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.

 

Did Hillary Clinton Sell Top-Secret Satellite Intel?

page: 1
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Big conspiracy theory here.

This article is suggesting Hillary (or somebody) may have "sold" some classified info.

Perhaps the email scandal is more than we think.

Hillary has been involved in some questionable things in the past.

Who agrees with the story?

I think this is possible. Hmmm.

Did Hillary Clinton Sell Top-Secret Satellite Intel?



While the media is focusing your attention on the shiny object that is her email server, the real story is not being told. The circumstantial evidence indicates that Hillary Clinton, or members of her inner circle with her connivance, purloined highly classified US intelligence and either sold it, traded it, or used it for personal gain. This is not a conspiracy theory and it is not hyperbole. Stick with me for a moment.


Read the whole article and form your conclusions




posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Well, Hillary figures that anything on her personal server belongs to her....Top Secret Satellite data included.
So, why not make a few extra million off of it?



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Well... a couple of years ago, Hillary said that she and Bill were "flat broke". Now, they're worth millions of $$$. SOMETHING happened to suddenly lift the Clintons from the poor-house to the mansion over the past 24 months.



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Shades of Bill's Chinagate!



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Nothing would surprise me when it comes to politicians and what they would do for personal gain. Would also not surprise me if it's a hit piece, or just a conspiracy.

Interesting, thanks for posting.



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Selling state secrets is treason. Off to jail Hillary.

Makes you wonder how many other private servers have been set-up by politicians?



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Perhaps it will depend on what the definition of "sell" is. With Mr. Clinton, we had to define the word "is".

Nothing about the Clintons surprise me.



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: NewzNose

Now we find ourselves asking what IS IS, is!



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Irregardless of what top-secret protocols were violated, and what may have been leaked/traded/sold, the entirety of the situation arises from HRC's sense of being above the rules that apply to everyone else, and her lack of fear from repercussions. HRC's gilded outlook on her responsibilities as SOS were altered and tailored to suit her needs, mostly securing more money and power. Clinton's actions in positions of power(USB intervention, private server,etc.) exposes her character, and the latter her motivation. If the article is proven true, it will be dismissed as a R-Wing witch hunt, another hit piece on the Dem front-runner.



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I want to see her hanging from a yard-arm by sundown!

Along with the rest of her treasonous ilk!



Ok, now I'll actually go read the article... Pardon me. Just needed to get something off my chest there...



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

To have Top Secret/SCI anything on an UNCLASS email account should get her, or someone, significant federal prison time. The article goes into these classifications and what they are nicely to educate the reader and where this information is housed, aka SCIF. So if there are TS/SCI imagery within her account that means it left a SCIF, which is an highly secured environment, and cell phones along with flash drives/portable hard drives are forbidden. So did she acquire this info herself from a SCIF or is someone from the inside working with her?

However this turns out, if there are classified imagery within her email account I doubt she'll get into any trouble because she is Hilary Clinton. If someone acquired this info for her they will most likely take the fall. Remember Petraeus? He got a slap on the wrist for his shenanigans.



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Weren't the Clintons involved in selling American nuclear secrets to the Chinese? If I remember back during the Clinton years?



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

"No" is always a complete answer to any headline ending in a question mark - it is called Betteridge's law of headlines


edit on 18-8-2015 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: xuenchen

"No" is always a complete answer to any headline ending in a question mark - it is called Betteridge's law of headlines



However, even if she didn't sell it, TK is pure Kryptonite. You don't futz around with NRO data from any source post about 1990. It takes a near act of congress to transfer Keyhole, Lacrosse or (other) imagery even between IC agencies.



posted on Aug, 18 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
On a CPU, Pictures hang around till the fat lady sings.
Did someone tell her this?

I noticed she is wearing Orange.



posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Well, all those "donations" to their foundation aint just for charity!

Same as Blair's charity, it receives money from high placed donors for services rendered, which otherwise would be seen as bribes and payoffs. In short, it's a money laundering and influence peddling setup, but all above board in the eyes of those at the top.

This whole email issue should have had Clinton thrown in jail long before now. She broke the law, plain and simple, and compromised classified material, knowingly! Hell, some in congress wanted Snowden hung as a traitor for essentially the same thing.



posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Britguy
Hell, some in congress wanted Snowden hung as a traitor for essentially the same thing.


He should have been. She should be. She is, however, a leftie darling, so she will, for a bit, evade what's coming, while the MSM avoids discussing it and folk like Soros apply pressure to prevent the investigation.

In the end, she'll start trying to throw people under the bus to protect herself, which I expect will begin shortly.



posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Left or right doesn't matter one little bit.
She has dirt on both sides, as they do in her case as well. It comes down to a mutual acknowledgement that they are all dirty and the prime objective is to protect themselves above all else. The whole Left or right thing is nothing more than theatre for the masses to divide and rule.

Thus, despite the mounting evidence of wrongdoing, she, like all the others, is teflon coated and will never see a day in jail, let alone an interview room. That's the way politics works.



posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Britguy
Well, all those "donations" to their foundation aint just for charity!

Same as Blair's charity, it receives money from high placed donors for services rendered, which otherwise would be seen as bribes and payoffs. In short, it's a money laundering and influence peddling setup, but all above board in the eyes of those at the top.

This whole email issue should have had Clinton thrown in jail long before now. She broke the law, plain and simple, and compromised classified material, knowingly! Hell, some in congress wanted Snowden hung as a traitor for essentially the same thing.




And probably sold national secrets from her server as well. Some politicians are criminals and the others are criminals who are politicians. POWER TO THE PROLES!



posted on Aug, 19 2015 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Britguy
a reply to: Bedlam

Left or right doesn't matter one little bit.



It does to the US MSM, far more than it seems in the UK press. Here, you can tell if a scandalized pol is a Democrat by the article failing to mention it.







 
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join