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.

 

FBI investigates Hillary Clinton

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   
"FBI looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail setup" it is not "FBI investigates Hillary Clinton"
big difference, I was click baited fix the title.

FBI is looking into the security of the servers.




posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Ultralight

I hope that she'll stand trial and be held accountable - the same way any other citizen would be if they broke the law.

No more special treatment, no more back door deals....



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: EvilBat
"FBI looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail setup" it is not "FBI investigates Hillary Clinton"
big difference, I was click baited fix the title.

FBI is looking into the security of the servers.



But it sure is close isn't it.

"Close enough for government work".


edit on Aug-05-2015 by xuenchen because: [shiver me timbers]2965



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Wetpaint72

She lied. I heard what she said while standing at that podium the first time she offered explanation. What she said is not true.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: EvilBat

I disagree and explained my title choice in a previous response.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   
It's not a criminal investigation so....whoopee. Not a damn thing is going to happen.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

I posted the link to the source. My info is accurate.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude



She broke the law, jeopardized the entire country, and then lied about it.


I found this for ya. It's even from FOX news Legal Analysts! Read it and weep.



www.mediaite.com...



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Ultralight

So were allowed on ATS to change news articles titles now? when did that change?



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Ultralight

What? I used your source for my own post. You selectively posted what you wanted to prove your point, just like I did.
Get it?



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: charolais

I am shocked the FBI has the backbone. Imagine the possibilities in what they will find...


It's also quite possible that the FBI will not find anything. Are you open to that as well, or if she is not found to have done anything wrong or compromised security will the argument be that the FBI was on her side?

We have to be open to all possibilities and that's why I'm glad this issue is being addressed.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I don't see how this can go anywhere at all. Hillary isn't stupid, and wiping a server doesn't take much effort or time.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Ultralight



So, my question to you is....How can you not see the story is in the start of FBI investigation and not that she has not been charged with any wrongdoings...AT THIS TIME?


Uh, because there were no laws against what she was doing at the time she was doing it?

And because this FBI investigation is looking into the possibility of any leaks because she was the Secretary of State at the time privy to confidential information, and NOT because she is suspected of breaking the law?

I mean, yeah. There is an FBI investigation. Clearly. What else do you want me to say?



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

It specifies they are concerned that sensitive information is not IN THE GOVERNMENT'S POSSESION. That is a lot stronger than investigating security.

The info was only in the government's possession when HC was Secty of State.

She wrongfully wiped the server.....or are you disputing this action was wrong?
edit on 1438798045Wednesday31Wed, 05 Aug 2015 13:07:25 -0500pmWednesday0710131 by Ultralight because: typos



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: EvilBat

I disagree and explained my title choice in a previous response.



I disagree and looked at your posts not once not twice , three times now.
maybe you can link me to this. "I changed the title because...."

~~~
Want to blame security on someone blame the person who installed it. I'd say the same thing if it were Bush



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

There are no laws against destruction of governmental property? Tampering with government's property? Etc?

Are you saying her having the classified info transferred to a thumb drive and now in the care, cutody, and control of her attorney, a man who does not appear to have had classified clearance ...at the time....is 100% legal?



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: EvilBat

This isn't about Bush.

I will only change the title if mod's request, and then under protest.

This is the opening of the investigation, even if there are no wrongdoings yet charged. She had care, custody, and control of the emails, classified info, and SHE is the party responsible for the server.



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: EvilBat

Furthermore, if I hire someone to do any work for ME, I am not excluded from responsibility. I am responsible and subrogate that responsibility to the party who I hired.
edit on 1438798636Wednesday31Wed, 05 Aug 2015 13:17:16 -0500pmWednesday1710131 by Ultralight because: typos



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Why title this thread that Hillary is being 'investigated' when that is not the case at all?



posted on Aug, 5 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Ultralight

You still have not answered my question.

What will be your response if this investigation does not show any wrongdoing?



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join