Saturday, February 20, 2016

Criminal Activity in High Office


For John, BLUFMaybe the Lesson Learned is that Ms Clinton doesn't follow directions.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



From the on line publication Truth Revolt we have an interesting item from On-Line Commentator Bill Whittle, "The Criminal Arrogance of Hillary Clinton"

The sub-headline is:

Lawlessness is endemic in this administration. But beyond the lawlessness is, of course, the contempt.
Passing over, for a moment, Ms Clinton's WikiLeaks like treatment of classified information, there is the mandate in Law to protect public records.  There is the assumption that after the passage of some time the records of an Administration will be released so that historians can comb through them and help us to understand what happened way back when.

So, here is the US Code to which Mr Whittle was referring (U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 101, § 2071):

(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.

Someone in the Department of State, who was responsible for State employees following the law, fell down on the job and failed to point out to Ms Clinton what was as obvious as the nose on her face.

Regards  —  Cliff

  Like revealing the identity of an Afghan intelligence asset for the CIA.  Sure, it isn't like revealing the fact that Ms Valerie Plame was a CIA asset, even though she was safe in the US.  But still, to the Afghan's family it might be an issue.  Let them sue.  It is the American way.
  It turns out that news reports really are just the first draft of history.  Why do you think Sandy Berger was at the National Archives.  To remove materials.
  I realize Mr George Anthes, from City Life, will tell us that four different lawyers will have four different opinions, but I took it to be something that I had to pay attention to, taking the king's shilling and all that.
  Did she learn nothing from Mr Sandy Berger's 2005 conviction?

No comments: