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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The FBI Files - Hillary R. Clinton

page: 1
32

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
The FBI has had their (heavily redacted) files for the Hillary R. Clinton criminal investigation up on their website for some time now and there have been a few news stories about what those files contain. Some of those stories have spawned relevant threads, however none of the threads have focused on the files themselves. That is what we will be doing within this thread.

The files are hosted at the FBIvault in 4 parts (linked below) and are available for download should you wish to view them other than with the built in reader they have on the .gov site.

It is my hope that there will be others interested in delving into these files in detail to see what may be contained within for ourselves rather than rely on outside news sources. Nothing like getting your news directly from the horse rather than a stable boy, eh?

After a couple of redacted paragraphs, the document begins thus:
[1]

I present this to give us a timeline with which to compare news stories and, among other sources, perhaps what has been revealed within the Wikileaks production of the Podesta emails in order to crosscheck against what we have presented within the FBI files. Some of this has already been done, so there may be some slight duplication of effort, but this sort of analyzing will help us gain a fuller understanding of these events. The advantage we have now with the publication of the Podesta emails is that we can compare and contrast what was said publicly in various news stories against what they said privately amongst themselves.

With the above said, I present the first bit that caught my attention:
[1]

This falls under the section "B. Second Email Server: March 2009 June 2013"

Note that the highlighted footnote indicates that "The new Clinton e-mail server hosted accounts for Clinton, President Clinton [redacted] and their respective staffs."

Just who is the redacted person "and their staff" who would have an account on the server? And why is only that person's name redacted whereas the other people who had an account on that server are not?

This next section talks about the hand over to Platte River Networks, which is where Paul "stonetear" Combetta worked along with one other to migrate from the "Pagliano Server," to the third party system Hosted by PRN and backed up by Datto.

[1]

With a bit of 2+2, one can figure out which PRN employee is which. None of this is too revealing other than to be able to look at time stamped events and cross reference them with other sources of information.

And that is where I will leave you for now, ATS. I hope to see others who are interested contribute to this exploration of what the FBI has to say about the Hillary R. Clinton investigation.

 


[1]Hillary R. Clinton Part 01 of 04

[2]Hillary R. Clinton Part 02 of 04

[3]Hillary R. Clinton Part 03 of 04

[4]Hillary R. Clinton Part 04 of 04

Related ATS threads:

FBI files reveal missing email 'boxes' in Clinton case, allegations of evidence tampering

NEW CLINTON EMAIL SCANDAL: State Dept Bribed FBI To Protect Hillary From Espionage Act Indictment

FBI Says a Laptop That Held Clinton’s E-Mails Has Gone Missing

Obama used pseudonym in emails with Clinton

Clinton Left Classified Data in Russian Hotel During State Secretary Trip


edit on 25-10-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: Trouble counting


"Follow the Foundation," the legacy of FBIanon


edit on 25-10-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: added one more "Themed" thread





posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Thank you kindly for your due diligence Jaded!

We really do have a crack team of investigative journalists who contribute so much in getting this vital information out!






posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Thank-you for starting what I call a "Themed" thread. These are very useful for tying together aspects of Hillary's wrong doings, or personal problems.. when they're scattered amongst WikiLeaks, Judicial Watch, Citizens United, etc.. Themed threads relating to this mega important election are wonderful for the many VISITORS who come across AboveTopSecret.com every hour.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I am confused.

first there is this:
[1]

If that is the mission, why aren't they investigating why the sun comes up in the morning. Why it get's dark at night. Why water is wet?

Good lord, our tax dollars fund this fiasco.

All that was found to be true. and nothing happened. I blame Bush for this.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Thanks for the thread OP.

Newsflash : we ALL have FBI files... isnt that special?? Dont you feel real cool??




posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Well done Jaded S+F!

Whenever I see more and more of H Clinton's wrong doings I get dismayed that she is still on the outside of a jail cell.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE AMERICA???



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Obviously the president was involved in and had full knowledge of the e-mail server and why.

The question really is what do they know and who are they talking too???????



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 10:12 PM
link   
I really should have included the footnotes for the "C" section I included above, the footnote q is interesting in the same manner as the redacted person who also had an email address on the server.

It states, "The [redacted] domain was also added to the PRN server at a later date."

Who else would have a domain on the PRN server and is that domain related to the redacted person(s) (and their staff) email as mentioned in the OP?

Since I mentioned PRN and Combetta toward the end of the OP, I want to lay out a little timeline here on him and some things that may strike some chords.

September 12, 2016


Also, Senator Grassley says:


...the FBI has “instructed” the Senate office that handles classified information not to separate the unclassified information.

Think about that.

The FBI is instructing a Senate office about how to handle unclassified information.


senate.gov

The FBI is obstructing a Congressional investigation

September 13, 2016:

* Bryan Pagliano, a former State Department employee who managed Clinton’s server while she was secretary of state. He defies the subpoena by failing to appear at all.
* Justin Cooper, a former Bill Clinton aide who helped Pagliano manage the server. He does answer questions for nearly two hours at the hearing.
* Paul Combetta, a Platte River Networks (PRN) employee, which managed the server from June 2013 until at least late 2015. He deleted and then wiped all of Clinton’s emails from her server. He fails to answer any questions and pleads the Fifth instead.
* Bill Thornton, another PRN employee who managed the server with Combetta. He also to answer any questions and pleads the Fifth instead.




September 16, 2016


twitter.com... Katica tweet (link won't work?)

It took a week three days to make it to ATS:
[url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1137573/pg1]Reddit post apparently related to Clintons email coverup


edit on 25-10-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: fixed some stuff

edit on 25-10-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: I don't know what's going on but links are acting strange?



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Advantage

How to obtain YOUR FBI file.

I know I have one and one part is HILARIOUS!



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

hey. stumbled upon this through Google alerts.

you might be interested in using www.Thompsontimeline.com for your research. it's a chronological listing of news summaries regarding the Clinton Email Investigation. good for cross-referencing what was going on at a given time with the podesta emails.

the long version of the timeline is over five hundred pages printed out, & it's added to daily.

i'm one of the editors/researchers for the CEIT. seems like a fun little community over here. will have a better look around in the morning!

cheers.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ladyships


i'm one of the editors/researchers for the CEIT. seems like a fun little community over here. will have a better look around in the morning!


Welcome to ATS!

I'm glad you found us, was looking for a bit about CEIT and came up with a couple of possibilities. Have a link? Not asking you to identify yourself, just want to know which org to which you're referring here.

Yes, I've used the thompsontimeline.com site as a source in a few posts. They do have a phenomenal amount of information about all of this and I would encourage anyone interested in this situation to avail themselves of it as a resource.

As to our community, well...it takes all kinds and we get most of them in here.

Looking forward to seeing you in the threads!

 


In looking at the behind the scenes reaction to the investigation, I ran across the following:


This is in relation to this letter with which the Clinton Campaign is responding to the NY Times:


Times posts Clinton email report, quietly changes it.
Late on Thursday, June 23, the paper posted a story titled “Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email.” It began with the lede:

Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

About an hour later, the headline was changed to “Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account” (along with the URL), and the lede was rewritten to put some distance between Clinton and the potentially criminal behavior.


NY Mag

If you look at the portion I outlined, they show that the story was in fact damaging to their campaign and that, again, they are more worried about how the story will be received by the public (the optics) rather than by the content what the story is.

And then you can see them lying to themselves where they characterize the image of the email scandal damaging the campaign as a "misinterpreted," They're even in denial amongst themselves.

Which fits with their whole M.O. spin rather than deal with the issue.



new topics

top topics



 
32

log in

join