House Republicans make case for perjury against Hillary Clinton

Link
>businessinsider.com/house-republicans-clinton-perjury-case-2016-8

OK, Sup Forums, do they have a case? Remember that they have to prove that she intended to lie and it wasn't a faulty memory.

Here's Trey Gowdy shitting on Comey if you forgot about it or haven't seen it.
youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=OqbDBRWb63s
youtube.com/watch?v=FmIRYvJQeHM
youtube.com/watch?v=O894bXmqqGU
youtube.com/watch?v=xvhBoF_pCHo
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury#United_States
cnn.com/2016/08/16/politics/hillary-clinton-interview-fbi-notes/
youtube.com/watch?v=pG4P5_nON4Q
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No, but it doesn't matter. The point is it will keep the email scandal in the news for another month or so.

I remember the Comey incident. It was bizarre

For it to be perjury, they need to prove that she was aware of it, which she can easily refute with "I didn't know they were classified". It's not going to happen.

but the FBI literally set the precedent that she's exempt from laws

Perjury is a Clinton past time. Her husband got away with it. She'll get away with it.

But they still should try because she's a guilty fucking cunt.

It's great how nobody cares that Congress is still wasting time and money on this non-issue.

go back to occupy democrats. you have propaganda to write.

No. They're going to try to say she had emails "marked classified", but those marks were section headings, not banners, i.e. buried down in the body of the email.

Since perjury requires intent, and is rarely prosecuted, it's a no-go in this case. She can easily plead ignoance about those few messages' section headings.

>durr

At this point it's as likely to backfire on the GOP as help. They're taking a genuine case of bad judgement and turning it into a transparent witch-hunt.

It's been like this since the 90's. For some reason professional-class Republicans never considered the Clintons "legitimate" and feel that any waste of time and money on pseudo-scandals is justified.

I honestly don't get it. I guess it's a higher-class version whatever has been eating the brains of the rest of the GOP. Political mad cow.

>bad judgment

And all those deleted emails that shows she was selling her influence?

Just "bad judgement" too?
You shills are pathetic.

She will be your next president, sorry bigots.

...

witch hunt's are okay is the public believes the person to be an actual witch

>And all those deleted emails that shows she was selling her influence?
I haven't heard of those. Link?

I think you're missing the point.

Except that the documents weren't classified until after Clinton stored then on her server.

>Liberals claim to be peaceful
>Liberals claim to be compassionate
>Liberals claim to be against war
>Liberals claim to support Islam

And yet the person they support is a psychopathic killer


youtube.com/watch?v=OqbDBRWb63s - The Truth About Hillary Clinton's Mental Illness

youtube.com/watch?v=FmIRYvJQeHM - "We came, we saw, he died! LAUGHS" (Gaddafi)

youtube.com/watch?v=O894bXmqqGU - Hillary Clinton openly states she wants war with Iran to protect Israel

youtube.com/watch?v=xvhBoF_pCHo - Hillary laughs maniacally about war with Iran

>Remember that they have to prove that she intended to lie and it wasn't a faulty memory.
Is this how it is for the unwashed masses? I don't think I've ever heard this before.

>a genuine case of bad judgement
you mean............neglect?

>lying to congress should just be acceptable
you're missing the point

I don't care if they have personal opinions, I want the law upheld

>"pay to play"

>For some reason professional-class Republicans never considered the Clintons "legitimate" and feel that any waste of time and money on pseudo-scandals is justified.
>I honestly don't get it. I guess it's a higher-class version whatever has been eating the brains of the rest of the GOP. Political mad cow.
t. seth rich's mugger

read perjury law m8
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury#United_States

Hillary is above the law. Best thing you can hope for is bad press for her, but i'm sure that annoying orange will be there to distract media from this.

>Remember that they have to prove that she intended to lie and it wasn't a faulty memory.
So, if I get into a drunk driving accident and kill a whole bus full of kids, but walk away and get charged later with multiple homicide for killing a bus full of kids, and my defense is 'My memory is faulty, I don't remember doing that.', I can get off? That's fuckin' interesting.

Everyone ignores this, both here in Sup Forums and the MSM.

The FBI had to ask the agencies whether or not the e-mails were classified. If the material was clearly classified, as Sup Forums believes, would the FBI have needed to even ask?

Retroactive classification, what a joke.

Eh, she was dodging FOIA, which is skeezy but not a crime.

>I want the law upheld
Sure you do.

keep it up guys ;^)

>House Republicans to repeal ACA for 50th time.
They'll never stop trying and they'll never get anything done.

Vote the do nothing fuckers out.

You are stupid.

Even if she isn't found guilty, I think it's a win-win situation for the GOP.

Either she committed perjury or she's incompetent, both will make her appear more unfit for presidency to the public.

She said "I have never sent or received classified information".
FBI proved she did.

She committed perjury.
per·ju·ry/ˈpərj(ə)rē/
noun

the offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or affirmation.

It's pretty open and shut. They might not be able to pin her money laundering, cronyism, and illegal pay to play on her, but if she gets out of this it's obvious how rigged the system is.

Win-win for the GOP would be taking Trump out and putting in someone who doesn't say stupid shit daily.

So they are suing her? I wonder how many more people are going to die because of Clinton?

Laws are for peasants

She won't be charged

Comey stated during his interview at the committee for govt oversight and reform that some of the emails were marked classified at the time of being sent

>OK, Sup Forums, do they have a case?

No.

which lie - there are so many
did she forget that she created an illegal server? the emails say no

Did she forget that she deleted 30,000 emails?
If so can she still wipe her own ass?

They would waste it on something else either way.

Replacing your democratically elected nominee with an establishment favorite would be a lose-lose.

It's what the DNC did with Bernie and Hillary.

>bad judgement
Drinking beer before liquor is bad judgement.
Leasing furniture is bad judgement.
Buying a Nissan is bad judgement.


Storing classified intelligence on an unsecure private server in your basement after explicitly being told it wasn't allowed, and then giving your uncleared legal staff access to files so they could delete them is a violation of federal intelligence and espionage codes.

ITS FUCKING HAPPENING
"The evidence collected by the (FBI) during its investigation of Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email system during her time as secretary of state appears to directly contradict several aspects of her sworn testimony,"
cnn.com/2016/08/16/politics/hillary-clinton-interview-fbi-notes/

I think points 2 and 3 in the congress document actually are perjury though.

She was adamant that her lawyers read through every email before deleting them which was proven to be a lie.

She also lied openly about have data on multiple servers in different locations

Frankly I think the classification shit is pointless but she did explicitly lie about the 2 above elements

>Buying a Nissan is bad judgement.
I have a nissan and it's a great car. You must have meant "chevy".

>I have a nissan
And now you're spending six hours a day Correcting The Record on a forum for Mongolian underwater basket weaving enthusiasts


... I rest my case

Witnessed.

Bill got impeached for perjury. The clock ran out, though. He would have been removed from the office had he had more time to serve. They start early this time. Their whole legal defense is lie first, deal with consequences later. They are bad lawyers. They only look good around other dem semi-retards.

Oh shit

The only thing that can save me now are these dubs

Can the House of Reps subpoena her to testify under oath?

She was not under oath when interviewed by the FBI,correct?

If so then lying while not under oath is not perjury is it? Is it a crime nonetheless?

>She also lied openly about have data on multiple servers in different locations
I think that's key. You would have to be retarded to not know the difference between one and multiple.

>She was adamant that her lawyers read through every email before deleting them which was proven to be a lie.
This one not so much. In the document she says she " didn't read over their shoulders" so it's within reason to believe that the lawyers lied to her because they're lazy and didn't want to read every single email.

she testified in a congressional hearing

ahh wow forgot about that

youtube.com/watch?v=pG4P5_nON4Q

>She was not under oath when interviewed by the FBI,correct?
It's illegal to lie to the FBI so this is irrelevant. That's why she wasn't under oath.

she either lied to the FBI, a crime, or lied to Congress, a crime. They do have to prove intent though, and the only one slicker than Slick Willy himself is Slithery Hillary

They can have all the cases they want. Nobody with the power to jail her is going to do it. If the Republicans want her, they're going to have to seize her. The law will not help.

That wasn't me, someone hacked my account!

I remember news outlets making a point of saying she wasn't under oath.. if that's not relevant well at least some of those in position of oversight know the law..

lel

>Since perjury requires intent
If that's the case and Comey the Cuck said there was no intent, merely calling it "gross negligence" or extreme carelessness or whatever, yeah, she'll probably get off. And considering she can probably just bribe/threaten whoever's responsible for prosecuting her, then she'll definitely get off.

The only way to stop Hillary is with the ballot or the bullet. Or maybe we'll get lucky and she'll have a seizure and die before November.

That's not perjury, but it's hilariously corrupt. However, didn't Rand say it's a felony to lie before Congress?

Weren't some of them classified at the time she sent/received them?

I mean, it's a more productive use of their time than trying to sabotage their own party's candidate, so whatever works I guess.

That was for the server. This is for statements about the server.

>perjury requires intent

Are you fucking serious?

>Clinton News Network reporting on something that might hurt their precious Hillary
Must be big.

If you heard his remarks, you´d knew that there were 100+ classified emails AT THE TIME, including TOP SECRET information. Now tell me people didn´t classify TOP SECRET info before sending it out.

Go fuck yourself, you disgusting idiot/troll/shill.

Oh, in that case they might have a better shot at a guilty verdict since she's lied numerous times under oath.

It does require intent

That being said, if what she said to the FBI is in direct contradiction to what she said to congress, that alone will prove it

There are 4 specific charges of Perjury that Chaffetz/Goodlatte want the FBI/AG to investigate/indict upon

What you stated is one but there's 3 more testimonies :
1) Whether she sent or received emails that were marked classified at the time.
2) Whether her attorneys reviewed each of the emails on her personal email system.
3) Whether there was one, or more servers that stored work-related emails during her time as Secretary of State
4) Whether she provided all her work-related emails to the Department of State

People's memories are pretty shitty.

Yes, to avoid something like
>get called to congressional hearing
>asked where you saved the important deets
>Oh I think I saved them on a CD a year ago
>go home enjoying life for a few weeks
>receive summons back to congress
>turns out you saved the info in question on a blu-ray 8 months ago not a CD 1 year ago
>become a felon and jailed for 5 years

I want based Chaffetz to cum inside me.

No homo

>Remember that they have to prove that she intended to lie

Correct.

That's also why Comey had to recommend against prosecution -- because the FBI had nothing against her proving intention. And, despite what many people on Sup Forums believe, all of the law-breaking that Comey was investigating required proof of intent. In fact, Comey was dragged in front of the House where he had to spend hours repeating over and over to those brain-damanged Republicans that the reason he could not recommend prosecution was because he had no evidence of intent.

this website is almost normal now that CTR ran out of money.

logic, reason, understanding. keep it up user.

Except that's wrong, ya dumb idiot. Many were marked classified at the time, over 100, and while over 2000 were retroactively marked classified it was made clear that she should have known they were marked classified since they had sensitive material in them and she was the fucking SoS.

Hell, in one of the emails she tells a staffer to take the classification marking off something and send it unsecured. Highly irresponsible.

You're actually kind of right but it would be way easier to prove intent here than there.
>Says there was one server
>Multiple servers
I mean, how do you just fuck that shit up in a congressional hearing. That's a mistake toddlers would make.

>what is criminal negligence

I've got your intent right here: Hillary used those servers to sell special access programs to foreign nations.

It's possible that she didn't lie to the FBI, since we don't know what she said to the FBI and Comey indicated that she didn't lie, but couldn't comment on whether she lied to congress.

He said he needed a request from Congress to investigate whether she lied under oath during the congressional hearing, and Rep. Chaffetz said they'd get him one.

But Comeys public press release started 300 of them were classified, and that they were so secret the Office of National Intelligence can't even reveal the originating agency.

and the fact that she changed her wording from
>I never sent classified material
to
>I never sent any material marked as classified
To me is the clearest indicator of intent, as she actively had staff remove classification markers, and someone on her defense team told her to use weasel words like that to avoid perjury charges (well technically it wasn't marked classified when it was sent)

All that was needed for criminal prosecution was gross negligence; which was DEFINITELY the case.

Sooner or later Comey's going to fry for this shit.

>the documents weren't classified until after Clinton stored then on her server.
She wasn't supposed to use a private server for anything work related you moron.

bump for Inmate Hillary R Clinton United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth

You don't understand how classifications work

da kang is abuv dem raciss laws

>>perjury requires intent
>Are you fucking serious?

Everything pertaining to Hillary's case requires intent.

Even the most serious crimes being investigated -- like putting classified e-mail in an insecure place (such as a personal e-mail server) where it then gets stolen by the Russians -- even THAT requires intent before a conviction is possible.

I've read a lot of posts by people who say things like: "Well, if I ever did what Hillary did, they would put me in prison for the rest of my life." That's quite unlikely. In general, criminal intent is quite difficult to prove -- they need hard evidence of it. Sloppiness, mistakes, neglect, etc. doesn't get you convicted of these kinds of crimes.

Believe me, if you happen to have a job working with classified info, then you REALLY WANT intent to be required to convict. It would be too hard to hire for those positions if, for example, an IT guy could get thrown in prison for making a mistake configuring a server.

See

> Remember that they have to prove that she intended to lie
> they need to prove that she was aware of it, which she can easily refute with "I didn't know they were classified"
> Since perjury requires intent,

intent
intent
intent
intent
intent

TO
DO
WHAT FAGGOT?

Hillary's perjury before congress has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CLASSIFIED EMAILS. She lied about facts concerning the investigation after she and her lawyers became aware of it all.

Stop being stupid. Don't swallow this journo bullshit. Yes they are stupid enough to believe that somehow exonerated once means exonerated forever, but most people know what when you trip yourself up in lie after lie, each new one opens up a whole new problem. See

>Hillary used those servers to sell special access programs to foreign nations.

I'm not going to believe any of that until you find a prosecutor willing to put his reputation on the line to bring those criminal charges.

And, no, there is no conspiracy to prevent charges from being filed. Any prosecutor would LOVE to find that evidence against Hillary and bring those charges. It would be a huge boost to his career. But a smart prosecutor is only going to do that if the evidence is credible.

Sorry, buddy, but until a prosecutor comes forward with evidence and a belief that it's strong enough to convict, then all you're doing is just repeating the rumors of the wing-nut conspiracy theorists.

removing the classified tag does not make something unclassified.

the SoS does not have the power to unclassify something.

my point was
>I never sent or received anything (((marked))) as classified

>All that was needed for criminal prosecution was gross negligence

Nope. In addition to that, intent is also needed.

You can bet that every word out of Comey's mouth was carefully vetted by administration lawyers.

Comey clearly said (over and over and over again) that he needed intent, and he didn't have it -- and that's why he couldn't recommend prosecution.

>LIES
>LIES
>MORE LIES

I don't think they can get her for perjury since that requires intent, but gross negligence, corruption, taking bribes, etc. should be easy enough.

>do they have a case?

Perjury is on video, the question is whether they want to go after her for that or the shit with the Foundation.

see
intent doesn't mean "intent to knowingly break a law"

intent means "intent to break a law regardless if you know its the law or not"

she had intent to give her lawyers access to her email server even though they didnt have security clearance

that's intent

she had intent to receive work related emails which may contain classified emails on a non-classified mobile server (her phone)

that's intent

You don't need proof for an indictment. The FBI had enough for an indictment. You are supposed to do the "proving" in court, not before.

Well technically he didn't, it's just that people don't understand the concept of precedent

>she intended to lie and it wasn't a faulty memory
Win-win.

>intent is also needed

It's not, if you watched the hearing you would know this.

Comey was in the hot seat for not being able to explain himself over why he thought intent was necessary when it wasn't.

Hey dumbass, it depends on what the definition of "is" is....

Thank you for bringing up this important issue.

Thanks for correcting the record!

There is enough evidence to warrant indictment. Only probable cause is required to indict. There is definitely that.