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: 21
60
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Public Service Announcement


This is too important a thread to let it descend into off-topic comments, name-calling and bickering.
Sooooo....those who continue down that path will find posts removed...and may face Posting Bans for the weekend.
Your call.

You are responsible for your own posts.

Community Announcement re: Decorum




posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Peversion of the course of justice , anyone ?

Of course nobody would have known of this
secret meeting , except for a pesky reporters
observation .
So I guess the briefcase stuffed with cash ,will
have to be returned .
And so carefully planned , right down to the gun to the
head while playing a vid of one of their victims
suicidal demise .
.... Whitewater anyone .....?

... and so the beat goes on , the Antichrist just
moves on to his next crime , which will end badly for
the world , when the living God , yes He's watching ,
hands you all another GFC ...... because He can.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: mbkennel

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?



Who knows? If I'm right and this whole thing was planned, then probably not.

Why bother? She'd be right in the inner circle of the party. A future leader.....



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Recused?



Sshe would accept whatever recommendations that career prosecutors and the F.B.I. director make about whether to bring charges in the case.
...
Some called for Ms. Lynch to recuse herself, but she did not take herself off the case — one that could influence a presidential election.

Ms. Lynch said she wants to handle the Clinton investigation like any other case. Since the attorney general often follows the recommendations of career prosecutors, Ms. Lynch is keeping the regular process largely intact.

Link



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Do you think Clinton met with her on purpose?

That way she would have an out for not being personally involved in the results? If she steps back, then she is not connected when her underlings decide not to prosecute....



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   

“I think that people have a whole host of reasons to have questions about how we in government do our business, and how we handle business and how we handle matters,” Ms. Lynch said. “And I think that, again, I understand that my meeting on the plane with former President Clinton could give them another reason to have questions and concerns.”

While she insisted that the meeting was a purely social encounter, Ms. Lynch said, “I certainly wouldn’t do it again.”


Darn true we have questions

If Somebody doesn't see anything wrong with this, when the person that this Attorney General of the US so nonchalantly call it a "purely social encounter" then we are truly as a nation in deep trouble and corruption will keep running rampant as usual and getting worst when the elite in power can never be touched by the law and the law only applies to the commoners, tax payers and voters.

Her so call social encounter was with none else that the husband of a presidential candidate that is investigated for nothing short of treason.

And we are to see this like just a chat and coffee between long time friends.

Unbelievable.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: butcherguy

There will be an indictment.

If it's not Hillary, then the indictment will be on the Department of Justice for not following the law.


I'm almost positive the previous saying about 'A Wall'
in regard to our southern border is the exact
opposite of the info monster we're getting from the
DC government.
They built the wall to keep us away from the truth--
and they'd always savor a war.
Besides, Ken Starr was used before for little else than
the limited hangout with Bill and Monica. That really
didn't come out right but it's my $3 bill and I'm sticking
to it. Sticky or not.
edit on 1-7-2016 by derfreebie because: the attack of the italicoids via mis-formatting AGAIN



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
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.


Perhaps she expects the prosecutors in her department to overrule the FBI and recommend "no indictment"?



Ms Lynch has maintained that she did not discuss the email investigation into Mrs Clinton and instead discussed topics including grandchildren and golf.


Note what was not said.

The FBI also has an investigation into the Clinton Foundation, whether it was a conduit essentially for bribes or at least pay-for-influence.

Perhaps that is the real thing to look out for? It's the CF emails, not the State Department emails, which are the real target---and the pressure on the email administrator is a means to get at these?

Think about it: which is more serious?

(a) a technical issue about email servers (done to avoid scrutiny, clearly ineffectively)
(b) corruption in the performance of duties to the US

I think that the FBI and most people would consider (b) to be more serious, unless there is conclusive (not just suggestive) evidence that the emails have been stolen by foreign intelligence as a result of the negligence---and all of that will stay classified because of the need to protect "sources and methods".

One is a shameful disregard for security protocols, but the other goes straight to the core of job performance. I bet that (b) is what the Clintons are really afraid of---HRC would take a hit on (a) "sorry my bad, I'm a technophobic grandma" in order to avoid (b).
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 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

A "social encounter" is chit chatting by the bar while holding a shrimp cocktail.

A private meeting in a secure aircraft on the tarmac is not a social encounter. Somebody had to make specific plans ahead of time, and both people had to accept this. Both of them experienced lawyers in government and political service.

The questions are "who arranged the meeting? When? When was it accepted? What were the terms? Why on the airplane? "

Wait, updated news.

"Hillary Clinton to meet with the FBI on Saturday."

dailycaller.com...

In other words, FBI will take a deposition under oath and HRC has to be exceptionally careful.

I think we know what the meeting was about.



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 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel


The questions are "who arranged the meeting? When? When was it accepted? What were the terms? Why on the airplane? "


Sounds like good questions on which to base a FOIA request of the DoJ.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
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?


For a couple of reasons, including population size and
dosage levels Tex, we're way past Iceland in terms of
fixability.
We are collectively and at a high enough percentage
politically lobotomized, the hot dogs on the Weber
Monday have a better idea of how SCRUD THEY be.
It priceless... they telegraph an impropriety to duck the
mud, and not even care about it. It's how far we've fallen...



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 09:57 PM
link   
There is a former White House Secret Service agent being interviewed on Fox now.
He believes that Bill Clinton arranged this meeting to use "soft intimidation" to influence Lynch.
He claims he saw Bill do this same thing, including with a law enforcement officer in the Lewinski case.

There was also a retired FBI director interviewed.
He said the FBI is LIVID.
They believe this meeting compromises their investigation and the outcome of their case.

Also, he said the FBI who were with Lynch were asked to leave the plane before Clinton arrived.
The meeting was planned, not an accident.

.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

This episode alone with the Clintons and the US attorney General under FBI investigation should disqualified Hillary at that moment of the meeting from ever running from president.

The Watergate scandal was a bad time in our nations politics, Hillary affair has become no only bigger but worst, dirty, corrupted and a mockery to our nations national security.

And People still doesn't get it, this is not just propaganda, these political figures think that they are beyond justice.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I agree. A coup by the military is not the American way. We need a revolution-we the people. Our poor military is scattered as the World Police. Anyway, would our present military take orders against the civilians from Obama? I don't think so but they are so confused that they really don't understand what's going on back at home. Us non-politicians need organization. I know, I know-Obama has labeled us gun-toting free thinking Americans terrorists-still can't believe we are putting up with this government and dirty, filthy politicians. Yes, that's how I really feel and I don't think I am alone.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: marg6043

A "social encounter" is chit chatting by the bar while holding a shrimp cocktail.

A private meeting in a secure aircraft on the tarmac is not a social encounter. Somebody had to make specific plans ahead of time, and both people had to accept this. Both of them experienced lawyers in government and political service.

The questions are "who arranged the meeting? When? When was it accepted? What were the terms? Why on the airplane? "

Wait, updated news.

"Hillary Clinton to meet with the FBI on Saturday."

dailycaller.com...

In other words, FBI will take a deposition under oath and HRC has to be exceptionally careful.

I think we know what the meeting was about.




That's EXACTLY what it was about. Does anyone else not think the timing of these two events are absolutely linked? I wonder if Comey has already appointed a team leader on finding out more about the meeting with Bill.

Unless, of course, that the FBI didn't already know about it.

I mean, they COULD have been the ones that tipped off the reporter. Has SHE been checked out and vetted?

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



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker


Thought about it a bit more. I doubt Lynch leaked it. Assuming it was a 'private' meeting with just the Clinton people and her, they'd know it wasn't them that leaked it. All eye would turn to Lynch....


On the other hand, if my suspicion holds up, Bill might have well had a motive to leak it if his intent was to get rid of Lynch.

That fits better if it's true that Lynch hasn't recused herself..


edit on 2-7-2016 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Reagan had Col. Oliver North to take his heat, I wonder who Hillary will use?



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Bill set it up, according to:

observer.com...



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

The Clinton Foundation and meeting with Bill raised another issue for the AG.

Depending on what occurred and why she could be in violation of witness tampering laws.

Also the DOJ walked back the AG's statements, saying 2 deputy AG's (political appointees) will review the recommendation and Lynch will have final say.

edit on 2-7-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
Reagan had Col. Oliver North to take his heat, I wonder who Hillary will use?


The American people...

I don't think Clinton has ever taken responsibility for any of her actions - ever. Its always someone elses fault.
edit on 2-7-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
60
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join