|
Replies: 22
| visibility 396
|
110%er [9736]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9842
Joined: 9/16/15
|
Honestly she should be in jail. I love how she says ive been cleared.
Nov 1, 2016, 8:01 PM
|
|
It's such b.s.
My 2 Good friends. One works for department of justice and the other for the cia. Both stated they would be in jail for doing what she did. Our family friend who works for the fbi on Sunday said he would also be in jail for what she did. Why does she get a pass. Better yet why do her supporters not care? Does party affilation blind people's ability to be rational?
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [4480]
TigerPulse: 63%
Posts: 4381
Joined: 10/13/13
|
curious
Nov 1, 2016, 8:57 PM
|
|
do you know what law(s) she violated that would put her in jail?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1606]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1140
Joined: 7/1/13
|
Re: curious
Nov 1, 2016, 9:30 PM
|
|
HTH***
Here’s The List Of The Laws Hillary Has Potentially Violated
by @SeanHannity
As new details about Hillary Clinton’s email servers trickles out, the number of potential criminal violations she has committed continues to pile up.
Former Mayor of New York City Rudy Giuliani now estimates that Clinton has run afoul of 13-15 federal statutes. The list potentially includes the improper transmission and handling of confidential information, mail fraud statutes, wire fraud statutes, and obstruction of justice.
“The case is getting so strong now that it’s going to be really hard to have an intellectually honest decision and walk away from it,” the former federal prosecutor claimed on Thursday’s Hannity adding that, “she has also proven that she is completely grossly negligent in the handling of sensitive information, and we want someone like this for President of the United States?”
As we reported earlier this week, Hillary Clinton is reportedly being advised to seek the services of a criminal defense attorney. With the case against her mounting, she might be wise to heed such advice.
Here’s a brief rundown of some of the laws the former Secretary of State has potentially run afoul of:
Unauthorized Removal And Retention Of Classified Documents Or Material
18 U.S.C. § 1924
Class: A Misdemeanor
Possible Penalty: Imprisonment for 1 year and/or $100,000 fine
Text: “Knowingly removing materials containing classified information of the United States with the intent to retain said info at an unauthorized location without the authority to do so”
Gathering, Transmitting Or Losing Defense Information
18 U.S.C. § 793
Class: Felony
Possible Penalty: Imprisonment for 10 years and/or $250,000 fine
Text: “Allowing [by means of gross negligence] any document relating to the national defense to be removed from its proper place of custody or destroyed –or- willfully retaining unauthorized documents relating to national defense and failing to deliver them to the United States employee entitled to receive them –or- failure to report that unauthorized documents relating to national defense were removed from their proper place of custody or destroyed”
Concealment, Removal, Or Mutilation Generally
18 U.S.C. § 2071
Class: Felony
Possible Penalty: Imprisonment of no more than 3 years, a fine, or both
Text: “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”
Destruction, Alteration, Or Falsification Of Records In Federal Investigations And Bankruptcy
18 U.S.C. § 1519
Class: Felony
Possible Penalty: Imprisonment of no more than 20 years, a fine, or both
Text: “Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States”
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34117]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33632
Joined: 9/13/99
|
It doesn't help when even the title won't commit.***
Nov 1, 2016, 9:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11228]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14066
Joined: 9/2/03
|
OrangeNpurp81® laid it out for you pretty well.
Nov 1, 2016, 10:57 PM
[ in reply to curious ] |
|
It's not conjecture, it's not what if, it's not maybe...it's a big problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3590]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 6987
Joined: 11/30/12
|
It's criminal. Felony type criminal.***
Nov 2, 2016, 6:11 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34117]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33632
Joined: 9/13/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9736]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9842
Joined: 9/16/15
|
Just lol. She potentially did none of those things.***
Nov 2, 2016, 6:29 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34117]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33632
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Take it up with Hannity.***
Nov 2, 2016, 6:31 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9736]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9842
Joined: 9/16/15
|
She did all of those things***
Nov 2, 2016, 7:07 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34117]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33632
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Hannity isn't sure.***
Nov 2, 2016, 7:10 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49105]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38843
Joined: 12/31/97
|
If there was actual evidence that she did those things
Nov 2, 2016, 1:32 PM
[ in reply to She did all of those things*** ] |
|
or, evidence that she did some or all of those things at a moment in time when it was illegal to do so, then headlines would NOT talk about laws she potentially broke, but laws that she definitely broke.
The fact is, unless someone proves something one way or the other, supporters will not believe she did these things and detractors will believe she did these things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9736]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9842
Joined: 9/16/15
|
They did prove she did these things.
Nov 3, 2016, 6:24 AM
|
|
They just didn't prosecute her. They have laid out what she did. She did use unauthorized devices and servers. She did destroy emails and electronic devices. She admitted so much when she said it and apologized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80176
Joined: 11/29/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80176
Joined: 11/29/99
|
What should she be in jail for? Be
Nov 2, 2016, 8:39 AM
|
|
specific and in your own words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9736]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9842
Joined: 9/16/15
|
Did she not store or use an unauthorized device or server?
Nov 2, 2016, 8:54 AM
|
|
Did she not destroy information or devices? Probably for the intent to cover up.
And I get where you are going. So what you are implying is that the people I know don't understand either? That they would not be in jail? The retired fighter pilot that stood in the town hall and also said as much. He would be in jail if ever did anything that she had.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80176
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Lutz, in this country, you kind of have
Nov 2, 2016, 9:22 AM
|
|
to be convicted of something. Your friends would be right if we were living in Cuba or Syria.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40353]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23466
Joined: 7/13/12
|
i'll bite
Nov 2, 2016, 9:30 AM
|
|
you need evidence to be convicted right?
but someone has destroyed said evidence, so there is none to convict with
so then it sorta falls under obstruction right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80176
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Potentially***
Nov 2, 2016, 10:26 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55817]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 35337
Joined: 11/30/98
|
ANY of us would be in jail. They just jailed a dude
Nov 2, 2016, 8:58 AM
|
|
for posting pics he took inside a submarine. Poor sailor gets thrown under the brig. Hitlery? Nope. And BHO would pardon her if she was convicted before taking office.
This must not be allowed to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80176
Joined: 11/29/99
|
That's laughable. Signed:
Nov 2, 2016, 9:25 AM
|
|
OJ in 1994
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49105]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38843
Joined: 12/31/97
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7227]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9465
Joined: 12/18/13
|
Your friends are dumb.
Nov 2, 2016, 12:27 PM
|
|
Hillary's case is about intent, they could uncover more "classified" emails and it wouldn't change anything. Also, the Justice department has a history of not pursuing charges without extreme circumstances when it comes to mishandling classified information. Patreus did much worse, and he pled guilty and got probation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 22
| visibility 396
|
|
|
50
