Search The Archives

Saturday, July 23, 2016

WE'RE WITH HER... Celebrating #RNCinCLE With the Trump Women





Tuesday, July 19, 2016

SMEAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST MELANIA TRUMP: UNFAIRLY ACCUSED OF PLAGIARISM


July 18, 2016


The Republican National Convention is just barely off the ground, and already there are accusations being made that Melania Trump has committed the act of "plagiarism." This accusation, according to the New York Times tonight, seems to stem from a self-proclaimed Obama supporter who was watching the convention.


The individual citing that Melania Trump plagiarized (or in other words, stole the speech Michelle Obama gave in 2008 when then-Senator Barack Obama was running for President), Mr. Hill, 31, found the clip of Mrs. Obama’s speech online and noticed that parts of the two speeches sounded the same. He then realized that a larger portion appeared to have been borrowed as he continued to examine both.


Mr. Hill is on record stating essentially that Melania took portions of Michelle Obama's speech in 2008 and merely plugged in her own information.   This in fact is not unheard of in politics, however, in comparing the speeches, they are nothing alike.


Our review of both the Melania Trump Speech and the Michelle Obama Speech (viewable by clicking the hyperlinks) showed that the two speeches had some similar overtones, and only a few words or phrases actually matched up at all.  Michelle Obama's speech was also about twice as long as the one Melania Trump delivered on the RNC opening night.



Of even greater noteworthiness, was the tweet made by Mr. Hill prior to the "plagiarism" claim whereby he made a rather distasteful comment about Melania Trump and Donald Trump, implying that Mr. Trump is against "immigration" yet is married to.... well... Melania.  One could interpret that comment in many ways, however, it points to the common narration of many in the Democratic Party race that Donald Trump is somehow against all immigrants, a statement that is not based on fact in any shape or form.




"There are, of course, certain things that do not need documentation or credit, including:
  • Writing your own lived experiences, your own observations and insights, your own thoughts, and your own conclusions about a subject
  • When you are writing up your own results obtained through lab or field experiments
  • When you use your own artwork, digital photographs, video, audio, etc.
  • When you are using "common knowledge," things like folklore, common sense observations, myths, urban legends, and historical events (but not historical documents)
  • When you are using generally-accepted facts, e.g., pollution is bad for the environment, including facts that are accepted within particular discourse communities, e.g., in the field of composition studies, "writing is a process" is a generally-accepted fact.



Saturday, July 16, 2016

STATE DEPARTMENT MARKS SECOND ANNIVERSARY OF FLIGHT MH17

Marking the Second Anniversary of the Shootdown of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17


Press Statement
Mark C. Toner
Deputy Department Spokesperson
Washington, DC
July 16, 2016

Two years ago today, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine, taking the lives of 298 innocent people from 11 countries. Our sympathy and thoughts remain with the families and friends of the MH 17 victims.

In October 2015, we welcomed the findings of the Dutch Safety Board in its final report on the cause of the MH 17 crash. This report validated that MH 17 was shot down by a surface-to-air missile. Our own assessment has not changed – the missile was fired from territory controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.

The United States continues to work with the Joint Investigation Team and law enforcement authorities. We have full confidence that these professionals are conducting an impartial, credible, and comprehensive investigation that will form the basis of an independent prosecution to bring the perpetrators of this tragedy to justice.

Friday, July 15, 2016

CONGRESS PUSHING FORWARD WITH INVESTIGATION INTO HILLARY CLINTON PERJURY CHARGES

Truthfulness of Congressional testimony taken under oath called into question
Washington, D.C. – Today, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (VA-06) and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (UT-03) sent a letter to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia requesting an investigation into whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton committed perjury and made false statements when testifying under oath before Congress.
The letter states:
“The evidence collected by the FBI during its investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email system appears to directly contradict several aspects of her sworn testimony.  In light of those contradictions, the Department should investigate and determine whether to prosecute Secretary Clinton for violating statutes that prohibit perjury and false statements to Congress, or any other relevant statutes.”
Background:
During a July 5, 2016 hearing before the House Oversight Committee, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey stated the truthfulness of Secretary Clinton’s testimony before Congress was not within the scope of the FBI’s investigation. According to Director Comey, the Department of Justice requires a criminal referral from Congress to initiate an investigation into Secretary Clinton’s congressional testimony.
Additionally, Chairman Chaffetz sent a letter to Director Comey requesting the FBI’s full investigative file from its review of former Secretary Clinton’s use of an authorized private email server. Chairman Goodlatte sent a letter to Director Comey pressing for more information about the FBI’s investigation and also led a letter signed by over 200 members of Congress demanding answers from FBI Director Comey regarding the many questions surrounding his announcement that he does not recommend federal prosecution against former Secretary Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information through private email servers.
Full text of letter:
The Honorable Channing D. Phillips
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
555 Fourth Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Dear Mr. Phillips:
We write to request an investigation to determine whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton committed perjury and made false statements during her testimony under oath before congressional committees.
While testifying before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on July 7, 2016, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey stated the truthfulness of Secretary Clinton’s testimony before Congress was not within the scope of the FBI’s investigation.  Nor had the FBI even considered any of Secretary Clinton’s testimony.  Director Comey further testified the Department of Justice requires a criminal referral from Congress to initiate an investigation of Secretary Clinton’s congressional testimony.  We are writing for that purpose.
The evidence collected by the FBI during its investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email system appears to directly contradict several aspects of her sworn testimony.  In light of those contradictions, the Department should investigate and determine whether to prosecute Secretary Clinton for violating statutes that prohibit perjury and false statements to Congress, or any other relevant statutes.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
###

TURKEY COUP D'ETAT: OFFICAL NOTICE FROM US STATE DEPARTMENT

Emergency Message for U.S. Citizens: Shots Heard in Ankara, Bridges Closed in Istanbul

July 15, 2016
U.S. Embassy Ankara informs U.S. citizens that shots have been heard in Ankara and both bridges in Istanbul, Bosphorous and Fatih Sultan Mehmet, are now closed.  The Turkish Government states that elements of the Turkish army are attempting an uprising, security forces are taking action to contain it, and some buildings are under blockade.  
We urge U.S. citizens to contact family and friends to let them know you are safe.  We have seen reports that social media is blocked, but you can contact friends and family by email, telephone, or SMS.  We encourage U.S. citizens to shelter in place and do not go the U.S. Embassy or Consulates at this time.  Monitor local press for updates, avoid areas of conflict, and exercise caution if you are in the vicinity of any military or security forces. 
For further detailed information regarding Turkey and travel: 

Wednesday, July 13, 2016

Petition To Congress: Impeachment of AG Lynch

July 13, 2016

The Honorable Bob Goodlatte
Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
United States House of Representatives
2138 Rayburn House Office Bldg
Washington, DC 20515

Email Contact: https://goodlatte.house.gov/contact/
Twitter Contact: https://twitter.com/RepGoodlatte
Facebook Contact: https://www.facebook.com/BobGoodlatte/




A PETITION FOR CONSIDERATION OF ACTION BY CONGRESS


Whereas:  The House Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over matters relating to the administration of justice in Federal Courts, Administrative bodies and Law Enforcement Agencies, and;

Whereas: On July 5th, 2016, FBI Director James Comey announced that the FBI has determined that several potential violations of law may have been committed by Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Candidate for the office of President of the United States, and;

Whereas: On July 5th 2016, FBI Director James Comey stated the investigation began as a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General in connection with Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail server during her time as Secretary of State and focused on whether classified information was transmitted on that personal system, and;

Whereas: On July 5th, 2016 FBI Director James Comey provided several areas of the investigation and stated in the affirmative that Sec. Clinton did the following:

  1. Utilized multiple unauthorized servers over an extended period of time for the purpose of sending and receiving emails for official business in her official capacity as Secretary of State;
  2. Utilized multiple mobile devices over an extended period of time for the purpose of sending and receiving emails for official business in her official capacity as Secretary of State;
  3. Failed to produce all work related emails to the FBI as Sec. Clinton has stated on multiple national networks and news agencies repeatedly;
  4. Failed to archive official emails as required by federal law and statutes;
  5. Failed to provide appropriate security for all emails that were on the unauthorized, some of which were both marked Classified, as well as other emails that were Classified in nature without markings, for which, no distinction is technically necessary;
  6. Failed to provide appropriate and proper security for emails found on the unauthorized servers at the Top Secret / Special Access Program level when they were sent and received;
  7. Failed to distinguish the need for security for Top Secret / Special Access Program level emails although a person in her prior positions should have known that an unclassified system was no place for those conversations;
  8. Had regular conversations with others whom the FBI determined hostile actors gained access to their private commercial email accounts thus placing sensitive information at risk; and
Whereas:  On July 7th, 2016, FBI Director James Comey testified under Oath before the House Oversight and Reforms Committee to further elaborate on his sole decision not to recommend protection for the above mentioned violations of Federal Statutes, despite very clear facts outlining the above violations by Secretary Clinton, and;

Whereas:  FBI Director Comey's announcement followed an unscheduled meeting between former President William Jefferson Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch on June 27th, 2016 on-board a United States government private airplane giving the appearance of impropriety and possible influencing the outcome of the FBI Director's decision to bring forth a recommendation to prosecute Secretary Clinton, and;

Whereas: United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch has testified under Oath before the House Judiciary Full Committee on July 12, 2016 at which time General Lynch provided minimal details of her conversations with former President William Jefferson Clinton on June 27, 2016, giving continued concerns of the appearance of impropriety and;

Whereas: United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch was admonished by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte for failing to respond to questions in regards to her failure to uphold the law by not prosecuting Secretary Clinton, not responding to even the most basic questions by the Committee, and;

Whereas: United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that she only utilizes a separate and distinct email system to send and receive classified and sensitive information and stated the importance to utilize official email to do official business in order to secure important information, and;

Whereas:  United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the nation and represents the United States in legal matters, in a fair and impartial manner for all Americans, and;

Whereas: United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch during sworn testimony before the Judiciary Committee did not provide or offer an explanation to Committee Members in a satisfactory manner that diminished the perception of "Dual Tracks of Justice" as established by Representative Gowdy nor diminished the perception impropriety, and;

Whereas: United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch should have known that her ongoing and long-standing relationship with former President William J. Clinton as well as her decision to not recuse herself from this investigation and potential protection against his wife Hillary R. Clinton demonstrated poor judgement and potential Ethical Violations within the practice of Law;

THEREFORE:

"We the People" who have entrusted our elected Representatives to maintain the checks and balances of our Government, are requesting this Committee, or any Committee of the House that has the appropriate jurisdiction to do so, bring forth action to investigate and commence Articles of Impeachment of United States Attorney General for failure to maintain the Oath of Office for which she took on April 27, 2015, and/or failure to utilize sound judgement and ethical standards overseeing the investigation and potential prosecution of Hillary R. Clinton up to and including self-recusal and the appointment of Independent Special Prosecutors not connected to either former President William J. Clinton or Secretary Hillary R. Clinton.

We ask for your immediate and expeditious consideration to commence this request prior to the July 15, 2016 "summer vacation" of Congress.

Electronically Signed By (We the People - simply comment via G+ or use link to Change.org below):

Scott Anthony

(Additional Electronic Signatures May Appear Below, or via Email / US Mail)

If unable to sign below in the comments, simply follow this link to Change.org


Monday, July 11, 2016

FBI DIRECTOR SETS UP AS THE FALL-GUY FOR CLINTON

July 10, 2016

There really is no other way to look at this event.  James Comey, FBI Director, stated before the House Oversight Committee several times that Hillary Clinton did in fact expose the highest levels of United States Secrets to the world.

What I can't also simply excuse, is the "secret meeting" between former President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch on a hot tarmac in Arizona just days before the FBI were set to meet with Secretary Hillary Clinton.  The appearance of impropriety was noticed world-wide.

With that said, rumors (unconfirmed at this time) are that Hillary Clinton invoked her Fifth Amendment Right to remain silent during her "interview" on Saturday,  July 2nd.  I suppose she hedged her bets on the fact that the "Clinton Sphere of Influence" would be strong enough after the former President talked about his "grandkids" on a Government owned plane.

The question remains though, who was on that plane with Loretta Lynch?  Her meetings with any persons are to be recorded, even if it's a private meeting.  This too is being questioned in many areas of the "curious" amongst us.  We will likely never know what was said, however, we have video evidence of how it may have went, as evidenced by FBI Director Comey, delivering a scathing list of violations Hillary Clinton committed, then dropped the other shoe by stating he would not recommend charges on July 6th.

As such, Americans were left stunned by this announcement followed up by a Congressional Hearing that was emergently convened.  Below is a quick summation of what was said.  For now, I leave it up to you, the readers and viewers, to decide what really happened with Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch.  I think it's fairly obvious given the video we have of the Hearing.  Take a look.


Wednesday, July 6, 2016

EVIDENCE OF HILLARY CLINTON CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR (INFO-GRAPHIC)



THE FACTS

FBI DIRECTOR COMEY ON THE INVESTIGATION PROCESS:

1.  "From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received."

2.  "Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification."

3. "The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014."

4.  "With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level."

5.  "Because she was not using a government account—or even a commercial account like Gmail—there was no archiving at all of her e-mails, so it is not surprising that we discovered e-mails that were not on Secretary Clinton’s system in 2014."  (It should be noted, that emails weren't being archived on her personal server, because she intentionally went around the assigned .gov system that would have archived them)

6.  "...some of the additional work-related e-mails we recovered were among those deleted as “personal” by Secretary Clinton’s lawyers when they reviewed and sorted her e-mails for production in 2014."

7.  "It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery." (In most circles, this would be deemed "Obstruction")

8.  "... we (the FBI) do not have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that sorting..."

FBI DIRECTOR COMEY ON INVESTIGATION FINDINGS:

1. National Security:  "there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

2.  National Security:  ".... seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters."

3.  Intent / Judgement Skills: "There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

4.  National Security: "In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails)."

5.  National Security: "None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail."

6.  Intent / Judgement Skills:  " even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

7.  Intent / Judgement Skills: "we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government."

8.  National Security: "We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account..."

9.  National Security / Judgement Skills: "We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent."

10.  National Security: "She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."

These are the statements of FBI Director James Comey on July 5, 2016.  

When taken as they were stated, in order, and without the final result statement he added at the end of his press conference, a reasonable person would have expected a recommendation to the Justice Department to move forward with prosecution under (at a minimum) the following statutes:


1. Mishandling Classified Information

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
prev | next
(a)
Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or
(b)
Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense; or
(c)
Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or
(d)
Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(e)
Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(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.
(g)
If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.
(h)
(1)
Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law, any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from any foreign government, or any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, as the result of such violation. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.
(2)
The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1) of this subsection.
(3)The provisions of subsections (b), (c), and (e) through (p) of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853(b), (c), and (e)–(p)) shall apply to—
(A)
property subject to forfeiture under this subsection;
(B)
any seizure or disposition of such property; and
(C)
any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property,
if not inconsistent with this subsection.
(4)
Notwithstanding section 524(c) of title 28, there shall be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund in the Treasury all amounts from the forfeiture of property under this subsection remaining after the payment of expenses for forfeiture and sale authorized by law.

2. Violation of The 2009 Federal Records Act

Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) requirements states that:
“Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record keeping system.”
According to the original story on Clinton’s emails published in The New York Times:
“Federal regulations, since 2009, have required that all emails be preserved as part of an agency’s record-keeping system. In Mrs. Clinton’s case, her emails were kept on her personal account and her staff took no steps to have them preserved as part of State Department record.
In response to a State Department request, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers, late last year, reviewed her account and decided which emails to turn over to the State Department.”
The fact that the State Department combs through the 55,000 pages of emails sent on Clinton’s private email account seems to verify that at least some of the emails Clinton sent contained classified information.

3. Violation of the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA)

Veterans for a Strong America has filed a lawsuit against the State Department over potential violations of FOIA. Joel Arends, chairman of the non-profit group, explained to the Washington Examiner that their FOIA request over the Benghazi affair specifically asked for any personal email accounts Secretary Clinton may have used:
“‘At this point in time, I think we’re the only ones that specifically asked for both her personal and government email and phone logs,’ Arends said of his group’s Benghazi-related request.”
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell believes that the use of a personal emails server appears to be a preemptive move, specifically designed to circumvent FOIA:
“‘Hillary Clinton’s system was designed to defy Freedom of Information Act requests, which is designed to defy the law.'”

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

SECRETARY HILLARY CLINTON: FEDERAL LAWS SHE VIOLATED (BUT GETS AWAY WITH IT ANYWAY)

July 5, 2016

There is no doubt that there were Federal Statutes violated by Secretary Hillary Clinton.  The FBI actually spelled it out for us today.   Yet, despite the fact that there is both an admission of errors by Sec. Clinton, and evidence that supports charges and Prosecution by the Justice Department, there is clearly a double-standard being applied to the former Secretary of State.

Some will undoubtedly be happy about this.  After all, Hillary does have a fairly large fan-base.  But that same fan-base would be protesting at the largest levels if a Republican official was in the same cross-hairs.  We don't see Republicans protesting (yet) even though we all know Hillary is very likely guilty of some fairly significant legal violations.

So what is all of this about?  Is it just because she had a private email server?  No.  It's not. However, had it not been for the efforts of the House Select Committee on Benghazi that we even know there WAS a private email server.  Hillary Clinton, appeared to be just fine prior to that Committee examining this email arrangement, not disclosing that her records of Public Service were in fact hidden and in some cases outright destroyed by the Secretary.  Not to mention the fact that her email was non-secured, likely hacked and she outright lied several times regarding the fact that she never "sent nor received classified emails on her private server."  We all know now, by the FBI, that her statements are not factual.  She lied about this fact repeatedly which was confirmed by FBI Director James Comey today.  

Here is a list as compiled by several sources of just which Federal Codes she may have actually violated (which we firmly believe that she got away simply due to her status):


1. Mishandling Classified Information

Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f) of the federal code make it unlawful to send of store classified information on personal email. Casey Harper at The Daily Caller delved into this angle:
“‘By using a private email system, Secretary Clinton violated the Federal Records Act and the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual regarding records management, and worse, could have left classified and top secret documents vulnerable to cyber attack,’ Cause of Action Executive Director Dan Epstein said in an email to reporters. 
‘This is an egregious violation of the law, and if it were anyone else, they could be facing fines and criminal prosecution.’”
Harper goes on to point out that multiple violations of this law have been enforced recently, including in 1999, when former CIA Director John M. Deutch’s security clearance was suspended for using his personal email to send classified information.
Additionally, this past week, Gen. David Patraeus pleaded guilty for mishandling classified information by using a Gmail account instead of his official government email.

2. Violation of The 2009 Federal Records Act

Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) requirements states that:
“Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record keeping system.”
According to the original story on Clinton’s emails published in The New York Times:
“Federal regulations, since 2009, have required that all emails be preserved as part of an agency’s record-keeping system. In Mrs. Clinton’s case, her emails were kept on her personal account and her staff took no steps to have them preserved as part of State Department record.
In response to a State Department request, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers, late last year, reviewed her account and decided which emails to turn over to the State Department.”
The fact that the State Department combs through the 55,000 pages of emails sent on Clinton’s private email account seems to verify that at least some of the emails Clinton sent contained classified information.

3. Violation of the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA)

Veterans for a Strong America has filed a lawsuit against the State Department over potential violations of FOIA. Joel Arends, chairman of the non-profit group, explained to the Washington Examiner that their FOIA request over the Benghazi affair specifically asked for any personal email accounts Secretary Clinton may have used:
“‘At this point in time, I think we’re the only ones that specifically asked for both her personal and government email and phone logs,’ Arends said of his group’s Benghazi-related request.”
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell believes that the use of a personal emails server appears to be a preemptive move, specifically designed to circumvent FOIA:
“‘Hillary Clinton’s system was designed to defy Freedom of Information Act requests, which is designed to defy the law.'”

SOURCE: http://ijr.com/2015/03/264655-3-federal-laws-hillary-may-violated-secret-email-accounts/