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 FINALLY responds to a hard question.

page: 4
55
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
So you and others will not be satisfied unless she is put in jail, regardless of her guilt, and if she isn't...there will be blood shed?

Look, dude, fair's fair. No law for her ... no law for me.


The laws in regards to classified info have clearly been applied equally.

Do you really not understand the decision that was made?

Is Bradley/Chelsea Manning in jail ... doing a 35 year stint for messing around with the laws concerning the protection of classified materials?


They did not do the same thing as Clinton. Apples and oranges.

Just like the MSM ... it's your opinion. The law isn't real hazy ... and it's easy to look up. I'm not gonna do it for you, when it's clear your mind is completely made up.


Bradley Manning purposefully gave wikileaks hundreds of thousands of classified military documents.

How can you compare that to what Hillary did?

That's fact. Not opinion. I looked it up and it's pretty easy to see the difference.

Do you maintain that the two cases are comparable?




posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
So you and others will not be satisfied unless she is put in jail, regardless of her guilt, and if she isn't...there will be blood shed?

Look, dude, fair's fair. No law for her ... no law for me.


The laws in regards to classified info have clearly been applied equally.

Do you really not understand the decision that was made?

Is Bradley/Chelsea Manning in jail ... doing a 35 year stint for messing around with the laws concerning the protection of classified materials?


They did not do the same thing as Clinton. Apples and oranges.


It's apples and oranges if you consider the motives......one was to conceal the truth and one was to shine light on the truth.....



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv
Look Kayla... I hate to fight a fellow Texan on this, but you are being intentionally obtuse here.

She has compromised this country in so many ways that she should be either incarcerated or killed. She has profited off of the suffering of countless thousands of people. She has lied outright about everything she tries to sell us on. She is as personable as Hitler as far as I am concerned.

Her transgressions are documented, even admitted to. Yet somehow people still want to give her a pass?

WTAF?

Where does it end?

She should be held to a higher standard than some low level peon, but that's not how things work, and for some strange reason you condone that.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: MountainLaurel

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
So you and others will not be satisfied unless she is put in jail, regardless of her guilt, and if she isn't...there will be blood shed?

Look, dude, fair's fair. No law for her ... no law for me.


The laws in regards to classified info have clearly been applied equally.

Do you really not understand the decision that was made?

Is Bradley/Chelsea Manning in jail ... doing a 35 year stint for messing around with the laws concerning the protection of classified materials?


They did not do the same thing as Clinton. Apples and oranges.


It's apples and oranges if you consider the motives......one was to conceal the truth and one was to shine light on the truth.....


Part of the FBI investigation was to see if she was trying to "conceal the truth". They found no evidence of that.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Hillary knows that there is nothing to gain by stepping up and answering questions that could derail her campaign.

She has maintained a lead in the polls, 5.0 lead as of today's RCP Avg, down a few points but nothing to panic about.

She is trying to ride it out until November, and hope that her October surprise of having the POTUS on the campaign trail in October will be just enough to carry her over the finish line...

They are also waiting for the next Trump faux pas that the MSM will exploit as much as possible..

They are also trying to imagine what information they will have to deflect from the WIkileaks drop scheduled before the first debate in Sept..

It's going to be a wild & crazy couple of months...



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Lying is not considered concealing the truth?
edit on 25-8-2016 by avgguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
Do you maintain that the two cases are comparable?

Please prove me that one must have 'intent' before a law is broken.

You're giving her a pass.

Everyone with a reasonable mind understands this.

Trump ... Landslide ... Expect it.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
So you and others will not be satisfied unless she is put in jail, regardless of her guilt, and if she isn't...there will be blood shed?

Look, dude, fair's fair. No law for her ... no law for me.


The laws in regards to classified info have clearly been applied equally.

Do you really not understand the decision that was made?

Is Bradley/Chelsea Manning in jail ... doing a 35 year stint for messing around with the laws concerning the protection of classified materials?


They did not do the same thing as Clinton. Apples and oranges.

Just like the MSM ... it's your opinion. The law isn't real hazy ... and it's easy to look up. I'm not gonna do it for you, when it's clear your mind is completely made up.


Bradley Manning purposefully gave wikileaks hundreds of thousands of classified military documents.

How can you compare that to what Hillary did?

That's fact. Not opinion. I looked it up and it's pretty easy to see the difference.

Do you maintain that the two cases are comparable?


Are you saying she did not purposefully use an unsecure server? That she didnt know ?



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: introvert

Lying is not considered concealing the truth?


It's much more complicated then that. It's not a lie if you believe something to be true, but it happens to not be.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: imsoconfused

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
So you and others will not be satisfied unless she is put in jail, regardless of her guilt, and if she isn't...there will be blood shed?

Look, dude, fair's fair. No law for her ... no law for me.


The laws in regards to classified info have clearly been applied equally.

Do you really not understand the decision that was made?

Is Bradley/Chelsea Manning in jail ... doing a 35 year stint for messing around with the laws concerning the protection of classified materials?


They did not do the same thing as Clinton. Apples and oranges.

Just like the MSM ... it's your opinion. The law isn't real hazy ... and it's easy to look up. I'm not gonna do it for you, when it's clear your mind is completely made up.


Bradley Manning purposefully gave wikileaks hundreds of thousands of classified military documents.

How can you compare that to what Hillary did?

That's fact. Not opinion. I looked it up and it's pretty easy to see the difference.

Do you maintain that the two cases are comparable?


Are you saying she did not purposefully use an unsecure server? That she didnt know ?

It's beyond that as well. It'll come out that she instructed her staff to remove the classification caveats from correspondence funneled to her private e-mail account (see my first post in this thread).

It's not just Hillary who needs to go to jail over this. It's the entire core of her team.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
Do you maintain that the two cases are comparable?

Please prove me that one must have 'intent' before a law is broken.

You're giving her a pass.

Everyone with a reasonable mind understands this.

Trump ... Landslide ... Expect it.




From the horse's mouth.

Pay attention. I'm tired of trying to explain this to you guys. It's not that hard to understand.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
It's not a lie if you believe something to be true, but it happens to not be.

So what you're saying is the Democratic front runner is ... DELUSIONAL??



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Cheesus Christ.

I could barely see Anderson behind the kid gloves he was wearing for this interview. The molly-coddling is real.

Compare this interview with Don Lemon's grilling of anybody that supports the Donald. Maybe if Anderson had taken off his glasses to show how serious he was about his questioning, some impact would have been gleaned.

My takeaway from this is the line of questioning, and the pursuit of real answers is as soft as Cooper's and Lemon's manhood.

CNN is a freaking joke.

Especially felt safe with Anderson Cooper. The live fake news casts in Libya, everyones forgotten about that.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: introvert
It's not a lie if you believe something to be true, but it happens to not be.

So what you're saying is the Democratic front runner is ... DELUSIONAL??


You're still not getting it, are you?



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Cheesus Christ.

I could barely see Anderson behind the kid gloves he was wearing for this interview. The molly-coddling is real.

Compare this interview with Don Lemon's grilling of anybody that supports the Donald. Maybe if Anderson had taken off his glasses to show how serious he was about his questioning, some impact would have been gleaned.

My takeaway from this is the line of questioning, and the pursuit of real answers is as soft as Cooper's and Lemon's manhood.

CNN is a freaking joke.

Especially felt safe with Anderson Cooper. The live fake news casts in Libya, everyones forgotten about that.


Better'n that even. Go back and listen to the squelch around the 6:40 mark in the video. They had to patch her answer after the fact is my guess. After hearing that, I can understand why there was no video of Clinton in the interview.


edit on 2582016 by Snarl because: autocorrect



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: imsoconfused

There was no proof that she purposely leaked classified information.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

How perfectly gracious. As is expected from a seasoned diplomat.
You guys have issues if you can't accept a gracious apology.
Only blood will do. I know.
The smart people who get up every morning to run the country and do the hard work have determined she didn't break any laws. The people who know the laws said so. But not here. This alt-right crowd can't seem to grasp it.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

The DOJ only refused to pursue the issue because your person runs it, and the FBI didn't recommend prosecution based on the insane logic that someone else got away with it before. No one ever suggested there was no basis, it simply wasn't pursued because of the lack of precedent.



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Your putting faith in the FBI and DOJ that I don't share, so our conclusions are incompatible. We have no evidence that the leaked "classified" documents from Manning have done anything but enlighten people. We do have evidence that Hillary's mishandling of "classified" information on many levels, not just e-mails, led to the Death of Americans and God knows how many Libyan's. Her bizarre comments about Gadaffi's death are chilling !



posted on Aug, 25 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Even IF it was just a # up, it's a major one unworthy of a presidential candidate.

So sick of holding politicians especially our presidents to the lowest possible standards.

You # up, your out, come on people get with it. This includes Trump too.



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join