livingston
20×102mm Vulcan
The IG Report: They're Guilty, but It's Okay
The IG report is really Comey 2.0. Comey spent a long time describing how Hillary had broken the law but then concluded that it was okay. Similarly, the IG report lists example after example of political bias but declares that it had no impact on the Hillary email whitewash.
The IG report on the Clinton email investigation is proof positive that the entire DC justice establishment is corrupt; that they view themselves as rulers not public servants.
First we were told that Comey was a straight shooter whom we could trust. Then we were told the same about Mueller, Rosenstein, and now the IG. Yet in every case we’ve discovered that they are biased political actors who put the interests of the Deep State and the Democratic Party ahead of their sworn duty to uphold the law. It’s time for all conservatives to acknowledge that there are few if any honest people at the top levels of the FBI or the DoJ.
Not surprisingly highly biased people will resort to big lies to protect their power and the big government ideology they embrace.
The big lie in the Comey report was that because Hillary supposedly had no intent to mishandle classified data there was no crime. Yet a Navy seaman who demonstrated no intent to mishandle classified data was sent to prison. Further, the law says that intent is not a requirement.
There are many laws that can be broken even if the person lacks intent. Take manslaughter -- if person A kills person B accidently because person A was very careless, then person A is guilty even though they never intended to kill person B.
The protection of classified data is important because it can lead to the loss of American lives. Hence, the law holds people who have access to classified data to a high standard; they can’t do things that could expose that classified data to random people or foreign spies. Because the damage that is done when classified data is exposed doesn’t depend on intent, just as someone can kill someone else unintentionally, the law doesn’t require proving that someone intended to subvert American security. Yet after describing fact after fact about how Hillary broke the rules on how to protect classified data, Comey said that it was okay.
The big lie in the IG report is that if people who are provably biased make decisions that go against normal investigative procedures in ways that uniformly conform to their biases, there is no reason to believe that their decisions were impacted by their biases.
For example, General Michael Flynn was attacked by Mueller because Flynn supposedly lied to the FBI. We now know that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn didn’t think he was lying; having been fooled into an interrogation thinking it was a normal meeting, it’s hardly surprising that he might have honestly misremembered something. We’re told by leftists that it’s okay for Mueller to go after Flynn, because what Mueller is doing is trying to turn Flynn to get the dirt on Trump.
But thanks to the IG report we know that the FBI agents who interviewed Hillary’s IT guy said that he lied multiple times in his interview -- that was not based on their “instinct” but because the guy changed his story multiple times. Still, they concluded that since the investigation didn’t matter, no one would prosecute the IT guy. If there wasn’t bias involved either by Mueller or the FBI in the Clinton case, why wasn’t the IT guy prosecuted to get him to turn on Hillary?
After all, the IT guy would be a likely person to have heard Clinton saying something that indicated that she knew what she was doing was wrong but she didn’t care, proving intent.
Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/the_ig_report_theyre_guilty_but_its_okay.html#ixzz5IuMF6Tfc
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
The IG report is really Comey 2.0. Comey spent a long time describing how Hillary had broken the law but then concluded that it was okay. Similarly, the IG report lists example after example of political bias but declares that it had no impact on the Hillary email whitewash.
The IG report on the Clinton email investigation is proof positive that the entire DC justice establishment is corrupt; that they view themselves as rulers not public servants.
First we were told that Comey was a straight shooter whom we could trust. Then we were told the same about Mueller, Rosenstein, and now the IG. Yet in every case we’ve discovered that they are biased political actors who put the interests of the Deep State and the Democratic Party ahead of their sworn duty to uphold the law. It’s time for all conservatives to acknowledge that there are few if any honest people at the top levels of the FBI or the DoJ.
Not surprisingly highly biased people will resort to big lies to protect their power and the big government ideology they embrace.
The big lie in the Comey report was that because Hillary supposedly had no intent to mishandle classified data there was no crime. Yet a Navy seaman who demonstrated no intent to mishandle classified data was sent to prison. Further, the law says that intent is not a requirement.
There are many laws that can be broken even if the person lacks intent. Take manslaughter -- if person A kills person B accidently because person A was very careless, then person A is guilty even though they never intended to kill person B.
The protection of classified data is important because it can lead to the loss of American lives. Hence, the law holds people who have access to classified data to a high standard; they can’t do things that could expose that classified data to random people or foreign spies. Because the damage that is done when classified data is exposed doesn’t depend on intent, just as someone can kill someone else unintentionally, the law doesn’t require proving that someone intended to subvert American security. Yet after describing fact after fact about how Hillary broke the rules on how to protect classified data, Comey said that it was okay.
The big lie in the IG report is that if people who are provably biased make decisions that go against normal investigative procedures in ways that uniformly conform to their biases, there is no reason to believe that their decisions were impacted by their biases.
For example, General Michael Flynn was attacked by Mueller because Flynn supposedly lied to the FBI. We now know that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn didn’t think he was lying; having been fooled into an interrogation thinking it was a normal meeting, it’s hardly surprising that he might have honestly misremembered something. We’re told by leftists that it’s okay for Mueller to go after Flynn, because what Mueller is doing is trying to turn Flynn to get the dirt on Trump.
But thanks to the IG report we know that the FBI agents who interviewed Hillary’s IT guy said that he lied multiple times in his interview -- that was not based on their “instinct” but because the guy changed his story multiple times. Still, they concluded that since the investigation didn’t matter, no one would prosecute the IT guy. If there wasn’t bias involved either by Mueller or the FBI in the Clinton case, why wasn’t the IT guy prosecuted to get him to turn on Hillary?
After all, the IT guy would be a likely person to have heard Clinton saying something that indicated that she knew what she was doing was wrong but she didn’t care, proving intent.
Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/the_ig_report_theyre_guilty_but_its_okay.html#ixzz5IuMF6Tfc
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
