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.

 

Obama used pseudonym in emails with Clinton

page: 3
91
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Thank you


Apparently the IT people were referring to this as "Hillary's coverup operation".
www.washingtonexaminer.com...

But yeah, no "intent" was found.
And Obama learned of this on the nightly news, sure...


Also of note:


Huma Abedin used Yahoo email when she couldn't access her State Dept. account. Hmmm…. pic.twitter.com/1XIWVLxHl9

— Andrew Blake (@apblake) September 23, 2016

twitter.com...




posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 03:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: dreamingawake

Great, fine by me. Doesn't matter what letter is in front of their name.

Get rid of all of the lying crimals.


Yes, you could have Mother Teresa get in to be President, but the system would corral her in to the same bin as every other politician. The system rewards corruption and is controlled by monied forces. The system needs to be changed.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I say the same thing I said from the beginning; it isn't just herself she was protecting. Her boss was protected as well. Benghazi? She surely holds much of the blame there, but all of it? Was he so unaware? What else? Read earlier that there are claims her "fall" was a plane crash, during a secret flight to meet with the then-president of Iran. If true, that's enormous. Either way, I'd bet money some of the deleted emails implicated him as well as her.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Just in case any Silly people forgot, here you are, Obama in his own words.
Skip to 30 sec.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
I've felt they have not pursued Hillary because to do so could expose much bigger scandals. I think it was decided that the fallout from whatever the scandal could be is not worth the societal unrest that might result.

You mean the expose of those in power. The people can see the obvious, this government is off the rails, waging unjust aggressive wars across the globe. Hillarys server is presented as a focus and she as the scape goat. Its not just her emails, every one is to someone else in the chain of command, from top to bottom. Shes the organizer, the fixer, motivating people not on board with the global agenda, to get on board.

Love to read the real dirt they are covering up. What do the damn emails say? Like 'missing' video of cop shootings, this is a state of secrets, a government of coverup.

edit on 24-9-2016 by intrptr because: spelling



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

Obama says, shes the one to answer the questions... see how he did that? Just focus on Hillary, only Hillary.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: Snarl




Really? Why does the most powerful man on Earth need to EVER use an alias in an e-mail?


He's not immune to prosecution for illegal actions. Being a President, half of the House and Senate want your head on a platter.




What? Was he up to no good?


I'd imagine he wasn't using an alias for snips and giggles. The real question is what emails are the public and Congess not privileged to see that had his alias?


Except he is immune, because he can just pardon himself. That's a thing, and he wouldn't be the first president to do so. Yeah he was using a pseudonym to make it more difficult to identify it was him -- plausible deniability, you'd have to place him at the actual computer at the actual time a message was typed and sent to prove it was him, otherwise, he'll just claim it was an aid or what ever....

Standard stuff here, all standard stuff.
edit on 24-9-2016 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
More ammo for The Don at the debates. Hes going to destroy Hillary.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime

How many presidents have pardoned themselves?



edit on 9/24/2016 by ColdWisdom because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   
I had a feeling that Obama was somehow involved. Now we all know why Hillary got a "pass" and isn't in Prison right now.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
Can Obama pardon himself?


It didn't work for Pinochet.. his own bodyguards did him in.
Ditto for Bush 43.. but nothing happened after PDD51, either.

With Obama, and as much transparency as we're getting from
the lawless enforcement wing of the Executive-- Mr.
Wonderful will probably slide into the Sec General at the UN.

Strictly to the OP... guilty demeanor from everyone
= naturally everyone is involved-- maybe more than the visible.
I'd like to see Assange's promised dump of 70K more damning
and elusive emails before Monday night. Right. I'd love to
see some official diplomatic tags from foreign agents to the
Clinton Foundation store front.. but I believe in unicorns too.

I'll believe the whole ugly ball of ear wax will come out right
after the ultimate damage is done, and she's sworn in. Then
the Queen will not only be above the law-- she'll just BE it.

"What are you prepared to do NOW, sonny?" Malone
edit on 24-9-2016 by derfreebie because: No Rhyme or nor is I Reasonable



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 01:15 PM
link   
What was his nickname?? GanjaUser61?



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Can you clarify? Was Pres. Obama sending her personal emails? Or classified emails?


Is it your contention that ANY email communication between Pres. Obama and Hillary Clinton is classified? Or subject to FOIA? That would seem to assume all personal communication between people in government not archived in some manner is illegal?



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Can you clarify? Was Pres. Obama sending her personal emails? Or classified emails?


Is it your contention that ANY email communication between Pres. Obama and Hillary Clinton is classified? Or subject to FOIA? That would seem to assume all personal communication between people in government not archived in some manner is illegal?


Good questions, and until the State Department decides to release the emails, we will not know:


The State Department has refused to make public that and other emails Clinton exchanged with Obama. Lawyers have cited the "presidential communications privilege," a variation of executive privilege, in order to withhold the messages under the Freedom of Information Act.


Politico

Remember also, that Huma Abedin indicated she thought these communications should have been classified:


"Once informed that the sender's name is believed to be pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed: 'How is this not classified?'" the report says. "Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president's use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email."


If it's the State Department sitting on them, and the White House claiming executive privilege, I would presume that would mean that they are official business of the United States Government.

I don't think I've seen any response from Hillary or Obama regarding these emails to say whether they are claiming them to be personal in nature. The only response I see is them trying to make sure they don't see the light of day until a very long time has passed.


"Given the Department's current [Freedom of Information Act] workload and the complexity of these documents, it can process about 500 pages a month, meaning it would take approximately 16-and-2/3 years to complete the review of the Mills documents, 33-and-1/3 years to finish the review of the Sullivan documents, and 25 years to wrap up the review of the Kennedy documents — or 75 years in total," the State Department said in the filing.


The Hill

These do not seem to be the actions of a party who wishes to be forthcoming.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical


Well...State has released the emails to he FBI since they were the ones showing exchanges to Abedin, just not the public.


Also this ..





The report doesn't provide more details on the contents of that particular email exchange, but says it took place on June 28, 2012, and had the subject line: "Re: Congratulations." It may refer to the Supreme Court's ruling that day upholding a key portion of the Obamacare law.


www.politico.com...


So whatever was there, the FBI didn't find anything sufficiently classified or illegal to warrant disclosure or charges..


No this comes down to FOIA and Congress...


Does the public get to see these emails? The WH has invoked Presidential Communications priviledge...


That can be reversed if the emails contain illegalities...or other content that Congress needs to be made aware of...The FBI says no...Chaffetz can take it to court and have a judge or panel review the emails and come to a legal conclusion on whether they qualify under "Presidential Communications" exception.


edit on 24-9-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=21288165]jadedANDcynical

These do not seem to be the actions of a party who wishes to be forthcoming.


Same for every Presidential Administration..>EVER..

The FBI is the only one who has seen the emails from and to Obama...

What we have is selective leaks of the FBI Interview notes..

If the subject line is "Congratulations"...I doubt the content is about Nuclear Tests in Iran..

If Congress (Chaffetz) wants to challenge the FBI's assessment that there is nothing there that would excerpt the emails from Executive Priveledge, then he should do that. A judicial panel will review..

But what he has done is choose what excerpts should be leaked for headlines..

Just saying the "Lack of Transparency" for agenda or political purposes...also includes Chaffetz...What we are fed by anyone in DC should be read with objective skepticism.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom

Nixon sure as hell didn't

Neither did Bill, i love the young ladies Clinton
edit on 24-9-2016 by BlueJacket because: Eta



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I've never seen this much corruption, & NOT ONE PERSON GETTING IMPEACHED OR FIRED! Truly unbelievable!



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
It seems logical that the president would have an alias email address to use if he knew he'd be sending messages to an unsecure server. Why in the world would he use an official email address to a private server for State business?


My understanding of how domain names and email work is that you don't know where the machine is only the name of the machine, right?

If I wanted to write to Obama I might have a FROM field addressed to: presidentobama@whitehouse.gov.

The whitehouse.gov website might be on a sanctioned server or it may not. There is no way for a person outside the IT administrators of that particular computer to know for certain.

Aliases are also fairly common in various jobs I have had through the years.

Imagine an employee is the web admin for a website, the person might have an email address alias:
webmaster@somecompany.com

The same person might also have another pseudonym, whether it be a nickname, or their actual name for more personal contacts:
bigdog@somecompany.com

I am not sure I am understanding why this is big news.

Do we know if this is an actual codename for Obama?

edit on 24-9-2016 by TheMalefactor because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:02 PM
link   
a reply to: TheMalefactor

The issue is the "@clintonmail.com" or "hr15@att.blackberry.net" vs "@stategov.com"




new topics

top topics



 
91
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join