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.

 

Why Hillary Clinton is running for President

page: 3
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 03:25 AM
link   
a reply to: starwarsisreal

I think what she meant to say was the "persistent scourge of lying public servants"....what a joke.....all you stupid shmucks that have no memory you should be ashamed of you stupidity...




posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: SouthernForkway26

Protocol does not equal law. Sorry.
It may not have been smiled upon but it's not illegal.

It's not a criminal investigation and just how much does this point need to be stressed before it sinks in?
Not you personally of course.LOL I'm sure nothing is wrong with your comprehension abilities.
Those idiots over at Fox with their secret ex LE who thinks this or their ex someone in the justice dept who thinks that.
The FBI has said nothing . The Justice Department has said nothing.
Apparently you CAN make this # up.



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CornShucker

I guess if they really get stuck the FBI can call your tech friends.


You strike me as someone who starts a lot of statements with, "I don't care what anyone says,..." Once I hear that I'm done with them.



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: SouthernForkway26

PS : The heart of the investigation is and has been the security of the data . The security of the server.
Which we're hearing was exceptional.
Pagliano is not her nephew who knows how to set up a PlayStation he's a IT professional . He knows what he's doing.



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: CornShucker

Really? I'm not.
You didn't see that or hear that from me.
Look it's going to all come out. What I'm saying is wait until it has. So far everything is guessing because the investigators haven't said a thing.
That doesn't equal "I don't care what anyone says"
edit on 362016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)

edit on 362016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Your post is badly informed and hysterical. But entertaining.



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: CornShucker

Really? I'm not.
You didn't see that or hear that from me.
Look it's going to all come out. What I'm saying is wait until it has. So far everything is guessing because the investigators haven't said a thing.
That doesn't equal "I don't care what anyone says"


I see that you are a fairly new member and there's no reason for us to start off on the wrong foot. Everyone I meet is considered a potential friend until they convince me otherwise, so my apology for reacting to what seemed like a one-liner cheap shot at first glance with a knee-jerk reaction.

In my post that you replied to I never made any claim to having techie friends that the FBI might seek out for help. My exact words started with, "Techies far more informed than me have pointed out..." How that can be construed to my believing I'm a part of any tech community or 'Inner Circle' anything escapes me.

My experience with computers and networking does, however, go back to 1980. All I was trying to do was provide some insight into that part of the discussion. The interviews I was referring to were with people that have no idea I even exist.
edit on 3 6 2016 by CornShucker because: added dropped word



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons

I remember wanting to say "YES you are" but kept quiet because we were taught to respect the presidency,now we see, some are indeed beneath us.



posted on Mar, 6 2016 @ 03:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: SouthernForkway26
a reply to: Sillyolme
-- snip --
Security logs won't show hacks if people with clearance accessed them.
-- snip --


That is the point I was trying to make in my post above:

Techies far more informed than me have pointed out that access to the system using the correct security responses, like the correct username and password, by someone from the outside but NOT the person with those credentials might not necessarily show up as anything but normal.


It's a huge over-simplification, but, for the benefit of a low tech example, think of a house and someone up to no good has a key to the front door and the four digit security code to the keypad just inside the house. That "someone" could come and go at will with nobody being the wiser. Unless something glaringly obvious like a robbery or physical assault took place, the security company's records would show nothing out of the ordinary. It would look just the same as if the owner of the house had been going about their day to day life with no problems. Everything would appear to indicate that the security of the house had never been breached.

It's hard for me to understand why more people can't grasp this.

I don't like the fact that our ISP/Cable Provider claims to have secure Webmail and has anything BUT. No POP3 or IMAP standalones will let you set them up without warning that there is NO secure way to login. The Webmail they provide is proprietary and they have no intention of trying to go in and fix it. I've watched the support forum for years and have just accepted the fact I've gotta live with it.

At least their login screen is SSL (HTTPS=Secure Hyper Text Transfer Protocol with Secure Sockets Layer), but once you have put in your username and password it is totally plain old http (HTTP=Hyper Text Transfer Protocol). It only took a couple of online chats with their support crew to convince me it was a lost cause. Far too often tech support (from anybody) is neither technical or much support...



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
a reply to: CornShucker

Ok. Here's my hand. SHAKE SHAKE.
It seemed to me that you were saying they told you that about her server. Ok so techies say.

What I meant was that the people going over her computer are experienced too. They say the data was safe and was always maintained as completely safe. Pagliano was an IT guy for the state department
Not only that but since most of what was re-classified after being viewed have the lowest level of rating or confidential.
I've gotten envelopes from my bosses marked confidential. Usually it was an application or employee file. Thing is they didn't mark super secret stuff as confidential. That's a rating for meeting schedules stuff like that. Not the combination of the lock at area 51 or the 8X10 glossies of Bin Laden's body.



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 11:30 AM
link   
How do you know when Hellary Clinton is lying? Her lips are moving...



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView


Good point, post and something for Americans to really seriously think about before voting.



posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Now people let us consider who the Clintons are working for and why they feel obligated to maintain their influence on the
United States and its citizens.

Fabian Socialism: The Cancer in Our Society Today


Over 200 years ago, our forefathers fought a bloody civil war to free us from the clutches of British Tyranny. For the 100 years that followed, the United States was the freest, most vigorous nation in Earth’s history; enjoying an age of prosperity and liberty heretofore unheard of. Yet, in 1884 something dark and sinister crept forth from the bowels of Great Britain, which once again threatened to enslave, not only America, but the entire world.

This sinister threat was known as Fabian Socialism.

Like Marxism, it was a political philosophy which embraced the idea of a Communist Utopia, where the State owned everything and controlled every aspect of the public’s lives. Unlike the more aggressive policies of Marx, the institution of these Communist ideals would not come about by use of force or revolution, but rather through the use of gradual change via the political process. Fabianism did not seek to persuade the masses to adopt its tenets, but rather sought to seduce those in positions of power, and persons of great influence..........

"Hillary Clinton, Barak Hussein O’Bama and seventy members of Congress. In fact, the entire leadership of the Democratic Party refers to themselves as “social or modern progressives”. The list of Self Professed Fabian Socialists is as follows:......"
See whole article here:
itmakessenseblog.com...

Oddly enough I did not see Bernie Sanders listed - Do they fear Bernie Sanders because he is his own man and his brand of
so-called socialism is not part of the 'in-crowd'


And fear Donald Trump because his brand of capitalism is not part of the other in-crowd of rich socialists with their
agendas


PS: One final thought - If Hillary and the Democrats win you will no longer have to worry about gun conrtrol and the
Second Ammendment of the Constitution - the Second Amendment will be eliminated and all private ownership of guns
will be outlawed. The US Constitution will not stand in the way of the Fabian Socialist agenda

edit on 7-3-2016 by AlienView because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join