Posted on Jul 27, 2016
For those not satisfied with Clinton or Trump, how are you voting this November?
12.3K
234
96
8
8
0
For me, both major party candidates are people I couldn't vote for with a gun to my head. Hillary should be in jail for her violation of national security policies and Trump is a narcissistic racist that I wouldn't trust to lead a Boy Scout troop.
Anyone else feel this way, and if so, what are you going to do this November?
Anyone else feel this way, and if so, what are you going to do this November?
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 38
Trump....if any of us service members had broken the COMSEC laws regarding our clearances we would be tried and punished under the below USC...not to mention she lied to Benghazi families about the video....
FBI determined Clinton's private email server contained :
110 classified emails in 52 chains
8 top secret emails
36 "secret" emails
8 "confidential" emails
All were clearly designated as such at the time sent or received. Additionally, another 2,000 emails had been "up-classified" to confidential after being sent or received.
It also found several work-related emails Clinton's staff did not include with the 30,000 handed over to the State Department for release to FOIA requesters.
The McCarran Internal Security Act 793(e), States: "mere retention" of information a crime no matter what the intent, covering even former government officials writing their memoirs.
1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
2.) 18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information
3.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
4.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena
6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations
7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States
18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television
18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States
If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud.
8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense
If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense.
FBI determined Clinton's private email server contained :
110 classified emails in 52 chains
8 top secret emails
36 "secret" emails
8 "confidential" emails
All were clearly designated as such at the time sent or received. Additionally, another 2,000 emails had been "up-classified" to confidential after being sent or received.
It also found several work-related emails Clinton's staff did not include with the 30,000 handed over to the State Department for release to FOIA requesters.
The McCarran Internal Security Act 793(e), States: "mere retention" of information a crime no matter what the intent, covering even former government officials writing their memoirs.
1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
2.) 18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information
3.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
4.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena
6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations
7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States
18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television
18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States
If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud.
8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense
If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense.
(9)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
COL Jean (John) F. B. - Not gullible, just skeptical of the right wing spin machine. As one of those IT professionals, I would never say, with absolute certainty, that her server was not hacked. However, since it is impossible to prove a negative, until actual proof is found, I will continue to point out that there is no proof. Even the alleged hacker won't provide real proof.
(0)
(0)
CMSgt Mike Esser
James Comey responses stating Hillary answered less than truthfully
http://www.politico.com/blogs/james-comey-testimony/2016/07/clinton-untrue-statements-fbi-comey-225216
http://www.politico.com/blogs/james-comey-testimony/2016/07/clinton-untrue-statements-fbi-comey-225216
(1)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
SGT Edward Wilcox - Fair enough, although I tend to subscribe to the theory that, despite the lack of "proof", it is more likely than not that it was hacked. One has to assume it was hacked and, as a result, do what is necessary to minimize the impact of that hacking.
(0)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
Here's my point: She used a private server with a private domain name, that may, or may not, have been hacked. We don't know for sure, so we err on the side of caution. Sec. Powell used a public email server, on a public domain. One that gets hacked regularly, by numerous attackers. His official emails may, or may not, have been accessed in one of those many "security breaches". Why then, do we focus only on Sec. Clinton? Why is Sec. Powell not being investigated, even after admitting that he did not retain and turn over official emails from his private account? Could it be because he is a conservative? Or, maybe because he served under Pres Bush? Or maybe, because Rep Gowdy was just grasping at whatever straw would finally allow the Republicans to finally stick it to her, and not in a good way.
(0)
(0)
I am not sold on Trump, but, there is absolutely no alternative. To pick anyone else would be to hand over the country, military and our society to an administration that will put the finishing shot to the head of the Constitutional Republic that we all have sworn to protect. An administration that has said they will continue with the policies and ideology that has brought more of a racial divide to this country than I have ever seen in my 53 yrs on earth, more illegal immigration, disregard for the laws of the land, arms to our enemies yet strive to disarm our citizens, leave Americans to die at the hands of our enemies. A foreign policy that is so non-existent that the world see's us as two bit rabble. Look at it this way; If you are going to be covered in cow shit, do you want to be covered to your waist (Trump) or over your head (Clinton). You can chose neither, pick door number 3 (other candidate/not vote), which will do nothing, and give the election to the scenario/candidate that has the cow shit well over your head. If I have to choose, I will choose the unknown evil over the known. At least Trump is not promising more of the same crap and not a career politician.
(8)
(0)
Cpl (Join to see)
As any times as I here this for both candidates it would be a tragic if either became president. If everyone that said that voted for Gary Johnson he would be our next president
(1)
(0)
SFC William "Bill" Moore
Cpl (Join to see) - This is true, however, Johnson may not be any better liked by the voter (not in my case though), Nor has he had any support from those that would make up the Electoral College. Without media coverage, advertisement and exposure, a candidate, on the national level will fail 9.9 times out of 10. Unfortunately, the larger Libertarian movements are isolated to a small number of states. I would vote that way, if I thought our Nation could handle 4-8 more years of the un-American policies and politics that we have put up with for the past 20 plus years. However, I seriously believe, if Clinton is elected, we will see the last of our Constitutional Republic destroyed in one of the bloodiest civil wars we have seen in the last 151 years. This time, there will be major foreign involvement including ground troops.
So, my inclination is to vote for the individual that will allow time for a strong Libertarian/Constitutionalist party to develop.
So, my inclination is to vote for the individual that will allow time for a strong Libertarian/Constitutionalist party to develop.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Not only an administration... it would be handing over the Supreme Court. That scares me far more.
(2)
(0)
Failing to vote is surrender. I know the lesser of two evils is still evil but the viability of a third party candidate or an independent will only siphon votes from one or both sides resulting in a plurality vote, not a majority. you don't vote, you can't bitch.
(7)
(0)
SFC J Fullerton
So far, the results of this poll show 43% are voting third party. If most of that 43% went to one (say Johnson), then it is quite possible neither DJT or HRC would have the electoral votes to win. If half of the 12% that currently refuse to vote decided to vote third party, then that would be enough to lock out both of them. Is it likely?, probably not because third party candidates do not get the exposure needed to run an effective campaign against the two major parties. But if there was an election year where is there was an opportunity for a 3rd party to pull an upset, this is it.
(2)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
I refuse to take any responsibility for voting for either the R or D candidate. I'll vote, but I will most likely leave my choice for president blank (i.e. no vote for a presidential candidate).
I don't affiliate with a political party. They decide far, far in advance who they will support. And what the potential candidates promise party honchos for their support undoubtedly has something, if not everything to do with the party support. So, I see the choice of candidates as a BIG problem in the parties.
IF a vote for a 3rd party candidate would not be considered support of a party, I might consider voting for Johnson. No write-in for president is allowed in NM. Yes, it is a "wasted" vote simply because it means other folks who vote for R or D candidate will be deciding who is president. But I will not feel responsible for putting either into office, and that is worth something to me!
I thought Gary Johnson as governor of NM was better than many. And the state didn't suffer economically with him at the helm as much as it has with other governors.
I don't affiliate with a political party. They decide far, far in advance who they will support. And what the potential candidates promise party honchos for their support undoubtedly has something, if not everything to do with the party support. So, I see the choice of candidates as a BIG problem in the parties.
IF a vote for a 3rd party candidate would not be considered support of a party, I might consider voting for Johnson. No write-in for president is allowed in NM. Yes, it is a "wasted" vote simply because it means other folks who vote for R or D candidate will be deciding who is president. But I will not feel responsible for putting either into office, and that is worth something to me!
I thought Gary Johnson as governor of NM was better than many. And the state didn't suffer economically with him at the helm as much as it has with other governors.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SFC John Lovelady - I'll say what I keep saying. It's no longer about POTUS. Its about the Supreme Court. That is far more important for the future of this country than who actually wins POTUS.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next