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.

 

State Dept. refuses to say whether Clinton, aides still have security clearance

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2016 @ 11:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: burntheships

Speaking of lying...
Crooked Hillary swore under oath and under penalty of perjury, before Congress and a Federal Judge that she turned over every government-related document she possessed. Today...Comey confirmed that was a lie.

Didn't she commit perjury?


Yes, without a doubt she did.

If she holds a clearance, it would be revoked.
If she applied for one, she would never pass the test.

How can she be POTUS without a clearance?




posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: burntheships

Speaking of lying...
Crooked Hillary swore under oath and under penalty of perjury, before Congress and a Federal Judge that she turned over every government-related document she possessed. Today...Comey confirmed that was a lie.

Didn't she commit perjury?


Yes, without a doubt she did.

If she holds a clearance, it would be revoked.
If she applied for one, she would never pass the test.

How can she be POTUS without a clearance?


How can she be POTUS is she has now been proven by the FBI to have committed perjury by lying under oath before Congress and a Federal Judge?
Standards, anyone?



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
How can she be POTUS is she has now been proven by the FBI to have committed perjury by lying under oath before Congress and a Federal Judge?
Standards, anyone?


The Benghazi chairman should move on this ASAP imo.
Bring her up on perjury charges, High crimes...



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   
IF Clinton wins this November.

Become's Potus, and is given TOP SECRET clearance.

This country has become an absolute JOKE.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: reldraSecretary of State Clinton was in direct violation of the agreement between her and the United States of American outlined on the Standard Form 312, section 4. She sent classified information outside of a server with the classification needed to keep the information she was sending secure. Her actions have created a major security violation and could potentially be used by enemies of the state.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
IF Clinton wins this November.

Become's Potus, and is given TOP SECRET clearance.

This country has become an absolute JOKE.



The president doesn't have a clearance.

@ OP - what's funny about all this is that continue to think people will care. The majority of her supporters won't. No charges? Great. That's it then.

Her detractors are the ones left grabbing at whatever they can and screaming for everybody to look at it and pay attention to it.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

As I understand it, elected officials automtically have a clearance commensurate with their office by virtue of winning an election. Appointed officials are granted a clearance during the vetting process.

The President has a clearance simply because of being the President. Secretaries have to go through a clearance investigation before being affirmed.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

What's especially concerning is the clearance status of her aides like Huma Abedin... I still would like to know who bridged the gap and put TS/SAP and Secret info onto Hillarys unsecured server...



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The president and every member of congress are cleared for access to classified material automatically, yes. But they don't have a clearance in the sense that most other people do, as in one that can be revoked or granted by any authority.

And the really scary part is that not only can the president, in theory anyway, look at any damn thing they want to, they can also SHOW any damn thing they want to whomever they want.
edit on 6-7-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 07:33 AM
link   
And they can make things disappear. Like all the dirt on all of their friends.

Baffling how we've gotten to this point, but at least we'll go down comically.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

I bet we see a Contempt of Congress vote.

Then it's up to the Justice Dept (again).

Just like Eric Holder and Lois Lerner.




posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
See, Comey was a genius!

He did what he could. He made people nervous, exposed incompetence and lies, and he got the administration and the State Department all nervous.

His statements:

While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.

and:

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions.


If he would have quietly tried to indict, all of this would have been swept under the rug.
Now, people are squirming.

.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

AGAIN...we're talking about penalties being levied against her NOW...not if she's elected.
Presidential nominees get Presidential security briefings (to keep them up to date until they assume office)...which can be taken away due to them being deemed a security risk.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Shamrock6

AGAIN...we're talking about penalties being levied against her NOW...not if she's elected.
Presidential nominees get Presidential security briefings (to keep them up to date until they assume office)...which can be taken away due to them being deemed a security risk.


Try reading what I responded to, and what that comment responded to. I know it's tough, but try. At no point was any portion of my comment discussing NOW. Because she will face no penalty NOW.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Thanks for the verification.

You're absolutely right, and unfortunately this is shaping up like the last three elections. I would start off sorta ambivalent, then someone would say or do something that scared the Cheerios outta me. So I would vote for the other candidate and pray.

TheRedneck




top topics



 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join