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 FBI Testimony Wasn’t Under Oath Or Recorded, But It Would Still Be a Crime To Lie

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   
With the eyes of the nation on this issue, I don't understand why she wasn't under oath.

Next question did she need to be? I would think the FBI would want every I dotted and T crossed to avoid any questions about their investigation.

And finally does it matter that she wasn't under oath? Is there anything that can be done, they didn't find any thing but being negligent so I guess she is innocent.? Time to get a promotion to POTUS?


Hillary’s FBI Testimony Wasn’t Under Oath Or Recorded, But It Would Still Be a Crime To Lie


Hillary’s FBI Testimony Wasn’t Under Oath Or Recorded, But It Would Still Be a Crime To Lie




posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Even though we now know about many proven Hillary lies (thank You Comey), I think her lawyers would not let her lie to Federal agents in that Q&A meeting.

Lying to Federal agents in that venue would not require an "Oath" to make false statements a lie.

She has been extremely careful for a year to only lie in public venues.




posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
We don't know what she said in the FBI 3 hour interview. Comey's response and protocol to capture it is not acceptable. He talks about being professional and thorough but he missed the target completely on that interview. Not professional and not thorough. Unprofessional and beyond weak.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Yes, she lied...again, still....


Yet, the quick thinking and through FBI never bothered to record the interview but did take notes on salient points.
Guess who asked/ordered that the interview not be recorded?

They did it to us again, folks.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal
if they handled the rest of the investigation the way they did the clinton "interview" then I would agree that there is no way any prosecutor could get a conviction with the half ass investigation that they did.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: LifeMode

yeah, It almost makes you think that he intentional did a half ass investigation,it`s almost like he wasn`t trying to find any evidence that would convict her.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I agree, even if she wasn`t under oath she could still be charged with obstruction if she lied to investigators.




top topics



 
3

log in

join