James Comey Could Now Be Facing Criminal Charges


Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.

So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ? If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it…

…by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box.  If he now accuses the President of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it.  If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the president of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him.”

Full article: James Comey Could Now Be Facing Criminal Charges | Conservative Journal

This is what I was saying yesterday. This apparently happened in February, and the memo was apparently written in February. If Comey believed Trump was trying to obstruct and had made an illegal demand, it should have been reported immediately to the DOJ… not to the New York Times after he was fired in May, three months later. Which is why this whole memo stinks of revenge and not much else. He had to know the facts presented in the last paragraph of the quoted text above.



Is Obama DOJ Dropping Case v. Arms Dealer to Protect Clinton?

A potential bombshell report published by Politico Tuesday suggests that the Obama administration is dropping a case against an American arms dealer, noting that, “The deal averts a trial that threatened to cast additional scrutiny on Hillary Clinton’s private emails as Secretary of State, and to expose reported Central Intelligence Agency attempts to arm rebels fighting Libyan leader Moammar Qadhafi.”

The irony of the Libyan arms story has not been lost on gun rights activists. It has been the launch pad for sarcastic remarks about an administration that seemed to have no problem supplying guns to foreigners without background checks, but demands all kinds of scrutiny on U.S. citizens wanting to purchase firearms.

Political reported that gun dealer Marc Turi was something of a scapegoat “to cover up Clinton’s mishandling of Libya.” The story asserted that “the government dropped the case because the proceedings could have embarrassed Clinton and President Barack Obama by calling attention to the reported role of their administration in supplying weapons that fell into the hands of Islamic extremist militants.”

Source: Is Obama DOJ Dropping Case v. Arms Dealer to Protect Clinton?


Lynch’s Surreptitious Meeting with Clinton Violates DOJ Ethics Regs

Paul Reid, CBS News Justice reporter, was taking none of Lynches baloney and called it “shocking, absolutely shocking”:

“The most high-profile national security investigation under the attorney general is the investigation into whether or not classified information was mishandled in connection with Hillary Clinton’s server,” Reid told CBSN. “Now, President Clinton and his foundation are also tangentially involved in that investigation, so the appearance of impropriety is just stunning.”

All lawyers are trained to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Worse for Lynch, her meeting with Clinton surely violates the Department of Justice ethics regulations. The Department’s Ethics Handbook requires the Attorney General to avoid the appearance of impropriety:

This Ethics Handbook for On and Off-Duty Conduct summarizes the principal ethics laws and regulations governing the conduct of Department of Justice employees. The purpose of this handbook is to increase your awareness of the ethics rules and their applications, including when you are not in a duty status or are on leave.  We have included citations after each rule and we suggest that you consult the full text of the law or regulation when you have specific questions.

The ethics rules condensed here include the conflict of interest statutes found at 18 USC §§ 202 to 209, Executive Order 12674 on Principles of Ethical Conduct as amended by EO 12731, the Uniform Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch at 5 CFR Part 2635, Department of Justice regulations at 5 CFR Part 3801 that supplement the uniform standards, and additional Department regulations at 28 CFR Part 45, and Executive branch-wide standards of conduct at 5 USC § 735. …

After that introduction the handbook offers 14 General Principles of Ethical Conduct. The most relevant one to this exploding scandal is number 14.

14. Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.  Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts

5 C.F.R 2635.101 (b)

Appearance of  Impropriety

An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that the employee is violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.

5 CFR 2635.101(b)(14)

Seems pretty clear.

Source: Lynch’s Surreptitious Meeting with Clinton Violates DOJ Ethics Regs | RedState



Lynch indicates DOJ not required to charge Clinton

Attorney General Loretta Lynch indicated Wednesday that the law doesn’t require the Justice Department to pursue criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email system, even if the FBI recommends criminal charges.

Lynch was asked in a hearing by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, what her department would do if the FBI were to recommend that step. “If the FBI were to make a referral to the Department of Justice to pursue a case by way of indictment and to convene a grand jury for that purpose, the Department of Justice is not required by law to do so, are they — are you?” Cornyn asked.

Source: Lynch indicates DOJ not required to charge Clinton | Washington Examiner

Basically, like I’ve been saying since the start… nothing is ever going to happen to Clinton. This will all vanish. Come on, folks. Hillary is leaving states she lost with more delegates than the guy who won. She was chosen before all of this even began. Lynch isn’t about to get in the way.

But if you are a climate change denier?! Whoa buddy!

Internal DOJ Memo Confirms Obama’s Plan For Gun Confiscation

Something to think about. Confiscation seems to be a big buzz word lately, and several candidates seem to think it is a safe idea to run with during their presidential run… especially Hillary who figures her female status will win her the White House – and hopefully she is wrong, but I have little faith left in people when it comes to such things.

An internal memo within the Department of Justice (DOJ) has surfaced which confirms that the Obama administration had plans for gun registration and confiscation in the aftermath of the Newtown school shooting.

According to Bob Owens, the NRA obtained the memo in February. But apparently there were questions as to the veracity of the information. Owens says that the existence of the memo, and its outline of a plan for gun registration and confiscation, can now be confirmed.

The document, which can be viewed here, was not released to the public via the news media.

Owens cites an analysis of the memo, including direct quotes from the document, which exposes the Obama administration’s real agenda on guns:

The DOJ memo states the administration “believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation,” according to the NRA, and thinks universal background checks “won’t work without requiring national gun registration.” Obama has yet to publicly support national registration or firearms confiscation, although the memo reveals his administration is moving in that direction.

Thus, despite the many denials by Obama, by members of his administration, and by Congressional Democrats, once again it has become clear that the administration’s true agenda is very different from that which is presented to the public.

The goal is and always has been gun registration and confiscation.

The Examiner has often reported the Obama agenda on guns, which can be traced all the way back to his years in the Illinois legislature. He was considered among the most aggressive anti-gun advocates in Illinois.

Obama voted to criminalize any homeowner who used an illegal firearm to defend himself and/or his family in the event of a home invasion by dangerous criminals.

The philosophy that underlies such a point of view is clear. To Obama it is more important that a gun be “legal” than for human lives to be saved. This stance portrays a shocking disregard for the sanctity of human life.

Thus, many conservatives warned as far back as 2007 that an Obama candidacy for the presidency would be a very dangerous turn for America. Obama would never tell the public just how radical he is. To do so would end his political career.

This is why Obama denied repeatedly that he had been close friends with murderous homegrown terrorists such as Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn. The couple bombed federal buildings, encouraged teenagers to murder their parents, and were arrested for the murder of a police officer but were released on a technicality.

It turns out that Ayers launched Obama’s political career in his living room — all confirmed as fact. Birds of a feather. And the Obama agenda reflects it.

But like so many other components of the Obama agenda, the public only finds out the real truth once the program is actually implemented. It is only then that it becomes clear that the emperor has no clothes. Only then it is too late.

Fortunately for the populace, enough conservatives, libertarians, and other freedom-loving citizens were on to the Obama gun ban agenda long before it became an issue. Nationally his agenda was thus thwarted. But astute citizens are certain that this is not the end of it.

The forces of tyranny never give up.

Source: Internal DOJ Memo Confirms Obama’s Plan For Gun Confiscation | Truth And Action

DOJ Closes Two-Year Investigation Into IRS Targeting Scandal — There Will Be No Charges Filed

The U.S. Department of Justice informed lawmakers on Friday that its closing the two-year investigation into whether the IRS improperly targeted conservative groups. There will be no charges filed against ex-IRS employee Lois Lerner — or anyone else for that matter.

FILE - This May 22, 2013 file photo shows Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official Lois Lerner on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

FILE – This May 22, 2013 file photo shows Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official Lois Lerner on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

 In a letter obtained by CNN, Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik claimed the investigation found ”substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia leading to the belief by many tax-exempt applicants that the IRS targeted them based on their political viewpoints. But poor management is not a crime.”

“We found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution,” the letter added.

The Justice Department also apparently uncovered no evidence that IRS officials attempted to “obstruct justice.” Critics quickly suggested wrongdoing may have taken place after Lerner claimed her hard drive “crashed” and was later destroyed before members of Congress could review its contents.

Source: DOJ Closes Two-Year Investigation Into IRS Targeting Scandal — There Will Be No Charges Filed | TheBlaze.com

DOJ Will NOT Press Contempt Charges Against Lois Lerner

From CBS News:

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia will not seek contempt charges against former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner for her refusal to testify before Congress, the Justice Department (DOJ) announced Wednesday.

It has been nearly a year since the House voted to hold Lerner in contempt in a mostly party-line vote. At the time, the charges were referred to the local U.S. attorney. The Justice Department officially informed House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, of U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen’s decision in a letter sent to Boehner’s office Tuesday.

“A team of experienced career prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office was assigned to carefully assess the referral. After extensive analysis, the team concluded that the House Committee followed proper procedures in notifying Ms. Lerner that it had rejected her claim of a Fifth Amendment privilege and gave her an adequate opportunity to answer the Committee’s questions,” the Justice Department said in a statement. “However, the team also concluded that Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment privilege by making general claims of innocence. The Constitution would provide Ms. Lerner with an absolute defense if she were prosecuted for contempt.”

The reward for tyranny is injustice. Lerner’s misdeeds including selectively targeting Republican and conservative groups for tax-exempt status, while rapidly approving far-left groups, including one linked to terrorists and run by Obama’s own half-brother. She clearly lied before Congress. She most certainly destroyed hundreds of emails to cover up her crimes.

In other words, she did her duty for Obama by unlawfully targeting his enemies, while enabling his allies.

DOJ Will NOT Press Contempt Charges Against Lois Lerner | Top Right News.