'Wow fellow citizen Aldo1887, I think you were actually able to
list all the fake right wing "controversies" in one succinct list.
That was amazing! Oh my goodness fellow citizen geezee, politicians
getting money from lobbyists and then coincidentally doing things they want?
That's shocking. I've never heard of such a thing before. Surely Ms. Clinton is
the first politician to ever do such a thing, we're going to have to ... oh
wait ... never mind.This is a perfect example of
why people giggle at the endless list of right wing "conspiracy"
theories. They've gone beyond silly.'
The Espionage Act
of 1917, now 18 U.S.C. ch. 37, says: 'It is a crime to knowingly remove such
documents without authority and with the intent to retain such
documents or materials at an unauthorized location.' See:
18 U.S. Code § 1924.
administration has prosecuted more people under the 1917 Act than all of his
predecessors combined. This, of course, includes General David
Petraeus. He kept some classified documents in an unlocked desk drawer in the
study of his Virginia home. He also shared some 'classified' information with
his mistress. What was that 'classified information'? His schedule.
used an unsecured and unauthorised homebrew server in her home
in Chappaqua exclusively throughout her four years at State.
She claims that it was secure because Secret Service agents were at the house.
It's weird how all of our national security agents couldn't prevent the Chinese
hacking into the Office of Personnel Management and obtaining the
highly-delicate, detailed, and intrusive records and security clearance reviews
of 24 million current and former Federal employees and contractors, but Hillary
Clinton continues to assert her 55,000+ pages of emails were secure because
some agents were on the premises. Doesn't she know that actual, physical
presence is unnecessary in cyberwarfare? If not, she is uniquely unqualified to
serve as President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief.
She further claims
that none of her emails contained classified or sensitive information. Well,
first of all, how can we ever know when she deleted many of them even though
she was under a subpoena? Secondly, her assertion has been flatly contradicted
by the Inspectors General at State. Of a sample of just 40 of her emails, 10%
contained national security secrets or otherwise highly sensitive information.
The State Department, itself, has warned that her emails likely contained
hundreds of items that were classified. Moreover, Reuters, relying on multiple,
high-level sources within the Administration and security agencies, reported
that the emails that she did turn over contained classified information
from FIVE national security agencies.
If one is unwilling
to say that Secretary Clinton put her own ambitions and paranoia over the
nation's security, then s/he must, at least, if being intellectually honest,
admit that her behaviour was grossly negligent, which is the test under the
Espionage Act, by the way. She knowingly acted and her intentions are under the
law, frankly, irrelevant.
Under 18 U.S.C. ch.
37, each violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1924 is punishable up to 10 years in a
maximum security prison. That means each document (email) 'knowingly remove(d)
...without authority...and retain(ed) without authority' is a separate charge. Now,
I don't expect her to be prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to dozens or
hundreds of years in Leavenworth. Petraeus was forced to plead guilty to a
Federal felony, pay a substantial fine, and be on probation for two (2) years.
As a convicted felon, he also forfeited his right to vote, including in the
2016 Presidential election where the Democratic nominee acted more egregiously
than he ever did.
Let me ask you
this: Which method of obtaining American national security secrets would be
harder and more perilous for Putin or the Chinese to obtain? Retrieving
classified information from the unlocked desk drawer in the home of the
Director of Central Intelligence Agency or hacking into the unsecured
'homebrew' server in Hillary Clinton's basement? Whose actions were more
egregious? Who exponentially exposed more sensitive national security
information and secrets?
My answer: The
woman for whom General David Petraeus could not vote even if he wanted to.
And, yet, you will
crawl over broken glass to put the Clintons back in the position of renting out
the Lincoln Bedroom.
my luv, is some seriouslyserious 'searing truth'.
Sandy Berger, a
Democrat, removed, without authorisation, COPIES of five classified documents
from the National Archives concerning Bill Clinton's handling of Al Qaeda's
Millennial Plot prior to testifying before the 09.11 Commission. He did not
destroy them. He was forced to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of removing
and retaining COPIES of classified information without authorisation. For this,
he was sentenced to two years of probation, ordered to pay a fine of $50,000,
required to perform 100 hours of community service, and was stripped of his
security clearance for 3 years. To avoid being cross-examined on the matter by
Bar Counsel, he permanently relinquished his licence to practise law.
Defence (1994-95) and Director of the CIA (95-96), John Deutsch, a Democrat,
kept a small amount of classified information on his home computer for
'convenience' (Gee, where have I heard that excuse before?). For years the
Clinton administration tried to cover this crime up and postpone any
investigation. When Congress was finally informed, DOJ had no choice but to
take a cursory look. AG Janet Reno declined to prosecute, but did refer the
matter of his national security clearance to authorities to review. Since the
statute of limitations had not run on this flagrant violation of 18 U.S. Code §
1924 and a Republican was about to be in the White House, President Clinton
pardoned Deutsch on his last day in office. This event was lost in the uproar
over Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, the largest tax cheat in American history,
following the latter's wife, Denise, making a very large donation to the DNC.
Gen Petraeus, party
affiliation unknown for certain, kept some classified documents in a drawer in
the desk located in the study of his home in Virginia. He also shared the
'classified information' of his schedule with his mistress. Both the CIA and
FBI referred this matter to the DOJ felony prosecution. For this violation of
the law, Petraeus was sentenced to two years’ probation and a $100,000 fine,
which was actually double the government's recommendation.
What makes Hillary
Rodham Clinton so special, entitled and different from Mssrs. Deutsch, Berger,
For those that
believe she is honest, ethical, and speaks for the ‘common man and woman’…
She closed off part
of Bergdorf-Goodman in order to get a $600 haircut. I wonder if it looks like
the same 'do' she was sporting when under sniper fire in Bosnia with Sinbad the
Comedian. Let's hear it for the 1% of the 1%!!!
On a serious note,
she did do something: She told the nation for weeks that Benghazi was the
result of a 'spontaneous protest' when she knew - at the time it was happening
- that it was a terrorist attack. Emails and other documents have been produced
as a result of a court order that proves this beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hillary Clinton has always been unethical and a lying. Sh/t, she was even fired
from the House Judiciary Committee's Watergate investigation by its Chief of
Staff and Counsel, Jeffrey Zeifman. In 2006, Zeifman, a DEMOCRAT, published a
book, Hillary's Pursuit of Power. In
the book, he wrote:
engaged in a variety of self-serving unethical practices in violation of House
rules...and...is ethically unfit to be either a senator or president — and if
she were to become president, the last vestiges of the traditional moral
authority of the party of Roosevelt, Truman and Johnson will be destroyed.'