Clinton, Muller, Donald Trump discussed on Sean Hannity


What Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Okay. So if you have top secret classified information, marked as such on a private server is that or is that not a clear violation of eighteen USC seven Ninety-three the espionage act, every single lawyer that I know that as any intellectual honesty says it's a clear violation and then of course, you have the obstruction area which has a real intent real underlying crime. I mean, if there's going to be Justice, don't we have to go back and find the truth here. Well, the statute that you're talking about the requires specific intent I was familiar with the case in the air force. When I was a judge advocate, where a guy mistake, and we took some classified information home with them in a pile of papers lost it on the subway ride and got court the what about Christian sauce, remember the kid could took the president. He spent a year in jail, but, you know, he took six pictures of a submarine that was nearly four decades old because he was proud to work in the submarine. Never shared them with. Anybody there were for his own personal use? He's been a year in jail espionage out. Right. But why is the military so hard over on the ordinance still into the troops? This is an important task here. Don't compromise classified information and grossly, negligent behavior has been the criminal standard up until this case. So they changed the criminal standard to basically specific intent. And it means gross negligence too extreme carelessness gross. Negligence is the legal standard. Right. So, but they did not apply that standard, so he in the memo describing what happened. They used the term gross negligence. Then they change it coast. Gross negligence has a legal meaning right right though, if they have used the word gross negligence and the July Prescott basically that would be an indictment, a Clinton. So they said, extremely careless. Careless words matter, this wouldn't happen to a normal person, you wouldn't get the benefit, they also can add one thing, but. By yourself, not under oath. Well, she was interviewed. They were writing that exoneration that you're talking about in may of two thousand sixteen July. Second. They interviewed her and seventeen. Other witnesses. Have you ever heard of an investigation, where you get to bring in a witness and another person while you're supposed to be interrogated by the FBI for crimes? So everything was done in a way, that is unusual. And the best explanation is that they had made up their mind that they were not gonna charge over the crime. So call me for some reason holds a press conference. Talking about her being floppy, but not criminal, which is inappropriate. That's what Muller did not. You know, the goal is not exonerate. Somebody, the goal is to find out whether or not you have a case. So the bottom line here is that the best explanation for the Clinton Email, handling was a political bias. It Elise in the system was turned upside down is wanted an outcome that the political narrative. So the question is once they got the use the dirty pillory bought and paid for dossier after they saved her from what otherwise would be an indictment for anybody else, then they lie about its verification than they hide from the court, he paid for it, then it becomes a pathway to spy on all things Trump world through Carter page campaign associate, and then all things Trump transition, and then all things, Trump presidency and one day counterintelligence investigation. Well, what was when did it really start? And. And this is what I love to ask Muller. I'd love Muller to go under oath. I don't know about you, but I, I have a lot of questions for him. Well, the bottom line here is the same group of people, the same group of people that investigated Clinton investigated trucks, the same group of people that have swore that the dossier was alive. When puttable opened up the counterintelligence investigation, the same group of people followed Trump's transition team. So when you look at a process broken here is broken at multiple levels in the same group of people to size, the worn out location is going to be looked at by Horowitz internally as to whether or not they followed the rules of the department of Justice Durham is going to look at whether or not somebody to fraud, deport friendly. I'm going to look at a system to make sure that the next time this happens, they'll be wool as to how you Seville presidential campaign. And it you've gotta tell the court more about the source of documented this politically, generated, well, I do appreciate you look. Looking for seeking the truth. We better get this, right? This country is built on a we are constitutional Republic, the foundation of the rule of law. Equal Justice under the law matters equal application of our laws matter. And I know you're a committee is going to play a key role in this as the attorney general has Michael Horowitz, as John Durham, and everybody else. And I do think we'll get to the truth. And I think when we get there, there are a lot of people that are going to be, well, held accountable, if.

Coming up next