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.

 

Classified went sent..Hillarys email drama

page: 26
41
<< 23  24  25    27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2016 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

You are correct...that's the only damn question he appears to have answered. lol




edit on R142016-06-23T16:14:08-05:00k146Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Its happening, so the news says.

Hillary Clinton To Be Interviewed By The FBI over July Fourth Weekend

Apparently Lynch's meeting with Bill was more than
talk about Golf.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
Its happening, so the news says.

Hillary Clinton To Be Interviewed By The FBI over July Fourth Weekend

Apparently Lynch's meeting with Bill was more than
talk about Golf.


Naw.

Neither one of them knew about the FBI questioning !!




posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

Naw.

Neither one of them knew about the FBI questioning !!



New lows for long time political crooks.
Hard to believe it is even possible.




posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Hi Rick.
Guess what day it is?

Yes. It's the day your clock runs down.

No criminal charges.
No indictment.
No credible prosecutor would try to make a case.


Here this will get you started

www.cooks.com...



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Indeed the clock has struck.

All hail the Queen.


Just keep in mind, the same thing that makes you laugh will also make you cry.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

You are and were correct no indictment.

Rick was right as to the evidence that comey laid out.
Classified info was sent.
Classified info was mishandled.
Classified info was not secured.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: 200Plus

Thanks .good to know.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Rick was not correct. If laws were broken they would have charged her.
He listed pages of laws and how she violated them.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 12:26 PM
link   
See y'all in Nov. I'm off for the summer.
This was all I was waiting for.
Oh gotta go rib my neighbor the big trump supporter.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Aside from Hillary not being recommended by the FBI for indictment (mere days after her husband met with the AG of this country, and a few weeks after the sitting president - Comey's boss - endorsed her) all of the statements about the evidence found fully support what Rick and other folks have been saying.

Classified info, including TS / SAP information was improperly handled, and was classified when sent and received - 110 emails actually. In the end, the candidate you support was found to have acted in an extremely irresponsible manner while running the State Department.

Go ahead and gloat all over these forums, but it doesn't change the fact that many of those whom you are gloating to were actually totally correct when it comes to the evidence - some people just had more faith that the justice system would not cowtow to political pressure, which it turns out they did.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor

Yup. You're right.
I'm not gloating.
I will ask this. If the decision had been to indict how much gloating do you think would be going on?
Check out all of the I hate Hillary threads for a hint.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I hate to be the one to say it....

But Hillarys emails were classified when sent... which is the title of this thread.

Now go back through this thread and read the comments of those who insisted everything was classified after the fact..

Guess you won't be hearing them saying they were wrong.



edit on R372016-07-05T14:37:56-05:00k377Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I'm not gloating.


Yes, you are and have been since the announcement. Makes you look small and insecure. Same with your incessant comments that you're intelligent. If you were intelligent, it would shine without needing to tell people.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I'm not gloating.


Yes, you are and have been since the announcement. Makes you look small and insecure. Same with your incessant comments that you're intelligent. If you were intelligent, it would shine without needing to tell people.


Why on earth would someone gloat over a report that characterizes their candidate and extremely careless with the handling of classified information?

That is not a quality any normal human being would look for in a candidate.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

My biggest question so far, only having brief time to ponder this issue during breaks at work, is this: What is the actual difference between "extreme carelessness" and "gross negligence"?

Gross negligence is after all, according to US Code, all that is needed for the commission of a felony in this case...



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I'm not gloating.


Yes, you are and have been since the announcement. Makes you look small and insecure. Same with your incessant comments that you're intelligent. If you were intelligent, it would shine without needing to tell people.


Why on earth would someone gloat over a report that characterizes their candidate and extremely careless with the handling of classified information?

That is not a quality any normal human being would look for in a candidate.

It is pretty obvious that these are sterling qualities for the Democratic Party.
My proof.... has anyone heard of someone at the DNC drafting a replacement for Hillary?

Idiocracy is here, and isn't just about Trump!



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 03:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: RickinVa

My biggest question so far, only having brief time to ponder this issue during breaks at work, is this: What is the actual difference between "extreme carelessness" and "gross negligence"?

Gross negligence is after all, according to US Code, all that is needed for the commission of a felony in this case...



My guess is the difference between extreme carelessness and gross negligence is exactly how many other people you can drag down the tubes with you.

If you are a lowly GS worker.... its gross negligence.

If you are Hillary Clinton and can implicate the President and other people...it is just extreme carelessness.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa




If you are Hillary Clinton and can implicate the President and other people...it is just extreme carelessness.


Bingo! There is a reason Obama did not appoint an IG during her entire tenure. More and more I am thinking he was complicit in whatever they were hiding and doing. #1 - He KNEW she was using a private server and personal email for State business. #2 - He intentionally neglected to appoint an IG for the State Dept. during her entire tenure.

Also, did you notice the extreme kiss-assing between the two of them today in North Carolina. It was sickening to hear.



posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

You were right.



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 23  24  25    27  28 >>

log in

join