Should Hillary talk to the FBI??

a reply to: RickinVa

Answer the damn question.... it's a real easy answer.... put on your big boy pants and spit it out.

Ok.

We shall see.

a reply to: introvert


Interesting.

Does this mean that if people are not charged with a crime then people should stop talking about said "supposed" crime?

I ask as there are other politicians (two come instantly to mind) that are constantly being accused of crimes on this site yet no charges have ever been brought against them.


Not being argumentative, and perhaps I'm misreading your posts, just wanting clarification if possible.

a reply to: 200Plus

Does this mean that if people are not charged with a crime then people should stop talking about said "supposed" crime?

No. I suppose they can talk about it all they want. But it would be disingenuous to call them criminals if they were not convicted on any crime.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

Answer the damn question.... it's a real easy answer.... put on your big boy pants and spit it out.

Ok.

We shall see.

1. Intending to be legally bound, I hereby accept the obligations contained in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted access to classified information.

2. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications

3. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information

4. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation

5. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it

6. I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 1924, title 18, United States Code; *the provisions of section 783(b], title 50, United States Code; and the provisions of the Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.

7. I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government and until otherwise determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law.

8. I agree that I shall return all classified materials which or may come into my possession or for which I am responsible.


Which of those 8 apply to Hillary Clinton?

Do you need hints......... hmmmmm

They come from the SF 312.

Hillary signed her SF 312 in Feb 2009.

Since you are too chicken to take a stand that way, let me rephrase the question for you:

Do the 8 things above apply specifically to Hillary Clinton.... yes or no?

It's a real easy answer... why is it so hard for you to state the obvious truth?

a reply to: RickinVa

Fine Rick. Let's play your game.

Do the 8 things above apply specifically to Hillary Clinton.... yes or no?

Yes. If she signed it, they apply to here.

Now your next response will be that she violated provision #x of the agreement she signed, and my answer will be what proof do you have. Since you do not have that proof, we will have to just...wait and see.

There is a lot of context that neither you or I have, so it's hard to come to any conclusion.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

Fine Rick. Let's play your game.

Do the 8 things above apply specifically to Hillary Clinton.... yes or no?

Yes. If she signed it, they apply to here.

Now your next response will be that she violated provision #x of the agreement she signed, and my answer will be what proof do you have. Since you do not have that proof, we will have to just...wait and see.

There is a lot of context that neither you or I have, so it's hard to come to any conclusion.

Wrong... I just wanted you to acknowledge that she did sign and she agreed to all those listed above.

That's it... nothing else... thanks.


Everything else will have to be decided in court... but you really need to start asking yourself.... how is it going to wind up in court?

a reply to: RickinVa

Everything else will have to be decided in court... but you really need to start asking yourself.... how is it going to wind up in court?

If it even goes to court. It may be over at the end of the investigation.

So we will just have to wait and see. Glad you agree.

a reply to: RickinVa

Don't spend too much. Get the cheap champagne because you'll be all alone.
The rest of us will be at the inaugural.
I have a gown all picked out.

a reply to: Sillyolme


Don't get too close to Bill, he has a habit of ruining gowns

a reply to: shooterbrody

Unfortunately there is no defendant.
LOL

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

Everything else will have to be decided in court... but you really need to start asking yourself.... how is it going to wind up in court?

If it even goes to court. It may be over at the end of the investigation.

So we will just have to wait and see. Glad you agree.

only on that....

I want everybody to be talking about the crap Hillary did,,,, you don't want anybody talking about the crap she did...

We will never see eye to eye on that.... you are on a conspiracy website but yet you feel you have the right to dictate that Hillary conspiracies should held to higher standards than other conspiracies on ATS... I call that nothing but pure hogwash.

a reply to: SonOfThor

NONE. Do I need clearance to read on a government web site?
Are you saying because I don't I can't write about it? I can't read about it? What? What's your point.
What part of my link shoots down my argument?
You need to be more specific.

a reply to: introvert

If she's charged I owe everybody here an apology.
But I really feel an I told you so moment is coming.

a reply to: RickinVa

I want everybody to be talking about the crap Hillary did,,,, you don't want anybody talking about the crap she did... We will never see eye to eye on that.... you are on a conspiracy website but yet you feel you have the right to dictate what conspiracies get discussed.

Talk about it all you want. I don't have the power to stop that. What I can do is be vocal in my disagreement with your assessment that her guilt is a foregone conclusion. It is not. We do not have enough evidence to come to that conclusion. Yet you continue to carry-on as if you do have the information and her guilt is imminent.

That is illogical and disingenuous.

Expect more HRC apologists and more attaks on Sen Sanders!

Clinton SuperPAC spending $1M to astroturf online support, framing it as fight against Bernie bros correctrecord.org... … ht @MaxBlumenthal

twitter.com...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVawww.whitehouse.gov...

Read it and weep.
Here's a tissue.

You do know that is the same basic executive order that has been around for 70 years right? Little has changed since it was implemented.

I do read it and weep.... I weep tears of joy because it proves over and over again why Hillary is going down.


Thank you for posting that and supporting my case... I always knew you would come around!!

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: introvert

If she's charged I owe everybody here an apology.
But I really feel an I told you so moment is coming.

I am in the wonderful position of not having to apologize for anything. I have not come to any conclusion and will wait to see what happens.

a reply to: RickinVa

There's a crack in the 45 Rick.
Intended to be Intended to be intended to be sssssssss crackle, psssss

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

There's a crack in the 45 Rick.
Intended to be Intended to be intended to be sssssssss crackle, psssss

I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 1924, title 18, United States Code; *the provisions of section 783(b], title 50, United States Code; and the provisions of the Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.


Hurts you to read that doesn't it?

Her and her old pal Sidney Blumenthal were quite the chatty cathy's.... dozens of emails..... some of them deemed to contain classified information.... Ole Sid worked for the Clinton Foundation and has no security clearance whats so ever.

unauthorized disclosure


Sidney Blumenthal is right behind Bryan Pagliano in this mess..... except I doubt very seriouly ole Sid is going to get immunity...they already got enough on him from his emails to and from Hillary.

a reply to: introvert

I know. That's ok. I know how to be humble.
I'm a mother. I've wiped vomit off a floor and poop off a wall.