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.

 

Hillary's State Dept. Blocked Investigation into Orlando Killer's Mosque

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Given the interest and focus, and given her assigned clout and purview,

She could likely squash whatever she wanted to squash almost wherever she came across it.

She didn't have any trouble squashing the WH Travel office investigation.
She didn't have any trouble squashing the investigation into her Fosterizing Vince Foster.
She didn't have any trouble squashing the Rose law firm investigation.
She didn't have any trouble squashing the Whitewater investigation.
She didn't have any trouble squashing the investigations into the bimbo's hubby raped.
etc. etc. etc.




posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

Hah yeah. I am one of the ones reading and researching.
Ya know, deny ignorance and all.
We don't know what the end result will be, but those who just dismiss things without research are missing out on opportunities to learn.

ETA: I also emailed Hannity at FoxNews to see what he thinks. I posed the question as, is there any truth to this?
Not that I actually expect a response.
But maybe they will investigate.
edit on 6/14/16 by BlueAjah because: eta



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
Why don't you read past the thread title and get back to me ok?


I have it open in another window and there is nothing about visas or passports that I can see so what investigation did she block?

Just because you do not understand how the various departments and cabinets function does not mean the rest of us do. You derail your own thread.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

"unable"

????

Unmitigated nonsense.

It may have taken as little as a phone call or a wink and a nod in a certain off the record meeting.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: theantediluvian

I'm skeptical you'd recognize disinformation if it morphed into a cobra and bit you in the private parts.

You sure seem to give the oligarchy's crap a free pass day in and day out.


Blah blah blah. You're obviously not that skeptical about anything if alarm bells don't go off when you read a supposed "news article" whose entire informational content boils down to a couple unsubstantiated statements of pure speculation by the author of a book that the supposed "news site" is SELLING FOR $19.95.

Have some respect for yourself.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Oh good, see how that works?

Your not someone simply responding to thread titles and personally attacking me with zero to know knowledge of what's being discussed with no interest in even finding out if it's real or not because you're promoting some hidden agenda.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Uhhhhhh . . . I'm no longer delusional that most folks on ATS WANT to really learn anything of substance.

Sigh.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

Was her husband President at that time of the instances you just listed? Was her husband President at the time when the title of this thread alleges she blocked the investigation?

Seeing the difference yet? Rhetorical, no need to answer.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Nothing but personal attacks that's all you've got, no substance as per your usual.

Try attacking any of the information instead of me the person purveying the information.

Did you read any of my OP?

Probably not because here's a quote of what I said in my OP on the first line...




WTF people? That's all I can say about this if proven true.


Here that's a quote from my OP.

Try using your eyes and reading something before injecting your ignorant rhetoric.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

You're the last person who should be giving any advice on debate procedure, since all you do is speculate.

"You believe she has no political pull? You have no idea."

GREAT point, lol. Please elaborate, and be sure to provide sources. This IS a debate, after all. Or do debates in Idiot Land just consist of pasting InfoWars links and calling people sheeple. Also, "You have no idea" should immediately be followed by links to credible sources, not just an open invitation into a clueless mind.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
It may have taken as little as a phone call or a wink and a nod in a certain off the record meeting.


Then it would not have been her, it would have been Holder or Obama.




edit on 14-6-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer becasue he left it in the ladies room



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Did you read anything but the title?

No.

So please go away.'

I'm sure you could answer 10 of your own questions and cut the BS if you read anything other than the title but since you haven't then give it a rest.
edit on 6/14/2016 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I respect myself enough

to respect my study of globalism since 1965.

Lots of things just obviously walk like a duck, swim like a duck, waddle like a duck, lay duck eggs . . .



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

They have no idea what their talking about they are purposely derailing the thread and as usual the MODS couldn't care less.

They admittedly read the title and that's it.

How much more ignorant could it get?



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: neveroddoreven99

Also, let's recap. You've provided nothing of substance. You just pasted someone else's speculation. then when people call you out on that, suddenly the burden of actually proving anything is on everyone else? I mean, how much lazier and more ignorant can you get? Wanna tell us the Earth is flat while you're at it... because aliens!



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

If she initiated the action . . .

I assign it to her sorry carcass.

But if she had a known comrade in arms in whatever dept . . . and they were in sync in values and goals or merely in a corrupt quid pro quo--she'd not likely have needed to phone the Imposter/Traitor in Chief at all.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: neveroddoreven99

Did you read the brietbart article where the whistblower was interviewed?

No of course not.

Someone who worked high up in terrorist investigations is whisteblowing what happened I don't need anymore proof.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
Did you read anything but the title?


Once again, this time in crayon, I have it open in another window, there is nothing in there that the State Department can investigate. ZERO.

Learn how the government agencies and cabinet positions work. The only department that could do anything regarding this mosque investigation is the Justice Department which she did not run.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

SOP.

Very standard SOP.

And the band played on . . . as the Titanic continued to sink.



posted on Jun, 14 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
If she initiated the action . . .


She could tell Holder to stick his head in a microwave, does he need to listen?

Again, rhetorical.

She ran State, he ran Justice. The both answer to Dear Leader, not each other. If there was an investigation and it was blocked it is on Holder and/or Obama for pulling the plug.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join