Posted on 08/21/2015 9:17:10 PM PDT by Moseley
Larry Klayman points out in this column that those who conceal or destroy government records
"shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”
* * *
Pursuant to 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b), “Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. …”
Hillary concealed government records from State Department control and access from January 2009 until March 2015. When exposed, Hillary deleted approximately 32,000 emails with attachments, then scrubbed the email server. Hillary is thus “disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”
* * *
Like the original Bonnie and Clyde, who evaded arrest for nearly two years in a nationally famous manhunt, the Clintons boast that critics have been making accusations against them for years. The problem is that those accusations happen to be true. In the late 1990s, I obtained a ruling while at Judicial Watch that Bill Clinton had committed a crime when he illegally released private White House files to smear a woman he had sexually assaulted in the Oval Office, Kathleen Willey. So there is some precedent of the criminality of the Clintons. It should not be surprising that eventually the law will fully catch up with the Bonnie and Clyde.. What is more than troubling is that they have gotten away with their crime spree for this long. But all “good things” must end. Bad times are ahead for the Clintons, for sure.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Do you know when Klayman left Judicial Watch and why? I didn’t know he had left nor that he’d started Freedom Watch. I wonder why?
“It should not be surprising that eventually the law will fully catch up with the Bonnie and Clyde..”
My mind’s eye conjured up an end for the Clintons similar to the end of the Warren Beatty/Faye Dunaway movie. Been watching those two get away with crap for so long they have a kind of demonic immortality, like most dems these days.
I admire Klayman for his doggedness. Too bad be can’t harpoon the whale...
No to both questions, but he started something that is bearing fruit today.
Ignorance from the World Smartest Woman has always been her Oxymoron defense. Being so bright and so stupid simultaneously has to be done with smoke and mirrors.
Bill blows the smoke, and Hildebeast breaks the mirrors.
So how does 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) NOT apply?
I could agree with that, but when was the last time any elitist cared what the law said? Unfortunately, unless someone grows a pair, and tries to stop her, and the rest of them, the elitists will continue to ignore the laws.
Not nothing. Bill was impeached, disbarred, and lost a civil law suite. It wasn’t what should have happened, but it was something.
What we keep forgetting is that the oldest candidate we have in the race is Trump. He is the same age as the youngest candidate that the Democrats have in the race, Hilary. Now this might sound misogynistic, but looking at Trump and Hillary side by side, who would the Entertainment Tonight low information voter vote for?
Trump looks like he could still play catch in the yard with his kids and run a five K. Hilary looks like she needs a walker to negotiate the stage to the podium.
The Dems stepped in it when they went after Petraeus, convicted him, and fined him for something quite innocuous compared to what is already in the record to charge Hillary.
How do they justify not charging her with a crime? Several crimes actually.
If Justice doesn’t charger her, then Comey at the FBI will continue to pursue the e-mails, which in the end will be worse for the Dems, probably including Obama. This is why I think Justice will charge her.
Rock, meet hard place.
Everything Larry Klayman touches turns to crap.
That would be true, but only because most of the hard-core extremists in the democrat party would be free to embrace socialism publicly.
If the Republicans get Trump instead of Jeb and Trump wins, that's what the dems worry about. The others, not so much. They can probably defeat the other 16 easily. So then, the dems have to find another candidate they can control and they can win with. Problem is, under narcisstic Obama, the Democratic Party hasn't developed any stand out talent.
So I say I wouldn't mind Trump vs Sanders. Neither one represents the puppet masters. Those running for other offices would have to express their real views. Sanders is against the invasion of the US, and favors US jobs for US workers, and less interference from the feds. An election Trump vs Sanders might be a nice housecleaning, a real discussion of opposing views, developed through the lives they've led.
That statute doesn’t apply in this case because Hillary submitted 55,000 copies of the emails (lies, but we know what will happen) on that server back in December.
These crooks know all the backdoors. Still doesn’t mean criminals can’t become president either.
The same set of voters who re-elected Obama have no qualms about the lies and crimes of H. R. Clinton. That segment of the voting population is intellectually fraudulent and morally bankrupt. We could recover from Obama; we can’t recover from the majority of voters who re-elected Obama and are comfortable with H.C.’s lies and crimes and cover-ups.
I don’t know if you’re aware of it, but 300 of those emails have been determined to be classified by the FBI.
Oh I’m fully aware of classified data on unauthorized networks. This, however doesn’t fit the mold of the statute you were referring to earlier.
What might fit better here is U.S.C T.18 P.1 Ch. 37 § 798.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.