It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

EmailsGate Theorem, Proof by Contradiction: State Dept Gral Inspector Vs FBI Criminal probe Reports

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 11:27 AM
The Peace of God to all that belong to the Light,
Dear Readers,

This week the political country entered literally in Shock with the decision of the FBI, in voice of its Director, to determine that Hillary Clinton
didn't commit after all any crime in handling top secret information during her tenure as State Secretary, although it was clear that certainly there were multiple faults but all of them were considered negligence not Crimes, because Carelessness at such level is definitively Professional Negligence.

Pls Read:

FBI Gral Director James Comey:
"State Department’s entire security culture is generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.

"There is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

..."She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries,” ..... “It is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account."

Today Mr James Comey, General Director of FBI is presenting his testimony to the House of Representatives special investigation commission in the issues of emails and Benghazi and it is expected he defend his argument that there were no crimes carried out by Mrs Clinton to prosecute in this case.

However, there is an evident contradiction in between this report and the one that the Internal auditory of the State Department presented weeks ago that certainly found that Mrs Clinton as State Secretary of President Obama violated in multiple occasions clear established policies, rules of the department and even more put in so serious risk the national security in to do that since they also found there were certainly dozens of emails containing extremely sensitive information that is considered TOP SECRET.

Here it is the complete General Inspector Report:

( in spite of what Mrs Clinton or Mr Comey have said the report mentions in detail a series of internal rules, classified information protocols and national security policies that certainly existed long time before her tenure and were not followed at all to handle her emails, as well to mention hacking attempts to the servers that were detected on time or after they happened and apparently contradict the assumptions of the FBI report. )

Inspector General State Departement, May 25th 2016: Clinton’s private email server appears to have been a target for hackers. The IG report found that on 9 January 2011, a technical adviser retained by former president Bill Clinton said he had shut down the server because he thought there was “someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to”. There was another suspected attack later the same day. On 10 January, Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin told officials not to send her “anything sensitive” and said she could “explain more in person”.

On 13 May 2011, “two of Secretary Clinton’s immediate staff discussed via email the Secretary’s concern that someone was ‘hacking into her email’ after she received an email with a suspicious link”. It added: “However, OIG found no evidence that the Secretary or her staff reported these incidents to computer security personnel or anyone else within the Department

Pls Read:

Paul Ryan Speaker of the House, May 25th 2016: “No public official is above the law. Secretary Clinton’s actions were at best negligent and at worst harmful to our national security. The state department should work to ensure that all employees strictly comply with the law, and follow the IG’s recommendations to strengthen its record-keeping system.”

It is clear that the House of Representatives has all the motifs to ask for explanations , they have enough material at hand to see that there is clear contradiction jumping out of the page when anybody compare the two reports, and they are going to dig deeply on it to try to find what is the situation they are dealing with and why the FBI is considering the all those violations of rules and policies don't constitute in their opinion a crime.

July 7th 2016, “The FBI’s recommendation is surprising and confusing. The fact pattern presented by Director Comey makes clear Secretary Clinton violated the law,” said the committee’s chairman, Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz. “Individuals who intentionally skirt the law must be held accountable.”

Now is H. Clinton guilty because she committed systematically Negligence? What makes different her faults to the ones of other State Secretaries?

Well, if the IG is right she can't argue that there were no rules to obey or follow, also possibly and occasionally before her there were in use private servers, but she was also the only one that never requested approval for her, as well as, unique in to use not protected or approved mobile devices.

So possibly her best defense is that she never had any professional credential to be hired as State Secretary, no previous studies or career in Diplomacy.

In that sense only M.Albright was really made for the job, since also C.Rice or C. Powel didn't have diplomatic career, although they had at least previous national security agencies public service ones.

So one only can infer that She was chosen for that job due to be married with a former President and considering mere political convenience.

The issue here is that she is right now running for a higher office in which she probably also expect to "gain" experience while playing dice betting international and national interests, a risk electors must weight carefully and consciously.

Again, somebody can claim that she is going to have at hand always the advice of a former President, but she have had it already all the time during her tenure, and as far as the law says reelection beyond two terms in any form is forbidden isn't it?

The thread is open to all the members that are also astonished for the collision of opposite points of view in between investigation reports carried out by two of the most prestigious investigation organizations of the country.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/7/2016 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 11:35 AM
a reply to: The angel of light

I love the internet lawyers who seem to think they have access to actual evidence and are able to interpret the law better than Comey. Everyone seems to think they know the law better than the professionals around here. "Hillary is guilty! I know because I read it in some news article where they listed a bunch of things that I think are illegal."

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 11:55 AM

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: The angel of light

I love the internet lawyers who seem to think they have access to actual evidence and are able to interpret the law better than Comey. Everyone seems to think they know the law better than the professionals around here. "Hillary is guilty! I know because I read it in some news article where they listed a bunch of things that I think are illegal."

Hillary needs her own forum. I have never seen a more dedicated group of fangirls who feel absolutely compelled to make - yet another - Hillary thread, discussing the SAME topics as the fifteen other thread created just that day.

I can't stand Hillary, but what was it that all of these Trump supporters said?

"No such thing as bad publicity?"

"500,000 more votes for Hillary?"

There is (in my opinion) no need for multiple threads that are all about Hillary and her emails.

For months our resident ATS members have ensured that "it's heating up now!," and they just can't let it go.

Instead of making a new thread every two hours about how "it's REALLY heating up now!," why can't they continue to discuss this in one of the HUNDRED other Hillary threads?

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 12:05 PM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I would rather have a citizenship that thinks and reads for themselves. Then swallow whatever swill the power(in this case the democrats) are trying to shove down our throats.

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 12:08 PM
a reply to: RomeByFire

I agree. It's about time that the mods cleaned this mess up. There is only so many different ways you can expound on this issue, and most of them were covered in the initial thread talking about this.

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 12:09 PM

originally posted by: thinline
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I would rather have a citizenship that thinks and reads for themselves. Then swallow whatever swill the power(in this case the democrats) are trying to shove down our throats.

This statement is funny considering it is posted in a thread where the OP just swallowed whatever the articles he posted said at face value.

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 12:15 PM
a reply to: RomeByFire

With all respect,

I don't agreed, This thread is going well beyond the point of the Hillary or Anti Hillary electoral rhetoric, it is pointed to a huge contradiction in interpretations of what can be done or can't be by a person that has security clearance and is incharge of a so important office.

if the contradiction really exist we have a so dangerous gap in the law, some one that can put easily in checkmate the national security, and it does not exist and one of the two corporations is right it is interesting to determine why the other one insist to support a point of view that would be extremely wrong, and if that is also negligence or what?

if you put side by side the report of Mr Steave Linick and the one of Mr James Comey it is easy to see that they are both talking about the same issues on the same functionaries of the public administration but with a dramatically different interpretations and conclusions.

Those interpretations and conclusions are creating legal precedents and constitute key tools for any future application of the Law, so the Thread is going well ahead of this time and of any particular incident of the past, in spite of whoever at future would be heading the State department or any other public dependency that produces documentation and records in electronic form.

This is a discussion that is extremely important since we see to opposite points of view in between two major Investigation organizations that supposedly must show consistency in their decisions and in their way to analyze and conclude the legal weight of certain actions.

The report of the FBI is not just exonerating Clinton of Criminal charges would be exposing the State Department as a corporation in which there are not really rules of to handling top secret information, and that is a huge contradiction with what the 79 pages report of the Inspector General stated in May 25th, where there was rigor to mention one by one all and every rule and under which policies they were created and moreover which political bureaus of the public administration designed them.

Please notice that the while the State department General Inspector report extends along the tenures of M.Albright, C. Powel, C. Rice and H. Clinton, the FBI criminal probe report seems to be entirely centered only in the H. Clinton Tenure.


The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/7/2016 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 12:20 PM
How many Hillary email threads do we friggen need.

This is like a message board version of S.E.O (Search engine optimization) flood the boards with the same topics over and over and its all anyone sees or registers.

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 01:04 PM
a reply to: bknapple32

Sorry bknapple,

let me just mention only some few statistics taken almost at glance to respond your curious claim and question:

I have browsed rapidly the entire ATS server, excluding intentionally the topic you claim belongs this thread, and this is
what I have found:

14 threads about the Roswell Incident
40 threads about the death of JFK
22 threads about the death of RFK
10 threads about the death of MLK
5 threads about the death of Malcom X
12 threads about the Obama birth certificate
9 threads about the Watergate scandal
8 threads about the death of Marylin Monroe
60 threads about the Moonlanding hoax theories!

Is this really a problem to be worried in ATS?

My answer is definitively No, it seems to be an issue only if you decide to see it from a negative perspective.

Many of those threads certainly have a clear overlap, but they have also their own aspects in which they are unique.

They represent an evidence of how deep and specialized is the level of investigation in ATS on any possible angle or aspect of any topic that represents a possible conspiracy scenario.

I am not afraid at all of tolerate diversity of points of view and different levels of specialization of analysis in mater of discussing topics.


The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/7/2016 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 8 2016 @ 07:33 AM
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well, This is a really predictable situation, if there is something wrong there is no way for smart that a person can be that after to many questions on three different inquiries, all of them by extremely rigorous investigators ( The House committee, the General Inspector and the FBI) contradictions don't appear.

Now, it is not that contradictions appeared what is right now boosting a new really strong case against Mrs Clinton, is that the size of those contradictions is definitively so much to be ignored or attributed to mere negligence or any human mistake.

'Not to my knowledge. I don't think there's been a [criminal] referral from Congress,' Comey said.

Asked if he needed one, Comey told Chaffetz: '[I] sure do.'

'You'll have one,' said Chaffetz. 'You'll have one in the next few hours.'

Read more:

- She said to the House that there was nothing marked as classified information in what she decided to handle in a private server, but The GI report clearly says that she was warned on this situation well in advance and yesterday the FBI director confirmed they were labeled in that sense.

- She said that there were not clear rules or protocols to follow in handling emails, but the fact is that the GI report is mentioning a series of rules that are supported in decisions taken by different committees that were working in to create them and also in to make them consistent with respect to general policies that existed at least since the 1940s.

- She said to the House that she was using only one device to transmit and receive emails, but other was her response to the FBI, where she accepted there were multiple devices.

- She said to the House that she returned all the emails that were produced on her tenure to be stored as records and the FBI discovered after recovering a lot of erased messages that also that statement was false.

Dailymail July 7th 2016: Asked whether it was accurate that none of those materials were 'marked' classified when Clinton sent or received them, Comey said: 'That's not true.'

'There were a small number of portion markings on, I think, three of the documents,' he said.

Later in the hearing he was asked directly what offense lying under oath would be and what punishment it could lead to.

'Perjury,' he replied. 'Felony. I can't remember precisely... years in prison.'

Read more:

Almost Twenty years ago a President of the USA was facing impeachment for different charges including obstruction of justice and perjury, can History repeat twice in the same country but moreover with the same family?

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/8/2016 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 8 2016 @ 08:04 AM
The legalese aside, which has been enforced for the most part on us peons since the first law was ever written is still alive and will be used against us. Evidently not against those who are well connected though.

The only surprise is there are people who are still surprised at how she is gonna walk IMO even without a presidential pardon if the need should have arose.. It is and has been a political circus and half assed witch hunt of the first magnitude. If they had really wanted the Clinton emails all they had to do was get a court order for NSA to turn them over when this stuff first hit the fan. NSA may not read everything but they darn sure collect everything that is sent and received electronically.

One thing about it if H.C. takes the oath of office for the presidency..... between her and sugar daddy Bill, ATS over the next 4 years will have plenty to post and talk about.

posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 08:47 PM
a reply to: 727Sky

Well Dear 727Sky,

Now that you mention NSA, here it is their reaction toward what FBI is saying in their criminal probe report about the Mrs Clinton emails:

July 7th 2016, ZeroHedge, NSA Director: Clinton Emails Damaged U.S. National Security Much More than Manning, Assange Or Any Other Whistleblower:

This is the second time they express their concern of the use of private email servers by Clinton, the first time was in September of 2015 in a hearing at the congress:

It would present an 'opportunity' for spy agencies if the foreign minister of Russia or Iran were to use a private email server for official business, the chief of the U.S. National Security Agency said on Thursday. The comments by Admiral Mike Rogers were in response to questions during a U.S. Senate hearing about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private server for email. 'From a foreign intelligence perspective, that represents opportunity,' Rogers told senators. Read more: Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


The Angel of Lightness
edit on 7/9/2016 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)

top topics


log in