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.
Ok INTRO I know your no fan of Trump
but there is no doubt to anyone, including yourself, if she scrubbed her server and lawyers cell phones with programs specialized to make the emails unrecoverable there was CLEARLY INTENT to subjugate the collection of possible evidence by the FBI.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Puppylove
The proof exists, if it didn't it wouldn't be so widely known by name.
Let's see it.
They are ignoring it because they are under severe pressure to let her off.
Ahhh, conspiracy.
It's always a conspiracy.
Thirty out of how many? Or if they weren't prosecuted, what other sanctions were placed on those individuals? My guess is, at the very least, they lost clearances.
Or if they weren't prosecuted, what other sanctions were placed on those individuals? My guess is, at the very least, they lost clearances.
At the very least, the very least, this exposes her as incompetent, and should certainly not be President.
originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: introvert
In this case, politics and the legal system are intertwined.
The dominant faction is protecting one of their own, through the legal system.
You are the one conflating the issue, in the American legal system - truth and justice are two separate matters.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Sillyolme
Such bull.
I spent a long career in the military. Not once did I ever "misplace" sensitive documents.
So you're saying she's either incompetent or corrupt.
Choose which one.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Puppylove
The proof exists, if it didn't it wouldn't be so widely known by name.
Let's see it.
originally posted by: introvert
Nor a fan of Hillary.
originally posted by: JAY1980
originally posted by: introvert
Nor a fan of Hillary.
When did that change?
Your continued defense of her corruption says otherwise...
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MotherMayEye
You're talking about a potential perjury charge. That is completely different, although still very hard to prove and unlikely.