quote:

Originally posted by IrishWind:
....pardoned...

Did I or did I not just address this crap in this thread?

IrishWind, I have told you to cut out this crap, and more than once. There will be no more warnings. Next time, it's 30 days of Moderated Status. After that, it's going to be a full year.

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...5/m/9250013683/p/151

I am sick of some of you guys doing your very best to deflate everyone's hopes.

And if you consider yourself to be very stubborn, IrishWind, you've met your match.

May 16, 2016
The FBI may be looking at a violation of the Constitution in their Hillary investigation
By Richard Henry Lee

Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution forbids office holders from accepting anything of value from a foreign state, yet husband Bill Clinton collected $1 million from the Abu Dhabi government while Hillary was secretary of state.

Bill Clinton spoke at the Abu Dhabi Global Environmental Data Initiative (AGEDI) on December 13, 2011 and received a speaking fee of $500,000. The AGEDI is a program funded by the Abu Dhabi government, so the source of the funds was the government itself. Although the fee was paid to Bill, Hillary equally benefited from the payment. In effect, she accepted money from a foreign state.

A year later, Bill spoke to the World Travel and Tourism Council in Abu Dhabi (also funded by the Abu Dhabi government) for another fee of $500,000, for a total of $1 million.

The U.S. Constitution provides in Section 9 as follows:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

The Congress has provided that gifts to the president from foreign governments, for example, are transferred to the United States government. The Congress has never provided for office holders to accept personal gifts. Yet somehow, the Department of State allowed Bill to collect large speaking fees when Hillary was also a benefactor.

Bill and Hillary both studied law at Yale University and they presumably took a course on constitutional law. Also, Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. Yet Bill was allowed to brazenly accept large speaking fees from a foreign government where Hillary also stood to benefit.

It is possible that the FBI is investigating this angle, since Michael Mukasey, former U.S. judge and attorney general, stated on Fox News Channel's Sunday Morning Futures on May 15, 2016 that there was a violation of the Constitution when Bill took money from Nigeria. Mukasey apparently had his facts wrong, since it was a newspaper owner who paid for Bill's Nigeria speech, and it was the government of Abu Dhabi who gave Bill money. Even though he got his country wrong, Mukasey may have contacts in the FBI or Justice Department who revealed to him that the investigators are looking at a possible constitution violation.

Both Clinton Cash author Peter Schweizer and the Wall Street Journal have reported that Abu Dhabi benefited from actions by Hillary’s State Department during the time of the payments.

Meanwhile, Hillary's rocky campaign for the Democratic nomination continues while we wait for word on any criminal charges.

http://www.americanthinker.com...y_investigation.html

I am stating the obvious but...

Its so damn frustrating. Everyone knows what they did. Everyone knows they broke the law. They are so slimey and cunning that they figure they have covered their trail and thumb their collective noses (this includes their daughter) at you and I and the system.

I still believe in my heart of hearts that Comey & Co have what they need and are adding to it in order to make it rock solid.

I say a prayer for this Country every evening. Im not particularly religeous, but the next 6 months are truly going to decide how my 3 kids grow up. Its scarey as shit.

Is there a provision for military officers to receive awards from foreign governments? Almost every senior officer whose bio I have seen has several.

Did those military guys on the train who received the Legion d'honneur have consent of Congress?

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Is there a provision for military officers to receive awards from foreign governments? Almost every senior officer whose bio I have seen has several.

Did those military guys on the train who received the Legion d'honneur have consent of Congress?

A piece of ribbon and a frameable certificate are hardly an "emolument, office, or title".

I agree. Last time I read anything on the subject, military Officers werent pulling down tens of million dollars.

How is a military officer in the US Military equivalent to an "Office Holder" in the US Government, elected or otherwise appointed?

A happy thought:

http://www.lifezette.com/poliz...clinton-cash-cannes/

We’ve been told FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton are required to read “Clinton Cash” as a backgrounder.


The only question she received on her transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Putin’s Russia as nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation was asked by a local reporter, and she brushed off the question.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
How is a military officer in the US Military equivalent to an "Office Holder" in the US Government, elected or otherwise appointed?

What?

Every commissioned officer in the military is an office holder of the United States, nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

quote:

The President of the United States of America

To all who shall see these presents, greeting:

Know Ye that, reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities of .................., I do appoint ["him" or "her"] a ["Second Lieutenant" or "Ensign"] in the [name of service] to rank as such from the .... day of ........ ...... This Officer will therefore carefully and diligently discharge the duties of the office to which appointed by doing and performing all manner of things thereunto belonging.

And I do strictly charge and require those Officers and other personnel of lesser rank to render such obedience as is due an officer of this grade and position. And this Officer is to observe and follow such orders and directives, from time to time, as may be given by me, or the future President of the United States of America, or other Superior Officers acting in accordance with the laws of the United States of America.

This commission is to continue in force during the pleasure of the President of the United States of America for the time being, under the provisions of those Public Laws relating to Officers of the Armed Forces of the United States of America and the component thereof in which this appointment is made.

Done at the City of Washington, this .... day of ........ in the year of our Lord ................ and of the Independence of the United States of America the ..........

By the President:

I doubt very seriously that the President of France considers that he is awarding a "piece of ribbon and a certificate suitable for framing" when they haul out the honor guards with gleaming swords and helmets and horses and polished brass and leather to present Legion d'Honneurs to awardees.

quote:

I doubt very seriously that the President of France considers that he is awarding a "piece of ribbon and a certificate suitable for framing" when they haul out the honor guards with gleaming swords and helmets and horses and polished brass and leather to present Legion d'Honneurs to awardees.

OTOH, I'm sure that he does not consider that the award has any significant monetary value, which is the type of "award" covered by the laws. A medal, however distinguished, has very little material value (unless, of course, it's made of a precious metal). Accepting such an award is not governed by the laws against accepting gifts (which often actually specify an upper Dollar value limit).

Don't be obtuse.

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

I doubt very seriously that the President of France considers that he is awarding a "piece of ribbon and a certificate suitable for framing" when they haul out the honor guards with gleaming swords and helmets and horses and polished brass and leather to present Legion d'Honneurs to awardees.

OTOH, I'm sure that he does not consider that the award has any significant monetary value, which is the type of "award" covered by the laws. A medal, however distinguished, has very little material value (unless, of course, it's made of a precious metal). Accepting such an award is not governed by the laws against accepting gifts (which often actually specify an upper Dollar value limit).

Don't be obtuse.

flashguy

Don't be ignorant.

A bit of research reveals that Congress has exercised its power of "Consent" under the clause by enacting the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which authorizes federal employees to accept foreign governmental benefits of various kinds in specific circumstances.

quote:

d) The Congress consents to the accepting, retaining, and wearing by an employee of a decoration tendered in recognition of active field service in time of combat operations or awarded for other outstanding or unusually meritorious performance, subject to the approval of the employing agency of such employee. Without this approval, the decoration is deemed to have been accepted on behalf of the United States, shall become the property of the United States, and shall be deposited by the employee, within sixty days of acceptance, with the employing agency for official use, for forwarding to the Administrator of General Services for disposal in accordance with subsection (e)(1), or for disposal in accordance with subsection (e)(2).

5 U.S. Code § 7342 - Receipt and disposition of foreign gifts and decorations

Now you aren't, at least on this topic.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
A happy thought:

http://www.lifezette.com/poliz...clinton-cash-cannes/

We’ve been told FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton are required to read “Clinton Cash” as a backgrounder.


The only question she received on her transfer of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to Putin’s Russia as nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation was asked by a local reporter, and she brushed off the question.

I understand that there was much money also funneled into Canada, and then transferred to the Clinton Foundation, from foreign sources.

The sources of all these donations may never be known by the public.Organized crime syndicates could only wish to be this efficient one day.

Military earns foreign awards all the time. One of the benefits to being in EUCOM is the chance to earn foreign military awards. German expert infantry and Netherland's Nijmegan March are two that pop into my head. Really wanted the latter, but operational requirements kept me from going. But earning and keeping the awards just took some extra paperwork, but troops get to wear them. Makes formal dining events fun with "what is that? and where did you get it" questions.

So we're now discussing the comparason of military medals and decorations to the funneling of millions of dollars to elected officials?

OK...my call.

BULLSHIT

We did get a little side tracked, but I can see a Clintonista tossing out a comparison between Hilz and a trooper to make their side look better in the left's eyes.

I admit I don't understand how this works, but

Judicial Watch starts interviews over Clinton Email Server

http://www.wsj.com/articles/in...this-week-1463506592

Interviews in a civil lawsuit with current and former State Department officials concerning former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server will begin this week.

Lewis Lukens, a former deputy assistant secretary of state, will be interviewed under oath in the first deposition taken as part of a lawsuit by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch over access to Mrs. Clinton’s records during her time in office.

The civil lawsuit, which targets the State Department, doesn’t name Mrs. Clinton as a defendant

The depositions, which will explore why Mrs. Clinton set up a private email server for her government work, will become part of the public record.

Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Democratic appointee, granted Judicial Watch the right to conduct discovery, allowing the group to seek information from State Department officials—a rare order in a case concerning the Freedom of Information Act.

The deposition of Mr. Lukens will be followed by an interview next week with Cheryl D. Mills

Five other depositions are scheduled between now and the end of June, according to a schedule filed with the court.

Those interviews under oath will include Mrs. Clinton’s close aide Huma Abedin and Bryan Pagliano, the technology staffer who set up Mrs. Clinton’s private server.

Under federal law, all of Mrs. Clinton’s work emails belong to the federal government and are eligible for release under the Freedom of Information Act.

In a separate lawsuit in front of a different judge—concerning access to talking points in the aftermath of a 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya—Judicial Watch has asked to interview Mrs. Clinton herself under oath. That decision on whether to compel Mrs. Clinton to testify is expected later this summer.

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
So we're now discussing the comparason of military medals and decorations to the funneling of millions of dollars to elected officials?

OK...my call.

BULLSHIT

It's hard when participants don't know what they are talking about, so it is necessary to wander around and get the right info.

If we were restricted to only posting when we knew what we were talking about, our post counts might be in the hundreds and we could look in once a day, boring!

This way, we gain valuable, correct info, albeit at the cost of some drift now and then.

There is a vast amount of coordination behind the curtain that lead up to those gentleman on the train receiving the medals, though it likely happened at an accelerated rate.

They did an awesome thing, President France wanted to thank them. France diplomatic people talked to US diplomatic people, likely getting verbal go ahead while the paper pushers did their thing.

This is apples and asteroids in comparison to the dealings perpetrated by the Clinton foundation.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
I admit I don't understand how this works, but

Judicial Watch starts interviews over Clinton Email Server
-snip-

Separate lawsuit over the Clinton Emails. Judicial Watch has a FOIA suit filed to get at Benghazi information. State stonewalled, and during that food fight it was discovered Hilz's has an undisclosed, personal server in her home. The FBI is doing a separate investigation about the legality of that server, the classified information that was on it, and how did such volume come to be in Hilz's persona email files.

That is why Cheryl Mills walked out of the FBI interview last week is because she was asked about State's efforts under her teams watch to obstruct the FOIA inquiry by Judicial Watch. Anything she said in that interview would be used in the civil case that is going forward too.

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:
There is a vast amount of coordination behind the curtain that lead up to those gentleman on the train receiving the medals, though it likely happened at an accelerated rate.

They did an awesome thing, President France wanted to thank them. France diplomatic people talked to US diplomatic people, likely getting verbal go ahead while the paper pushers did their thing.

This is apples and asteroids in comparison to the dealings perpetrated by the Clinton foundation.

But it illustrates the essential differences between the two.

BTW, this topic came to my attention just the other day when I noticed that Chester W. Nimitz had more awards from foreign countries than from the US, and not "mere pieces of ribbon" either.

FADM Nimitz was a Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath. If that isn't an "emolument," I don't know what is!

It requires Congressional consent, which it has provided the Navy department ok'd it. Vastly different from the Clintons, although it isn't clear whether either Clinton is now an employee or officer of the United States, or than BJ was while Hillary was SecState.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: JALLEN,