It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

$6 Billion Missing From Hillary's State Dept, While $2 Billion Pours Into Clinton Foundation

page: 6
108
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 05:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Ridhya

Your attempt to cover up your lack of evidence by trying to counter attack me is telling.

The public has known about Mrs. Clinton's "private email server" since March 2013 when a hacker broke into the email of a White House staffer and saw an email from the private Clinton address, not to mention that every government official with whom Clinton has ever shared an email was aware that her email address was not "official."




The existence of Clinton’s private email account actually has been publicly known since March 2013, when the Smoking Gun wrote several stories about a hacker who broke into the AOL account of former Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal. Smoking Gun showed screen grabs of emails Blumenthal had sent to Clinton’s private email account, hdr22@clintonemail.com, when she was secretary of state. “Blumenthal’s memos and e-mails to Clinton were sent to her at a non-governmental e-mail address through the web domain ‘clintonemail.com,’ ” Smoking Gun reported on March 18, 2013.


factcheck.org

No please, let's not pretend that this current hubbub is anything but politically motivated.

If this newest "faux outrage" were truly over concerns about email security and use of private servers with the State Department, or, fergodssake, the Bush White House, then you and the others would be EQUALLY appalled and calling for investigations because there "might be something wrong."

The State Department's Inspector General Linick has never claimed that $6 B was carried out of the State Department by Mrs. Clinton. What he did report was that poor record-keeping across the board at State made it impossible to completely identify how $6 B had been paid out to mercenaries and other "independent contractors" beginning in 2007 under Secretary Rice.

(I realize you believe that pointing out the fact that the issue started under Rice is irrelevant, as your only concern is with Clinton, but the facts are the facts.)

So, the IG points out a systemic problem in the State Department which was established in the Bush Administration, affecting hundreds of contractors in locations across the world ... and you want to tie that directly back to the fact that Clinton had a private email server?

Are you claiming that Clinton also kept all financial records of State on her email server?

If not, what does the private email server have to do with the IG reported issues?

The answer here is nothing.

You're trying to claim that Clinton broke the law in regard to the Federal Records Act OF 1950? As updated by Congressional Act in November 2014 to specifically include email on private servers be turned over as well?

When did Clinton leave State? Was it 2013?

Again, do you have any evidence of Clinton emails that have not been turned over?

Of course you don't. And neither does anyone else.

Faux outrage; Washington politics as usual continues.




posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 05:44 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

It's easy to tell the lies are getting to much for them to handle. They have so many complex lies going on all over the place, no one seems to be able to keep their story strait. The wind is blowing and the house of cards are shaking.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
I can tell you're not a businessman. There is no way someone could lose records covering 6 BILLION when their duty (and the law) is to keep records of it. And for YEARS she deliberately left the oversight post empty.

Yet again, the very best case scenario, she had a disgusting dereliction of duty that deserves being fired and barred from any position in government in the future. If I did that at work, what would happen to me?



Are you claiming that Clinton also kept all financial records of State on her email server? If not, what does the private email server have to do with the IG reported issues?

No, im claiming you dont create a private email server unless you dont want oversight from your boss. She also lied about this.


Again, do you have any evidence of Clinton emails that have not been turned over? Of course you don't. And neither does anyone else.

There is not evidence but PROOF that she didnt turn over all of her emails, straight from the horse's mouth


No please, let's not pretend that this current hubbub is anything but politically motivated.

That's right, poor Hillary is the victim :'( Your hostile attribution bias is showing, that whole anyone-who-hates-hillary-must-be-republican crap. You should judge people on their merits (or lack thereof), not their party!
edit on 11-3-2015 by Ridhya because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Ridhya

Why do you want to talk about ME so badly? Could it be because you don't have anything other than innuendo here, because you're certainly short on facts:

The State Department IG is appointed by the President, not the Secretary of State.

So, the Bush White House staff, Colin Powell, and Governor Scott Walker were all trying to avoid "oversight" from their boss? That's the only option? Wow, this thing goes WAAY deeper than just Clinton, eh?

Lied about having an email server? Lied about trying to avoid "oversight" from her boss? Your link is unclear; what's your claim? That because Bill Clinton has only supposedly sent two emails in his life that he doesn't have a staff that reads his emails and responds for him? Wow, that's some brilliant deductive work!

But, hey you get a point (finally) on the meaning of "all." Here I thought we were discussing emails relative to her work at State, and you want to know about her yoga schedule or Chelsea's wedding dress. Okay, I stand corrected on that "point." Clinton only turned over the emails that had to do with State Department business, but not every email that had to do with ordering bunion pads or what have you.

Didn't say Hillary was a victim; and your argument is so void of facts you're just making stuff up at the end there.

While we're dispensing advice back and forth, YOU should judge on what people actually say, not what you can try to hang your scarecrow on.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66



Again, do you have any evidence of Clinton emails that have not been turned over? Of course you don't. And neither does anyone else.

How would one know if she turned them all over ( we know that she didn't turn over the 30,000 that SHE DELETED!), when she is the only person that really knows?
The point is that she is a government official that isn't trustworthy.... she has proven that time and again over the years.

edit on bu312015-03-11T08:18:33-05:0008America/ChicagoWed, 11 Mar 2015 08:18:33 -05008u15 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:20 AM
link   
As to my actual opinion on the subject:

Hillary Clinton is not my choice for the next President of the United States for a multitude of reasons.

I think creating a private email server was an utterly bone-headed play on her part.

I think she has a crap "team" for dealing with damage control in the press if this is the best they can do.

And, on a one-to-one basis, I wouldn't trust anyone involved in politics as far as I could toss them; it's a dirty business.

As to the hoodoo-ed connections presented here though, there is no evidence only innuendo.

And we're supposed to be better than that, here, at least I thought we were.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66



Again, do you have any evidence of Clinton emails that have not been turned over? Of course you don't. And neither does anyone else.

How would one know if she turned them all over ( we know that she didn't turn over the 30,000 that SHE DELETED!), when she is the only person that really knows?
The point is that she is a government official that isn't trustworthy.... she has proven that time and again over the years.


How would you know? Indeed! If she had used her "official" email how would we know that she never used any other means of communication?

The point is, we wouldn't. We're supposed to be going on evidence, not what we believe might have or could have happened.

The point is that YOU and others don't trust her, and you're willing to use anything to damage what you see as her overwhelming chance at being the next President. I have no idea what you're all so threatened by, but that's beside the point.

Your mistrust does not equate to wrong-doing. An absence of evidence does not prove anything in itself either way.

You and others are arguing that we don't know what is there, so it must be bad. That's pure bias not logic.

That is my point.
edit on 8Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:29:31 -050015p082015366 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66



I think creating a private email server was an utterly bone-headed play on her part.

She is a lawyer.
Do you think that she is stupid? Is that the excuse that we should let her go with?

Something else.... Why did she mislead everyone at her news conference yesterday?

edit on b000000312015-03-11T08:46:18-05:0008America/ChicagoWed, 11 Mar 2015 08:46:18 -0500800000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66



I think creating a private email server was an utterly bone-headed play on her part.

She is a lawyer.
Do you think that she is stupid? Is that the excuse that we should let her go with?


Are you going to convict her on what you believe to be true?

You're obviously NOT a lawyer.

Find some evidence; try her on that.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66



I think creating a private email server was an utterly bone-headed play on her part.

She is a lawyer.
Do you think that she is stupid? Is that the excuse that we should let her go with?


Are you going to convict her on what you believe to be true?

You're obviously NOT a lawyer.

Find some evidence; try her on that.

Don't want to answer this?

Is she stupid?



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

What reason would she have to mislead us at her press conference yesterday... if she is clean?



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
what's your claim? That because Bill Clinton has only supposedly sent two emails in his life that he doesn't have a staff that reads his emails and responds for him? Wow, that's some brilliant deductive work!

It was actually SkepticOverlord who showed that Hillary lied. She said that many of her private emails were to Bill, who denied using email. Hm. Fancy that.

And now you're blathering on about yoga and dresses. Anything to avoid the fact that she lied, broke the law, and account for 6 billion dollars belonging to taxpayers.
Trust me, I'd rather talk about anything but you.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ridhya

originally posted by: Gryphon66
what's your claim? That because Bill Clinton has only supposedly sent two emails in his life that he doesn't have a staff that reads his emails and responds for him? Wow, that's some brilliant deductive work!

It was actually SkepticOverlord who showed that Hillary lied. She said that many of her private emails were to Bill, who denied using email. Hm. Fancy that.

And now you're blathering on about yoga and dresses. Anything to avoid the fact that she lied, broke the law, and account for 6 billion dollars belonging to taxpayers.
Trust me, I'd rather talk about anything but you.

Good point.
Her private emails to Bill that if read, were read by staff? So much for them being private, eh?



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

I didn't answer because your question is both irrelvant and innane.

Is Hillary Clinton stupid? No.

Are you going to try to contrue that answer into some further baseless comment on Clinton? Probably.

Moving on to your next post ...

Drop the flawed attempts at asking loaded questions and refer to your claim: what did Clinton mislead you about yesterday at her press conference?



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Ridhya

You quoted the argument; own it.


State your claim that you believe that Clinton is guilty of ... whatever ... and move on.

My point is referring to your absolute lack of evidence in your claims, well, that and the ludicrous implication that Hillary Clinton stole $6 B from the State Department. In everythign you've stated you're either mistaken or you haven't proven your claim. And for godssake she didn't break any laws.

As to your last, then, stop talking about me or to me for that matter.

I will not shed tears.
edit on 8Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:57:29 -050015p082015366 by Gryphon66 because: Spelling



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
You said that the private server was a bone-headed move on her part, and then said she's not stupid. If she's not stupid it implies deliberation and intent to utilise a secret email system.

She's not stupid. She knew what she was doing. She had a secret server which she deleted emails from. She ignored FOIA requests about it (see my previous post for the link). Uber suspicious.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




what did Clinton mislead you about yesterday at her press conference?

She stated that she didn't have a governmental email account because she would have had to have two devices to make that happen. First, it isn't true. Second she had multiple phones by her own admission and there are photos of her with multiple devices.
Then this: She stated that her server wasn't breached because she had Secret Service personnel guarding it. The is misleading because a server can have a 24 hour guard and that will do nothing to prevent hacking. Plus, her emails were hacked.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
How dare you people make "false statements" about our dirty recycle class call the political dynasties in the US.

Don't you get it, when they do it is money missing or "misplaced", because after all is just tax payers money, when we do it is call misappropriation, thievery and fraud of the Federal government.

Hillary one of the most corrupted and most scandal ridden political hag and gets to get away with it.


I feel like I'm living in the Hunger Games. When are they going to start the death games? Total abuse with no repercussions. America, it's time to take a stand.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Depends on what private means doesn't it?

Do you have any evidence that links funds missing in the State Department to Clinton's email server?

That's the contention here. I'd be glad to see some evidence.



posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




I'd be glad to see some evidence.


I would be glad if the government had access to the server.




Depends on what private means doesn't it?

For most of us, private means that it was between Bill and Hillary..... not tongue-wagging servants.
edit on b000000312015-03-11T09:01:25-05:0009America/ChicagoWed, 11 Mar 2015 09:01:25 -0500900000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
108
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join