Criminal Arrogance of Hillary Clinton

The video below from Bill Whittle is the most clear, concise reason Hotlips Hooligan and her buddy O should be indicted and found guilty of obstruction of justice.

A quick highlight of what is included in the film:  Besides the exit list of information, the Constitution itself supplies both reasoning and two part sentence required for those in office who willfully destroy destroy government documents or eliminate or refuse to turn all records over prior to leaving. They can be fined, receive a 3 year sentence, or both.  Additionally, they can never hold public office again.  We can only hope Congress sees this.

 

 

–Uriel–

About Uriel

Retired educator and constitutionalist
Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Criminal Arrogance of Hillary Clinton

  1. tiretramp says:

    Would it not be super fantastic to see the Bitch fined 20 million and given 6 years it gitmo. One can only dream.
    skip

  2. Uriel says:

    If it were any of us, we would have been booked within days and never see outside prison again. I think GITMO is the purrrfect place for these guys!

  3. Kathy says:

    Just think how many people she corresponded with that also knew it was a private account – they are all complicit and are probably working overtime to scrub emails off their phones, computers, etc.

    Congress will do their usual nothing, so it’s basically up to Trey Gowdy.

    We have come full circle right back to monarchy and there are indeed people who are above the law.

  4. Uriel says:

    I agree Kathy. But in tge final analysis. Who is more at fault corrupt system or those who allowed it by apathetical attitudes and greed for more — handouts, free rides, etc.

  5. Hardnox says:

    As usual Bill nails it.

    The question remains: If Hillary didn’t communicate secret info, classified info, or sensitive info… what the hell did she do for 4 years??????

    EVERYTHING she communicated would have been classified to one degree or another, even personal stuff, if for nothing else: her personal security.

    The lefties blather on about how others did it, but they weren’t SoS on a private unsecured server that anyone could have hacked.

    • Uriel says:

      I agree Hardnox. Two glaring facts–(1) having worked in a federal government facility (granted 1998-1999). We All were aware of standing orders about personal vs gov use. We’re in fact monitored and called out for it. (2) She sent an email out to subordinates about this And reprimanded at least one harshly for doing so are the few sending emails exempt from the policy sent??

  6. captbogus2 says:

    First to my FB then to my address book…