All Episodes
Previous Next
July 5, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:53
July 5, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists on across the fruited plane.
Rush Limbo behind the Golden EIB microphone at 800-28-22882.
That's a number to call if you want to appear on the program today.
I kind of think you probably do.
Because they're lining up now and getting ready to have at it.
I hope none of you are depressed.
I'm sure a lot of you are.
I told you that we were being played throughout this whole thing, and it was, I never wavered.
Even when Comey started today, when Comey, if he, we've got some audio soundbites coming up, the FBI director, James Comey, when he started out, I'm sure there's some of you, oh my God, oh my God, he's going to lower the boom.
And I knew throughout the whole thing, there's no way that Barack Hussein-O is going to put Hillary on Air Force One today, fly to a campaign event, if the FBI director is going to recommend she be indicted.
It just wasn't going to happen.
And then furthermore, this puts in perspective now that apparently off-the-cuff surprise meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch.
Well, man, oh man, and it's amazing how that worked out.
So they have the meeting.
It's discovered by a lone media outlet, the ABC affiliate in Phoenix.
It blows up just like that lone picture of the Clintons dancing on the beach three weeks before the Lewinsky story appeared on Drudge.
Everybody got all hopped up and just like that one picture appeared and Mike McCurry in the White House started belly aching about it.
Nobody had seen it.
It's pre-internet.
It's the front page of the LA Times.
One picture, one picture.
So they got the picture out everywhere.
And then three weeks later, here comes a Lewinsky story on Drudge.
It had been spiked at Newsweek.
Well, here we go.
So you have the one media outlet in Phoenix that finds out Clinton's on the plane with Lynch.
Then it blows up and everybody finds out about it.
And then all hell breaks loose.
And then Lynch is acting all embarrassed.
You know what?
Tell you what I'm going to do.
I'm going to back out of this.
I am going to accept the recommendation of the FBI and the career prosecutors at the Department of Justice.
Isn't she looking like a champion today to the people that matter?
backs now, and she says, I'm going to, do you think anybody knew what was coming down the pike?
I mean, Comey said nobody knew.
He hadn't talked to anybody.
But it's, if you want to be depressed, look, I understand it.
The thing to be really disappointed about is the sad reality that just one institution after another that we used to be able to count on that we thought was reliable, they all seem to be crumbling right before our very eyes.
So now, where we are with this, I mean, we can parse Comey.
We can go through it.
We will today, just for the fun of it, because you know what I thought I was listening to today?
I told Mr. Snerdley, so this James Comey's press conference today reminded me of Joe Biden's announcement saying he wasn't running.
You remember that?
Biden goes out and announces he's not running, but if you listen to the speech, all throughout the speech, you got the impression he was going to run because it laid out an agenda.
It detailed what problems exist and how he was going to solve them.
I mean, it was the speech of somebody that was going to run.
And then at the end of it, he says he's not going to.
I had the same feeling today watching Comey.
He lays out all the violations.
He lays out all the irregularities.
He lays out all the problems.
And there are a lot of people in jail for doing exactly what he's exonerated Hillary Clinton for today.
Where does Petraeus go to get his reputation back?
I mean, they charged him with a felony until he settled for something far less than this.
I mean, Comey admits that it's likely that hostile adversaries have seen detailed data from her servers, that she had more than one.
So he's going through all this and then says, but there's nothing to see here.
There's not a reasonable prosecutor out there that would make this case that would bring these charges.
I mean, this is just like the Biden speech for what it's worth.
The Clintons pulled a trick.
And here's another thing.
How many of you got all excited when you found out that Cheryl Mills had been brought in there once again for another interview and then took the fifth all these times?
Do you know what the Clintons did with that?
It's finally been uncovered.
This whole thing started in 2013.
Hillary hired a lot of her assistants as her lawyer and then claimed privilege so that they would not have to answer any questions about what went on in her office.
And Cheryl Mills is one of those examples.
She hires Cheryl Mills, quote unquote, as a lawyer, and Mills thus can't testify because of the lawyer-client privilege, even though Mills was hired after all of this had happened.
Comey didn't talk about any of that.
So, where we are now is that it's going to be up to Trump and the Republicans to make the case.
Since the DOJ is not, I mean, there's no way that the DOJ is going to bring charges when the FBI director doesn't suggest doing so when there's no recommendation.
Now, there is a parallel investigation Comey didn't talk about, and that's into the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.
And that was another aspect of the Clinton-Lynch meeting that people said, wait, wait, wait, wait a minute.
Now, he's under investigation, too.
What the heck's going on?
Same thing, folks.
I wouldn't expect anything to come of that.
Like, nothing was going to ever come of this.
I can't tell you the number of times, and I'm sure it happened to you, too.
No matter where you go, people ask you, you think Hillary's going to be indicted?
And a lot of people, I think they're going to get it.
This is serious stuff.
This is play of a fire.
This is national security.
It's top-secret information.
And it's like every other time they get there, people all get hopped up, all anticipatory, all thinking, this is going to be the time.
This is going to be it.
And I think the Clintons actually have a playbook strategy.
I think one of the things they relish doing is using instances like this to get people on our side all hopped up and eager and excited, thinking that there's going to be an actual, in this case, indictment or some form of punishment.
And they always skate, and people get deflated and depressed, and they throw their hands up in despair.
It's, I'm through with it.
I'm finished.
I don't care.
It doesn't matter what I do.
It doesn't matter how I vote.
They're going to win no matter what we do.
Blah, blah, blah.
And that's their objective: to dispirit you, depress you, and to have you thinking there's nothing that can be done to beat them.
They just have an answer or a way to slither out of virtually everything.
But I do think we were played, spent a lot of time on Friday detailing why.
And it has come to pass.
Let's go through some of the things here that Comey said.
There is evidence that they were extremely careless.
No evidence of intent to violate law, but evidence of carelessness with classified material.
I always thought that intent was irrelevant.
Officer, I didn't intend to speed.
I just wasn't paying attention.
Oh, really?
Okay, you weren't Trump.
And then, well, forget that I stopped you.
Comey, Secretary Clinton used multiple servers.
The meaning of that is there was no doubt a concerted effort on the part of Mrs. Clinton to keep whatever she was doing out of public view.
There's no question this was going on in total violation of government law.
Comey admitted that crooked Hillary sent and received all levels of classified information.
He said the FBI also discovered several thousand work-related emails.
Remember that Hillary claimed under oath that she had surrendered all emails, but they kept finding things in a drip, drip, drip, drip, drip kind of fashion.
FBI Director Comey said from 30,000 emails that were deleted by Hillary, 110 emails and 55 email chains contained classified emails, eight of them top secret, 36 secret.
But we think that Hillary just deleted emails like you do, and like I do.
You occasionally decide you need to purge your inbox.
So you just start deleting things here and there to make room.
You're not specifically hunting and pecking for which emails to delete.
You just select a bunch and you delete them.
And we think that's all that went on here.
The FBI director said email chains regarding a then top secret program involved Hillary both sending and receiving emails.
The FBI director said there is evidence Clinton and associates were very careless in the handling of classified material and a private server was no place for such careless handling, and yet she did it.
And remember, Petraeus was actually charged with the crimes that Hillary could have been charged with.
He revealed classified data to his biographer/slash mistress.
Writing a book on him, she gave him, or he gave her classified information, passed it along, and it was the regime.
It was the Obama administration which pursued and went after Petraeus and basically took him out.
He was somebody at one time being talked about as a potential Republican presidential or vice presidential candidate, but they took care of him.
Petraeus' reputation is gone, and it's no better than the guy who did the video that did not incite the protests and the violence at Benghazi.
FBI director said the security culture of the State Department was generally lacking compared to elsewhere in the U.S. government.
But still, there's nothing to see here.
FBI director said it is possible hostile actors gained access to Clinton's personal email account.
It is possible hostile actors gained access to Clinton's personal email account.
You know, the thing about that, indictment or not, crooked Hillary allowed top secret information to be open to attack by foreign governments and WikiLeaks.
Julian Assange is still holed up in the Ecuador Embassy in Britain, in London, says he's got enough information to get her indicted.
Of course, that's a moot point now, but he's going to keep releasing things.
As I say, it's going to be up to Trump and the Republicans now to prosecute Hillary on this.
It's going to be up to them to make campaign issues out of all of these things, the lack of concern, the laziness, the whatever charges you want to make about her unfitness and her lack of attention to necessary detail, her unqualified status, if you will, since there will not be any official election.
By the way, some people are going to try to find some positive in that too.
Let me give you a version how that's going to go.
Hey, Rush, it's not all bad.
Think of it this way.
And actually, I know this because people write me this this morning.
Look, if Hillary had been indicted, and you said it yourself last week, if Hillary had been indicted, the Democrat Party would have rallied to her and a bunch of Democrat independents would have rallied to her simply because they're not going to be sitting around idle and let the Republicans take Hillary out this way because they'll think it's a vast right-wing conspiracy that got her because Comey has long been known as something other than a Democrat.
He's a straight shooter, which means he's uncorruptible.
And so if she had been indicted, Rush, that might have meant either the Democrat Party really circles the wagons and supports her no matter what, or it could have been Biden.
Rush, imagine if she has to get out and Biden becomes the guy.
I mean, it'd be really, really much more difficult for Trump to beat Biden than it would Hillary.
So Rush, it may be a net positive here.
People are going to be looking for all kinds of things to hold on here, hold on to here to not give up on everything.
I don't blame people looking for those things.
There may be some validity to some of them as well.
The FBI director said no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case.
No reasonable prosecutor would bring this case.
Now, what Comey brings to this, he's got a straight shooter reputation.
James Comey has, among everybody that knows him, strict law and order, uncorruptible, has not been corrupted to this point in time.
If Comey says it, you can trust it.
That's his reputation.
When he says no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case, it's kind of like saying no reasonable Supreme Court justice would ever look at Obamacare and call it constitutional.
Or further, no reasonable Supreme Court chief justice would ever take Obamacare and rewrite it from the bench to make it constitutional.
So, what we have here, the FBI director detailed gross misconduct and then said there'll be no prosecution.
Bottom line from Comey: although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.
There is evidence, potential violations.
Isn't that one of the things you do a trial for?
Who was the last?
Mr. Sterdley, a pop quiz.
Who was the last?
Well, I don't want to give the answer away, but in the question, who was the last public figure?
We were all told in the legal system, straight shooter, you can trust this guy.
He is untainted by either party.
This guy's a bulldog.
He puts his nose to the grindstone and he digs it out until he's got the truth.
And when he gets it, you can count on it.
Right.
Exactly.
You're exactly.
Patrick Fitzgerald, who was the special prosecutor that nailed Scooter Libby for lying to him in the Valerie Plain leak case, even though we all knew who leaked her name.
They got Scooter Libby for supposedly lying during the investigation.
So, Patrick Fitzgerald, we were all told this guy's above the law.
This guy's a you can't taint this guy.
He's a straight shooter.
It's all he cares about.
It's a lawyer.
He doesn't have a girlfriend.
He just eats pizza out of boxes and drinks Diet Coke and doesn't even have any furniture except a wooden chair in his apartment.
That's how serious he is.
And they say the same thing about Comey.
Got to take a break, folks.
Be back here in just a second.
Don't go.
I'm only hearing my formerly nicotine-stained fingers a story from thehill.com just today.
You ready for the headline?
Court, colon, officials cannot use private email accounts to evade records laws.
Thehill.com, July 5th, 2016.
Federal officials may not use private mail accounts to get around public records laws.
A federal judge ruled today.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overturned a lower court decision in which judges dismissed claims from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank that attempted to obtain correspondence from a top White House official through the Freedom of Information Act.
The White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy said it did not need to search for or turn over records held by the head of the Office of Science and Technology Policy on a private email account as part of the open records request.
So to review, the Conservative think tank wants records from the guy who runs the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
And the White House says, no, those emails are on his private server and you can't get them.
So the White House specifically cited private server location, private email server location, as a means of denying a Freedom of Information Act request, which, by the way, is why Hillary did this.
And in part, there were many reasons.
In addition to the official White House email, John Holdren, the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, sent and received emails from a domain at the Woods Hole Research Center.
So a judge, his name is David Sintel, disagreed.
I don't have time to read his ruling, but the bottom line is you can't use a private email server to shield your work from FOIA requests.
What a day to hear that.
Let's say Donald Trump's had a couple of tweets.
The first one, FBI director said crooked Hillary compromised our national security.
No charges.
Wow.
And he also tweeted out, the system's rigged.
General Petraeus got in trouble for far less.
Very, very unfair.
As usual, bad judgment.
As I say, it's going to be up to Trump to make the case now.
Trump campaign surrogates and the Republican Party.
Republican Party not going to be comfortable doing this.
My guess is DOJ exonerates, which is what this is.
No reasonable processor.
The FBI exonerates no reasonable prosecutor.
But I mean, I want to go through this again because this just flew out here from thehill.com.
Federal officials may not use private mail accounts to get around public records laws, according to a federal judge.
It's David Sentell, the chief judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, disagreeing with the government.
The government argued throughout the case that documents on a non-governmental email server are outside the possession or control of federal agencies and thus beyond the scope of Freedom of Information Act.
I'm sure we've mentioned this before, but everybody thinks that Hillary decided to do this on her own.
But the more you look at this administration, all kinds of people did this.
I mean, here we have this science guy.
There have been others we have learned that kept official documents on, yeah, Lisa Jackson over at EPA, now working for Apple.
She had a private email server, and all of it was to escape Freedom of Information Act requests, which makes total sense.
I mean, here we have a Democrat Party administration which does not believe in transparency, which wants to hide everything it does, cannot even be honest and open about its agenda if it wants to win elections.
The Democrat Party, to this day, even though people think the country's lost in many ways, I still maintain to you that if Obama had run a campaign based on exactly what's happened, promised he was going to do exactly what he's done, he would not have been elected.
The Democrat Party, the American left, cannot be honest.
They have to use subterfuge.
They have to deceive.
They have to lie.
And here they are with numerous officials, private email servers, making the case in court.
Hey, private email servers, even if it's government-related, you can't see it.
Private email.
Freedom of Information Act has no purview there.
And the judge said if a department head can deprive the citizens of their right to know what his department's up to by the simple expedient of maintaining his departmental emails on an account in another domain, that purpose is hardly served, Sentel wrote.
It would make as much sense to say that the department head could deprive requesters of hard copy documents by leaving them in a file at his daughter's house and then claiming that they're under her control, which is a brilliant point.
Let's say we're not even talking about email.
Let's say some people have some paper documents.
They work for the government, but they're over at the employee's daughter's house.
And here comes some think tank or news agency wants to see them under FOIA.
Sorry, he doesn't have them.
They're at his daughter's house.
You can't get them.
No different.
It's absurd.
And it's no different.
So, well, you can't see them.
They're on his private server.
And his private server, it's government business on his private server.
It doesn't matter.
So it begins to appear to me that the Obama administration may have had a hand in setting this up to begin with.
And by the way, folks, Obama was communicating with Hillary, knowing full well she had this off-site server, this private server.
It was not news to anybody.
I think it's part of the practice that these people engage in regularly to deceive the American people and to continue to be able to operate in the darkness without any sunlight.
I just find it ironic that here we have an appellate court decision saying that government officials cannot use private email accounts to evade records laws.
And the same day the FBI said, nothing to see here.
No reasonable prosecutor would ever bring this case.
No criminal activity here, no willful intent.
Mrs. Clinton basically is a non-tech person and didn't know what she was doing.
She didn't intend to break the law.
She didn't intend to do this.
Yes, some hostile actors might have seen this stuff, but we don't know for sure because we couldn't find any direct evidence that she'd been hacked.
Yet it just, the willful suspension of common sense is what is necessary to get through each and every day when the country is run by a bunch of leftists and globalists and statists.
In order to maintain your sanity, you have to willfully suspend your common sense because everything they do is in utter defiance of that.
Let's get to the phones.
I know a lot of people want to weigh in.
We're going to start in Pleasanton, California with Chris Hevattitz, sir.
You're up first.
Yeah, hi, Russ.
Megadittos.
Thank you, sir.
Hey, you remember the IRS scandal?
We had kind of a similar circumstance.
We had people taking the FIS, disappearing emails.
I remember the groan that went through the crowd when the director Koskinen, I believe his name, said, you know, we destroyed some of the hard drives.
And early on, Obama said, don't worry, we have the FBI looking into this.
And so I've been saying to my friends for months, why would we have confidence now when they would say, oh, we have a straight shooter handling this when we see how the IRS got it?
Well, here's the thing.
You know, you're absolutely right.
This is our old buddy John Koskinen, who ran the IRS, and he's up there testifying.
And he says under oath, I'm sorry.
It was either, I forget which, either the stuff was not backed up or the copies of the backup were lost or some, whatever the case was, it was gone.
Sorry, Congress, we can't get it.
It's gone.
And if it's, come on, everything's routinely backed up.
A copy of whatever somebody wants is somewhere.
And then months went by after the emotion of the case had dissipated.
And all of a sudden they found it.
And Coskinen had been lied, had been lying all along.
And finally, now Congress is prepared to take, well, they were preparing.
I don't know what the status is of impeachment proceedings against Coskinen at the IRS.
But yeah, it's the same thing.
And you're right, Obama did say, don't sweat it.
The FBI is looking and we'll get to the bottom of it.
And of course, the FBI didn't get to the bottom of it.
I mean, Coskiden, the IRS, skated.
Literally skated.
This was the case involving Catherine Engelbrecht's group, a Tea Party group that wanted tax-exempt status, and they were never granted it to fundraise for the Tea Party.
This is Lois Lerner's operation, which was Obama's operations, what all this really adds up to and means.
And they got away with stonewalling and lying.
Sorry, there aren't any backups.
Sorry, you know what?
Somebody erased them.
You know what?
We got this giant degausser back there, and unbeknownst to us, everything's just erased.
I'm sorry.
It's gone, said Koskanen.
Or the backups were never made or some such thing.
And he said it with a smile on his face.
He said it with a smile, almost a contemptuous sneer on his face as he was telling Republican members of Congress that what they wanted was gone.
It was irretrievable.
And then later, when there wasn't any emotion left, months and months had gone by, somebody found the stuff.
But the caller's point, Chris's point is here that we should have seen this coming because the FBI was brought into that.
We were told the FBI is looking into it, and we'll get to the bottom of it.
Obama said that, and should have been a tip-off.
Well, the tip-off for me is it's the Clintons.
The tip-off for me is the Clintons, and it's a Democrat Party and a presidential campaign.
And I'm sorry, folks, like I said last Friday, there's just no way that a Democrat administration is going to take action that would result in their presidential candidate, their nominee, being forced out of the race, unless there was something we don't know about that made it almost required that this candidate get out because there was something worse to come that had not been learned.
But under normal circumstances, there's no way to think that this, this is the Democrat Party for crying out loud.
They use government to get their way.
They use government to advance their agenda.
They use government to protect their people.
They use government to cover up whatever they do to advance their agenda.
All of a sudden, they're going to come along and recommend that their presidential presumptive nominee be indicted.
It was just never going to happen.
Yeah, Rush, but what about Comey?
He's a straight shooter.
Supposedly, he's not.
Well, draw your own conclusions.
Who's next?
This will be Elizabeth in St. Louis.
Great to have you.
Elizabeth, you're next.
Hello.
Hello there.
Hi.
Listen, once again, you know, the Clintons have been given a pass, and they always get a pass, whether it's from, you know, like SNL or the mainstream media or the Justice Department.
But the only, and the only ones that can take away that pass are the American voters.
We have to defeat Hillary Clinton at the ballot box.
It is the only way to get rid of them.
And it has to be a decisive defeat.
In my mind, we can't count, like you say, we can't count on the institutions that always served this nation so gallantly, you know, so honorably.
They just don't seem to work the way they used to work.
And I don't think the American people are blind.
I think that people see that.
They get that.
And if we can beat her at the ballot box, I mean, we could have.
Well, let's talk about that for a second.
Mrs. Clinton, if you look at people are making a big deal out of this today, and they have been in recent days.
Comparing Democrat primary turnout, total turnout, say in 2008 for Obama and this year for Hillary, they're down 10 million votes.
I mean, so many fewer Democrats showed up to vote for Hillary this time and Bernie combined than voted for Obama.
And the analysis of that is that this just isn't any enthusiasm on the Democrat side.
Forget what we saw with Crazy Bernie.
It just isn't any enthusiasm at all.
Yet Republican turnout, way up, record turnout, record number of Republican votes cast.
Now, they use this to argue that Mrs. Clinton doesn't have any pizzazz.
She doesn't have any enthusiasm behind her.
And some people are saying, you know, this ruling today may be okay because if she had been indicted, if the FBI director had come out and said, we recommend that she be charged, because that puts pressure on the DOJ, that would cause Democrats to circle the wagons just to protect her from being damaged by us.
Now, that's not going to happen.
So do you put any stock?
You said you trust the American people.
Polling data is out there.
Hillary's up by nine.
Hillary's up by five, depending on the story, Trump is closing the gap.
She's spending all kinds of money.
He's spending zero.
How's all this making you feel?
Well, I really believe that the American people, they don't like Hillary Clinton.
I mean, it's one thing to talk about Bill Clinton.
I think they basically like that guy.
But I have always felt ever since Hillary care that the American people, they just flat out don't really like her.
And I think that does mean something.
Well, we'll find out.
It isn't going to take long.
It's clear that she does not have a connection.
Now, I know I keep saying that, folks, but I do so for a reason, because it matters.
I mean, any Democrat, any presidential candidate that the Democrats put up, anybody with a D next to their name, is guaranteed a certain percentage of the vote.
People are just going to show up.
It doesn't matter.
She does not have a personal connection with most of those people.
They're showing party loyalty, not Hillary investment.
She just doesn't have that because she isn't that likable and she doesn't relate.
She doesn't even try to establish such connections, just like tyrants don't.
Doesn't matter whether people love them or hate them.
It has nothing to do with what they do and how they do it each and every day.
Anyway, I'm a little long, so I got to take a break.
I appreciate the call, Elizabeth.
We.
We'll be back with much more right after this.
Now, here we are back to intent.
Again, Jeffrey Toobin, well-known leftist and liberal Democrat, legal analyst over at CNN.
And he, of course, brought in immediately when Comey finished his press conference to tell us what we had just seen.
And Kate Baldwin said, so, Jeff, what's your big takeaway from this?
It's an enormous relief for Hillary Clinton and her campaign.
This was a dagger aimed at the heart of her campaign, and she has avoided being charged.
Simple as that.
I also think it is worth focusing on what Director Comey said about the nature of these sorts of charges.
These cases have only been brought when there has been knowing and intentional violation of the rules of classified information.
Here, the issue of intent is critical.
She has said publicly, undoubtedly, she said in her interview, that she never intentionally disclosed classified information.
The FBI found nothing to refute that, and that's why she wasn't charged.
Man, oh, man, you know, it is interesting how the whole issue of intent seems to be relevant when it involves Democrats in government.
So does this mean that they discovered that Petraeus intended to share classified information with his mistress?
And that that's why they got him?
That's why they because he intended to imperil the security of the U.S. Comey said that she was sending out top secret emails that were both marked and unmarked.
How can you not know?
How can you be so ignorant?
Is this a defense?
Well, in Hillary's case, yeah.
I guess she'll be as ignorant as a day is long if it avoids an indictment or charges.
Because at the end of the day, the bottom line's what counts, and she's scot-free here.
But for crying out loud, how can somebody eminently qualified to be Secretary of State not know what she's doing?
Is that going to be the defense?
If you listen to Toobin here, it sounds like that's what they're going to hang their head on.
Well, you know, Comey couldn't find any evidence that she meant to do this.
Really?
That's the positive?
That's what's supposed to relieve us of any concern?
Oh, the fact that she did send classified data, but she didn't mean to.
That makes it okay.
That makes it all better.
How many times have you heard, I know this might be a specific case, and even though my dad was a lawyer, I'm not.
And I probably can be, will be corrected on this, but it just seems to me that we hear all the time that lack, you know, intent or lack of intent is no shield.
It doesn't matter whether you intended to do this or not.
You still did it.
I can't tell you the number of times I've heard people had people explain to them that in fact you didn't know ignorance of the law, the fact you didn't intend.
Sorry, sir, it's of no concern.
You committed the act.
But how could she not?
This whole business of intent?
Well, I didn't intend to send classes.
Well, who would admit that they ever did?
Anyway, that's what I said.
This case is not over in the political sense, and it's going to require some work.
I checked the relevant statute here during the break, and at first I thought it doesn't say any about intent, and I kept reading, and it does.
The statute involved here, 18 U.S. Code 793, gathering, transmitting, losing defense, it does mention intent.
So it is required as part of this particular statute.
I just wanted to confirm that.
Still weird.
▲
Export Selection