Last Sunday, a man was arrested for attempting to stab a GOP congressional candidate at a Fall Festival in California.
On Monday, a 94-year-old Broadway star, Carole Cooke, referenced President Trump by asking:
Where is John Wilkes Booth when you need him?
And in the last day or so, I received a remarkably hostile email from an individual who, among other things, took a moment from his valuable time to attack me personally:
“You right wingers have a selective memory. And [you] trnd [sic] to be stupid and gullible idiots who are brainwashed by Fox "Fake News" endless lies.”
“Prosecutors have to look at actual evidence after all, not crazy right wing conspiracy theories and wishful thinking. The 26-year GOP-anti-Clinton obsession is the real witch-hunt…”
This attack was in response to an op-ed I recently wrote in which I suggested — somewhat along the lines of Genesis 3:15 — that the President seriously consider prosecuting Hillary Clinton for at leastone of the possible felonies stemming from her mishandling of classified information. He must crush the head of the corrupt snake, even if it wounds his heel.
I argued the benefits would be two-fold. This effort could help President Trump regain his constitutional authority over what presently appears to be a rogue Department of Justice, while at the same time it would also go far toward restoring our country’s faith in the rule of law.
And for this, my new email friend calls me not just an ordinary Idiot, but a stupid idiot no less?
Holding to the hope that he is not correct, I must admit, this individual’s email — coupled with the attempted stabbing and Ms. Cooke’s call for an assassination — has compelled me to consider other possibilities that perhaps may be more plausible.
Like, for instance, could it be they who are the idiots?
For the California stabber, I am confident the courts will ultimately decide this issue.
To answer this question for those like Ms. Cooke is also fairly simple. I would only recommend that she — not to mention anyone concerned about people like her — give some serious thought to another op-ed I recently wrote: Solicitation of Murder is a Crime — Even When Committed by Celebrities.
And so, for now, that leaves me to deal with my new email friend.
For him, the answer may require a little more effort. He has attacked me for spreading conspiracy theories about Secretary Clinton based on lies for which he suggests — per his world-view — there is no “actual” proof.
In response, perhaps I could encourage him to consider the following “actual” evidence that just might support an indictment of Hillary Clinton for violating at leastone criminal statue — like say,18 U.S.C. Section 793(f):
A. It is not a Fox “Fake News” lie that, on January 21, 2009, Hillary Rodham Clinton was both confirmed by the U.S. Senate and took the oath of office to become the U.S. Secretary of State, in which capacity she served until February 1, 2013.
B. Nor is it the off-spring of my “wishful thinking” that, the very next day, January 22, 2009, Secretary Clinton read and signed a Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement that provides, in oh-so-very pertinent part, as follows:
1. Intending to be legally bound, I, [Secretary Clinton], hereby accept the obligations contained in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted access to classified information. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or unmarked classified information… I, [Secretary Clinton], understand and accept that by being granted access to classified information, special confidence and trust shall be placed in me by the United States Government.
2. I, [Secretary Clinton], acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information… and that I understand these procedures.
3. I, [Secretary Clinton], have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable harm to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation…
4. I, [Secretary Clinton], have been advisedthat any breach of this Agreement may result in… a violation, or violations, of United States Criminal laws, including the provisions of [18 U.S.C. Section 793(f)]…
7. I, [Secretary Clinton],understand… If I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of… [18 U.S.C. Section 793(f)]... a United States criminal law.
8. … I, [Secretary Clinton], understand that all conditions and obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply during the time I am granted access to classified information, and at all times thereafter.
11. I, [Secretary Clinton], have read this Agreement carefully and my questions, if any, have been answered…(emphasis added)
Signature — H R Clinton
C. In addition to Fox "Fake News,"on March 2, 2015, the New York Times also reported the following two important facts (i.e. not lies):
1. “Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state…
2. Secretary Clinton did not have a [secured] government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department...
D.Again, in addition to Fox "Fake News,"in September 2015, CBS News also reported that, of the over 63,000 emails on Secretary Clinton’s private server, she unilaterally agreed to 33,000 being deleted by her subordinates.
E.And another non-lie is that on July 5, 2016, James Comey — most certainly not an employee of Fox “Fake News” — revealed publicly that, of the over 30,000 emails Secretary Clinton did belatedly hand over to the State Department, the FBI had discovered the following important facts:
1.110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains contained classified information;
2. 8 of those chains contained information that was Top Secret;
3. 36 chains contained Secret information at the time;
4. 8 contained Confidential information; and
5. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were later “up-classified” to make them Confidential.
F. It is not the product of a “conspiracy theory” to say that18 U.S.C. Section 793(f) provides, in pertinent part, the following:
“Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document… or information relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody… or destroyed… shall be fined… or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
Based on the foregoing “actual” evidence, perhaps even my email friend will agree that even reasonable minds — i.e. non-idiots — might conclude that a grand jury should indict Secretary Clinton for a violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 793(f)… that is, should one ever be convened for that purpose.
None of this evidence is even remotely dependent on any “crazy right wing conspiracy theories” or “Fox ‘Fake News’ lies” or my “wishful thinking.”
And, even better, it also does not bear the stain of association with things like collusion, Session’s recusal or anything else that has been Muellerized.
Nor need President Trump’s Administration bother right now with whether former President Obama, Attorney General Lynch or FBI Director Comey (together with their eager minions) did anything else that might also be unlawful — like abusing the authority of their office to either exonerate or support a Presidential candidate they happened to prefer over another they disfavored in the course of, and following, an election.
All of this, and possibly much, much more of such “wishful thinking” can be left for others —like Q perhaps — to sort out at a later date, if and when it is necessary and appropriate.
For now, those American’s who are not idiots only want their faith in the rule of law restored … and, at this point, even a single indictment of an elitist law-breaker like Hillary Clinton might just do the trick.
At the very least, it would be a good start…
But perhaps it should get started soon!
Some have suggested the statute of limitations applicable to18 U.S.C. Section 793(f) may only run for five years.
And the last time I looked, 2013 plus 5 years is 2018.
I point this out only because, when all is said and done, if I’m going to be called an idiot by the likes of brainwashed people such as the California stabber, Carole Cooke and my email friend, then, unlike them, I would at least prefer the compliment of being known as a “useful” idiot.