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.

 

Federal Prosecutors in Virginia Assisting in Clinton email Probe

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2016 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

The FBI knows her MO....since
this is not the first time they have had her name.

People can speculate, like your doing....however the magnitude
of this FBI investigation indicates this could go all the way
to Espionage charges.


Federal prosecutors in the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country — are assisting in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server
www.washingtonpost.com... 81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html



Hillary, up there with the likes of 9/11 terrorists, and Edward Snowden.
She is a disgrace.




posted on May, 5 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Those prosecutors are also the people in charge of the Guccifer case. They are prosecuting him and it stands to reason that they would be part of the entire investigation.

That is in no way indicative of a Hillary indictment.



She is a disgrace.


Is it time for the Two Minutes of Hate?



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: burntheships

Those prosecutors are also the people in charge of the Guccifer case.



Yes, I posted that in my Opening Post.


They are prosecuting him and it stands to reason that they would be part of the entire investigation.


Not how it works. They are the same district that just interviewed Huma.
They handle National Security matters.

I read your thread, it is pretty sad when people equate a nation of laws
with hatred....misguided line of reasoning.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships



Yes, I posted that in my Opening Post.


Indeed. Still not indicative of a Hillary prosecution. Surely you are honest enough to admit that.



Not how it works. They are the same district that just interviewed Huma. They handle National Security matters.


Still not indicative of a Hillary indictment.



I read your thread, it is pretty sad when people equate a nation of laws with hatred....misguided line of reasoning.


Apparently you misunderstood the thread.

I'm not surprised. It had nothing to do with this investigation, but you exhibited the attitude I spoke of.

Thanks.
edit on 5-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
Still not indicative of a Hillary prosecution.




Since it is an ongoing criminal investigation, you really
don't know there will not be an indictment.

Obviously you are a Hillary supporter, and you equate the
investigation into her criminal activities as "hate". That is
very misguided thinking...I am sure the FBI would agree.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: burntheships

The reason I bring it up is because the Hillary's legal team can use that information to make the case that similar things have happened and it was never pursued.

Legal precedence.

The case could be made that it is wrong to prosecute Hillary for what she did when the Justice Department and the FBI did not even completely investigate similar issues under another administration.


Good thing you are not a lawyer there Bud... you wouldn't be very good at it.

You're trying to call using a gmail account using a private server by your definition.... never would hold up in a court of law because that is a commercial server...same as the RNC server you keep talking about. Having a personally owned private email server located in her own private residence is just about as stupid as any one could possibly get.

She got caught. Sucks to be her.
edit on R142016-05-05T21:14:09-05:00k145Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I heard on the news officials leaked than there is no evidence found as of yet to illegal activity. I'm pretty sure if they had anything on her she wouldn't be the front-runner for POTUS.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



You're trying to call using a gmail account using a private server by your definition.... never would hold up in a court of law because that is a commercial server...same as the RNC server you keep talking about.


You have said that many times Rick and I have asked you to show me in the law or security protocols where it differentiates between personal, private and commercial.

You've never been able to show that to me.

If you want me to believe you, you have to prove it. I've provided links. Please do the same.

Prove to me what you say is true.



Having a personally owned private email server located in her own private residence is just about as stupid as any one could possibly get.


Stupid? I agree. What the hell was she thinking?

Now is what she did illegal?

That's the question that matters.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Their involvement is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. Or even likely.

The story with Guccifer is a lie. The man can't show any proof of what he says. He's a criminal being extradited for completely different issues and charges unrelated to Clinton.
That and records supposedly show that Clinton's server was never hacked.
edit on 562016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: burntheships



Since it is an ongoing criminal investigation, you really don't know there will not be an indictment.


Exactly. So why are you and many others saying she is already guilty?



Obviously you are a Hillary supporter, and you equate the investigation into her criminal activities as "hate". That is very misguided thinking...I am sure the FBI would agree.


I'm not a Hillary supporter. I suppose you could call me a defender. I defend her and like to debate the fact that many people are calling her guilty and a criminal, but even you said there is no way of knowing. So I defend her against those that are illogical and hateful.

It would be disingenuous for you to not admit that you hate her. At least be honest.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

And the rest of the story.....
So far investigators haven't found evidence that Clnton willfully violated the law.


Hillary told Andrea Mitchell that the FBI has not contacted her yet. That was a few days back. After Indiana.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa



You're trying to call using a gmail account using a private server by your definition.... never would hold up in a court of law because that is a commercial server...same as the RNC server you keep talking about.


You have said that many times Rick and I have asked you to show me in the law or security protocols where it differentiates between personal, private and commercial.

You've never been able to show that to me.

If you want me to believe you, you have to prove it. I've provided links. Please do the same.

Prove to me what you say is true.



Having a personally owned private email server located in her own private residence is just about as stupid as any one could possibly get.


Stupid? I agree. What the hell was she thinking?

Now is what she did illegal?

That's the question that matters.


Look man... you can not have classified information on a personal, or commercial or private unclassified server.

What is so hard to comprehend about that?


Your blowing smoking trying to determine what is a "server" when you need to be concentrating on what is required of an individual in order for them to legally possess classified material in their residence.

NSA can assist you with that.... other wise.... Hillary is in deep doo doo for having classified information on an unclassified server...bottom line.




"Now is what she did illegal?"

YES.... having classified information on an unclassified email server in your residence is in direct violation of almost every federal law described in the SF 312 that she signed in Feb 2009.


edit on R432016-05-06T09:43:30-05:00k435Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R442016-05-06T09:44:04-05:00k445Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R442016-05-06T09:44:15-05:00k445Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R442016-05-06T09:44:34-05:00k445Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

It's the 21century. Campaigning online is expected. Who is going to pass up that big a venue?



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

And the rest of the story.....
So far investigators haven't found evidence that Clnton willfully violated the law.


Hillary told Andrea Mitchell that the FBI has not contacted her yet. That was a few days back. After Indiana.


So far investigators haven't found evidence that Clnton willfully violated the law, that I am aware of...there fixed it for you.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme


That and records supposedly show that Clinton's server was never hacked.


Logs (on the server) show this.

Do you know how logging works?

You do understand that unless specific parameters are set up on the server that logging will not take place and any outside access will not show as having happened. And even if logging was turned on, there are ways around this.

It's the 21st century, having someone in a position of power you are wanting her in should require up to date knowledge of the technical capabilities which are being employed in communications.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



Look man... you can not have classified information on a personal, or commercial or private unclassified server. What is so hard to comprehend about that?


This all goes back to the issue of why it was classified, retroactive classification, over-classification, etc. We don't know any of that.

Also, we now know that there was a case in recent history in which a private/commercial server was used for official government business with up to 22 million emails missing and it was not fully investigated, let alone prosecuted.

But this is the statement you made:



You're trying to call using a gmail account using a private server by your definition.... never would hold up in a court of law because that is a commercial server...same as the RNC server you keep talking about.


I'd like you to substantiate that claim. You have to prove there is a difference between the two, because you are trying to make the case that it is somehow different.



Your blowing smoking trying to determine what is a "server" when you need to be concentrating on what is required of an individual in order for them to legally possess classified material in their residence.


I've never questioned what is a "server". That's actually quite silly of you to say. What I've questioned is what you base your assertions upon.

"show me the money", Rick.



Hillary is in deep doo doo for having classified information on an unclassified server...bottom line.


How do you know? You know very little.

You are talking about your personal desires, not actual information from the investigators.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

What money? What on earth are you talking about?



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

There won't be an indictment. Everyone knows this. Some apparently just have a hard time accepting it.



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I do not have to substantiate anything other than it is illegal to have classified information on an unclassified server.... if you have proof that Bush had 22 million classified emails... call the FBI..

How many wrongs will you continue to bring up to try and justify that Hillary got caught with classified information stored in her residence was somehow right?


"This all goes back to the issue of why it was classified, retroactive classification, over-classification, etc. We don't know any of that."

Thank you once again my friend for stating the obvious... Hillary Clinton will be recommended for indictment... she has to be...

She says over classified, retro classified, classified after it left her possession...

Every federal agency that reviewed that information other than the SD, determined that is was classified when sent.,..


Looks like it is going to court to me..... I wonder how this could possibly end up in court?

You keep right on babbling about private servers and precedence.... I will see you on indictment recommendation day.


Again, you can not have classified information on a unclassified server, whether it be commercial, private or government. It is simply not allowed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"How do you know? You know very little."

If I know very little... where exactly does that leave you?

You are talking about your personal desires, not actual information from the investigators."

I am talking from 25+ years experience with a TS/SCI clearance with a full scope polygraph..which is a helluva of a lot more experience than you have. I have seen people get in trouble for way less than what she has done.... what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

One of the biggest conspiracies in decades and you are trying to tell us that we can not talk about, theorize about, discuss, whatever unless all information meets whatever guidelines you set forth. Good grief.


Anybody with more than two functioning brain cells can do the following:

1. Read this: www.whitehouse.gov...

2. Notice that certain types of information are deemed to be originally classified...that means as soon as it is created, it is classified.

3. Two particular types of information are included in the originally classified part, section 1.4

(b) foreign government information
(d) foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources


I can surmise, as can anyone, that clearly most of the daily emails that Hillary Clinton would have dealt with would and should have been classified from origination, as has been found by reviewing authorities as well.

None of her emails were marked officially..... not a single damn one in 4 years...amazing considering her daily conversations and emails would and did include (b) foreign government information & (d) foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources.

Some of those emails clearly fall under Executive Order 13526 and that makes them classified from origination.

Sucks to be her right now.

edit on R142016-05-06T11:14:22-05:00k145Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R162016-05-06T11:16:42-05:00k165Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



I do not have to substantiate anything other than it is illegal to have classified information on an unclassified server.... if you have proof that Bush had 22 million classified emails... call the FBI..


So you refuse to back-up your claim.

Got ya.



How many wrongs will you continue to bring up to try and justify that Hillary got caught with classified information stored in her residence was somehow right?


That's not what I said. What I've been saying this entire time, which you still have yet to grasp the simplicity of, is that we do not have the information or context to come to any conclusion. Yet you continue to claim, with certainty, that it's a done deal. She is guilty. End of story.

That is illogical and absurd.



If I know very little... where exactly does that leave you?


In the position I am still in. I've not said she is guilty or not guilty. To make any claim is absurd. Why are you making any claim?



Sucks to be her right now.


Not really. It appears that charges may not be filed against her. We don't know yet, but apprently US officials have told the media as much.

It really sucks to be you. If she is not indicted you have a lot of explaining to do.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join