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.

 

BREAKING! Congress requests investigation into Hillary for PERJURY!!

page: 14
120
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

During her deposition Huma Abedin stated Clinton told her no to use / did not want to use a government email account because Clinton did not want any personal emails accessible by the public.

That contradicts what Clinton claimed - using one device for convenience.
edit on 13-7-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 04:35 AM
link   
I fail to see why this topic is still Debatable.

It is not.

Democracy is dead, until the People declare it is not.

Everything is determined by 'The People of the USA'.

Now if only 'The People could stand in Unity, this would have been dealt with a long long time ago.

My advice...

Grow Some Balls.

Wake Up.

Do something about it.

If not, then continue in your own Vomit.



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 05:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: M5xaz

Prove that ?

Seriously ?

From Webster

Definition of lie
lied lying play ˈlī-iŋ
intransitive verb
1
: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2
: to create a false or misleading impression


I think the word your missing is "purposefully". Introvert is saying that its not enough to find out a statement given by Hilary turns out to be factually incorrect, you need the initial statement to have been "purposefully" deceiving of the truth.

In other words, you need proof that Hilary knew she was telling a lie at the time of the statement, not that something she said turned out to be not true.

There is a big difference that is going over a lot of people's heads.


Prove that Hillary knew she was telling lies ?

OK

Hillary stated numerous times she only used ONE mobile device with her private server containing classified information.

The FBI investigation showed that she lied, and actually used several mobile devices.

What now ? Claim that Hillary "forgot" about devices she used in her own hands ?

The glaringly obvious fact that Hillary is a pathological liar is going over some people's heads .....



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Of course they would. Thehouse and Senate are controlled by the opposite party.



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

That's why when you fill out legal documents many of them state "to the best of your knowledge". One can't be blamed for being ignorant and if she lied then she can't be convicted of perjury if she says she didn't know she was doing something wrong. If there were a way to prove that she knowingly lied then the perjury charges would stick, but at this point the people propping up these charges are wasting their time dragging this out.

Hillary will be the next president. It's happening. It's not like anyone is satisfied with this. Whenever we're all ready to admit that the whole thing is a game that's rigged for the elite then we can start putting them in the same gutter we've all been living in.



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 11:01 AM
link   
No perjury here folks... just "extreme carelessness".



edit on 13-7-2016 by Konduit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: [post=20983069]M5xaz

Prove that Hillary knew she was telling lies ?

OK

Hillary stated numerous times she only used ONE mobile device with her private server containing classified information.

The FBI investigation showed that she lied, and actually used several mobile devices.



OK...Let's play lawyer...NOT "mobile" and NOT "Several"

What she said referred to "Phones"..She did in fact only use one "Mobile" device.



When I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department," Clinton said,

"because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two."

She added: "Looking back, it would've been better if I'd simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn't seem like an issue."


So apart from the phone...what was the other "device"..SINGULAR...as in one other device?

IPAD ...NOT PHONE...



"She said her reason for opting for one email account in 2009 was a desire to not have to carry more than one device around," the source said. "And in the second sentence of the above statement, she specifies that the extra device she was seeking to avoid was 'a second phone.'"

www.cnn.com...

Now...you can turn red and throw tantrum over that distinction...but legally...that "Devices" bit holds ZERO water in any perjury charge.
edit on 13-7-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: SudoNim

During her deposition Huma Abedin stated Clinton told her no to use / did not want to use a government email account because Clinton did not want any personal emails accessible by the public.

That contradicts what Clinton claimed - using one device for convenience.



Let's try this...I declare the above statement "Untrue"..Not "lying"...

Now can you provide me with a link to the publicly available deposition by Huma Abedin stating "Clinton told her no to use / did not want to use a government email account because Clinton did not want any personal emails accessible by the public."

I'll reserve pointing out the irony around false statements and the difference between lying and inaccuracy.

edit on 13-7-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Lets try this....
In 2008 a baseball player named roger clemens testified before congress about steroid use. Some congressmen thought he lied so he was indicted on perjury charges.

In 2015 a secretary of state named hillary clinton testified before congress about an attack in which americans died. Some congressman thought she lied. Congress is referring the investigation to the fbi.

If we can investigate a baseball player why not a former SOS?



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Indigo5

Lets try this....
In 2008 a baseball player named roger clemens testified before congress about steroid use. Some congressmen thought he lied so he was indicted on perjury charges.

In 2015 a secretary of state named hillary clinton testified before congress about an attack in which americans died. Some congressman thought she lied. Congress is referring the investigation to the fbi.

If we can investigate a baseball player why not a former SOS?


That is one illogical chunk there..Let's try this...We can "investigate" anyone ...anytime..on Perjury Charges when the evidence warrants it.

The case being made against Hillary Clinton..According to law scholars...is not there..at all...it is absent of any evidence that even remotely demonstrates any hope...what-so-ever...of anything that could even warrant an indictment, let alone conviction.

The case against Roger Clemons was 1000% percent a stronger case and STILL he was not convicted of Perjury.

Thems the facts...can't help you beyond facts and reason.

People seem thoroughly confused between emotions, what they "want"...and reality, evidence, law and facts...
edit on 13-7-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

People seem thoroughly confused between emotions, what they "want"...and reality, evidence, law and facts...


It is you who is confused about "reality, evidence, law and facts"

The reality is Hillary Clinton took an oath of office, she also signed a non-disclosure too. Do you understand the laws behind taking an oath?

Let's get your memory jogged a bit here. "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...." That is an oath. And when someone whoever it maybe swears by an oath, then lies under oath.....wait for it...........Drums rolling...............It's called "Perjury"

Now the facts, very simple and easy to understand in Hillary case because of what Hillary already claimed, under oath.

I'm not sure what scare's me more the fact that people are supporting and covering for career liars, or the fact that they actually believe the lies that are being told. Either way if this is the mindset we are in big trouble.




edit on 13-7-2016 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=20984372]Realtruth


I'm not sure what scare's me more the fact that people are supporting and covering for career liars, or the fact that they actually believe the lies that are being told. Either way if this is the mindset we are in big trouble.



We agree there...

Was that a Trump ad you posted?
edit on 13-7-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: [post=20984372]Realtruth


I'm not sure what scare's me more the fact that people are supporting and covering for career liars, or the fact that they actually believe the lies that are being told. Either way if this is the mindset we are in big trouble.



We agree there...

Was that a Trump ad you posted?



I can't stand Trump, nor would I support either of these scumbags running for the highest office, in the USA. It's the content of the first part. Trump is using it against Hillary, but it is the truth.

Maybe both candidates need to take a look at each other's ads to see how FOS they both are, then step down in shame, and embarrassment from running for office.

It's time we stop BS ourselves and call out the liars, cheaters, and criminals that think they are entitled to a position in our government.


edit on 13-7-2016 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5




That is one illogical chunk there..Let's try this...We can "investigate" anyone ...anytime..on Perjury Charges when the evidence warrants it.

lol what is illogical?
What Hillary said did not square with what Comey said.
What would be illogical is to not refer the fbi to investigate.



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Perjury will be the least of her troubles after the first televised debate between her and Trump.

Her numbers are already dropping, there are numerous civil lawsuits sure to keep people talking about this for the next 6 months.

Her lawyers are desperately trying to keep her from having to testify under oath in court.... wonder why? Her being innocent and all.

Let's hope the judge in the case forces her to testify... hopefully it will be taped.

Film at 11.

When asked if the Clinton Foundation was being investigated by the FBI, the director replied, "No comment". Seems to me that he would have just said no if they weren't looking into it.
edit on R312016-07-13T14:31:05-05:00k317Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Let's not forget the Patriot Act! Clearly there are some violations.

Patriot Act

From broad concern felt among Americans from both the September 11 attacks and the 2001 anthrax attacks, Congress rushed to pass legislation to strengthen security controls.

Title I: Enhancing domestic security against terrorism
18 U.S. Code § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers www.law.cornell.edu...

(1)having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, or any restricted data, as defined in paragraph y. of section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation willfully communicates, delivers, transmits, or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;

(3) intentionally, without authorization to access any nonpublic computer of a department or agency of the United States, accesses such a computer of that department or agency that is exclusively for the use of the Government of the United States or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, is used by or for the Government of the United States and such conduct affects that use by or for the Government of the United States;



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: [post=20983069]M5xaz

Prove that Hillary knew she was telling lies ?

OK

Hillary stated numerous times she only used ONE mobile device with her private server containing classified information.

The FBI investigation showed that she lied, and actually used several mobile devices.



OK...Let's play lawyer...NOT "mobile" and NOT "Several"

What she said referred to "Phones"..She did in fact only use one "Mobile" device.



When I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department," Clinton said,

"because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two."

She added: "Looking back, it would've been better if I'd simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn't seem like an issue."


So apart from the phone...what was the other "device"..SINGULAR...as in one other device?

IPAD ...NOT PHONE...



"She said her reason for opting for one email account in 2009 was a desire to not have to carry more than one device around," the source said. "And in the second sentence of the above statement, she specifies that the extra device she was seeking to avoid was 'a second phone.'"

www.cnn.com...

Now...you can turn red and throw tantrum over that distinction...but legally...that "Devices" bit holds ZERO water in any perjury charge.


Tantrum ?

No, that; s the specialty of the left, "got to be given the freedom to destroy" and all that.

Google ethics, concepts alien to a Hillary supporter...



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: VivreLibre

Bill wasn't impeached by the Senate. The vote was 50./50



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Lord...you people...Keep talking about the location of an email server...

Meanwhile..in reality land..Just another day for the Trump campaign...

Ex-Staffer Alleges Trump Misused Funds, Set Up Fake Company
www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
Lord...you people...Keep talking about the location of an email server...


Talking about that server...China, and Russia, and ......




top topics



 
120
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join