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.

 

Here comes the Big Press Down and Outright BS = Obama leans on DOJ Lynch

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Here comes the heavy lean on the DOJ by the Big O......... minutes after endorsing the Big Hill
For us honest folks, move along nothing to see here!!




WH Denies Endorsement Will Intimidate FBI Investigators

Weekly Standard Source




3:25PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Attorney General Lynch Oval Office Closed Press The topic of Obama's closed door meeting with Lynch has not been made public. Earnest made the statement in response to questioning from Fox News' James Rosen.


Comey and FBI team need a "Deep Throat" to unload the truth......otherwise, Clinton is going to run free and wild or how else could she say this? "It's not going to happen"......of being indicted. ~ Hillary Clinton to Brett Baier.





Clinton's comment "that it is not going to happen" comes at the very end right around the 8:10 mark. But the rest of video just shows what a liar she is and as other pundits have noted, during this same interview, she stumbled badly in answering Baier's question about her and her whole team refusing to cooperate with the SOS IG investigation.


If this is not a conspiracy to circumvent the law and protect Clinton, I don't know what is. Obama's meeting: 'Closed' and Clinton's emphatic statement on video is 2+2 = No indictment. What does ATS think
edit on 9-6-2016 by thenightisours because: added vid

edit on 9-6-2016 by thenightisours because: added information where to look at the video at 8:10




posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: thenightisours
its total BS, she should be indicted and never able to be our president, I cant stand that arrogant hag!!

it makes me mad seeing people get away with something just because of who they are.... what a joke.





posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: thenightisours

I think no indictment t. But I think it's because she didn't commit any crimes.
I stand with her.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ware2010

I think the FBI knows what it's doing.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme
just like the government?





posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ware2010
a reply to: thenightisours
its total BS, she should be indicted and never able to be our president, I cant stand that arrogant hag!!

it makes me mad seeing people get away with something just because of who they are.... what a joke.



It really is disgraceful and just as a reference point in the video above, Clinton's comment "that it is not going to happen" comes at the very end right around the 8:10 mark. But the rest of video just shows what a liar she is and as other pundits have noted, during this same interview, she stumbled badly in answering Baier's question about her and her whole team refusing to cooperate with the SOS IG investigation. She lied.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: thenightisours

I think no indictment t. But I think it's because she didn't commit any crimes.
I stand with her.


originally posted by: Sillyolme
I think the FBI knows what it is doing

originally posted by: [post=20832105]Sillyolme

a reply to: Sillyolme

I know you believe this and will stick with her SILLY, and I respect that. But, if you just look at the facts that we do know about, which are quite bit, but only the tip of the iceberg. there is overwhelming evidence she committed not only mistakes, but real crimes. If you read the IG report, you will see a scathing and direct rebute to everything HRC has stated on this matter.
Washington Post article on IG report on Clinton emails

Peace!!


edit on 9-6-2016 by thenightisours because: sentence structure

edit on 9-6-2016 by thenightisours because: sentence structure



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: thenightisours

I have looked at the facts. I don't go in for the witch hunt right wing who throw crap constantly. Funny how no matter what the right tried nothing ever seems to come of it.
This email thing has been so overblown.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Overblown? I don't think you drank the kool-aid. You splashed it into your eyes. If this had been you or I we'd have been in Leavenworth for a tenth of what she did. That's what the hangup for me is, personally. Based on just the things we've seen thus far, this very poor example of a human being should have been in jail a long time ago.

##snipped## We already know that she's involved in social engineering activities like Correct the Record but who knows what's not been caught yet.

##snipped##
edit on Thu Jun 9 2016 by DontTreadOnMe because: Community Announcement re: Decorum



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: thenightisours

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: thenightisours

I think no indictment t. But I think it's because she didn't commit any crimes.
I stand with her.


originally posted by: Sillyolme
I think the FBI knows what it is doing

originally posted by: [post=20832105]Sillyolme

a reply to: Sillyolme

I know you believe this and will stick with her SILLY, and I respect that. But, if you just look at the facts that we do know about, which are quite bit, but only the tip of the iceberg. there is overwhelming evidence she committed not only mistakes, but real crimes. If you read the IG report, you will see a scathing and direct rebute to everything HRC has stated on this matter.
Washington Post article on IG report on Clinton emails

Peace!!




I actually downloaded and read the report from the govt website where the 35page PDF is available.
It didn't say more than what she has already apologized for. It was against policy but not against the law.
The question is was states secrets ever at risk. And what the FBI needs to determine.
edit on 692016 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: netwarrior

Nope. We wouldn't either. You obviously think she did something like sell states secrets or something? She's a traitor?
Get real. Read about her somewhere besides above top secret. See what her record really is. Don't you drink the koolaid the right is feeding you intravenously.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

No. I don't think she sold state secrets. I at least give her a little bit of credit; I do not think she would sell herself for money. What I do think is that she is self-absorbed enough to give absolutely -0- considerations for anything other than what directly affects her. She's not a traitor, she's power-drunk and lazy. When you're Secretary of State for the United States of America that combination is very very dangerous.

I don't have to see what her record really is. I've seen it since I was ten.

I'm in government (not federal) and if I did what she did I would bare minimum lose my job and re-employment eligibility. That's the infuriating part. What's worse is I know how much of an entry-level "hack" this gucifer guy did. It's literally year two curriculum in network security. I know, that's what the "net" in my name stands for. Other nations, possibly hostile, read everything that went through that server.

I've said my peace. Be well.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

So you not realize she had classified info related to HUMINT assets on her unsecured private server?

That's why COINTELPRO is the program office of the FBI working this investigation. You can see this by the redaction codes in the publicly released redacted emails.

If someone like Guccifer got those original email and gave them to anyone else, they could then compare them to the redacted emails and figure out / identify all of the assets and their locations.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: thenightisours

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: thenightisours

I think no indictment t. But I think it's because she didn't commit any crimes.
I stand with her.


originally posted by: Sillyolme
I think the FBI knows what it is doing

originally posted by: [post=20832105]Sillyolme

a reply to: Sillyolme

I know you believe this and will stick with her SILLY, and I respect that. But, if you just look at the facts that we do know about, which are quite bit, but only the tip of the iceberg. there is overwhelming evidence she committed not only mistakes, but real crimes. If you read the IG report, you will see a scathing and direct rebute to everything HRC has stated on this matter.
Washington Post article on IG report on Clinton emails

Peace!!




I actually downloaded and read the report from the govt website where the 35page PDF is available.
It didn't say more than what she has already apologized for. It was against policy but not against the law.
The question is was states secrets ever at risk. And what the FBI needs to determine.


Sorry, but it is an 83 page report. Here it is. Very readable and it disputes everything you say. Although the IG investigation was not a criminal/legal investigation, it clearly show HRC's disregard for policies, out-right disinformation, and a total cover-up. Why have your own private server, not send all of her electronic emails, Only 55,000 printed pages?? To hide something that is why. and then wipe it clean, so no one could ever find the kernels.

I'm sorry, but there is something not right here, there is something wrong, and I just hope the FBI can give the American people the truth. I will live with that. But in the meantime.......here is the initial easy to read 83 page IG report that you said you have read. How you can walk away and say nothing seems out of line is baffling.

83 IG Official Report - No PDF required



IG 83 Page Report on Clinton Secretary of State emails



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor

That info came from who?



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 09:24 PM
link   
This whole email thingnis stupid.

It doesnt matter.

Its not a big deal. Its not like she was selling secrets, or performing treason, or murdering, or laudering, or embezzling.

So she broke a stupid rule about where her emails are stored. So what?

I work for a fortune 100 company and we have a million different guidelines and rules for everything, and yet ppl do what they do all the time, and its no big deal.

Plus, do you think Hillary.. a nearly 70 year old lawyer, knows how to set up a private email server and knows the ins and outs of network security and network engineering?

No, its probably something one of her ylung advisors recommended not knowing it was breakjng any rules, and she said sure go ahead.

To be honest, the person who would really be at fault is whomever allowed her email domain to forward to her server, that person is reapinsible. Not her.. im sure she has no idea abot any of the technicalities of any of it.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
This whole email thingnis stupid.

It doesnt matter.

Its not a big deal. Its not like she was selling secrets, or performing treason, or murdering, or laudering, or embezzling.

So she broke a stupid rule about where her emails are stored. So what?

I work for a fortune 100 company and we have a million different guidelines and rules for everything, and yet ppl do what they do all the time, and its no big deal.

Plus, do you think Hillary.. a nearly 70 year old lawyer, knows how to set up a private email server and knows the ins and outs of network security and network engineering?

No, its probably something one of her ylung advisors recommended not knowing it was breakjng any rules, and she said sure go ahead.

To be honest, the person who would really be at fault is whomever allowed her email domain to forward to her server, that person is reapinsible. Not her.. im sure she has no idea abot any of the technicalities of any of it.



And that my friend is exactly what you have been conditioned to believe.

You see it does matter. Were not talking about your companies latest ideas or what Susie and Jimmy are doing on their lunchbreaks.



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 12:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
This whole email thingnis stupid.

It doesnt matter.

Its not a big deal. Its not like she was selling secrets, or performing treason, or murdering, or laudering, or embezzling.

So she broke a stupid rule about where her emails are stored. So what?

I work for a fortune 100 company and we have a million different guidelines and rules for everything, and yet ppl do what they do all the time, and its no big deal.

Plus, do you think Hillary.. a nearly 70 year old lawyer, knows how to set up a private email server and knows the ins and outs of network security and network engineering?

No, its probably something one of her ylung advisors recommended not knowing it was breakjng any rules, and she said sure go ahead.

To be honest, the person who would really be at fault is whomever allowed her email domain to forward to her server, that person is reapinsible. Not her.. im sure she has no idea abot any of the technicalities of any of it.



And that my friend is exactly what you have been conditioned to believe.

You see it does matter. Were not talking about your companies latest ideas or what Susie and Jimmy are doing on their lunchbreaks.


You are absolutely 100% right my friend. At least some of us understand!!



edit on 10-6-2016 by thenightisours because: sentence structure



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
This whole email thingnis stupid.

It doesnt matter.


I work for a fortune 100 company and we have a million different guidelines and rules for everything, and yet ppl do what they do all the time, and its no big deal.

Plus, do you think Hillary.. a nearly 70 year old lawyer, knows how to set up a private email server and knows the ins and outs of network security and network engineering?

No, its probably something one of her ylung advisors recommended not knowing it was breakjng any rules, and she said sure go ahead.

Not her.. im sure she has no idea abot any of the technicalities of any of it.


I too work for a fortune top 50 corporation. And I know that my CEO & President do not know much about the inner workings of our communications network.

But guess what, if it is found that our company leaked out pre-earnings info before Wall Street knew, they would be directly held responsible as the top officers of the company. Most definitely fined severely and depending on the severity....prison time.

So Hillary's attempted ignorance is not an acceptable escape. She did it, she approved to have the lawyers delete over 30,000 emails, print out over 55,000 pages of emails that she determined as work related, and then had the server scrubbed. She is hiding things, that is why she and her team refused to cooperate and answer questions from the IG of the very State Dept she ran. Although for a year she has lied and said she would answer all questions from anyone???? what a liar......crooked, lying Hillary.
edit on 10-6-2016 by thenightisours because: spelling



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ware2010

I think the FBI knows what it's doing.


Given that nothing has leaked from the FBI yet concerning her doing anything wrong, either they're doing a fantastic job of keeping everything secret, or they're documenting everything and being extremely thorough so that no one can make further accusations.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join