CHARLES G. MILLS: WHAT TO DO WITH HILLARY
|
[GLEN COVE, NY - 12/2/16] -- The idea of Hillary Clinton on the chain gang or rock pile is attractive, but it is not good policy. We do not need to create a myth of the martyred Hillary Clinton.
One thing is certain and should have near unanimous approval. Hillary Clinton must not be allowed to practice law. President Nixon told one or two lies and President Clinton told even more lies. Both were disbarred from practicing law. Hillary Clinton told many times more lies than either of the former presidents and her lies were more malicious. It would be an outrage if she were allowed to resume her law practice after the way two former presidents were treated for so much less.
The Clinton Family Foundation has been used as a conduit for bribery, violations of the Internal Revenue Code in benefits to disqualified persons, and tax fraud. Its tax exemption must be cancelled and some kind of fine for its tax frauds should be imposed.
It would be just to impose a few months of prison in a country club prison on Clinton, but it would probably not be wise. On the other hand, Clinton must not be allowed to continue to hide the truth. Three possible solutions that would protect the truth are possible.
1. Clinton could be pardoned and then subpoenaed to testify before one or more Congressional committees. The pardon would prevent her from taking the Fifth Amendment but would not protect her from perjury charges if she lied to a committee. This is probably the worst way to solve the problem. 2. Clinton could be indicted. The United States Attorney could negotiate a plea with her, including an allocution of guilt as to many things, probably not Vincent Foster's murder, but probably including fraudulent options trades, hiding the Whitewater bills, deceit about Libya, mishandling Top Secret documents, and obstruction of justice. The plea must include some kind of punishment but it could be as mild as that imposed on Spiro Agnew. To make a point it could be exactly to same punishment Agnew received. 3. A Congressional Committee could grant her complete transactional immunity for everything she testifies to. The Committee could then force her to answer questions about Vincent Foster, the Whitewater bills, the White House Travel Office, her options trades, her internet server, her cell phones, her mishandling of Top Secret (compartmentalized) and Confidential information, her conduct and lies about Benghazi, and her slanders of her husband's sexual partners. ###
Copyright © 2016 by Charles G. Mills and the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation. All rights reserved.
###
|
|
Help the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation with an end-of-the year tax-deductible donation online at http://www.fgfBooks.com, by phone
at 877-726-0058, or by mail to 713 Park St., SE, Vienna, VA 22180 ###
|
DakotaBeacon