We’re so used to complicated problems that we occasionally overlook the obvious. Like fiddling around with some gadget, trying to get it to work when all you needed to do is plug it in.
Could the solution to the “problem” of Hillary running for president be just that simple? Did she really break the law — and would the penalty for breaking that law disqualify her from being president? The answers to those two questions are “yes,” and “yes.”
See the actual law on the following page:
Sad that she is because of Bill Clinton. Above the law
Now, please, make no mistake about me, I am a registered Republican and I will never vote for Mrs Clinton for ANY office ANYWHERE. Got that? Good. Now here is an interesting quot, not from an OPED in the New York Times but from the Constitution:
Qualifications for the Office of President
Age and Citizenship requirements – US Constitution, Article II, Section 1
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.
Now, painful as that may be, nowhere in those qualifications does it mention anything about the blatant mishandling of classified information. It does not say that if you lie to Congress, you can’t be President. Those things should render one unelectable in the minds of the voters but in the case of Mrs Clinton it seems to make no difference. That is the fault of the voters (and, in my opinion, the media) who just don’t seem to give a damn. But, alas, the Constitution trumps USC law. So, if you don’t want her to be president, don’t vote for her, and get all your friends to do the same. But don’t waste time chasing after things that, in the end, just don’t matter.
Read and make this ho viral
Time to do your
Whoever takes her down for whatever reason will be an American HERO!
QUOTED
So here’s the one law you need to know that should terminate her [ Hillary Rodham Clinton ] presidential campaign:
For those of us who do not have United States Code committed to memory, here’s what it says:”(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.”
Yes, it explicitly states “shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”
JUST RE-READ THE LAW a bit more carefully. The relevant part is: “…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 ….” So I bet a pile of bright Republican Lawyers looked at this and concluded that this applies to the active removal of court records or records filed with a public official. Since much of the fuss has been about confidential information, one assumes that those records aren’t normally filed in a public office. I’d bet history and case law says this applies to court records and public records like patent applications, tax returns and the like.
That’s not the only one. Her pay to play is against the patriot act. A firm of money laundering. Title III: International Money Laundering Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 is actually an act of Congress in its own right as well as being a title of the USA PATRIOT Act, and is intended to facilitate the prevention, detection and prosecution of international money laundering and the financing of terrorism. The title’s sections primarily amend portions of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986 and the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970.
How much of the $9 trillion has gone to terrorist nations?
Are Obama and the Clinton’s and this administration guilty?
Clinton foundation cash cow?
Admin funding of terrorists nations and release of terrorist at gitmo?
Attempt to overthrow Syria?
Attempt to overthrow Egypt?
http://eaglerising.com/8011/hillary-huma-muslim-brotherhood/
http://rightwingnews.com/top-news/president-and-former-secertary-of-state-were-officially-charged-with-aiding-and-abetting-terrorists/
Is this under the patriot act?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act,_Title_III
http://shoebat.com/2015/04/17/egyptian-government-arrests-muslim-who-worked-for-the-obama-administration-and-sentences-him-to-life-in-prison/
http://joeforamerica.com/2015/08/hussein-obamas-collusion-irans-mullahs-kerry-bagman-jarrett-point-woman/
It is not that Obama and Hillary tried to overthrow these nations to free them they tried to overthrow them for the Muslim brotherhood which is an enemy of this nation.
Why is nobody investigating this? Why are they not under arrest for high crimes and treason?
You know that doesn’t matter. The Clintons are the most corrupt political elites in American history.
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/415603/no-statute-cant-keep-hillary-being-president-matthew-j-franck
—-Where is this information?