Hillary 2016: ‘Hold Your Nose and Vote for Me’

Hold Your Nose pinBy Jeff Rutherford

Clothespin bulletIf you’re a Liberal voter, it doesn’t matter that Hillary Clinton served as the 67th U.S. Secretary of State for four years while using her own private email server, specifically in violation of U.S. Code, Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 101, Section 2071. [see footnote]

Clothespin bulletIf you’re a Liberal voter, it doesn’t matter that she then willfully concealed and removed those emails, personally picking which to delete and which to submit to the State Department as record of her actions in office, after the State Department asked her on 10/28/2014 to return her public record – 21 months after she left office.

Clothespin bulletIf you’re a Liberal voter, it doesn’t matter that she then wiped her email server clean of all emails older than 60 days before responding to a March 2015 subpoena from the House Select Committee on Benghazi, permanently covering her tracks on which emails she deleted.

Clothespin bulletIf you’re a Liberal voter, it doesn’t even matter that the Section 2071 law calls for fines and up to 3 years imprisonment, as well as disqualification from holding any office under the United States.  And it doesn’t matter that Barack Obama’s Department of Justice isn’t indicting Hillary Clinton for her clear violation of this federal law.

If you’re a Liberal voter, you only look FORWARD.  Frankly, if I were you I wouldn’t look back either.

Hillary logoIf you’re a Liberal voter, you’ll aim your nose upwind and vote for Hillary because it’s her turn.

Or you won’t vote.

Hillary closeup[Footnote]
U.S. Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 101, Section 2071

Paragraph 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.”

Paragraph 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.”


About Necessary and Proper

Jeff believes in the Individual's ability to excel when liberty and freedom of choice are protected. Also believes in the Community's ability to take care of the vast majority of its own issues and needs when the federal government leaves the Community's resources and sphere of control alone. State and local choice produce better results than centralized federal control. https://necessaryandpropergovt.wordpress.com/
This entry was posted in Politics in Practice, Progressive Paradoxes and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Hillary 2016: ‘Hold Your Nose and Vote for Me’

  1. Bullright says:

    “And be disqualified from holding any office.” Well, I guess we can predict a run on clothes pins. It seems nothing can deter or destroy her voting base.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Paula Parmentier Cooper says:

    Code, I believe, wasn’t there when she was SoS. Kerry is the first SoS to use a government email account. Did I misunderstand you?


    • As you can read at the bottom of the link to the government website that I provided in the footnote, this U.S. Code was written in 1948. It was amended twice: once in 1990 to exclude retired officers of the U.S. Military (wording which I left out of Paragraph B since it doesn’t apply here). And again in 1994 to remove a cap of $2000 for the fine. That’s it.

      I don’t think you misunderstood me. Perhaps you misunderstood or were misled by your sources of news and political analysis.

      – Jeff


  3. gwynell westervelt says:

    It is beyond comprehension that even the media will not call for her to be prosecuted. And where are the Congressional and Senate Republicans? They should be calling for her to be prosecuted. She is a common criminal. Actually, it is probably better that it wait until much later into the process. If they can get charges brought against her deep into the primaries, it will have a detrimental effect on the candidates wanting to take her place. At this point no one on that side seems to want to challenge her. Hopefully they will wait too long. She just has to go down for all of this. And so do people like George Stephanopoulos. Surely we can not keep letting them get by with this crap.


  4. Grumpa Joe says:

    As I have said many times “We are a Nation of laws that are convenient to enforce, or to disregard depending on the advantage to the elected.” JSR 13 May 2010


  5. Grumpa Joe says:

    She is prepared to spend 2.5 billion dollars to buy the presidency. I wonder what the pay back is on that investment?


  6. A larger issue, but long-forgotten: She is guilty of evident perjury in the largest federal election fraud (by dollar amount) of any candidate, in the famous case related to her 2000 Senate election. One man bought a favor from Bill by agreeing to support Hillary’s re-election, and gave nearly $2 million to her campaign. (He essentially paid for her star-studded party in Brentwood.)

    But someone revealed that he had been convicted of a felony decades before (he was prosecuted by a vindictive Florida government for running a sting/scam on Fidel Castro). So, he was not allowed to make a contribution. Since the legal limit wa $2300, the Clinton campaign wrote him a check “returning his contribution.” They could not return the million-plus, because it was illegal to accept, and they didn’t have it anyway.

    She signed a sworn affidavit asserting that she had no knowledge of his larger contributions. But video exists of Peter F. Paul being effusively thanked by Clinton for all of his contributions including paying for that fund-raising party. The California appellate court threw out the case and the feds prosecuted Paul for probation violations rather than allow Hillary’s perjury to come to light, though one of her campaign staffers did hard time in jail when she threw him under the bus.

    Her actions merit jail time, and all the evidence is in. But this will not be touched. And a video about it, aired before Clinton’s Senate election, was the case that triggered the creation of the McCain-Feingold Act. At the time, McCain and Clinton were considered the two leading contenders for the 2004 or 2008 elections, were called “good friends” on the cover of Newsweek, and were jokingly described in national news as considering running together as a “dream ticket.”

    Clinton could be convicted, right now, with no further subpoenas being required. Ah, fantasy land again, to think such a thing would be considered. It is “old news” — just as all of the above-listed scandals will be by next year.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle


    • My fantasy: Dept. of Justice (DOJ) as an independent and objective branch of government. Why is it a fantasy? Because “independent and objective” are impossible to achieve permanently, since such a DOJ would be very powerful. Any powerful government institution becomes a goal for conquest by those with nefarious political ambition. To this flawed human race, the intoxicating compulsion to covet power over others is our curse — as the Founders knew. They crafted the finest structure that is probably possible for ethical government, but alas the worms still find their way into the apple ’til the core is rotten.

      11th Commandment?: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s unalienable rights.”


  7. I’ve been thinking about the clothespin vote for a while. But for now, if you’re a Progressive and your primary is still coming up, you vote for Bernie. If Hillary wins the primaries, I’ll be conscious of the clothespin I wear when I vote for her in November, because there isn’t a clothespin with a big enough spring on it to allow to me to vote for Cruz or Trump.


    • This site is largely populated by Constitutional conservatives. Clearly you have a different perception. I am curious: What policy position inclines you most toward Bernie Sanders — and which one is most problematic for you with regard to Ted Cruz?

      (I don’t consider Donald Trump to have reliable policy positions, per se: He embodies a sort of political Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.)

      ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hi Tommy. Thanks for the comment.

      Your first sentence was “I’ve been thinking about the clothespin vote for a while.” Assuming it wasn’t just a way of setting up your ending point, please help me understand your view of a clothespin vote for Hillary. What about her has offended your nose? I listed some of my reasons…..what are yours? Lets have a discussion.

      BTW, that Youtube clip of Captain Kirk and Mike Brady on your Google+ page caught me by surprise, since it seemed like they were wearing Star Trek-like uniforms. I’m sure you realize it was a scene from a weird 1974 made-for-TV movie called “Pray for the Wildcats” and even included Sheriff Andy Taylor. 🙂 Thanks for the cool piece of video trivia.

      – Jeff


Chime in! Leave Jeff a comment...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s