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.

 

Under fire after secret meeting, Lynch to step back from Clinton probe

page: 20
60
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: RedDragon

Was it appropriate for Hillary to delete about 50% of her e-mails if they were just personal?


We already know she deleted work related emails that were property
of The State Department, she admitted as much.




posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: introvert

Of course not!

Blind loyalty involves no monetary transaction. One is loyal
to a famous person despite her lacking real qualifications,
her devastating track record on national security, despite the long
list of scandals and now under criminal investigation, one looks
at the political whore and sees a virtuous person instead.

The options for confidence in this creature are very limited.


I'm not loyal to any one person. I've stated many times that I will not vote for Hillary.

I like to debate issues and this issue is a good one to debate because it's rather easy.


Yes, it's so easy, right? Tell that to the hundred or more people working this case. You think they're twiddling their thumbs?


What do the people working on this case have to do with us debating the issue on ATS?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
I
And, I don't care anymore. Honestly. I'm done.



Ya,right. See you when you defend your girl on some other thread.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   
I just heard an interview with Lynch.

She specifically said that she is not recusing herself. She said recusal would mean she is not even briefed or involved at all, and she is not recusing herself.

She said that the FBI will take their findings to senior prosecutors, who will then present their findings to her, and then she "expects" to accept their findings. She never promised that will definitely happen, just that she expects to.

All legalese to appease critics. She will still do exactly what she wants to do. Or rather, exactly what the Clintons want her to do.


edit on 7/1/16 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)

edit on 7/1/16 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Of course, she did!


This 'meeting' was planned from the get go. The little station that 'just happened' upon the information about the meeting...yeah right. Fed is more like it!


Why? Lynch was in a lose-lose situation. If she indicted, she'd be hated by the Clinton supporters from here on out. No indictment? She would lose credibility from all those who didn't trust Hillary...in either party!


End of her political career. A casualty of the political wars.


Now she has a future......



My contempt is growing beyond the limits I thought I had.

edit on 1-7-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Are you suggesting that Lynch leaked the meeting?

Would be a good move to protect herself from a potential threat

Like a casual, "oh you know Hillary be fine, right?"

Kinda comment



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: nwtrucker

Are you suggesting that Lynch leaked the meeting?

Would be a good move to protect herself from a potential threat

Like a casual, "oh you know Hillary be fine, right?"

Kinda comment


I have no idea who leaked it. BUT, even the meeting, itself, was planned for this express purpose. To wit, 'create' the impression of impropriety. When even Dems say it was a bad move, it's set up for her bowing out.

When have 'secret democrat meetings' like this....especially in the middle of a presidential campaign EVER get exposed by the media??

The whole thing is orchestrated.
edit on 1-7-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

It's pretty sickening.

Fire the entire lot of ten and start from scratch



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: RedDragon

Was it appropriate for Hillary to delete about 50% of her e-mails if they were just personal?


We already know she deleted work related emails that were property
of The State Department, she admitted as much.



In what's perhaps an ironic twist of fate.

The results for the 2016 national election.

Clintons votes were DELETED.

Trump becomes victorious!.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   
so we just don't have any laws for people in goverment anymore? They do whatever they want, like have shady meetings in taxpayer funded airplanes?

What the hell? Are we not going to ever do something about this kind of stuff?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96


I just finished a trip from northwestern Washington to Yakima
and back. Not one single Hillary sign anywhere. In a left wing state.


I also saw a Sanders rally in Bellingham, Wash. last weekend. Even though Sanders has said he's lost. Not any money spent on Hillary's promotion and Sanders' people still active.


Then this little 'error' by Bill and Lynch. All BEFORE the convention, which is far better than after ir when Hillary would be the official candidate....


Sanders Vs Trump coming up.....



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



Are we not going to ever do something about this kind of stuff?


What do you suggest?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan



Are we not going to ever do something about this kind of stuff?


What do you suggest?


I dunno....im kind of a "0-100 prinicple" guy myself. It'd be nice if the folks I share this country with would stop voting on the maggot filled turds that fill the halls of our legislative and executive branches. Hell, write in the name of a random goat from your own county...but for the love of all that is holy why do we keep CHOOSING the same people who have made our lives miserable for generations?

I mean, we could at least try to use our votes first, right?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That is where it starts...the vote.

I think we have to make some other changes that "discourage" corporate control of elections and possibly publicly-fund elections in order to get more middle-class/poor candidates, but it all starts with the vote.
edit on 1-7-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The problem is the average American listens to the squak box and doesn't have time for research like we do.

I was talkin to someone who was fairly open minds about it at the machine shop the other day and he said between his tree kids and workin 50 hours a week he doesn't have time for it.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Introvert,

Let me at least say, Thank You for answering my questions honestly.

I do appreciate it.

Contrary to what some might believe, I do like debate, but in any "debate" honesty is key.

So, for that, thank you.

(honest).



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: butcherguy
If she is not indicted, a special counsel should be appointed by the Congress to investigate.


No. We don't need to drag this witch hunt out any further.

Congress investigated Benghazi...it flopped.


It's not a witch hunt.

There is an enormous difference between a partisan Congressional hackjob (a trusted Republican military serviceman member quit as he found it to be a slime job on Clinton and not a true investigation of the problem) and a Federal Bureau of Investigation investigation.

There were clearly willful and shockingly negligent and suspicious policies and actions taken by Clinton, actions which would have resulted in any other government employee to be fired, and lose their security clearance for certain, and possibly be indicted. It wasn't an accident, it was intentional.

There is also the Inspector General's report.

How were some of these emails retrieved? The Clinton people were hounding the ISP/cloud service connecting to the Clinton email to delete all their backups of the mail ASAP. The sysadmins of that business were afraid of what that may mean and to avoid obstruction of justice they notified the FBI.

PS: i'm not voting for Trump and I didn't vote for GWB.


edit on 1-7-2016 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2016 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

I have no idea who leaked it. BUT, even the meeting, itself, was planned for this express purpose. To wit, 'create' the impression of impropriety. When even Dems say it was a bad move, it's set up for her bowing out.


Was Bill bringing news of a future job offer?



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Likewise.




posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Gryphon66

Was it appropriate for Loretta Lynch to meet with Bill Clinton,
if it was just about grand kids and golf?



And why meet in person on a plane? Really? Why not leave a text, or send a card? Were they ever really personal friends?

It's clear to me that the goal was to communicate something which was too sensitive to communicate in any written form, obviously not golf and children, and/or create the appearance of an improper event intentionally.

Did AG Lynch even talk to her boss before doing this? Obama is not a friend of the Clintons.



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join