Comey Lies After Senator Cruz Alone Calls Out His ‘Law of Intent’


If I run over someone and didn’t INTEND to do it, I’m not liable. If I should shoot someone but you can’t nail down my INTENT, I’m off the hook, right? That’s as logical as what FBI Director Jim Comey wants us to accept in his absolution of not only Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server, but the Huma Abedin-Anthony Weiner’s illegal handling of the Clinton emails.

Jim Comey has written his own law, the Law of Intent, and he has used it to absolve the guilty parties.

All of the aforementioned are guilty of illegally sharing classified documents. All have been absolved because the Director could not find INTENT.

Intent does not matter as a rule of law because negligence is also covered under the law. The fact that Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner didn’t mean it is irrelevant.

Senator Ted Cruz alone addressed Comey’s illogical argument that blatantly distorts the law. Ted Cruz asked the pointed question:

“You described the reason why the case was closed against Ms. Abedin as that you could not determine she was aware her conduct was unlawful…Any first year law student learns in criminal law ignorance of the law is no excuse, and that mens rea does not require knowledge that conduct is unlawful.

In fact, the governing statutes – 18 USC 793f and 18 USC 798a – have no requirement of a knowledge of unlawful [intent]…under the terms of that statute, the fact pattern you described in this hearing [of Abedin’s behavior] seems to fit that statute directly. In that, if I understood you correctly, you said Ms. Abedin forwarded hundreds or thousands of classified emails to her husband on a non-government, non-classified computer. How does that conduct not directly violate that statute?”

Comey used past precedent as law and said no case has come up in fifty years that didn’t show intent. However, the law doesn’t call for intent. He then said it was his preference, not the law. In other words, he’s legislating from the offices of the FBI.

Cruz responded with appropriate disbelief:

“On its face, anyone dealing with classified information should know that conduct is impermissible. And let me ask you, how would you handle an FBI Agent who forwarded thousands of classified emails to his or her spouse on a non-government computer?”

Comey pretended it wouldn’t be an issue.

“I’m highly confident they wouldn’t be prosecuted.”

Just two days ago, Comey said he was investigating possible leaks to Rudy Giuliani and if he found there were, there would be “serious consequences”. He said much the same the day he announced he wasn’t prosecuting Hillary Clinton.


    • If they do not fire this idiot & get him out of the FBI, we will never see justice done! He only wants to bring charges against anyone who’s for our President!!

    • An Open Letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions

      Dear Mr. Attorney General:
      Just as Zika Virus has entered the Continental USA, so has corruption seeped into, what used to be, an above reproach Federal Agency, the Department of Justice. Former AG Lynch and FBI Dir. Comey, both Appointees of President Obama, have apparently become the Former President’s pawns to protect a guilty felon, Hillary Rodham Clinton. It’s time to take remedial action, agree that Loretta Lynch was under President Obama’s thumb, and indict Ms. Clinton on all charges.

      Neither Dir. Comey, nor Loretta Lynch are willing to indict Ms. Clinton, and yet Dir. Comey admits to The House of Representatives that Ms. Clinton is guilty of theft, perjury, treason, and other felony charges. The Statutes do not rely on “intent” for authority to prosecute.

      Ms. Lynch had chosen to allow corruption of the Rule of Law, by allowing Ms. Clinton to be above the Rule of Law; a two-tier system, if you will. Dir. Comey even stated that if anyone did the same crimes, they would be sent to prison (my paraphrasing). This is tantamount to Obstruction of Justice. Madam AG, did not recuse herself so that she could remain in total control. Had she recused herself, the Asst. Attorney General would be in control, and the outcome might have been different.

      Is it possible that “Pay to Play” is happening in Madam AG’s own House? I’m not speaking of a monetary exchange (although that’s still to be determined), but rather, a new career advancement. From my perspective, that appears plausible. If Ms. Clinton is not indicted, she remains a possible candidate for POTUS. If she becomes the POTUS, there is a distinct possibility that Loretta Lynch, would be appointed by Ms. Clinton, to a Seat on the Supreme Court. If Ms. Clinton is indicted, the Supreme Court offering goes away.

      Now. What about James Comey, former A Subordinate? How does he benefit? For starters, he gets to keep his career, under Ms. Clinton’s POTUS watch if she’s elected. Beyond that benefit, your guess is as good as mine. But we do know that Dir. Comey is a Director of a large bank, HSBC Holdings, that has donated to the Clinton Foundation. Hmmmm. And then???? We learn that Bleachbit was used to wipe clean Hillary’s private servers. Isn’t that the “Intent” that Lynch, for some reason, couldn’t find to indict her? AG Jeff Sessions. You now need to indict her, or you and James B. Comey, are as corrupt as she is, and must resign or be impeached.


      AG Jeff Sessions
      U.S. Department of Justice
      950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
      Washington, DC 20530-0001

      FBI Dir. James B. Comey
      FBI Headquarters
      935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
      Washington, D.C. 20535-0001

      • Itrail, good letter, here is a quote from Rep. Trey Gowdy which I think should be asked………If you can turn off certain categories of law, do you not also have the power to turn off all categories of law?

  1. Unless/Until Trump removes this man Trump is under suspicion. Notice that over the past 2 years republican leaders have been silent on all of this. They show no leadership in the presence of major illegality.

  2. Thank you Ted Cruz I have been saying this for months Freshman law course 50 yrs ago don’t remember many things clearly but I remember the “IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE (DEFENCE). What part of that didn’t Comet get???

  3. does he know law at all or is he acting dumb .humm sick America . he never did a case he has won???

Comments are closed.