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.

 

What if Hillary is just supposed to hold the door?

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: RainbowPhoenix


I'm sure that Mrs. Clinton has gone through all of this just for a feather in her cap. Once she has that she'll step aside and let a man do the job right is that it?
Yeah..no




posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: introvert
An even bigger conspiracy, which will seem nearly impossible to many people on this forum, is one where Hillary is not charged with any crime whatsoever and she is able to take office without threat of impeachment, etc.

There has been a massive propaganda effort against her to implant the idea in to people that she is guilty of many violations. Yet we have not seen any charges filed. The Benghazi investigations found no wrongdoing and so far it appears that the email investigation will produce the same results.

This entire thread, and the overall mindset of people in general in regards to Hillary, is centered on the results of that propaganda.


Not all of us are falling for the propaganda. Hillary supporters need to be louder here and on the streets.


I do not support Hillary, but we do need to be very vocal about the propaganda and lies people are intentionally spreading and believing.

Many people believe she is guilty without any evidence. That is not how due process works.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Slave2theTruth

Take the fall? For what exactly? I'm just curious .



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Why wouldn't they just run a good candidate people don't hate that could pardon her?



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: YouSir

Vertigo involves height. Maybe it's the spin on that propaganda that's got you dizzy.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert


The propaganda preys on the gullible and has them believing Hillary is guilt of crimes that she has either not been charged with, or has not committed whatsoever.

Politicians are only 'impeached' when they fall from favor. The are all guilty of hi crimes and treason.

The dog and pony show you call 'politics' is their covering for each other, their true masters and the control wielded by corporations and banks.

The only time there is any investigating or 'hearings', is when something slips through the censors, and they run damage control to remove suspicion from the public eye.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
I like to deal with facts. Fact is, regardless of what we are being told by the media, it appears that she did not violate any laws. That may change as the FBI investigation comes to a close, but I have yet to see anything released that would indicate charges are incoming.


Are you serious? I mean come on, you must be lying because it's Super Tuesday, right?

The charges aren't "incoming" because that will happen when the emails have all been gone through, and they've got a ways to go yet, but there's already more than enough related to mishandling of classified info that they'll have to at least indict her when the time comes.

Ask any security professional, they throw the book at regular GS lowbies who screw up even once like how she is now on the record as having screwed up multiple times.

Of course with her army of lawyers and overall status, she'll get more 'equality before the law' than most people would. So long as anything else they find is similar to what they've found already, i.e. not even more serious somehow, they'll probably be able to plea bargain it all down to a slap on the wrist, but it's already pretty clear they really will have to actually indict when the investigation gets to the point where its time to decide that.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: 11andrew34

When Benghazi didn't stick they threw emails at her when they don't stick it will be false reports about poor health.
She looks pretty sprightly to me.
What stupid new rumor is this?



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme



Ummm...no Silly...it involves one or more of the following...an inner ear problem...Parkinsons...MS...brain trauma...brain cancer/tumor...or other factors...

But your right it doesn't help to read all the spin...



YouSir



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
So now that Bern has gone down in flames...we're seeing these 'Maybe I can somehow rationalize a makeshift construct that allows me to support Hillary' threads from Bernie's ex-loyal supporters.

Geez...The old fella's body is not even cold yet.
edit on 1-3-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-3-2016 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-3-2016 by IAMTAT because: spacing



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: EightTF3

She doesn't need pardoning.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I do not agree with that. It's too conspiratorial for my taste.

a reply to: 11andrew34



Are you serious? I mean come on, you must be lying because it's Super Tuesday, right?


What does Super Tuesday have to do with the facts involved?



but there's already more than enough related to mishandling of classified info that they'll have to at least indict her when the time comes.


That sounds nice, but do you have that proof?



Of course with her army of lawyers and overall status, she'll get more 'equality before the law' than most people would. So long as anything else they find is similar to what they've found already, i.e. not even more serious somehow, they'll probably be able to plea bargain it all down to a slap on the wrist, but it's already pretty clear they really will have to actually indict when the investigation gets to the point where its time to decide that.


If her guilt was so clear, as it appears you are suggesting, why must you build a convoluted conspiracy around it?

It seems more logical to wait and see how the investigation goes before creating an entire narrative around her guilt, which is a product of propaganda.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Well offering truth on her behalf is support at least for her character even if you won't vote for her. I thank you on her behalf.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Brokered convention.

Why do you think this admin has been rabid on the global warming thing for the last 3 years?

Al Gore and finally the revenge for Florida over the Bushes. (Pile-O-crap)



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

My only point is that if the FBI determines crimes were committed and the Justice Department receives a recommendation to prosecute (a supposedly non-partisan process), I would not be surprised if the indictments stop somewhere below Ms. Clinton. I don't claim to know what crimes, if any, have been indeed been committed. That is what our justice system is supposed to do and I still have a great deal of faith in the integrity of many of the people who carry out those duties. I do know that from the standpoint of a prosecutor, going after a presidential candidate would be a very high risk undertaking, but pursuing the aides and staffers would be a much safer path.

If my prediction turns out to be correct, I will probably never know if Clinton was spared due to influence being exerted or due to tentativeness of the prosecutors to go after an undisputably powerful presidential candidate or simply because proving that the aides and staffers broke laws was indeed a more solid case.
edit on 1-3-2016 by Slave2theTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: EightTF3

She doesn't need pardoning.


You're right but that's because she's the leading nominee for a party that represents the Attorney General and President. She's also a Clinton, essentially shes a 70 year old version of the Affluenza Teen



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: YouSir

You Sir need to provide a source for this rumor.



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: YouSir

I am at a loss as to how to respond



It's okay...it was only an observation...and a touch of humor...





I like to deal with facts



Now that's even funnier than my attempt...Just where are you going to go to get these...."facts"...If we can't rely on the media to report without twisting in the wind of partisan spin...then tell me...where are these facts...

If we also can't trust you to not view these suppositions as factual due to your ideology then...it may as well be just another SNL skit...

Regardless...it's still not going to stop me from liking you...despite your flaws...


YouSir



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme


Ummm...YAWN..."Here's your sign"...

Next...


YouSir



posted on Mar, 1 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: EightTF3

And yet she's not flying around in a plane with her name in letters twelve feet high on the fuselage.
And I am right but not for the reason you state. I'm right because if there are no charges she needs no pardon. So far there are no charges.
Of course I'm aware of everyone who will say she bought her way out but that's how this works isn't it? It can never be that she was completely innocent of any crimes because that doesn't fit the conspiracy. I have friends who still believe she was culpable in benghazi even though no wrong doing was discovered in that committee either. There's an awful lot of carts in front of horses here.




top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join