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.

 

Guccifer brought to US amid Hillary email probe

page: 2
33
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Yes inconclusive. Yet you insist that means something.
I didn't say the articles were flattering to Hillary. They are not. But they are not biased like Fox stories where every bit of info points to the big house instead of the white house.




posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

Ya think?


Sure do.

The White House, The State Dept and the Inspector General have made numerous official statements and held news conferences.

Especially about those famous 22 emails they can't even release.

Not to mention the obvious evidence that is in the released emails.

All official and well beyond speculation.




posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

I can't make you see value in my posts. That comes from your head. I see value in what I type. If you don't...oh well.

edit on 482016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 12:50 PM
link   
It is my opinion that the FBI is interested in talking to Guccifer in order to better secure their email/online entities from hackers like him. This is an investigation in to security and such, so it makes sense that they would want to pick his brain to see how he did some of the things he did.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
It is my opinion that the FBI is interested in talking to Guccifer in order to better secure their email/online entities from hackers like him. This is an investigation in to security and such, so it makes sense that they would want to pick his brain to see how he did some of the things he did.


You call it investigation in to security, and I will call it exactly what it is, a criminal investigation in the mishandling of classified information by Hillary and her closest aides.

It is extremely important to push the "server was never hacked" because that is vital to public opinion. Most people would be very concerned if they knew that a server housing classified information in someones home had been accessed by outsiders.

Again, Guccifer has a very very well known track record of breaking into public official emails, and at this point it would be more suspicious to me if they claim he hadn't and to opposed to he had.

Guccifer accessed email accounts of various government officials based on weak security of the accounts them selves, weak passwords and security verification questions. There isn't much he can tell them other than clarifying the remark he made about how he used to read Hillarys diplomatic cables every day for 6 hours or so. That is what they want to know.... how much did he access and what did he do with the information he took?

Do not forget your pro Hillary checkmark statements from your troll play book,, you are slacking:

1. Her server was legal

2. All 2000+ classified emails were classified long after the fact.

3. No unauthorized people accessed her server.

4. It's a vast right wing republican conspiracy.

5. The State Department was lying when they said they do not dispute the sworn CIA statement that the 22 Top Secret emails were classified when transmitted.

6. The CIA created a bogus statement to specifically bring down Hillary (see#4)

7. The Inspector Generals of two different departments have no idea what they are talking about and no one should pay them any attention.

8. This is only a security review of her server.

9. She never sent or received any emails "marked" "classified".

10. Emails must be marked as classified, because that is how you know they are classified.

Yada yada yada.


edit on R092016-04-08T13:09:10-05:00k094Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R092016-04-08T13:09:42-05:00k094Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R112016-04-08T13:11:34-05:00k114Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R122016-04-08T13:12:30-05:00k124Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R232016-04-08T13:23:34-05:00k234Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R242016-04-08T13:24:43-05:00k244Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



You call it investigation in to security, and I will call it exactly what it is, a criminal investigation in the mishandling of classified information by Hillary and her closest aides.


But it is not a criminal investigation. In fact, the Justice department said last year that the referal was not criminal in nature.


The Justice Department said Friday it has received a request to examine the handling of classified information related to the private emails from Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, but it is not a criminal referral.


www.reuters.com...



It is extremely important to push the "server was never hacked" because that is vital to public opinion. Most people would be very concerned if they knew that a server housing classified information in someones home had been accessed by outsiders.


We don't know if the server was hacked. Many have made the claim based on the fact one of the emails on the server, that were never opened, contained a potential malware/spyware virus. But we have no other information to make any positive conclusion.



Again, Guccifer has a very very well known track record of breaking into public official emails, and at this point it would be more suspicious to me if they claim he hadn't and to opposed to he had.


He does have that track record and that is why I posted what I did. It's possible they want to potentially learn about some of the things he did to hack servers and social media accounts. That seems reasonable.



Do not forget your pro Hillary checkmark statements from your troll play book,, you are slacking: 1. Her server was legal 2. All 2000+ classified emails were classified long after the fact. 3. No unauthorized people accessed her server. 4. It's a vast right wing republican conspiracy. 5. The State Department was lying when they said they do not dispute the sworn CIA statement that the 22 Top Secret emails were classified when transmitted. 6. The CIA created a bogus statement to specifically bring down Hillary (see#4) 7. The Inspector Generals of two different departments have no idea what they are talking about and no one should pay them any attention. 8. This is only a security review of her server. 9. She never sent or received any emails "marked" "classified". 10. Emails must be marked as classified, because that is how you know they are classified. Yada yada yada.


I was only adding my opinion on the Guccifer aspect. Why do you have to make personal attacks when all I have done is add my opinion?

By the way, there are a few things on that list that I have never said. Number 6 and 7 to be precise.

I know you have a lot invested in this issue but you don't have to make things up and call me a troll to have a constructive conversation. Seems childish, to be honest.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

"But it is not a criminal investigation. In fact, the Justice department said last year that the referal was not criminal in nature."

It is now ole buddy.... you keep right on calling it a "security investigation".

I will go right on calling what it is.... a criminal investigation into the mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton and her aides.


I will see you on the day her indictment is announced.

"By the way, there are a few things on that list that I have never said. Number 6 and 7 to be precise."

lol... I have said 1,2,3,4,5,8,9, and 10 but don't accuse me of saying 6 or 7. lol


edit on R382016-04-08T13:38:00-05:00k384Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R382016-04-08T13:38:59-05:00k384Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-4-2016 by intrepid because: Insult removed.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



It is now ole buddy.... you keep right on calling it a "security investigation". I will go right on calling what it is.... a criminal investigation into the mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton and her aides.


You are entitled to call it whatever you like. That does not make it true.



I will see you on the day her indictment is announced.


But what if she is not indicted? Will we still see each other? If she is indicted, oh well. I have not said she would never be charged. Either way, I am not in the wrong. You, on the other hand, have placed everything on her being charged. If no charges are filed, will you admit you were wrong?



lol... I have said 1,2,3,4,5,8,9, and 10 but don't accuse me of saying 6 or 7. lol


Just perusing the list quickly, I have said similar things that you listed, but you have not put them in proper context. I would do so in this post, but the topic is about Guccifer. I stand by what I said on the issue. Perhaps they want to learn a few things from him. Is it possible he is here to testify in some form or fashion against Hillary? Sure, but I think my opinion is also logical.

Now do you have something to add about my opinion of the topic, or are you going to act like a butthurt teenager?



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Sillyolme

It has already been determined that her system has never been hacked.


Was that "determination" from officials or just the Hillary Campaign/supporters?

Can we get some actual quotes posted?

I think this Romanian fella could have been a "go between" in the Hillary hacks.



from your NYTimes story.....

A former aide to Hillary Clinton has turned over to the F.B.I. computer security logs from Mrs. Clinton’s private server, records that showed no evidence of foreign hacking, according to people close to a federal investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails.




The key here is telling an acceptable truth without telling the whole real truth. It is not that hard to take over a domestic server or bots from a strategically jumped foreign location. So you could have the appearance of domestic hacking from a foreign source and still not call it foreign ;-)

Cheers - Dave



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

If its just a "security review" then why was immunity given to the person who set up clinton's private email server? The guy plead the 5th you plead the 5th when there is the possibility of criminal prosecution.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: etshrtslr
a reply to: introvert

If its just a "security review" then why was immunity given to the person who set up clinton's private email server? The guy plead the 5th you plead the 5th when there is the possibility of criminal prosecution.



Key word: possibility.

Immunity is/was granted so that the individual could speak openly without the threat or concern of incriminating himself. It is not nessecarliy indicative of potential criminal charges. Or it could be he was granted immunity because charges are incoming. Fact is, we don't know either way.

That is why I am concerned when people speak about this topic in absolutes.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


She will be recommended for indictment by the FBI.

Wanna bet soda on it?



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Article on Guccifer:

pando.com... gardening/


"used to read Hillarys memo's for 6-7 hours a day"... claims to have documents stored on the cloud to release when the time is right...

Can't get link to work... google it
edit on R422016-04-08T15:42:40-05:00k424Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R442016-04-08T15:44:04-05:00k444Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
It is my opinion that the FBI is interested in talking to Guccifer in order to better secure their email/online entities from hackers like him. This is an investigation in to security and such, so it makes sense that they would want to pick his brain to see how he did some of the things he did.


I could be mistaken, but I think Guccifer was said to have used the same method that the hacker used on Sarah Palin's email account. IOW, he guessed at security question answers.

I find that to be so-interesting.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: introvert
It is my opinion that the FBI is interested in talking to Guccifer in order to better secure their email/online entities from hackers like him. This is an investigation in to security and such, so it makes sense that they would want to pick his brain to see how he did some of the things he did.


I could be mistaken, but I think Guccifer was said to have used the same method that the hacker used on Sarah Palin's email account. IOW, he guessed at security question answers.

I find that to be so-interesting.


Which is what Hillary fears the most.... if it becomes known that a cab driver from Romania was able to access her email server and classified documents, that would be game over.

Hillarys defense rests on 2 important facts:

1. She has stated she never had classified information on her server... then she upgraded that to "never sent or received and emails with classified information to the latest revision, I never sent or received any information "marked" classified.

2. She and her campaign repeatedly stress that there is no evidence that her email was accessed by individuals not allowed to.

Either one of those is a career ender for sure, but both together is 100% game over for Hillary 2016.


edit on R552016-04-08T15:55:39-05:00k554Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R022016-04-08T16:02:00-05:00k024Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R222016-04-08T17:22:33-05:00k224Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa


Either one of those is a career ender for sure, but both together is 100% game over for Hillary 2016.



Which is what I think is the point of the email scandal, to begin with.

She won't see prison, but this could be just the thing that will put Bernie's $18 trillion spending plan in front of our corrupt Congress. And that tax hike *whew* it will give the federal government unprecedented bloat and power.

The alternative to Hillary may be even more criminal because our Congress is criminal when it comes to spending.

It wouldn't be the first time Hillary helped throw the nomination to another Chosen One. Don't forget, she left her name on the Michigan ballot, in 2008, and the DNC gifted Obama with 600,000 of her votes.

'Guccifer' is probably controlled opposition. With the criminal backgrounds of the Bushes and Clintons and the best he got was this email scandal and some Bush family photos? Not buying all is how it's being sold.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: introvert
It is my opinion that the FBI is interested in talking to Guccifer in order to better secure their email/online entities from hackers like him. This is an investigation in to security and such, so it makes sense that they would want to pick his brain to see how he did some of the things he did.


You call it investigation in to security, and I will call it exactly what it is, a criminal investigation in the mishandling of classified information by Hillary and her closest aides.

It is extremely important to push the "server was never hacked" because that is vital to public opinion. Most people would be very concerned if they knew that a server housing classified information in someones home had been accessed by outsiders.

Again, Guccifer has a very very well known track record of breaking into public official emails, and at this point it would be more suspicious to me if they claim he hadn't and to opposed to he had.

Guccifer accessed email accounts of various government officials based on weak security of the accounts them selves, weak passwords and security verification questions. There isn't much he can tell them other than clarifying the remark he made about how he used to read Hillarys diplomatic cables every day for 6 hours or so. That is what they want to know.... how much did he access and what did he do with the information he took?

Do not forget your pro Hillary checkmark statements from your troll play book,, you are slacking:

1. Her server was legal

2. All 2000+ classified emails were classified long after the fact.

3. No unauthorized people accessed her server.

4. It's a vast right wing republican conspiracy.

5. The State Department was lying when they said they do not dispute the sworn CIA statement that the 22 Top Secret emails were classified when transmitted.

6. The CIA created a bogus statement to specifically bring down Hillary (see#4)

7. The Inspector Generals of two different departments have no idea what they are talking about and no one should pay them any attention.

8. This is only a security review of her server.

9. She never sent or received any emails "marked" "classified".

10. Emails must be marked as classified, because that is how you know they are classified.

Yada yada yada.



9. TRUE. She never received emails marked classified because there is no such designation, its confidential, secret and top secret. Thats an error we need to stop. So when she says, I didn't get no classified documents, she is telling the truth, in a twisted shyster kind of way.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: HUMBLEONE

Not to mention the State Department never even saw any emails until long after she left office.

How can reviewers make "classifications" when they never saw the documents.




posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I don't think we'll ever see a criminal indictment against the Clinton family. Between Bill and Hillary they can likely force the whole political House of Cards down on both sides of the aisle.

As sad as it is I think we just need to accept they are above the law. Who do you turn to when this family can ruin the career/life of anybody with influence?

We're f****d.

edit on 8-4-2016 by Jason88 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Jason88

There is one hope. The hope that she has done something illegal and the matter got taken up with Internal Affairs.

If there was a case she was involved in and the agents were abusing their authority and Internal Affairs had enough evidence to take over the investigation then we would see an indictment.

Internal Affairs is their own department and doesn't answer to the normal political power structures.

For example, treating a wiretap like it's a gossip rag, protecting her friends from criminal prosecution and providing them an unfair business advantage, false allegations of persons to justify the wiretapping. Numerous rolling false allegations.

At that point her and the people involved are screwed. Trying to politically intimidate Internal Affairs would just a cause a case to be opened up on the person trying to intimidate and they could probably even get a special prosecutor to prosecute if they feel that the crimes need to be punished.

ETA:

Another example for Internal Affairs to get involved would be the Director of the FBI taking a political stance on an issue and allowing his agents to commit crimes. That sort of thing you know.

Because Comey is investigating it will probably be a white wash.
edit on 8-4-2016 by gpols because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
33
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join