The Legal Loophole
Storm Brooks
Published: 7/5/2016
The headlines on today’s news reads, “Secretary of State Hillary Cleared.”
Rush Limbaugh was correct: “We are being played.” The drama served to deflate conservative hopes for justice and to inflate Hillary’s image in the eye of the public just before the democratic convention.
After this season of theatrics James Comey, FBI Director, announced he would not prosecute Hillary.
His announcement erodes public confidence in government generally and the FBI specifically. When the law is only enforced and applied to the little guy while giving the big guys a pass, American’s instinctively smell a dead rat in the gears of government.
Title 18 793 (f) reads:
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Comely conceded Secretary Clinton acted with “gross negligence.”
So, why wasn’t she prosecuted?
The political reason is that there is no way the Democratic Star Quarterback was going to be indicted for a felony conviction of violating Title 18, § 793(f) of the Federal Penal Code.
The legal reason, however, was a lawyer’s trick. Grabbing hold of the word “intent” in Title 18 § 793 (b) which applies to willful intent to injure the United States, Comely inserted the word “willful” in section (f) which doesn’t belong in the statute because it applies to actions of “gross negligence” and not intent.
Title 18 § 793 (f) is in place to underscore the seriousness of handling classified information by criminalizing “gross negligence.” It has nothing to do with intent, but has everything to do with one’s actions, habits, customs, practices, and procedures. Not having an evil intent for the criminal act of §793 (b) does not absolve Hillary Clinton of the guilt of “gross negligence” in §793 (f).
That is, Comey performed a magician’s trick saying because the FBI could not prove Crime A, therefore Hillary was not guilty of Crime B. However, Hillary was not being charged with Crime A. She was being charged with Crime B, “gross negligence” which did not require proof of intent.
Comey’s illusion conveyed the falsity that because Hillary was not guilty of Crime A (intentional injury), she was not guilty Crime B, (gross negligence).
Such reasoning is nonsense. Consider for a moment a courtroom situation where a man is accused of counterfeiting dollar bills. Suppose his lawyer gets up and begins to argue that his client is not guilty of rape, therefore he must not be guilty of counterfeiting. We’d think he was nuts. But this is what Comely did on a more refined scale with his no “intent” argument. He argued that because Hillary did not have criminal intent to pass classified information to the Russians, she was not guilty of the crime of “gross negligence.”
No wonder Jesus said, “Woe unto you lawyers.”
The net result of this injustice is that it erodes public confidence in the FBI and reaffirms the belief that the United States government is a graveyard of corruption—a belief a whopping 75% of us hold according to Breitbart.
Comey’s resignation is in order! Lower FBI agents must confront higher FBI agents (See 1 Samuel 15: the doctrine of intervention).
Recent Comments