It seems that every other day the opinionated and skewed media corporations appear to be only printing who Trump insulted this time or how well Hillary is supposedly doing in the polls. As a nation we are seemingly obsessed with the reality show Trump puts on, we blissfully ignore Hillary’s wrongdoings: lies, suggested murder, and placing herself above the law.
Our Founding Fathers specifically stated in the Bill of Rights that no man is above the law, meaning that no one should be able to escape justice for their crimes based on status or wealth. Then why do we allow Clinton to do so? Based on the 33,000 emails Clinton deleted in a rather questionable manner, she technically could have been tried for violating six major U.S. codes of law:
-18 U.S. Code § 2232 — Destruction or removal of property to prevent seizure
-18 U.S. Code § 1512 — Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
-18 U.S. Code § 2071 — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
-18 U.S. Code § 793 — Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
-18 U.S. Code § 641 — Public money, property or records
-18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations and bankruptcy
Despite the fact that Hillary had clearly mishandled classified, and even top secret information on her private servers and probably should not have deleted the evidence, FBI investigator James Comey stated that they would not prosecute Clinton, simply because she did not have a “clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information.”
She is a powerful elitist, and therefore avoids prosecution even though she technically committed several crimes. Prosecution is typically not a matter of “I didn’t mean to do it” but rather “Whodunnit?” Had Clinton been an average Joe, she would have been convicted and sentenced to a maximum of 67 years of prison time, and charged tens of thousands of dollars worth of fines. Though the investigation was carried out properly, the handling of the findings was not logical by legal standpoints for reasons unknown.
Regardless of the illegality of the emails, Clinton also made some wealthy friends in Saudi Arabia and other countries we aren’t too amicable with by ensuring that they received Boeing military-grade weapons after donating money to the Clinton fund. The International Business Times states,”In all, governments and corporations involved in the arms deals approved by Clinton’s State Department have delivered between $54 million and $141 million to the Clinton Foundation as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to the Clinton family, according to foundation and State Department records. The Clinton Foundation publishes only a rough range of individual contributors’ donations, making a more precise accounting impossible.” It seems that Clinton’s own funds are more important to her than the safety of U.S. citizens. Not only do these actions harm us in the here and now, they also set new legal standards for the rest of the elite, allowing them to “get away with” these actions and know they are above the law.
Clinton also changed her statement on gay marriage when it was convenient for her, stating several times that she was adamantly against it until 2013 when political tides changed. To not change her statement would be career suicide, but the question is, has she really changed her beliefs?
Finally, we come to the fact that at a recent meeting to discuss Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks brainchild who released the Clinton emails, Hillary plaintively asked her fellow politicians, “Can’t we just drone this guy?” When her remark was met by confusion and nervous laughter, Clinton then went on to discuss the matter seriously, and referred to Assange, an innocent foreign man, as a “soft target.” The evidence comes from an email released by Wikileaks, and there is no substantial evidence to deny that it happened as of yet. However, no one has gone on record to confirm that it happened, though that would be expected of such a huge accusation. Whatever the reality of the matter may be, it definitely arouses suspicion of Clinton’s moral integrity.
