In case you missed it, Lisa Page testified last week and dropped a bomb on Congress. Unsurprisingly, the DOJ under Obama told the FBI to not charge Hillary Clinton with “gross negligence” in 2016 after it was found that she mishandled classified government information. That was after it was revealed that she had used a private email server from her home while serving as Secretary of State. That’s a massive no-no in regards to national security.
According to the law, any document, not just ‘classified’ documents, that are removed in the manner that Clinton did makes the perpetrator subject to fines and up to ten years in prison or both. That also includes anyone having knowledge of the dirty deed being done which would certainly include Loretta Lynch and others. The word ‘intent’ does not appear anywhere in the statute.
According to the statute:
“(f) 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.”
NEW: Lisa Page's congressional testimony reveals that the FBI was considering charging Hillary Clinton under the Espionage Act for "gross negligence" — until the DOJ flat-out told them "No."https://t.co/c6t7UyttzB
— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) March 12, 2019
David Harris Jr. wrote that the FBI and DOJ carried all of this out with intent: “Congress felt so strongly about it that they wanted to make it known that even if you accidentally violate the statute, you will be charged. Gross negligence is the standard, and that’s what former fired and disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok wrote for former fired and disgraced FBI Director James Comey, until gross negligence was changed to “extremely careless,” thinking we the people would be stupid enough to believe that only the words gross negligence would trigger the statute?” That’s exactly what they thought.
Republican Georgia Rep. Doug Collins released the private testimony of former FBI lawyer Lisa Page this week. Both the testimony from former FBI lawyer Lisa Page and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe highlight the corrupt fact that the DOJ aggressively pushed the FBI to look the other way on crimes committed by Hillary Clinton. Page’s testimony transcripts released this week bear this out in stark detail.
— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) July 1, 2016
“In her testimony, Page said that the FBI did not blow off the charge of gross negligence, to the contrary, she said they had “multiple conversations” with DOJ officials about charging Clinton with gross negligence. In the end, the DOJ said that a charge of gross negligence was “too vague” and felt it couldn’t “permissibly bring the charge” or “sustain” it. BULLSCHTEIN! Gross negligence is gross negligence. Extremely careless is gross negligence. In this instance, it means a lack of caring about the security of government documents, a reckless disregard of the legal duty to protect the contents of said documents. The very fact that Clinton had a private email server, and was using it to conduct government business, is in itself a reckless disregard of the legal duty to protect the contents of the emails sent and received.”
The only difference here is that ‘gross negligence’ is a crime and ‘extremely careless’ is not. They knew that and thus the careful wording.
Lisa Page confirmed to me under oath that the FBI was ordered by the Obama DOJ not to consider charging Hillary Clinton for gross negligence in the handling of classified information. pic.twitter.com/KPQKINBtrB
— John Ratcliffe (@RepRatcliffe) March 13, 2019
Remember way back in 2016 when Loretta Lynch testified in front of Congress? She told the committee: “I made the decision, some time ago, that I would accept the recommendation of that team. When I received it, there was no basis not to accept it, and again I reiterate my pride and faith in them.” All of this is connected to the notorious tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton where Lynch claims they discussed their grandchildren.
The Washington Examiner also reported on the sleazy setup:
“She also said, “I met with … career prosecutors and agents who conducted that investigation. I received and accepted their unanimous recommendation,” “I received the recommendation of the team, and that team was composed of prosecutors and agents. With the unanimous recommendation as to how to resolve the investigation, and what the information that they had received,” and “I accepted that recommendation. I saw no reason not to accept it.”’
The just revealed FBI Agent Lisa Page transcripts make the Obama Justice Department look exactly like it was, a broken and corrupt machine. Hopefully, justice will finally be served. Much more to come!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 13, 2019
David Harris Jr. again pointed out: “If we are to believe the testimony of Lisa Page that the DOJ had already ordered the FBI not to charge Clinton for her crimes, was Lynch not committing perjury when she testified that she would accept whatever recommendation the FBI made, even though her department had already ordered the FBI not to charge Clinton?” Why, yes… she was.
Cornell Law: “18 U.S.C. § 1503 defines “obstruction of justice” as an act that “corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice.”
If what Page is saying is true, and it certainly has the ring of truth to it, then Lynch did indeed lie to Congress and obstruct justice when her DOJ ordered the FBI not to prosecute Clinton. Regardless of what the Dems claim here, Lynch appears to have lied her head off just as we all knew she did at the time.
Obstruction of justice carries a ten-year sentence with it. Perjury will earn you another five years. I don’t believe there is any way Lynch will ever serve time because there is not enough backbone in our politicians to actually go after her. But maybe the threat of prison would at least get Lynch to roll on Clinton and Obama over all of this corrupt collusion.