PDA

View Full Version : Obama flies Criminal Hillary to Charlotte, NC today



EE_
5th July 2016, 04:03 AM
It costs $228,288 an hour to fly Air Force One and Hillary's campaign only has to contribute a small portion of the cost.
Doesn't seem right a president can help himself to our tax money for personal use to campaign for a criminal this way.

These people that are supposed to be public servants aren't held accountable for anything these days.

Hillary sets up an illegal server and destroys email evidence after she finds out she is under a criminal investigation, Obama used Hillary's unsecured email server, Hillary destroys government records of her schedule calendar, Hillary and Bill both purger themselves constantly, Bill and Lynch compromise and violate ethical protocol in the criminal investigation on themselves...and none of it seems to matter.

The 3 U.S. Criminal Laws Hillary Broke with Her Email
Posted on April 12, 2016 by Eric Zuesse.
Why Are ‘News’ Media Hiding Them from the Public?

Eric Zuesse

When I submitted on April 9th to virtually all U.S. news-media a news-report headlined “Two Ways Hillary’s Private Email Operation Was Obviously Criminal”, and provided there the U.S. statutes that Hillary Clinton had clearly violated by her privatized email operation when she was serving as the U.S. Secretary of State, it was news-enough to qualify for publication by all of the major newspapers and TV networks and the other major and minor U.S. national news-media — but they all rejected it, declined to publish it, even though I don’t charge for my news-reports; and the only reason why they wouldn’t publish it had to be that they don’t want the public to know that she had violated at least two specific U.S. criminal statutes. But then a reader, Rocky Springer, at one of the news sites that did publish it, rinf.com (there were four, all very small: those two, plus this and this) posted a comment calling my attention to yet a third federal criminal statute that she was violating there:

18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a)Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(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. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

That’s not as high a penalty (“fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both”) as the two statutes I had cited earlier (one of which was 20 years’ imprisonment, the other of which was 10), but it certainly is yet a third criminal statute that she certainly did violate, and yet she is being voted for by more of my (former) fellow Democrats to represent us as our (their) Presidential nominee, than is her competitor, Senator Sanders (who has no such “experience”); and how could this possibly be the case but for the U.S. ‘news’ media’s hiding from the voters that Ms. Clinton definitely and incontestably did violate at least three U.S. criminal laws, there?

Are the ‘news’ media — that is, the persons who own the major blocs of stock in each and every one of them — wanting the Republican nominee (whomever he turns out to be) to be running against a person who should be facing prosecution under those three (and perhaps other) U.S. criminal laws — wanting, in other words, to hand the White House to whomever wins the Republican nomination? Is the U.S. Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, and is her boss the current President Barack Obama, not going to be bringing Hillary’s clear crimes in this matter before a grand jury to consider for indictment? Or, are the millions of Democratic voters in those primaries simply fools who don’t care that they’re voting for a clear-cut (regardless of whether the U.S. President and his Administration are refusing to prosecute her) crook?

It can’t be only the voters that are to blame, because (also very clearly here) they’re simply not being informed by the U.S. national ’news’ media what the laws are that she has, so very blatantly, violated. How can the voters be blamed for not knowing what it is that the ’news’ media are hiding from them?

As regards the possibility that the President and his Attorney General are to blame: we don’t know, and we have no way of knowing, whether Clinton’s case in this matter is being seriously investigated by the FBI for possible bringing of federal criminal charges against her for what she so incontestably did do in regards to her State Department email. Quite possibly, the FBI are interviewing and getting plea-bargains from her subordinates in this criminal activity, as a prerequisite to obtaining her own under-oath testimony; quite possibly, they’re doing their duty.

What is not in question is that the U.S. national ’news’ media are hiding from the American public the statutes, the criminal laws, that the currently leading candidate for the U.S. Presidency has so clearly, on the basis of the emails that were able to be reconstructed from her wiped-clean private email server, did violate.

Whereas Ms. Clinton obviously is a crook (in this matter if not for any other), what can we say about the U.S. national ‘news’ organizations?

They are not violating any criminal law by hiding this crucial information from the public. But what they are doing is even more heinous than what she did. With a ‘news’ media such as this, we can only continue to be deceived into electing and even re-electing people such as George W. Bush who during 2002 and 2003 lied this country into the disastrous and unwarranted and illegal invasion of Iraq. And, if that’s not a heinous national ’news’ media, then what is? This is, before so many primary elections for the U.S. Presidency. Not allowing the public to know the truth.

It’s as bad now as it was in 2002 and 2003. It’s a dictatorship. That’s what we have, with a press like this.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/04/3-u-s-criminal-laws-hillary-broke-email.html

EE_
5th July 2016, 04:12 AM
Figures. Bill Clinton’s ‘Oral Sex’ Attorney Is Defending Hillary Clinton on Email Scandal
Jim Hoft Jul 4th, 2016 9:35 am 71 Comments

The Clinton’s favorite attorney, David Kendall is now representing Hillary Clinton in the FBI’s probe into her private email server. Kendall has been there for the Clintons for many years and scandals, including Whitewater and the Monica Lewinsky affair.

According to the Washington Post Kendall is blamed for pursuing the legalistic argument — that receiving oral sex did not constitute a sexual relationship — that has proved widely unpalatable.

Kendall is now again up to his old tricks but this time with Hillary. Per the New York Times he recently sent a letter to lawmakers, noting that although some email messages he had possession of had recently been deemed classified, none were so designated at the time they were sent.

The Daily Beast reported that the State Department put up virtually no resistance when Kendall requested to keep copies of Hillary’s emails—even though those emails contained classified information, and even though it was unclear whether the attorney was cleared to see such secrets.

The Daily Beast stated that back in May 2015, a senior State Department official informed Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, that government reviewers had found at least one classified email among the messages she sent using a private account, which she used exclusively while in office. “That email was only part of the “first tranche” of the review, a State Department employee noted at the time, leaving open the possibility that more classified information would be found, which it was.”
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/figures-bill-clintons-oral-sex-attorney-defending-hillary-clinton-email-scandal/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3xqNTzSuSw

palani
5th July 2016, 04:19 AM
"Obama flies Criminal Hillary "

The mind conceives the image of the sitting president perched on the haunches of a winged Hillary in flight.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TsLh9-p2o8w/VbvLcelbZ2I/AAAAAAAAfkU/9vzOq-TircQ/s400/Hillary%2BBroom.jpg

http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/hillary_clean_sweep.jpg

EE_
5th July 2016, 04:36 AM
From Monica To Loretta - The Clintons Corrupt Absolutely
by Tyler Durden
Jul 4, 2016 10:15 PM

Authored by Michael Goodwin, originaly posted at The New York Post,

She can’t help herself. Even yesterday, with the political world fixated on her meeting with FBI agents, Hillary Clinton had her flack mislead the public.

A spokesman said she gave a “voluntary” interview, which is true only because she agreed to talk instead of waiting to be subpoenaed. The flack also said she was “pleased” to assist the gumshoes.

Who believes she was “pleased” to be interviewed by the FBI in a criminal investigation that could upend her life?

But that’s the way the Clintons roll.

Wherever they go, whatever they do, ethics are trashed and suspicions of criminal conduct follow them like night follows day.

It’s who they are and it’s self-delusional to believe another stint in the White House would make the Clintons better people. Power exacerbates rather than cures an absence of integrity.

Yet there’s another dimension to their chronic crookedness, and it gets insufficient attention even though it might be more important to the nation’s well-being.

It is that, in addition to being personally corrupt, the Clintons are corrupters. They are piggish users, with the people and institutions around them inevitably tarnished and sometimes destroyed even as the Clintons escape to their next scam.

Monica Lewinsky is a prime example, and Loretta Lynch is the latest. The attorney general’s dumbfounding decision to meet privately with Bill Clinton while the FBI investigates Hillary’s handling of national secrets stained Lynch’s reputation and added to public mistrust of the Justice Department.

Lynch didn’t create that mistrust — she was supposed to be the antidote. Her predecessor, Eric Holder, was a left-wing activist who used his role as the nation’s chief law-enforcement officer to further his and Obama’s political agenda.

That role earned Holder an undesired distinction. His refusal to cooperate with Congress on the disastrous Fast and Furious gun sting led to a bipartisan vote in the House holding him in criminal contempt, the first time in history a sitting Cabinet member ever faced such a censure.

Lynch, as his successor, was handily confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate, with her steady, firm demeanor and solid record as a prosecutor carrying the day.

Yet her lifetime of good work and the hope for a fresh start at Justice are now overshadowed. She acknowledges the meeting with Bill Clinton was a mistake, and pledged to accept the recommendation of FBI agents and career prosecutors on whether Hillary should face charges.

That’s not enough, not nearly enough, given the circumstances and stakes.

While Lynch offers no explanation as to why in the world she agreed to the 30-minute meeting on a plane in Phoenix, perhaps she felt she owed the former president something. Remember, he first nominated her to be the US attorney in Brooklyn in 1999, a promotion that changed her life.

After his presidency, she went to a top private law firm, and became a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Bill Clinton had been very, very good to her, and without his boost, she probably wouldn’t even have been a candidate to replace Holder.

And now her patron wanted a private meeting. Both had to know it was wrong, but he had nothing to lose and didn’t care about her reputation or the Justice Department’s.

That was her responsibility. And it doesn’t really matter if they didn’t discuss the case. Just his being there was reminder enough that she owes him.

Lynch also had to know that an FBI agent who socialized with the spouse of a suspect in a criminal case probably would be investigated and fired. Yet she agreed to the meeting anyway.

Despite Lynch’s vow to let others make the call, her refusal to recuse herself means she will remain in charge. That was never ideal because Obama endorsed Hillary and all but exonerated her, but there seemed no way to argue for a special prosecutor without more evidence that the outcome was rigged. There was also FBI Director James Comey’s reputation as an independent straight shooter to provide some reassurance that the case would be handled on the merits.

Now Lynch has broken that fragile confidence, and the need for a special prosecutor is obvious.

The explosive result shows the Clintons haven’t lost their touch for leaving destruction and chaos in their wake. The remarkable events also serve as a clear reminder that while the Clintons enriched themselves over the years, they were helping to bankrupt the public trust in its government and institutions. And they won’t stop until they’re stopped.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-04/monica-loretta-clintons-corrupt-absolutely

Tumbleweed
5th July 2016, 05:20 AM
This is Larry Nichols take on what was going on during the meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=999NuVGiBIs

Twisted Titan
5th July 2016, 05:35 AM
probably wouldn’t even have been a candidate to replace Holder.

And now her patron wanted a private meeting. Both had to know it was wrong, but he had nothing to lose and didn’t care about her reputation or the Justice Department’s.

That was her responsibility. And it doesn’t really matter if they didn’t discuss the case. Just his being there was reminder enough that she owes him.




When you work for the Devil you get paid in his coin. ......and he ALWAYS pays on time