@ZekeJMiller @KellyannePolls And since intent is required she was not guilty of anything.
-
-
-
So she didn't knowingly and willfully communicate?
-
You can watch Comey's 4.5 hours of testimony explaining why at your leisure.
-
Comey didn't write the law, his testimony doesn't change the letter of the law. I only asked a question 2 which the obvious response is yes.
-
You need to prove action and intent to prove the crime. One without the other means there's no crime. Go watch Comey's testimony.
-
The fact she had classified email (albeit improperly marked) on her server means nothing without the requisite intent.
-
Lynch may be unwilling, but an average Joe could get conviction based on her INTENTional use of private server n deleting subpoenaed emails.
-
You really don't understand how the law works do you? Go watch his testimony. She lacked the requisite intent to prosecute.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@ZekeJMiller@KellyannePolls another instance of Comey breaking with precedent and now he's really stepped in it.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@ZekeJMiller@KellyannePolls Which is crazy. Plenty of lawbreaking involves negligence without intent.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@ZekeJMiller@KellyannePolls I vote that the most common phrase used during the Hillary transition will be "taking the fifth."Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.