Controversies & government corruption
Educational
Real controversies and conspiracies, and well-documented crimes committed by a government whether in the present or the past.
Infowars reporter David Knight reports on how the fix is in for Hillary and how the RNC & DNC are going all out to make sure she gets in the white house in 2016. The Washington Post spins it as a 'security inquiry'. The FBI does investigations into criminal wrongdoing.
Infowars.com
Infowars.com
Infowars.com
Loretta Lynch has final say, the meeting with Loretta and Bill took place a few days before Hillary Clintons scheduled meeting with the FBI on her suspected criminal conduct:
Dailycaller.com
Issuehawk.com
Election Fraud 2016: Electionfraud2016.wordpress.com
Hillary's War Crimes: Liveleak.com
Corruption (Emolument Clause): Independentsentinel.com
Bill Clinton Selling our Security: Atlasmonitor.wordpress.com
Obama Endorses her (he replied to 2 of her unsecured emails): Youtube.com
Hillary deleted Rose Law firm files. Now its 30'000 emails with 110 classified files.
Clintons legal violations: Tinyurl.com
FBI director Comey's recommendation: Tinyurl.com
FBI director lied twice: Youtube.com
White House Petition: Tinyurl.com
Comey’s History of Clinton Cover-Ups - Youtube.com
If she refused to follow through with the FBI recommendations then she will have to be disbarred, and she should have recused herself from her position as a result of this.
Here are the codes that where broken as a result of this meeting: 18 USC §§ 202 – 209; Executive Order 12674 on Principles of Ethical Conduct as amended by EO 12731; Uniform Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, 5 CFR Part 2635; Department of Justice regulations, 5 CFR Part 3801; Department of Justice regulations, 28 CFR Part 45; Executive branch standards of conduct, 5 USC § 735; and, United States Department of Justice Ethics Handbook for On and Off-Duty Conduct, 14 Principles for Ethical Conduct:
“14. Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.”
5 C.F.R 2635.101 (b)
“An employee shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that the employee is violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part.”
5 CFR 2635.101(b)(14)
This isn't just "bad optics" as the democrat apologists are saying: Youtube.com
Comey's recommendations: Tinyurl.com
Hes lying that "no charges are appropriate". The fact that she was "extremely careless" is violating the law.
Hillary intentionally hid her emails from the public or oversight, by establishing a private server without authorization (which she would never get) in order to circumvent the Freedom of Information Act. She deleted emails that are classified (belong to the govt) is sufficient to have violated the law of the federal Espionage Act.
That is 10 years prison time under Espionage Act section 793, which applies to anyone who has been "entrusted" with information relating to the national defense, and to a federal official who "through gross negligence permits" information "to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, to be lost, stolen, abstracted or destroyed."
Section 798, which applies to any government official who "knowingly and willfully communicates" information "to an unauthorized person."
Section 1001, which addresses giving "false statements."
Additionally, Clinton and aides could allegedly be charged with a misdemeanor count under section 1924.
Whether the emails where marked as classified or not (if she or someone else removed it from the headers) does not matter, neither does her criminal intent. Anyone who gets access to classified information is taught how to recognize what is and is not classified. Criminal intent may affect the seriousness somehwat but not whether it violates the statute.