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 formally confirms its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: network dude
We all knew this was true, but were continually assured by the ardent Hillary supporters and Militant liberals that NOBODY was investigating Hillary.


For the life of me I can't think of anyone who denied that an investigation was happening. I can think of people skeptical that anything will come of the investigation though.


I know right?


originally posted by: Krazysh0t


Can we PLEASE stop relying on a friend of a friend saying "for realsies this time, Hillary is getting indicted!" and just go to the horse's mouth? Wait until the FBI says something official then we will know if it is going to happen or not...


this thread was full of tears and people whining about the source. Turns out to be right on time.

the horses mouth has spoken.
edit on 9-2-2016 by network dude because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2016 by network dude because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: network dude


We all knew this was true, but were continually assured by the ardent Hillary supporters and Militant liberals that NOBODY was investigating Hillary. Well, it's official. She is the investigation.


Funny, I could swear the statement said: "working generally on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server,” not: "We are investigating former Secretary Clinton on suspicion of criminal activities or treason."
you may not have read far enough.


...the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

Baker says the FBI has not, however, “publicly acknowledged the specific focus, scope or potential targets of any such proceedings.”



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
The ignorance here is amazing. She will win you will cry and complain for another 8.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy


So the FBI is obviously investigating so that they can check for wrongdoing by the person or persons responsible for forcing poor Hillary to use her own private email server and forced her to let them also use her private email server, right?


They are investigating to see whether her use of a private email server actually endangered national security. It may not have been illegal.


One question though....
If there is nothing to see here, just what is the FBI investigating.... for all this time?



First, they had to determine whether or not they had jurisdiction. Now there is a swamp of technicalities they have to negotiate. What are the standards for handling classified material within the State Department? Was any of the information classified by another branch of government, and was it handled appropriately? Is Hillary responsible for actions taken by her staff without her knowledge? I know some of you can't wait to see her burned at the stake, but if W could ignore a memo that specifically warned that al Qaeda was planning on weaponizing passenger aircraft and not get put on trial or even impeached, I wouldn't expect Hillary to face any charges for using her personal electronics for business purposes.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

are you in the FBI? I'd hate to have all sorts of speculation going on about this. I know in the past, speculation was frowned upon. let's just deal with facts. what we KNOW is the FBI has admitted to having an active investigation into Sec. Clinton's use of a private server for e-mail during her time as Sec of State.

I guess we will just have to wait to see where this investigation leads.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

But she hasn't been indicted yet... Unless I read the OP wrong, it is just saying she is under investigation. Where is the indictment?

For the record, that post wasn't denying that an investigation was occurring. It was denying that an indictment was imminent based on the opinion of some guy not related to the investigation. Maybe try some reading comprehension next time?
edit on 9-2-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am just reporting what was said. All our words exist forever here, so there will be no way to pretend words weren't typed. I didn't say she was being indicted, I said what the article said. She is officially under investigation. Perhaps reading comprehension isn't your best quality either.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

And I stand by my statements. I'm not denying ANYTHING I've said now or in the past, but context is key and trying to quote me out of context or misrepresent what I said to score points or stars is dishonest and rude.


+3 more 
posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

the king of reporting false equivalencies for stars and flags calling the kettle black har har.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




For the life of me I can't think of anyone who denied that an investigation was happening.


Hillary said so herself....and a lot of folks picked up on HER statement. Unfortunately , like 110% of what she says , turned out to be a lie also, She knew





posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Well that's one I guess, but no one believes her anyways.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

And I stand by my statements. I'm not denying ANYTHING I've said now or in the past, but context is key and trying to quote me out of context or misrepresent what I said to score points or stars is dishonest and rude.


in the interest of being fair, honest and not rude, I only quoted what you said. If it's out of context, just explain what I missed.

the FBI SAID SOMETHING OFFICIAL. If that was not what you meant, please explain that.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Fine, they said they are officially investigating her. I didn't have my doubts there, but there you have it. I'm still waiting for this imminent indictment that has been coming for the last half year myself. What's the official word on that?



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

You can clearly see in what you quoted that Krazy said she isn't being indicted presently...
And to wait for official word from the FBI.

Don't be lazy, network.
It's unbecoming.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: NewzNose

Can you imagine if she gets elected, but has to serve a mandatory sentence of a couple months after a pardon...!! So our soon to be president starts running the country from a cell or under house arrest until she takes office.

I almost want her to win now just to see that happen.

Maybe she will get a conditional pardon where she is required to serve the remainder of her sentence after her time in office is up.


edit on 2 9 2016 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: network dude

Fine, they said they are officially investigating her. I didn't have my doubts there, but there you have it. I'm still waiting for this imminent indictment that has been coming for the last half year myself. What's the official word on that?


Don't know, we haven't heard what the FBI has OFFICIALLY found. But we will. I guess will will just have to wait. (and militantly argue against any and all speculation on the matter.) So I'll just stick to facts for now.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

See. We didn't have to have a confrontational argument. You could have skipped being rude to me initially and we would have had a much easier conversation. It appears we are in agreement. Wait until official information is out before speculating.



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Oh Chuckles, he's a big boy. I quoted the whole thing so as NOT to take anything out of context. It was for the "FBI says something official" comment. Based on what I read in this article, the FBI said something official. Or is there some ambiguity about that?



posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Longshot possibility....

Maybe Hillary is getting arrogant because she has already been granted immunity.

The FBI has already "interviewed" some key people including some of her top aides and associates.

Maybe she throws them under the bus and gets away clean.

If so, the "trial" will be in the press.




posted on Feb, 9 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I know he can look after himself he is a great debater on our boards...

But it seemed a tad unfair that even if you were only highlighting the "wait and see" part you didn't take it in the context of an indictment.

Just seemed a little sloppy from you if I'm honest.
If it was the other way round I'd defend you too fella.

edit on 9-2-2016 by CharlieSpeirs because: Out of place inverted commas.




top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join