The False Statements Accountability Act of 1996 – Under Bill Clinton

This law was reframed under Bill Clinton. No one can lie to congress, even FBI directors according to this law, but there's a big catch to it.

congressionalresearch.com...

www.law.cornell.edu...

www.justice.gov...

a. Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully --

1. falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
2. makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
3. makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

b. Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.

c. With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only in --

1. administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or

2. any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.

A look at it from lawyers perspectives.

Did you know that it is a crime to tell a lie to the federal government? Even if your lie is oral and not under oath? Even if you have received no warnings of any kind? Even if you are not trying to cheat the government out of money? Even if the government is not actually misled by your falsehood? Well it is.

corporate.findlaw.com...




OK now the Zinger and why the FBI kept stating “Intent”, on Hillary's behalf.

The DOJ has to be absolutely sure that there is intent, otherwise the above laws don't stand a chance, and who gets to decide that? Guess.


www.mondaq.com...

United States: DOJ Shifts Stance On False Statements Prosecutions

Joel Athey and Vince Farhat are Partners and Nicholas Melzer is Senior Counsel in the Los Angeles office

A Change That Could Have a Major Impact on Future White Collar Investigations and Prosecutions
HIGHLIGHTS:

• The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently adopted a more defense-friendly position on criminal prosecutions under a commonly used federal charging statute, Section 1001. This statute makes it a crime to "knowingly and willfully" give false statements in any matter under federal jurisdiction.

• In recent court filings, DOJ has quietly clarified that in order to prove a defendant acted willfully, federal prosecutors must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew his or her statement was unlawful - not just that the statement was false. This is a material change in the government's position that could have a significant impact on future white collar investigations and prosecutions involving Section 1001.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently adopted a more defense-friendly position on criminal prosecutions under a commonly used federal charging statute, False Statement to Government Agency, 18 U.S.C. §1001 ("Section 1001").

To be convicted under Section 1001, a person must act "willfully" in making false statements to federal investigators. Courts are divided over whether Section 1001's "willfulness" element requires proof that the defendant knew his or her conduct was unlawful.

However, in recent court filings, DOJ has quietly clarified that in order to prove a defendant acted willfully, federal prosecutors must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew his or her statement was unlawful - not just that the statement was false.

This is a material change in the government's position that could have a significant impact on future white collar investigations and prosecutions involving Section 1001.

It goes to show that with just a shift in position, laws can significantly be interpreted by the DOJ, however they choose, but in this instance it appears to protect those a bit more, via the defense arena.

Good work

That's nice. Now the DOJ is 'more powerful than powerful' (when it comes to crony corruption).

Of course a tyrant of a POTUS would want to set that up when he's a crook and he's the boss of the boss of the DOJ.

a reply to: Realtruth

One of the only good things that we will come to understand about this current "election" cycle is that the masses of this country are being brought face to face with the sheer level of conspiracy that dictates their world.

There is no more illusion to be held on to in the context the public having a voice.

Hillary Clinton is one of the most corrupt, criminal, psychopathic politicians we have ever seen.

Her, Cheney and Bush Sr are the epitome of the elite cabal that rule in the background. Cheney and Bush Sr got away with it, largely due to the ignorance of the masses. With Hillary there is no more ability to close your eyes to the sheer level of power these elite weild.

It is summed up with the her treatment by the DOJ/FBI and even though we will end up with the heinous monster as POTUS, as she implements the NWO agenda like a good little puppet, people will inevitably have to face what the rest of us have been getting at in regards to who she is beholden to.

How can the FBI determine there was no intent ?

That is impossible to determine.

Nobody knows her intent on anything.

No wonder Bush, and Obama, each had such cajones n their blatent disregard for notions of anti-dictatorial powers and repercussions. In hindsight, that should be the Big Story here.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
No wonder Bush, and Obama, each had such cajones n their blatent disregard for notions of anti-dictatorial powers and repercussions. In hindsight, that should be the Big Story here.

True.

Well it's kind of a double edge sword, but only for selective people this law has been buffered at bit, with the DOJ filings.

Here's the reasoning behind it, since the DOJ filings prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone is acting willfully in making false statements. I guess this is the part where prosecutors and hand pick jury's are important, but it comes down to "Who is actually going to prosecute the elite?".

The nepotism that goes on at high levels is far beyond what the average Joe can comprehend, so laws basically don't apply to them, only to the grunts.

At least every other nation in the world can say they ain't the most corrupt country on the planet 👍

Good old USA .

Putin must be pissing his self .

a reply to: Realtruth

the Founding Fathers would be livid

originally posted by: whyamIhere
How can the FBI determine there was no intent ?

That is impossible to determine.

Nobody knows her intent on anything.

And all the evidence definitely suggests intent. Having an illegal, hidden server, deleting emails, destroying equipment you claims you didn't have.......

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: whyamIhere
How can the FBI determine there was no intent ?

That is impossible to determine.

Nobody knows her intent on anything.

And all the evidence definitely suggests intent. Having an illegal, hidden server, deleting emails, destroying equipment you claims you didn't have.......

I don't think many sane critical thinkers would disagree with you, but since the policies are written with ambiguity, then the people in charge of those laws, and policies can " Word Play " however they chose.

For the average Joe we are pretty much screwed, but the elite's all have a stack of "Get Out of Jail Cards"