SmarterthanYou
rebel
and apathetic as well. just so long as your guy won, right? no honor, no integrity, no character.
FBI completes Clinton email probe, recommends no criminal charges
- Thread starter anatta
- Start date
and apathetic as well. just so long as your guy won, right? no honor, no integrity, no character.
yawn
They don't know, they are just sure she is guilty.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
it's been posted, counselor. if you wish to wordsmith and legalspeak, then acknowledge that waterboarding isn't torture.
The US CODE IN QUESTION? 18 U.S.C. 2071. The law she ignored and disobeyed was not the use of her private email account....it was not turning over and archiving "ALL" (being the crime in question) the STATE DEPT. CLASSIFIED communications. While the in house investigation granted her a pass...its Clear that many documents were either destroyed or withheld with deliberate premeditation. Its a question that deserves at least....a formal charge...indictment in order for WE THE PEOPLE to get to the facts or charge her with "perjury". Its something that should never have been dismissed with a false pretense of "frivolous litigation" by those who get their marching orders from the same administration that the defendant serves. BETTER KNOWN as
WHITE WASHING: To conceal or (gloss over....whitewash) wrongdoing by a cohort.
FYI: there is such a thing as Post Facto Law Litigation. Considering the possible consequence of her blatant disregard of Transparency demanded by her service to THE PEOPLE. This was a clear case of IN HOUSE WHITE WASHING.
One thing is clear.....she had damn well better win the election come Nov......or she will be breaking big rocks into small ones for a least a 3 year period, if honest statesmen ever get the chance to launch a formal rule of law investigation. Many people have the wrong idea about this dog and phony show. It was not the fact that she had the right to use her private email account to communicate and store her work related projects. She "assumed" that no one would have the audacity to request from A CLINTON the information stored in her private account. Why? It was not government business she feared becoming public knowledge....it was the many back door business deals she made IN HER NAME as a CLINTON and Sec. of State with foreign powers that would indict her as the criminal that she is.....thus THOUSANDS of her personal emails were destroyed or hidden. When and if a REAL INVESTIGATION is ever launched....those emails can be salvaged by someone with a warrant and the expertise required to edit the hard drive of all her systems.
That's the obvious reason that she...with full knowledge and premeditation DECIDED to mix the two together...she assumed and concluded that her position as Sec. of State would shield her underhanded business deals from sight. And she has bought herself at least a temporary stay.....that will be permanent if she is allowed to win the office of Chief Law Enforcement Executive in these United States of America.
There is no statue of limitation regarding "TREASON". There are 6 US LAWS that have no statue of limitations. Treason is number 5 of that list.
WHITE WASHING: To conceal or (gloss over....whitewash) wrongdoing by a cohort.
FYI: there is such a thing as Post Facto Law Litigation. Considering the possible consequence of her blatant disregard of Transparency demanded by her service to THE PEOPLE. This was a clear case of IN HOUSE WHITE WASHING.
One thing is clear.....she had damn well better win the election come Nov......or she will be breaking big rocks into small ones for a least a 3 year period, if honest statesmen ever get the chance to launch a formal rule of law investigation. Many people have the wrong idea about this dog and phony show. It was not the fact that she had the right to use her private email account to communicate and store her work related projects. She "assumed" that no one would have the audacity to request from A CLINTON the information stored in her private account. Why? It was not government business she feared becoming public knowledge....it was the many back door business deals she made IN HER NAME as a CLINTON and Sec. of State with foreign powers that would indict her as the criminal that she is.....thus THOUSANDS of her personal emails were destroyed or hidden. When and if a REAL INVESTIGATION is ever launched....those emails can be salvaged by someone with a warrant and the expertise required to edit the hard drive of all her systems.
That's the obvious reason that she...with full knowledge and premeditation DECIDED to mix the two together...she assumed and concluded that her position as Sec. of State would shield her underhanded business deals from sight. And she has bought herself at least a temporary stay.....that will be permanent if she is allowed to win the office of Chief Law Enforcement Executive in these United States of America.
There is no statue of limitation regarding "TREASON". There are 6 US LAWS that have no statue of limitations. Treason is number 5 of that list.
Last edited:
Nope....the law is directly quoted as such, "Whoever, willfully, conceals, removes (its a fact there at least 6 documents that she willfully, concealed and then removed), mutilates......(here is the obvious crime).
....or carries away any record.....document...etc., that is filled with any court of the US.
She claims she is innocent because she deliberately refused to archive and file those documents? Really?
Then....she must answer to U.S.C. 18: 1519. If one message is hidden or destroyed to stop any subpoena....SHE IS GUILTY AS HELL.
Her office does not protect her from the code that Demands all RECORDS to be turned over and ARCHIVED for protection of THE PEOPLE....in an immediate and timely manner. When she retired from her office.....those records were to be filed and then become the property of THE PEOPLE....if her personal emails were contained with some obstructive SUBTERFUGE...those records became the property of the people. What liberals refuse to acknowledge....its impossible to have one's cake and eat it also. She has had over 3 years to obstruct THE PEOPLE. That's real Transparency in action.
Again a simple question for any of the lefttards? What legal court appointed representative such as a judge has ever presented ONE OPINION as to the actual intent and meaning of these US CODES in an official manner? Name them.......yet you insist upon accepting and parroting the IN HOUSE interpretation...why? As I said....its a most difficult thing to be convicted of a crime against the PEOPLE....if one is never considered for indictment or charge.
This has been white washed just like the FAST and FURIOUS, and the clear cut case of VOTER INTIMIDATION at the polls by the Black Panthers....because, THE HOUSE refuses to charge is no indication of anyone's innocence...if THE PEOPLE never get the chance to prove guilt....then innocence comes from DICTATE. What does she have to hide if SHE IS INNOCENT?
THE PEOPLE in the United States of American are not as "Think" as you "Stupid" they are. She will never get elected after this dog and phony show....her base remains less than 30% of the people.....the gullible....OLD, WHITE, LIBERALS...and the black minority that always vote for the free shit.
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
it was linked somewhere in these threads.....subsection f)
Leonthecat
Racism Watchdog
Nothing, you have nothing.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
with thanks to annatta....
18 U.S. Code § 793 (f)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
....
Leonthecat
Racism Watchdog
Chin up, Pimp. There's always 2024
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
...
The "exact" words of James Comey? "...there were at least 5 ILLEGAL systems in use...that had to be looked at...one was completely and totally crashed by Hillary's lawyer in a method that made recovery all but impossible."
At first he read form the law and its statue articles....section 793 of U.S. Title 18, leaving no ambiguity whatsoever she did by willful negligence or in removing and causing some classified communications to be at risk by her actions.
Then in a sudden LEFT TURN.....he rewrote the code and claimed that since she was IGNORANT OF THE LAW...he would not recommend any formal charges. Really? Read the transcript. Ignorance nor intent does not justify CROSS NEGLECT when she confessed to being IGNORANT....he supposedly brought the excuse and DRAFTED AMENDMENT of the code by personal mandate.
Read the transcript of his decision to refer the case over to Obama's cohorts at the Dept. of Justice. www.politico.com/story/2017/07/transcript-james-comey-clinton-email-225103
"Although we did not find clear evidence that Sec. Clinton or her colleagues INTENDED to violate laws governing the handling of classified information...." (Clearly there were laws broken or there could be no use of the word INTENDED).
"...there was evidence that they were EXTREMELY CARELESS in the handling of very sensitive HIGHLY CLASSIFIED information." (that would have been enough to CONVICT any lay person might along simply recommending Charges to the Dept. of Justice.)
Nope....no cover up here....the law was quite ambiguous to the highest ranking FBI agent in this nation. Legal precedent has been established....IGNORANCE is now a viable EXCUSE to avoid charges, Simply say, "I never knew anything I was doing was against US CODE..."
LMAO.
Read from the Article and Section of U.S. 18, IGNORANCE, INTENT nor CARELESSNESS are excused from indictment.
JUST HOW STUPID does this self serving administration believe WE THE PEOPLE to be? We all very well, Democrat, Independent, or Republican alike understand the ole axiom, "Just because you feel something wet on your back is no indication of truth when someone tells you to relax ITS ONLY RAIN....when we all very well know its PISS running down your back." That's what this administration thinks of THE PEOPLE they are sworn to serve with transparency. They assume we the...by majority to be STUPID IGNORANT SHEEP that will believe anything if its done with enough flair.....WE SHALL SEE COME NOV.
At first he read form the law and its statue articles....section 793 of U.S. Title 18, leaving no ambiguity whatsoever she did by willful negligence or in removing and causing some classified communications to be at risk by her actions.
Then in a sudden LEFT TURN.....he rewrote the code and claimed that since she was IGNORANT OF THE LAW...he would not recommend any formal charges. Really? Read the transcript. Ignorance nor intent does not justify CROSS NEGLECT when she confessed to being IGNORANT....he supposedly brought the excuse and DRAFTED AMENDMENT of the code by personal mandate.
Read the transcript of his decision to refer the case over to Obama's cohorts at the Dept. of Justice. www.politico.com/story/2017/07/transcript-james-comey-clinton-email-225103
"Although we did not find clear evidence that Sec. Clinton or her colleagues INTENDED to violate laws governing the handling of classified information...." (Clearly there were laws broken or there could be no use of the word INTENDED).
"...there was evidence that they were EXTREMELY CARELESS in the handling of very sensitive HIGHLY CLASSIFIED information." (that would have been enough to CONVICT any lay person might along simply recommending Charges to the Dept. of Justice.)
Nope....no cover up here....the law was quite ambiguous to the highest ranking FBI agent in this nation. Legal precedent has been established....IGNORANCE is now a viable EXCUSE to avoid charges, Simply say, "I never knew anything I was doing was against US CODE..."
LMAO.
Read from the Article and Section of U.S. 18, IGNORANCE, INTENT nor CARELESSNESS are excused from indictment.
JUST HOW STUPID does this self serving administration believe WE THE PEOPLE to be? We all very well, Democrat, Independent, or Republican alike understand the ole axiom, "Just because you feel something wet on your back is no indication of truth when someone tells you to relax ITS ONLY RAIN....when we all very well know its PISS running down your back." That's what this administration thinks of THE PEOPLE they are sworn to serve with transparency. They assume we the...by majority to be STUPID IGNORANT SHEEP that will believe anything if its done with enough flair.....WE SHALL SEE COME NOV.
Last edited: