and then drive. Their decision to actually get int he car and drive occurred when they were already drunk and not able to think clearly.

Now, I don't agree with any of this, but if the law had some consistency on the whole "intent" thing then this is how it goes.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:29 PM (zc3Db)

496 Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.

Well yeah, but they wrote that on July 1st. It didn't matter what was said, only what they can get people to believe.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 04:29 PM (39g3+)

497 473 Between the two of them Comey and Gowdy totally eviscerate the Comey claim Clinton lacked "intent" to break the law.

Yes, Gowdy led Comey to the obvious conclusion but it leaves one wondering what Comey uses now as an explanation for his perfidy, other than the obvious: no prosecutor, Democrats all, would willingly take the case against the Queen. So he surrendered without even trying.

https://tinyurl.com/znocj6d

Posted by: MTF at July 07, 2016 12:57 PM (LISuA)
-------------------------------------------------------

Like I said earlier today when I saw this transcript, Comey tried the "no intent" dodge but abandoned that today.

The "evil intent" dodge isn't even a serious try, since we are talking about why Comey wouldn't refer Clinton to Justice prosecutors, so we are really left wondering: what is Comey's explanation?

He must have known in advance this ridiculous "intent" explanation wouldn't wash, since it was disposed of in a literally two minute exchange with Gowdy.

Was he blackmailed? Did he think that he'd get more publicity for her crimes this way? What in all hell was he thinking here?

Posted by: MTF at July 07, 2016 04:29 PM (LISuA)

498 Peeing on the side of the road could get you listed as a sex offender.

Having a rapist, sexual predator, intern abusing husband is a qualification for POTUS.

#SeeNoEvil...Intent

Posted by: SMOD, take me away at July 07, 2016 04:30 PM (H9MG5)

499 It sounds like you've heard/know more than was on the show. He did seem like a bad dude in every way.

On camera, his little girl said, "Daddy killed a policeman, but Mommy told me it was the policeman's fault."
Posted by: RM at July 07, 2016 04:24 PM (U3LtS)

=============
I read the court opinions and interviews of his baby mamas.

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:30 PM (iQIUe)

500 They prosecuted a guy in Florida for releasing
balloons on valentines day near aprotectednature reserve.The ballons
drifted into the reserve and he is now a convicted felon.His defense was
he never intentended for the ballons to drift into the reserve

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 04:25 PM (lKyWE)

Stupidity like that is why mens rea reform is needed. Laws against murder, rape and theft are obvious because murder, rape and theft are always and forever wrong. Rules that outlaw stuff that a normal person would never know is outlawed because.. WTF, its balloons... should require knowledge of the law before conviction. Or, better yet, stop making stupid, totally non-obvious shit illegal.

Posted by: redbanzai at July 07, 2016 04:31 PM (3JA/M)

501
Gowdy - "She's as guilty as home-grown sin."

MSM - "Exonerated! Witch-hunt! Waste of money!"

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at July 07, 2016 04:31 PM (9mTYi)

502
Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.
-------------------

Yeah, like

- we live in a country of laws, not men

- the rule of law prevails

- the Constitution is sacred

It did kind of blow away those talking points, gotta admit.

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 04:31 PM (pC96u)

503 He came across as a simpleton, not some straight shooting dealer of justice.

Posted by: ejo at July 07, 2016 04:32 PM (il4FI)

504
Yes, but it's Comey who is conflating the two with his new "evil intent" standard. He is saying that a deliberate intent to mishandle classified docs is not enough; there must be an EVIL intent.

Apparently, under the Comey standard, unless Hillary intended to bring down the U.S. government by sending thousands of classified and secret and top secret docs through her unsecured private e-mail servers, then it's all good.

The fact that she was doing it, deliberately, simply to evade the requirements of the Federal Records Act and the FOIA, so that she could hide the evidence of her illegal influence peddling, is hunky dory, according to Comey.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:12 PM (NnYnv)

Exactly. And Ace pointed out, he is basically rewriting the statute.

Another way Comey is doing this is when he looks at past cases and finds distinguishing facts and then claims prosecutorial discretion to not prosecute because those other additional distinguishing facts were not present in Hillary's case.

It's like a prosecutor goes back and notices that in all of the prosecuted bank robberies in his district, the robber shot the security guard on the way out.

So the police bring in one of Comey's friends for bank robbery and District Attorney Comey says, "I'm not going to prosecute this because we only prosecute bank robberies in which the robber shoots the security guard on the way out!"

Posted by: Scalia's Ghost at July 07, 2016 04:32 PM (5xDis)

505 Can anybody explain why Cruz is costing up to the northeast liberal running for president?

Posted by: Amazing Grace Slick at July 07, 2016 04:32 PM (6QVM/)

506 Kind of a Blake Snake Moan but less talky and more boobly. But tasteful and artistic.

Sure, I get you. A few nude scenes, but tasteful and in a way that advances the plot and isn't exploitative.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at July 07, 2016 04:32 PM (39g3+)

507 JackStraw: "Well if Comey really is investigating the CGI he should be able to find plenty of intent."

I think it's pretty clear Comey wouldn't find intent if you spotted him an "i", a "tent", and a notarized admission statement from Hillary stating, "Yes, I fucking did it, meant to do it, and will do it again. Everyone kindly suck my dong!"

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at July 07, 2016 04:32 PM (1CroS)

508
So Chaffetz was going to deliver some piece of paper to Comey "in a few hours." Anyone know if that's been delivered?

Posted by: iforgot at July 07, 2016 04:32 PM (pC96u)

509 >>> Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.
.....

Of course they did. It's not as if the is vast majority will actually click anything or bother to read what was actually said by anyone. The drones and the media will simply repost and retweet the campaign- made headline where thousands of others will like it and congratulated one another on exposing the lies of the vast right wing conspiracy.

We have arrived at the point where the entirely of what is knows, truthful, and absolutely irrefutable fact must be no more than 140 characters.

In other news, there are no tanks in Iraq, the infidels are fleeing, and chocolate rations have increased by 15%. Tweet your friends about our enormous victory!

Posted by: Damiano at July 07, 2016 04:33 PM (71OEY)

510 Just a question. Wasn't the FBI investigating the Clinton Crime Family Foundation also? Or is it going into the crapper too?

Posted by: Soona at July 07, 2016 04:33 PM (Fmupd)

511 Sounds like they pretty much screwed up the Clinton Foundation investigation on purpose.

Were the other people interviewed put under oath?

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:33 PM (iQIUe)

512 >>And Comey didn't say Hillary didn't lie to the FBI. At least, that's not what I heard him say. He said he had not "parsed" Hillary's statements closely enough to know if she had lied to the FBI or not. In fact, Comey gave me the impression that he really didn't care one way or another if Hillary had lied to the FBI agents in her interview.

He did. I can't remember who asked him, Chaffetz maybe, if Hillary lied to the FBI and he said no. Again, not saying I believe him but I was listening pretty closely because I kept waiting for something that didn't sound like an excuse for not going after her.

>>As for the referral from congress, I wasn't saying that the FBI should have prosecuted Hillary for perjury in her congressional testimony, I was saying that if Comey's "evil intent" standard requires evidence of lying (which is what Comey claimed showed Petraeus' "evil intent"), then Comey had plenty of evidence of Hillary's lies (such as the false statements she made to congress).

Again, he was specifically asked about her lying to Congress as proof of intent and he said that he didn't even consider it because he was not asked to consider it by Congress. Seriously. That is why Chaffetz said he would have the referral to him by the end of today.

Posted by: JackStraw at July 07, 2016 04:33 PM (/tuJf)

513 Cozying

Posted by: Amazing Grace Slick at July 07, 2016 04:33 PM (6QVM/)

514 You can't "knowingly" aid or abet an act that you don't even know is going on.

Exactly. Let's say you are an Uber driver and you pick someone up and take them to a liquor store. You don't know it, but the guy intends to rob the store and carries through with it. You did not know his intent or other facts of his criminal activity. You are not a co-conspirator.

Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:34 PM (B001q)

515 Hillary camp saying Jim Comey's testimony shot down many Republican talking points today.

Well yeah, but they wrote that on July 1st. It didn't matter what was said, only what they can get people to believe.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor
---------------

A. They didn't actually watch.

B. They will get the 'exonerated' conformation-bias meme from their bubble of 'news' sources.

C. They don't care if she is a corrupt, vile, harpy. She's their candidate.

Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at July 07, 2016 04:35 PM (9mTYi)

516
So Chaffetz was going to deliver some piece of paper to Comey "in a few hours." Anyone know if that's been delivered?

I think its going to be a request for the FBI to investigate Hillary Clinton for lying under oath to congress when she said she never recieved or sent any classified e-mails from her private server

Posted by: Flawless Male Logic at July 07, 2016 04:36 PM (lKyWE)

517
American diplo gets decked by commit cops:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_SjQAbnM3U

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:36 PM (iQIUe)

518 commie cops...

Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at July 07, 2016 04:37 PM (iQIUe)

519 I always liked the felony murder doctrine. Think of the bullshit it obviates: there's no point in co-conspirators pointing the finger at each other ("I didn't pull the trigger - he did!"), in hopes of getting off because who did what exactly is unclear.
Under the felony murder doctrine, they can ALL get rung up, with no need to figure out who did exactly what.

Sadly, I believe a number of states no longer have the felony murder doctrine.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at July 07, 2016 04:20 PM (oKE6c)

++++

I mostly like it, though I think it gets misused in some circumstances. I can recall one case where some criminals got in a shootout with the cops. One guy is killed by the cops, another is captured. The guy that got captured gets charged with murdering the accomplice that was killed by the cops.

If it was an innocent bystander that got killed, even if it was by a cop's bullet, I would be ok with the surviving criminal getting the murder charge, but sticking him with the accomplice's killing didn't seem right.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 04:37 PM (R+30W)

520 Posted by: ObjectionSustained at July 07, 2016 04:34 PM (B001q)

No. I was talking about a getaway driver whose intent was merely to help rob a bank, not kill anyone ... but the gang decided to shoot the place up. The getaway driver could not have knowingly aided or abetted the shooting. He was in for the bank robbery.

Are you saying that that getaway driver cannot be held liable for the shooting that occurred, because he certainly didn't know about it?

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:37 PM (zc3Db)

521 Standard liberal defense for everything: It doesn't matter what happened. All that matters is what I intended to happen.

Any disconnect between intent and actuality is the result of right wing obstruction, racism, sexism, hate, unfairness, not going far enough, and insufficient funding because rich people don't pay their fair share.

Posted by: Damiano at July 07, 2016 04:37 PM (71OEY)

522 Was he blackmailed? Did he think that he'd get more publicity for her crimes this way? What in all hell was he thinking here?
Posted by: MTF at July 07, 2016 04:29 PM (LISuA)

-----------------

He was thinking, "I don't want to die now".

Posted by: Soona at July 07, 2016 04:38 PM (Fmupd)

523 The seas were angry that day as he plucked the Titleist from the whale's blowhole.

Posted by: Buffalbob at July 07, 2016 04:39 PM (8nL8o)

524 I'm ' back here.... Nood is a banning... Ace is mad...

Posted by: donna at July 07, 2016 04:39 PM (O2RFr)

525 I mostly like it, though I think it gets misused in some circumstances. I can recall one case where some criminals got in a shootout with the cops. One guy is killed by the cops, another is captured. The guy that got captured gets charged with murdering the accomplice that was killed by the cops.

If it was an innocent bystander that got killed, even if it was by a cop's bullet, I would be ok with the surviving criminal getting the murder charge, but sticking him with the accomplice's killing didn't seem right.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at July 07, 2016 04:37 PM (R+30W)

I have no problem with a criminal being held liable for all problems and damage that occur during his attempt to carry out a (serious or dangerous) crime, which is why I dislike the concentration on "intent" so much when it's clear that intent is merely one small part of a criminal action, not a determining factor for a wide variety of cases.

And the insanity stuff just drives me nuts! Just because someone is insane doesn't mean that a reasonable person wouldn't think that he should still be punished for his actions. In the end, actions matter, not words or thoughts.

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 04:44 PM (zc3Db)

526 Damn.... the case of the Sailor who took pictures in the Sub and is being prosecuted???

I'd SOOOOO be using that if I was his Lawyer...
Posted by: Don Q. at July 07, 2016 04:13 PM (qf6WZ)
___________________

Yep. Unless there is evidence that this sailor was planning to sell the photos to some hostile foreign nation or commit a terrorist act on the sub, there should be no prosecution. He lacks the required "evil intent" that the FBI head now says is essential to making out a prima facie case under the statute. Merely being "extremely careless" or "reckless" with classified info. will no longer suffice.

So go ahead and post those sub photos to Facebook, sailor. Unless you're connected to an international espionage ring, it shouldn't be problem.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:44 PM (NnYnv)

527 409 400 Who is this Maurice troll?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (1ZOkK)

Some people call him the Space Cowboy
Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (7HtZB)

LOL!

Posted by: washrivergal at July 07, 2016 04:45 PM (CFc5L)

528 527 409 400 Who is this Maurice troll?
Posted by: Jane D'oh at July 07, 2016 04:06 PM (1ZOkK)

Some people call him the Space Cowboy
Posted by: josephistan at July 07, 2016 04:09 PM (7HtZB)

LOL!
Posted by: washrivergal at July 07, 2016 04:45 PM (CFc5L)

And because I am laughing so loud, the dogs I am babysitting are now so excited they think it's go outside and play ball time. See what you've done.

Posted by: washrivergal at July 07, 2016 04:47 PM (CFc5L)

529 Come on guys - leave Comey alone. He had Whoopi Goldberg advising him...it wasn't "intent" "intent"...

Posted by: Hari Seldon, Psychohistorian at July 07, 2016 04:50 PM (HebZm)

530 If you're not Cankles, you're little people.

Posted by: Bryant Comey at July 07, 2016 04:59 PM (WVN3k)

531 So go ahead and post those sub photos to Facebook, sailor. Unless you're connected to an international espionage ring, it shouldn't be problem.

Posted by: TrivialPursuer at July 07, 2016 04:44 PM (NnYnv)

And if some interested party should see those photos and send you some cash or have a hot chick come by and thank you ... well, no problem, as long as you remember to file the proper tax paperwork. Carry on comrades.

Posted by: Jean at July 07, 2016 05:20 PM (Doh4+)

532 Even if Comey was right on the preferences of prosecutors in charging under this law, it makes no sense for him to pull a mind-reading trick when his job is simply to determine if sufficient evidence of violation of the law exists. If the prosecutor wants to exercise his discretion to not prosecute for that reason, that's the privilege of his position, and he will take the heat for it from his boss or the voters; it's above Comey's pay grade to make that decision for them short of a court ruling that the law is unconstitutional absent the element of mens rea.

Posted by: Socratease at July 07, 2016 05:21 PM (FqHs5)

533 So her deposition wasn't under oath or recorded, like that's ever happened to anyone else, ever. Scary stuff, regardless of the b@tch slapping given today. We're done for methinks. Time for the pirate flag mates!

Posted by: Land Pirate at July 07, 2016 05:21 PM (W2Rcw)

534 Excellent. But reminded me of the "depends on what the definition of is is." This is what lawer-opolies get us.

Posted by: Crowley at July 07, 2016 05:31 PM (ba6SM)

535 Find out who and how Comey was bribed

Posted by: ploome at July 07, 2016 05:35 PM (vzZKT)

536 Given that today Barney Fife refused to answer about whether the FBI is investigating the Clinton Crime Family Foundation, not once but twice - and this is just a hope - maybe Barney Fife has one sure fire but deadly bullet & the classified emails is simply not that bullet. BTW, thus far everything Barney Fife has weaseled & waffled on screams the Mayberry episode 'Citizen's Arrest!'

Posted by: Bebe Dahl at July 07, 2016 05:37 PM (yNyJy)

537
Nope. Then you are a co-conspirator. Knowingly aiding, abetting or encouraging the criminal act of another.

So like Huma and the rest of Hellery's co-conspirators.

Posted by: An Observation at July 07, 2016 05:56 PM (Ib1C7)

538 Come. Mouth. No "evil" intent so quit bitching.

Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at July 07, 2016 05:56 PM (j1Wvr)

539 EXCELLENT POST!

Posted by: gts109 at July 07, 2016 06:01 PM (Deogo)

540
o

Posted by: Mister Magoo at July 07, 2016 06:03 PM (cW/qd)

541 It's almost as if he's refusing to sign his own death warrant.

Posted by: Jms at July 07, 2016 06:35 PM (XV8U1)

542 533 said: "So her deposition wasn't under oath or recorded, like that's ever happened to anyone else, ever."

FBI doesn't record interviews. I was interviewed by the FBI a few years ago for an investigation they were doing into a crooked DA and they neither recorded the session nor had me under oath.

Posted by: Jane at July 07, 2016 07:35 PM (TQ+Dp)

543 So doesn't Comey's logic here eviscerate "hate speech" charges?? I could just say that I never intended any hate. Or that I had no evil intent. All I have to do is to continue owning the fact that I said "Radical Sharia Supremecists" have murdered large numbers of non "radical sharia supremecists." I certainly intend no hate, just information. I have no evil intent.

Posted by: Dave at July 07, 2016 08:38 PM (ixLrd)

544 Posted by: Dave at July 07, 2016 08:38 PM (ixLrd)

Thew whole idea of "hate crimes" (or even worse "hate speech") is intellectually offensive in the extreme. There are no such things as "hate crimes". Just "crimes".

Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at July 07, 2016 08:51 PM (zc3Db)

545 The last time I felt this blindsided was the O.J. Simpson verdict.

Effectively, they're told us, "Who are you going to believe, me or your lyin' eyes?"

Posted by: crossoverChaos at July 07, 2016 09:30 PM (amYkM)

546 As long as she unintentionally divulged our sources and methods and got our agents and spies either compromised or dead, then it's okay?

Comey is also unintentionally damaging the country; when people no longer believe in the rule of law, you eventually get anarchy. And when they believe that the Potemkin Constitution no longer protects them even under an opposition party, then an election becomes a war.

This is how revolutions start.

Posted by: The Gipper Lives at July 07, 2016 10:06 PM (Ndje9)

547 So what do we get out of this? We get to run our chosen candidate (whoever he or she may be) against HC instead of against a Biden/Warren ticket which would crush Trump. We still have a chance. I know, it's not much when compared to the destruction of the rule of law in our country, but if the left win this election, how much of that will we have left anyway?

Posted by: Heresolong at July 08, 2016 10:23 AM (ntIeo)

548 So... I don't get the whole "intent" with regards to this law. One time when I was in the reserves, I was the comms officer for my unit which also made me be on the crypto account. One day we get audited and we can't find two of the canisters (things that held the keys). Anyhow, me and the chief on the account with me are starting to sweat bullets. We break for lunch and found the dang things in the safe (really a heavy duty filing cabinet) where we couldn't see them. But we were sweating bullets over a couple of keys, believe one was confidential and the other secret. If they were lost, I don't think me saying "Oops, I didn't 'intend' to lose them". No, we'd have been hung out to dry.

Posted by: PaterNovem at July 09, 2016 01:24 AM (wxQ53)

Processing 0.07, elapsed 0.0716 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0276 seconds, 556 records returned.
Page size 311 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.