g********2
发帖数: 6571 | 1 Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) demolished FBI director James Comey’s claim Thursday
that the government lacked sufficient evidence of criminal intent to
prosecute former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for mis-handling
classified information.
Gowdy, referring to his background as a prosecutor, and peppering Comey with
questions, demonstrated that the kind of evidence the government already
had on Clinton — such as hiding her private email server — was often used
to show intent.
GOWDY: …I’m going to ask you to put on your old hat. False exculpatory
statements — they are used for what?
COMEY: Well, either for a substantive prosecution, or for evidence of
intent in a criminal prosecution.
GOWDY: Exactly. Intent, and consciousness of guilt, right? Is that right?
COMEY: Right.
GOWDY: Consciousness of guilt, and intent. In your old job, you would
prove intent, as you just referenced, by showing the jury evidence of a
complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the
public record. And you would be arguing, in addition to concealment, the
destruction that you and I just talked about, or certainly the failure to
preserve. You would argue all of that under the heading of intent.
You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme: when it
started, when it ended, and the number of emails, whether they were
originally classified or up-classified. You would argue all of that under
the heading of intent.
You would also probably, under “common scheme or plan,” argue the “
burn bags” of daily calendar entires, or the missing daily calendar entires
as a common scheme or plan to conceal.
Two days ago, Director, you said a reasonable person in her position
should have known a private email is no place to sand and receive classified
information. And you’re right: an average person does know not to do that.
This is no average person: this is a former First Lady, a former United
States Senator, and a former Secretary of State that the president now
contends is the most competent, qualified person to be president since [
Thomas] Jefferson. He didn’t say that in ’08, but he says it now.
She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, she
kept these private e-mails for almost two years, and only turned them over
to Congress because we found out she had a private e-mail account.
So you have a rogue e-mail system set up before she took the oath of
office; thousands of what we now know to be classified e-mails, some of
which were classified at the time; one of her more frequent e-mailed
comrades was, in fact, hacked, and you don’t know whether or not she was;
and this scheme took place over long period of time and resulted in the
destruction of public records — and yet you say there is insufficient
evidence of intent?
You say she was “extremely careless,” but not intentionally so. Now,
you and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do
defendants announce, “On this day, I intend to break this criminal code
section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this
day.” It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial
evidence — or, if you’re Congress, and you realize how difficult it is to
prove specific intent, you will formulate a statute that allows for “gross
negligence.”
The statute to which Gowdy referred is the one under which Comey said the
FBI had investigated Clinton: namely, 18 U.S.C. section 793(f), which
requires only a showing of “gross negligence,” not intent, in mis-handling
classified materials.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. His new book,
See No Evil: 19 Hard Truths the Left Can’t Handle, will be published by
Regnery on July 25 and is available for pre-order through Amazon. Follow him
on Twitter at @joelpollak. | S******8
发帖数: 24594 | | k**f
发帖数: 301 | | b*******0
发帖数: 833 | 4 Trey Gowdy 检察官出身，交叉盘问技巧一流，那是“刀刀见血”，没一点废话，直捅
要害。
主席也不错，问到了Comey一个关键问题：Comey总回答邮件删除是老希律师做的。主席
问：那些律师是否经过sucurity clearence. Comey只能回答没有。律师没有经过
sucurity clearence居然能够access not classfied 的可能含有国家高级机密的邮件
。这本身是什么问题？越问越漏洞百出。 | A****0
发帖数: 1367 | 5 同意，chaffetz 也主持的很好，几个关键的提问让comey自相矛盾。从两党议员的提问
水平来看，共和党明显高出一筹，猪党那些个傻逼社会活动家除了撒泼喊冤外，屁都不
会放一个，尼玛AA出来的智商太差，其中一个DC来的黑大妈唠叨了五分钟，我愣是没听
出她想问什么问题。
【在 b*******0 的大作中提到】
: Trey Gowdy 检察官出身，交叉盘问技巧一流，那是“刀刀见血”，没一点废话，直捅
: 要害。
: 主席也不错，问到了Comey一个关键问题：Comey总回答邮件删除是老希律师做的。主席
: 问：那些律师是否经过sucurity clearence. Comey只能回答没有。律师没有经过
: sucurity clearence居然能够access not classfied 的可能含有国家高级机密的邮件
: 。这本身是什么问题？越问越漏洞百出。
| t*******d
发帖数: 12895 | 6 有点像这个版面的状况
【在 A****0 的大作中提到】
: 同意，chaffetz 也主持的很好，几个关键的提问让comey自相矛盾。从两党议员的提问
: 水平来看，共和党明显高出一筹，猪党那些个傻逼社会活动家除了撒泼喊冤外，屁都不
: 会放一个，尼玛AA出来的智商太差，其中一个DC来的黑大妈唠叨了五分钟，我愣是没听
: 出她想问什么问题。
| b*******0
发帖数: 833 | 7 呵呵，没错，也没听明白她想说什么，只觉浪费了那宝贵的提问时间。
comey也挺“惨”，感觉必有隐情,许多事支支吾吾的。他也是检察官律师出身，他不懂
吗？好像他以前口碑还行，一直想立身为Independent形象，不涉“党争”。
Reputation，credit算是因此有些毁了。
美国三权分立的三条腿制度，司法那条腿快“瘸”了，但愿能够纠偏过来。
【在 A****0 的大作中提到】
: 同意，chaffetz 也主持的很好，几个关键的提问让comey自相矛盾。从两党议员的提问
: 水平来看，共和党明显高出一筹，猪党那些个傻逼社会活动家除了撒泼喊冤外，屁都不
: 会放一个，尼玛AA出来的智商太差，其中一个DC来的黑大妈唠叨了五分钟，我愣是没听
: 出她想问什么问题。
|
|
