“Criminal Intent”…

If you pause for a few minutes and look at every recent headline, and the story therein that delivers frustration;… I mean really elevate and look at the bigger issue inside each of the examples… there’s a connective thread surrounding a shift in law-and-order to focus on “criminal intent.”

“Intent”, not consequence, is now the larger shield being applied toward excusing the action of people within institutions of government and society.

Hillary Clinton was not guilty, because James Comey said they couldn’t prove intent. Recent DOJ releases highlighting: “declined to prosecute” all surround intent.  Illegal alien entry, and accountability for fraud, all downplayed because there’s no proof of intent.

In the larger picture, the focus on intent -a specific decision made within the administration of justice- has become a shield against consequence.

It was a “mistake”…. he/she/it made “a poor decision” etc.  A pattern of obfuscation downplaying consequence and allowing those decision-makers charged with delivering accountability to withdraw or apply the rules of law based on their individual overlay of ‘intent’.

That shift is factually visible everywhere now.

The IG report by Michael Horowitz, on FBI bias and investigative outcome, was fraught with the application of ‘intent’ inside the inspectors explanation of absent evidence toward bias.  Each of these examples does not seem to be arbitrary, but rather connected to a more consequential decision by those in power to water-down accountability and open the doors for further abuse.

If the official didn’t ‘intend’ to do wrong, or more specifically if the people in position of delivering accountability for the wrong-doing, cannot find specific intent, then the action is less-than regardless of outcome.   Consider what officials were doing inside the FBI regarding media-leaks, then insert the James Wolfe example here.

Considering the use of ‘intent’ as a shield we review this recent example:

FLORIDA – […] Last week, a top attorney in the Department of State wrote a letter to three Florida federal prosecutors that asked them to review “irregularities” related to mail-in ballots. The department included information that showed that voters were given the wrong deadline to fix any problems with those ballots.

The letter alleges that voters in at least four counties — Broward, Santa Rosa, Citrus and Okaloosa — appeared to have received the altered forms.

For example, if a voter’s signature on the ballot envelope was missing or did not match the signature on file, they were notified by supervisors that they had until Monday, Nov. 5, to fix their signature.

The altered forms some voters allegedly received listed Nov. 8, two days after election, as the deadline to fix the signature.

Email chains provided by the Department of State include addresses that match the Florida Democratic Party and a phone number that is an active number for the Florida Democratic Party on the altered forms.

The Division of Elections has provided the information to federal prosecutors in the Northern, Middle and Southern districts of Florida, and now, the Justice Department will determine if any laws were broken.  (read more)

Following along the ideological lines of: “all actions are justified”, do you see how the shift to ‘intent’ is a serious issue within a corrupt system?

Within that system, and against that purposeful filter and determination, plausible deniability becomes the construct for intentional criminal engagement.

The voter didn’t intend to violate the law… therefore no law was violated.  The Democrats who send the fraudulent instructions didn’t intend to violate the statute… therefore no statute was violated.

Everyone just, well, made a mistake.

You don’t even need to put a finger on the scales of justice, once the scales are intentionally mis-calibrated like this.

If you wonder why there is such a surrounding sense of anxiety, poor conduct, lack of virtue and general unease within the recent landscape…. I would deposit the likelihood that all of the unnerving instability around us is being caused by this shift away from consequence based entirely on ‘intent‘.

Brazen unlawfulness and abuses are now subject to arbitrary determinations of intent.

This entry was posted in Cultural Marxism, Dept Of Justice, Election 2018, FBI, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Uncategorized, Voter Fraud. Bookmark the permalink.

372 Responses to “Criminal Intent”…

  1. Greg says:

    INTENT EASILY PROVEN (HILLARY EMAILS WAS THE COMMUNICATOR FOR THE CLINTON FOUNDATION)

    Hillary’s Emails had intent; is was the communicator to the Clinton Foundation alleged pay to play. IMO-there appears to be enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt by 100 times, there was intent.

    The Federal statutes that Hillary violated, mishandling of classified material, requires NO intent.

    The intent could be easily proven by a paper/digital trail that is everywhere. Criminal Cases are proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the accumulation of evidence. There is a mountain of evidence everywhere. There are also conflicting statements on the record, whistle blowers, and plea deals.

    The actions of the FBI/DOJ (Comey, Strzok, Page, etc.) in how they handled Hillary’s Emails, shows they did not follow proper Investigative polices and procedures because the entire 7th floor of the FBI thought 100% Hillary would be President. The paper/digital trails in how Hillary emails was handled is everywhere. It is a felony for a Law Enforcement not to prosecute for political reasons.

    Greg Jarrett stated tonight; there is plenty of evidence that there was an elicit scheme by the FBI/DOJ to clear Hillary Clinton and frame PDJT. It is a crime for an FBI Director or Official, or Agent to hide incriminating evidence and to make a decision about the Clinton Case for Political reasons. (not exact words)

    FBI-upper management allegedly conspired, directly/indirectly with Hillary Clinton (Clinton Foundation) to allegedly pre-arranged the framing of the President Elect and the President of the United States of criminal acts. The paper/digital trails are everywhere.

    PDJT will do his sworn duty to indict Hillary for the Emails and the Clinton Foundation; the alleged center of the largest criminal organization in United States History (Globalist/Elitist headquarters). Hillary and the Clinton Foundation had the power/influence to motivate and allegedly corrupt, top management of the FBI and DOJ.

    The alleged criminal acts will be voluminous; Treason, Subversion, Sedition, Espionage, Racketeering, Perjury Etc.

    PDJT knows his supporters and the rule of law requires PDJT to do his sworn duty and implement the criminal code against all corruption. Indictments of all corruptions will happen soon or the Constitution will be eliminated along with our way of life and IMO- PDJT and his supporter already knows what Sundance stated about PDJT pick of a New Attorney General:
    SUNDANCE WROTE; The success or failure of this person, whoever President Trump picks, will strongly influence: (A) his decision on running for re-election in 2020; and (B) the likelihood of success in the 2020 election.

    Fake Laws and not enforcing laws are what they do in 3rd world countries…PDJT will not let this happen.

    Criminal Codes needs to be applied as Written.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Leane Kamari says:

      Rmember that Michael Whitaker made sure Andy McCabe got fired before he became eligable for early pension payments? Hillery lost her security clearence in Oct. 2018 plus 5-6 of her former helpers like Cheryl Mills. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/10/breaking-hillary-clinton-loses-security-clearance-amid-email-scandal/
      What has been going on behind the scene and smoke screens?
      https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-09-21%20State%20to%20CEG%20(Security%20Investigation).pdf

      Like

      • Leane Kamari says:

        sorry, eligible.

        Like

      • Greg says:

        YES, Michael Whitaker is part of PDJT plan; who can become a hero by applying the criminal code and saving the Constitution. Whitaker or the unknow future Attorney General (or both working together) will have the opportunity to be known far into the future of saving the United States. Another part of PDJT is to have 53 or 54 in the Senate; to get enough votes in the Senate to ensure he can bring in another Attorney General; someone as brave as George Washington.

        Does anyone really believe PDJT just waits for Whitaker to just appear by chance; that would be insane.

        FORMULA TO WIN THIS CIVIL WAR IS EASY; CRIMINAL CODE
        There is only one way to win this civil war; go nuclear with the criminal code. We do not need to invent a nuclear weapon; the criminal code is already written.

        EVERY PROBLEM POINTS TO THE RULE OF LAW (all of the below are alleged)
        1. Criminal Acts in Voting.
        2. Criminal Acts in blocking Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
        3. Criminal Acts of allowing illegal aliens to stay in the United States.
        4. Criminal Acts of DACA.
        5. Criminal Acts of not enforcing E-Verify.
        6. Criminal Acts of left-wing mob at Tucker Carlson home.
        7. Criminal Acts of left-wing mobs attacking republicans house and senate members in public places.
        8. Criminal Acts of threats against PDJT.
        9. Criminal Acts of sending Vanessa Trump white powder.
        10. Criminal Acts of Hillary’s Emails.
        11. Criminal Acts of the Clinton Foundation
        12. Criminal Acts in Fisa.
        13. Criminal Acts in the intentional framing of the President Elect DJT in conspiring with the Russians.
        14. Criminal Acts in the intentional framing of PDJT in Russia Collusion.
        15. Criminal Acts of Perjury by Clapper.
        16. Criminal Acts of countless Perjuries before Congress.
        17. Criminal Acts in the Uranium One Deal.
        18. Obama allowing M-13 gangs to cross our borders.
        19. ETC.

        Like

        • Chieftain says:

          The death of the rule of law is the biggest issue facing the USA today.
          The intent requirement seems to only be in play for Democrats.
          The double standards between politicians, parties, deep state connected and ordinary people are obvious.

          Like

          • Greg says:

            EXACTLY RIGHT! I wish 330 million people knew what you know; the death of the rule of law is the biggest issue facing the USA today. PDJT knows this and he knows it is his sworn duty to use his powers given to him by the Constitution to implement the Criminal Code. There is no other way; only the criminal code. PDJT knows our way of life will be destroyed if the criminal codes are not implemented.

            Like

    • dbobway says:

      Mueller is about to throw journalists in jail for conspiracy to expose Podesta’s e-mails,
      Which provide all the proof one need to have me executed If I wrote them.

      Intent is only applicable to a few, while guilty till proven innocent to the rest of us.

      The rest of us who have just lost our only civil fight, our vote, against criminal fraud, corruption and worse.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Greg says:

        YES, PDJT will go nuclear with the criminal code and make sure the laws are applied has written. PDJT, his family, and the Constitution, are way of life is at risk. Hillary and the Globalist/Elitist wants to make an example of PDJT; no one ever challenge the new world order again in the future or we will destroy you.

        Reading through a few posts is appears some do not believe PDJT is smart/brave enough to fight back against the deep state criminals…you must also believe that we will eventually become a 3rd world country within 10 years. The power the Constitution gives the President of the United States in controlling the FBI/DOJ to destroy the criminals; any average high school student would know how to destroy them.

        Like

        • Armchair Quarterback says:

          The best indicator for future behavior is present behavior. Presently, not much has been done to address all of the clear violations thus far. For example, the “intent” in the email server scandal is the very fact that the server was set up and that all of Clinton’s communications went through it!

          Like

          • Greg says:

            PDJT allowed the criminals to reveal who they are and to destroy themselves over the past 2 years…
            PDJT prearrange this point in time for going nuclear with the criminal codes; after almost two years of planning to (1) Stack the court with Conservative Judges (2) Allowed Congressional Investigations (4) Exposed paper/digital evidence (3) Educated the Public on Corruption (4) Sworn Testimonies on the record (5) Sworn Testimonies Conflicting statements -Perjury (6) Whistleblowers to come forward (7) Pleas Deals, etc

            Like

  2. 6x47 says:

    There’s a great line in the opening of “The Wild Bunch” that is perfectly apropos:

    “It’s not what you INTENDED to do, it’s what you DID.”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jan says:

      Very appropro!! The FBI/DOJ didn’t “intend” to mislead or lie to the FISC, but they did–omission of material facts and/or exculpatory facts in the FISA application is as much an act of intention as out-and-out lying. In this case, we have all 3 facts going.

      Some statutes are “specific intent” crimes and others are not (like the law Hillary violated–it was not a specific intent crime). Trust politics, money & power to make lawyers forget what first year law students are taught in their first “Criminal Law” class.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Will Hunt says:

        No rational person doubts that Cankles intended to do exactly what she did… set up and maintain an email server that illegally, in violation of statute, was used to process classified information. Comey justified his action saying that no one has been prosecuted for similar crimes and he didn’t believe he could get a conviction.

        Liked by 1 person

      • 6x47 says:

        I got the dialog a bit off: “It’s not what you meant to do, it’s what you did I don’t like!”

        Like

    • Phillie_fan62 says:

      Your sentence in quotations is a perfect way for a prosecutor to finish his closing argument to a jury! Oh they could hem and haw about intent all they want and try to be cute. But when all is said and done the average citizen KNOWS the difference between what you actually did opposed to what you intended to do. You did it therefore there was intent.
      You could shoot someone and plea that you didn’t intend to do so. But the cold fact remains that you DID! The criminal code is pretty clear on this.

      Like

  3. 6x47 says:

    Well shoot – all General Flynn and Nick Papadopolous have to do is claim they didn’t INTEND to lie to Federal Investigators and PRESTO! They will be free as birds.iI bet Mueller even apologizes and begs their forgiveness for the inconvenience he put them through.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Aubergine says:

      Well, that’s the thing, right there.

      “Officer, I didn’t intend to break the speed limit, I was distracted by the radio.”

      Like

    • Phillie_fan62 says:

      That only works for the left my friend. The left contradicts everything when it come to what’s right and what’s wrong. To them when they’re wrong they’re right. But when the right is wrong? They’re wrong! The Hypocrat party!

      Liked by 1 person

      • 6x47 says:

        So, if it only works for the Left I suppose you’re going to tell me an election commissioner from the Panhandle discovering 85,000 uncounted ballots in the Florida recount that are 99% straight ticket Republican won’t be allowed?

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Kelly says:

    First comes a persons choice of wether an action
    They intend to put into action is wrong or
    Right. The intention is in the choice of do it or
    Or Not to do it.
    Clinton knew damn well what she was doing
    With the private server.
    Same thing with the voter ballot dates,
    Someone in the Democrats party knew what their
    Intention was . If a persons so called mistakes
    Are taken out of crimes committed what’s the sense of
    Laws, cause everyone that gets caught can
    Say well that wasn’t my intention . The choice is
    Where the intent is. An a prosecutor pile up the facts
    Of why Clinton’s decision would favor her.

    Like

  5. Retired IG says:

    Okay, I’m Hilary in the air traffic control tower. Whether intentionally or not, I, (HRC) just threw six planes together and with NO INTENT killed all people on board in a fiery crash.. But in the midst of this catastrophe – HRC says she had no intention of causing this catastrophe.. This NO INTENT syndrome is the weakest sack of shit defense/stuff I’ve ever heard of. And the people perpetuating this “line of reasoning “-NOT- know it too.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Mongoose says:

      Yes, and the ones feeding this horse pucky are lawyers and the one’s eating it up are politicians.

      Liked by 1 person

    • prOfounDGullet says:

      When you are running an ongoing criminal enterprise…. no intent is needed. We know she was laundering money via the foundation…. The simplest trigger, or flag on that… is the fact that the international funds were going through her friends in Canada, and then down into the US Foundation coffers. I always believed the Canada connection was also donating the money via that Canada satellite office and collecting a skim on the write off side, but since HRC is in cahoots with Justin and his boss the Queen…. Nothing could be done up there…. They probably were in on it.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. Jim Raclawski says:

    as stated earlier in this thread…. with INTENT comes PREMEDITATION – the consideration of an act, for however short a period that may be, is the central element here — what we are being asked to accept, is that fully cognitively functional adults,…. that have been placed in positions of elevated trust and responsibility — live their existences from moment-to-moment without ANY related active coherent thought processing or functions being conducted within their BRAIN-HOUSING-GROUP…….. horse excrement indeed
    thatisall

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Bastiat says:

    Intent is only necessary as it applies to well-connected Democrats.

    And in order to prove intent with these Democrats, nothing less than reading their mind will suffice.

    This is the stance that our media is taking. Even media that is supposedly conservative.

    If POTUS does not get the rule of law back on track, all his gains will be for nothing. I truly hope he realizes this and stops playing games with “leverage”. There is nothing more important to a functioning, stable society than rule of law. Freedom and prosperity can only be built on that foundation.

    Liked by 1 person

    • prOfounDGullet says:

      That’s because the MSM is part of the ongoing criminal enterprise…. don’t you remember Chelsea getting those big pay packages???? and then Ted Turner himself offering to help Clinton back in the day on camera??? Why do you think GE is going belly up??? It’s because Obama kept them alive during his Reign. It’s all interconnected.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. THE SERVER ITSELF WAS INTENT.

    And if you’re not sure, SHE DECLINED a state.gov address.

    1 + 2 = INTENT.

    HOW THAT B1TÇH GOT AWAY WITH IT MAKES ME INSANE TO THIS DAY.

    Liked by 4 people

  9. RAC says:

    Surely the law is the words that are written down on the paper, if it doesn’t say intent then intent is irrelevant. If you did it you did it. It’s not up to any individual to put their own interpretations on what’s written down in black and white, you just read what it says and that’s it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • RAC says:

      Furthermore all this nonsense about intent, is in my non lawyer but common sense view, putting the cart before the horse. Only after a person is found guilty should any talk of intent be brought up, when the guilty party is pleading for a lessor sentence.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sue Mcdonald says:

      Seems to me that everyone is doing what they deem right in there own eyes. laws dont seem to matter any longer ,my vote is useless has been for years we have been fooled into thinking we have a choice, we dont. lawlessness is rampant, if your one of the 1% you are set, break laws? no problem your one of the 1% so laws are not for you. we are taxed into poverty, have to follow the rules and keep our mouths shut and live in this grey dismal hell of socialism. so it follows that intent is the thing to destroy the law and let complete chaos reign then the country can remade into what the democrats want. I have been feeling despair this past week watching voter fraud and the insanity that has taken hold of most of the population in the country. what in the world can we do? I have no idea at this point . seems like were being overrun. oh yeah we are.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. One line in Jeff Session’s resignation letter was very clear on this subject and a number of others that have plagued the DOJ over the last 9 years.

    “Most importantly, in my time as Attorney General we have restored and upheld the rule of law…”

    I speculate that Sessions departure and Whitakers appointment are useful time markers that will indicate a point from which rule of law achieved critical mass once again in the DOJ. It took 2 years and many senior level resignations and firings to get to this point, but I think from here on, resistance by stay behinds can no longer affect the rule of law. This of course is in parallel to the Trump administration Judicial appointments.

    All this is crucially important because prior to reaching this point it was futile attempting to pursue justice for high level political crimes. There were simply too many ways for cases to be compromised. It would appear that the stage is now set for the kinds of investigations and indictments all of us were expecting in Trump’s first months. They simply were not possible then.

    The gloves are now officially off and bare knuckles on display. Based on the transparent, desperate and often blatantly illegal recent acts of Democrats they know what’s coming.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. tvollrath66 says:

    The “lack of intent” didnt work out so well for paul maniford. I guess its just for “special” people.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jederman says:

      Yes, exactly. It’s the two tiered thing again.

      It’s not a rich poor thing. Its DS gliding along on the fluid, shifting (as needed) upper (safe) tier, and the rest of us held to traditional, code of law standards on the lower tier.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Rose says:

    Intent is immaterial, Hilary knew using a private server was against the rules so yes it is proof of intent. Intent is usually considered in sentencing not in charging someone.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. sDee says:

    Very valuable perspective from Sundance. It is so apparent once pieced together.

    Crimes ignored and pardons granted at investigative level.

    This is really dangerous. It has crept into American culture and vocabulary. It is what the Statists mean by picking the winners and the losers.

    Throw “institutional racism” , “discrimination”, “sexual harassment” and “hate crimes” into the mix….. and they now can declare “criminal” intent even when none exists.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. For Eyes says:

    Boil it all down, and it becomes simply a case of who has the power. With it, and there are no limits. Without it, all means will be used to destroy Reps. And the nation.

    The law has been perverted, from cops (FBI and some locals) through prosecutors (DOJ and some lower) through courts.

    Citing law is no more than a talking point, a thin veneer for the public.

    The soft coup of 2016 hardened in 2018 election fraud that appears to be ongoing as we speak. Despite all efforts for the last two years it has grown worse not better. Actual governing seats have been seized.

    McConnell’s focus on judges is appropriate, in part because is a key lever but in part because it is a concrete action he CAN take. It has more impact than yet one more hearing that produces no change.

    I am really left to wonder two things: 1) what do the Dems tell themselves, and think about themselves in the midst of this? And 2) when we think it can’t get worse, more bold, more raw destruction of the nation, it has gotten worse, so what comes next that is worse yet?

    What does the end game look like? For us, and for them?

    Liked by 2 people

    • vexedmi says:

      If things are not handled properly, a Civil War with all it’s death and destruction.

      Like

    • Greg says:

      It unbelievable the voluminous amount of evil that has revealed itself in the last 3 years. The FBI/DOJ upper management who was the insurance policy to protect the Rule of Law which is the Foundation of the Constitution allegedly sold their soles for more money/power which is pure evil. Think of all the people who gave their life for over 200 years for our Constitution and they (FBI/DOJ top management) allegedly betrayed them all. The top management of the FBI/DOJ was motivated by Hillary (Clinton Foundation). They thought 100% Hillary would be President and they wanted to part of the new world order of Globalism. Think about it; they allegedly framed the President Elect and the President of the United States for crimes that Hillary actually allegedly did.

      The democrat party sold the Constitution for Globalism; it is that simple.

      There is only one way to destroy the evil criminals from destroying our way of life; PDJT implementing the nuclear codes. I repeat; there is no other way.

      PDJT plan from Nov. 8, 2016 was to indict the alleged largest criminal organization in United States History; the Clinton Foundation; in which Hillary Emails was the communicator link between the Government and the pay to play Clinton Foundation.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. henry says:

    It’s a pity that you can’t sue DAs or Attorney Generals for civil torts when they choose to hide behind prosecutorial disgression. If you could hold them financially libel for civil damages done because they CHOSE not to prosecute…..how much would the system improve?

    Like

    • For Eyes says:

      “Who shall guard the guardians?”

      Its an old Greek or Roman perplexity

      Like

    • Greg says:

      It is a felony for a Law Enforcement not to prosecute for political reasons. (Jail Time will solve the problem)

      Greg Jarrett stated last night; there is plenty of evidence that there was an elicit scheme by the FBI/DOJ to clear Hillary Clinton and frame PDJT. It is a crime for an FBI Director or Official, or Agent to hide incriminating evidence and to make a decision about the Clinton Case for Political reasons. (not exact words)

      Like

      • For Eyes says:

        That throws Sessions under the bus. Maybe that is where he deserves to be.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Litlbit2 says:

          Sessions did not cause the problem in my mind. However, nobody could have chosen a better promoter for protected corruption against the American folks than he. For two years we the people gave Sessions every benefit of doubt that in the end he believe so much in this country and it’s law abiding citizens. Therefore sessions would do what no one else had the moral value and confidence to do, up hold the law with one law for all.

          It is now clear, the citizens of the USA and Sessions father made a disastrous error. The amount of harm done to and by the Sessions Justice Department will live for years as more and more corruption becomes so clear it had to be covered up daily. It is just that bad and most all Americans know it as well as MSM nothing more than a pit of liars.

          Like

  16. Brian J Christiana says:

    I would love to be able to pinpoint “ground zero” when the corruption began to flourish within our LEO branches. The corruption of the HRC cover-up was so coordinated and acceptable that Comey had no problems addressing the nation and blatantly justifying this miscarriage of justice! He didnt believe a word he said, but he was more comfortable lying to the nation than standing up to his colleagues for truth and justice! How freakin’ scary is that?!? Such a deep hole to climb out from…I pray every day that the scales of justice can find balance again and America can regain its liberty and justice! Thank you for what you do, TLR and CTH! You guys are definitely part of our world’s solution! God bless!

    Liked by 1 person

  17. COLK says:

    The DEMS end game has been quite obvious for some time now (20-30 years in the making) –
    THE TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF OUR CONSTITUTION AND THE RULE OF LAW with their permanent installment as OUR RULERS. Now that’s THEIR CLEAR INTENT that is currently being pursued and accomplished by THOSE in the “DEMON- CRATIC” Party who truly believe that the “ends justify the means”. as outlined in the Communist Manifesto and Alinsky’s writings.

    Sadly – they appear to be succeeding thanks in large part to their continuing infiltration of our government institutions and especially our Judiciary with liberal judges who have continued to “LEGISLATE from the Bench” and turn a blind eye to the REAL rule of law as currently written.

    The real question for me at this point in time is — CAN WE THE PEOPLE STOP DEM??
    Based on the current election results it doesn’t appear as if we can!
    SO – what do WE INTEND TO DO ABOUT IT?? PITCHFORK TIME??

    Like

    • Zorro says:

      Pitchforks? I don’t think conservatives could organize even 1,000 persons for a peaceful march in DC.

      Like

      • Greg says:

        The President has many paths, given to PDJT by the Constitution to implement the criminal codes. PDJT can use extreme measures if needed. I would not choose this path; Judicial Watch stated PDJT should have the U.S. Marshall take over the FBI immediately.

        Mueller investigation is allegedly all fake and IMO-is aiding and abetting and framing the President of the United States of Crimes that allegedly Hillary Clinton Actually committed. PDJT has the criminal codes which is written; the criminals have nothing but fake laws.

        PDJT can release all the documents and expose the corruption which is already seen by everyone, showing the evidence would allegedly prove the criminal acts in a court of law; beyond a reasonable doubt x’s 1000.

        Do you really think the President of the United States doesn’t have the power to stop Treason, Sedition, Subversion, Racketeering etc…anyone who believes this also believes the United States and its Constitution will be taken over by Globalism and become a 3rd world country? If that was so, God Help Us!

        PDJT will use the Criminal Codes to destroy the enemy…

        Like

  18. @ChicagoBri says:

    Of course there was intent. On what planet is it easier for an employee to set up their own email system and server instead of using the email service provided by their employer? Why would one do such a drastic thing unless there was an attempt to hide something? (cough, cough, pay-for-play with Clinton Foundation, cough, cough.)

    Liked by 2 people

  19. unconqueredone says:

    “Protect and Serve” does not mean protecting and serving the public It means protecting and serving the government. The government at every level is more interested in protecting and serving the government and it’s rule(s) than in the people. Paine and others knew this over 200 years ago. We are just realizing it again.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Doug Amos says:

    Whitaker is at a turning point in American history. A few good men have revealed the corruption rampant in Washington and its environs but facts are shouted down, truths challenged, the mob roars and the citizens cringe. People skilled in crime, obfuscation and bullying brashly flaunt the laws with contempt; seemingly afraid of nothing; secure in their inurement. This small legion of conservatives must prove that right can prevail, that laws cannot be broken, that the truth wins over the lies and they must do it now. Go down in history for the right reason Mr. Whitaker; be the paragon of justice that turned the tide.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. EJ says:

    Most here are not lawyers have no understanding of the “elements” needed to prove a crime. Typically you have to prove a few prongs (called elements) to convict someone. Those elements are made up of two distinct types: mens rea and actus rea. This words are Latin for the mental state (mens rea) and the external actions / omissions (actus rea). So in theory you can prove that a person acts meet the element of a crime, but if they don’t have the property “mental state” then there was no crime. For example, burglary you must prove:

    1) The unauthorized breaking and entry; (actus rea)
    2) into a building or occupied structure; (actus rea)
    3) with the INTENT to commit a crime inside. (mens rea)

    So if I broke into a house with people sleeping b/c I needed to get to a phone to call 911, that is not burglary b/c I did not INTEND to commit a crime. It was simply an emergency, so I am off the hook.

    Some crimes do not require a mental state (i.e. intent is not required). For example. Possession of Drugs. You don’t need intent, because you either have the drugs in your possession or you don’t. You can’t possibly say you didn’t “intend” to have them, because you actually have them. You watch Live PD and everyone says “I didn’t know that was in there”. That does not work.

    The MAJOR ISSUE with Comey’s nonsense is that Hillary did not “INTEND” to do X, Y and Z. Well some of the crimes that Hillary committed (like possessing top secret information on a non-government device) is a crime that does not require a mental state! She possessed it illegally, period, end of story. She even acknowledged that she couldn’t do this when she signed her affidavit when becoming a member of the state department. There is also no “INTENT” required by 8 U.S. Code 1325 – Improper Entry by Alien.

    (a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts:
    Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

    So per (1) above, if you cross the border not an entry point designated by immigration officers, your are a criminal. Period end of story, doesn’t matter what you “though” or what your intentions were, etc.

    BTW – “designated by immigration officers”. I am sure the President can order immigration officers to designate certain ports of entry.

    Like

  22. Greg says:

    Criminal Intent, so if someone freaks out and kills someone (heat of passion) there is no Criminal Intent so no prosecution. The Democrats may get more than they wish for.

    Like

    • thedoc00 says:

      The 2-tiered legal system will handle the nuances of who get’s to use this defense. So, the politicians don’t have to worry about “spill over”.

      Like

  23. thedoc00 says:

    This is a direct result of Sessions and Rosenstein allowing the IG report to continue the “intent” defense established under the Obama administration to defend Clinton and other Obama cabinet members. The Republican Party will gladly preserve this standard for future use as well as self preservation for those likely caught up in election activity and follow-on coup attempt. So, don’t get your hope up too high for the next IG report.

    Like

    • thedoc00 says:

      Yet it boggles the legal mind how “intent” is not proven when one purposely and knowingly violates federal law and regulations, then does not report the violation as is allowed under those very same laws/regulations to preclude major legal punishments.

      Like

      • zephyrbreeze says:

        I had to read that 5 times. What does this mean exactly?

        Like

        • thedoc00 says:

          The federal laws and regulations violated by Clinton and Obama’s minions all have escape clauses related to “self-reporting” an “accidental” violation. When self reporting there is often nothing more than an administrative action taken as punishment. Not a single one of the perpetrators during the Obama administrative from Clinton to Lerner “self reported” that they made a mistake, yet they all knew they had violated the law and regulations. That alone proves “intent” was there to commit a violation.

          Like

  24. zephyrbreeze says:

    The quest for unlimited power at any price, has as it’s foundation, the unwillingness to be held accountable. Their crimes are so egregious that the thought to submit to an authority to be held accountable, drives them relentlessly, and endlessly. They cannot live in the open, and yet that is their ultimate goal. The #1 perk of tyrannical power: No accountability.

    Like

  25. jeans2nd says:

    The “intent” fallacy was quite obvious after the IG’s reports. Was surprised more did not see it.
    Our immediate problem now is that AAG Whitaker has continued with AG Jeff’s “Boost LEO Morale” tour, beginning yesterday. Was sorely disappointed listening to AAG Whitaker’s words at yet another round-table yesterday.
    Nothing has changed. Nothing will change, not at DOJ/FBI anyway.

    Thankful we have Pres Trump and the Economic Team for keeping us afloat this far. We are still and continually blessed.

    Like

  26. 6x47 says:

    “Intent” isn’t even part of the espionage act or the other laws Hillary Clinton violated. Ditto most of the other people getting passes. “Well, yes indeed he leaked classified info, but we can’t find any criminal INTENT.”

    A Democrat can go into a liquor store, pull out a gun, pistol whip the clerk and run out with the cash from the register … but we can’t find any INTENT to commit a crime. Other than committing the crime, of course.

    Like

    • 6x47 says:

      But on the other hand, if a REPUBLICAN goes into a liquor store, makes a purchase, and walks out … and recounts the details of the transaction to federal investigators … he’ll be charged with “lying to federal investigators”. Because he purchased 750ml of bourbon and paid with a MASTERCARD, not a VISA.

      Like

  27. JRD says:

    Oh look, more INTENT

    Like

  28. Folks, The WHOLE CORRUPT DOJ & FBI needs to be ABOLISHED—->IMMEDIATELY.
    ~Cancer is Pervasive & has Metastasized THROUGHOUT the Justice System.~

    Like

  29. This is why President Trump was wrong to step back from ordering the immediate release of those documents in September (or long before, in fact) — stepping back was tantamount to telling the traitors that the President was fine with accepting that Rosenstein et al. had no criminal intent, so they could go on pretending everything they were doing — in their WAR against him and us all — was righteous and good.

    Trump is showing himself to be not a tough lawman — a Wyatt Earp or Sheriff Arpaio — but a businessman, a negotiator. I can only hope he transcends from the latter into the former, because I doubt any AG he appoints will be any better, tougher a lawman than he is, on these high crimes by the Insane Left and Insane Right (the NeverTrumps and Ryanites).

    Like

  30. Anonymous says:

    As usual:

    Liked by 1 person

  31. This is the basis for all criminal investigations. However, when multiple crimes are suspected of being conducted by multiple people you meet the threshold of conspiracy and in turn, can justify intent more easily. Furthermore, this clearly is an example of Racketerring. Same problem in those cases which why we have RICO. I have always said RICO was the primary law that should be used un going after the Clinton-Obama Crime Family. It offers the easiest way of proving guilt and of tearing down the whole edifice.

    Like

  32. rayvandune says:

    PDJT is certainly talking tough about what is going on with Mueller, but it is time for ACTION. Threats just play into the narrative that the President is erratic, so he must communicate to the American people in clear terms how the conspirators attempted to influence the 2016 election, and protect Hillary, and now how they are protecting themselves, under the guise of conducting an investigation they themselves contrived.Time is our enemy, since with the help of their media co-conspirators, the Democrats are expert in using times of inaction (such as we are stuck in now) to convert any bad news for themselves into “old news”!

    Like

  33. Herbert Kroll says:

    Three words come to mind: ‘lock’, ‘her’ and ‘up’.

    Like

  34. TTConductor says:

    Many of us knew that the fix was in when Obama twice exonerated Clinton on national television citing a “lack of intent” several weeks before Comey made similar closing remarks on that fateful early July day. Reread this CTH article and then go back and watch the YouTube clips of Obama rationalizing Clinton’s actions. Your blood pressure will go up 35-50 points.

    Like

  35. J gray says:

    Most crimes do require proof of general intent, which is merely the intent to do the act that forms the basis for the crime. A few crimes require proof of specific intent- the intent to violate a specific law. So, there seems to be an effort to replace general intent with specific intent.

    Like

    • Litlbit2 says:

      At what point or time in the process, since this corruption has be on going for months if not years. Do you determine, “it was not my intent”? Six days, 6 weeks, 6 months, 6 years.

      What would it be called if you continued until caught or been told quit on they will know?

      CRIME!

      Like

  36. Brent Hull says:

    Trump does not intend to do anything about it.

    Like

  37. Brent Hull says:

    Trump does not intend to do anything about it.

    Like

  38. Greg Usher says:

    The fix was in way back in September 2015 when intent was made the standard for charging. The whole thing was a charade. They bent over backwards not to find any intent or damning emails, Strozk must have had a fit when apparently the motherlode of all Hillary’s emails conveniently turned up on Wiener’s laptop. That lanky loser Comey said they could not find a similar case that was charged. No wonder! The scale of the crime was so great it was a unique and damning case of misuse of classified information which made it even more essential to prosecute. I loathe these ‘good men of integrity’ like Comey and Mueller. Mueller is nothing but a vengeful swamp hack. When are any white hats going to speak out. What Mueller is doing is an unconscionable misuse of power. I hope Corsi takes him to court and exposes the hoax.

    .

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s