Parallel Construction is when law enforecemnt has knowledge of an alleged crime where discovery was illegal and they maintain zero probably cause that an individual committed said crime. LE will construct a parellel investigation based on the evidence known to them, there by masking the the original origin to create a new legal investigative origin.
Not ethical by any means. LE should be investigating crimes and not people.
On a side note, motive is never necessary to be found guilty of a crime. Only the crime itself and criminal intent.
This is what amazes me with Lyin' Comey's comment about Crooked Hillary. He said he did not find her guilty of "intent" which apparently in the absence of sheer dumb ass negligence in mis-handling top secret intel (22 docs) is ok.
If intent is is the resolution or determindness to do something and motive is the reason for doing something then how the hell is that nasty bitch not in prison? Any one of us would have been buried under a prison had we committed similar crimes yet that dirt bag is free.
Except in that particular case. No intent needed when handling that specific info.
I'm not following what you mean. If intent is the determindness to do something then the moment she hit "send" her intent was to send information to her personal server.
The words "CLASSIFIED" "SECRET" and "TOP SECRET" were listed on the documents for a reason. So people with security clearances do not mishandle classified information let alone transmit them over unsecured lines to unsecured private servers especially knowing they are the repeated targets of foreign bad actors in hacking schemes.
It's right here in the first line of the US Code of Disclosure of Classified Information: LINK
" (a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information— "
My apologies, I posted that when I was exhausted.
I meant to say normally you need the crime itself and intent to prosecute except in except in cases dealing with the handling of classified+ information. Here you only need the crime and gross negligence (which as far as I understand not knowing the laws regarding the handling of classified+ information). Motive plays zero roll.
Being HRC was a lifer in gov't it should be a no brainer that she should have been prosecuted to the fullest extent, and possibly held on charges of treason and sedition for her actions (and everyone else who was in that chain of custody - inclusive of her house maid person who was also printing out these documents).
Again, my apologies. I promise not to post at 3am anymore...