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

BREAKING: Clinton Email Case Just Reopened!

page: 142
284
<< 139  140  141    143  144  145 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

The possibility exists that Huma nor Weiner owned the electronic devices. That would make Weiners permission invalid. Given the fact that important documents are on these devices it's possible that they weren't personal.


I've seen no evidence for or against ownership.


Good point!

However, multiple reports have referred to the laptop as "Weiner's laptop" (oh my god I'm tired of typing that name).

The FBI have had the laptop (again, according to reports) for weeks.

The discovery of these "other emails of interest" has been made for weeks as well.

I linked a report from WSJ earlier that stated that the matter came up last week, and officials realized they hadn't gotten a warrant yet (for the new "emails of interest.")

I can go back and link that article at WSJ if you haven't read it ... it's one of the more informative I've seen on the topic.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
This may have already been stated, but just in case it hasn't, Trey Gowdy said today that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin and even Anthony Weiner could hold a press conference tomorrow and tell the public exactly what is on that computer where 650,000 emails were found pertaining to the HRC investigation.

Nothing is keeping them from revealing what that computer holds. Huma? Spit it out. Inquiring minds want to know.


Could we get an update on the Bureau's investigation of Trump ties to Russia, by any chance?


Still waiting on the link....the last one you posted had nothing. And now I can actually call you a liar justifiably here....intentionally misleading is almost as bad as....well you've been involved in this thread for a while.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

They don't discuss on-going investigations, right?


Ah...so you did lie. If they don't discuss them then how do you have evidence of one?


The Senate Majority Leader requested the investigation was a good hint.

So no, I'm not lying, I'm speculating.

You know, like this entire thread?



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Gryph - and I truly say this with love in my heart - not only is this poor horse dead, there is no longer even any flesh on it's bones. Can we stop beating it?

At this point you are certainly not helping the elect HRC campaign- that ship sailed a while ago. But you are damaging your own personal brand here by baiting, word sophistry just to prove a point, etc.

That should matter to you a little as this is one of the few sites where you can converse with intelligent knowledgeable people on a wide range of topics. But the best here will not engage if they believe you're not reasonably intelligent, open minded and not willfully blind - on any subject.

Politics aside and be damned...
edit on 10/30/2016 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
This may have already been stated, but just in case it hasn't, Trey Gowdy said today that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin and even Anthony Weiner could hold a press conference tomorrow and tell the public exactly what is on that computer where 650,000 emails were found pertaining to the HRC investigation.

Nothing is keeping them from revealing what that computer holds. Huma? Spit it out. Inquiring minds want to know.


Could we get an update on the Bureau's investigation of Trump ties to Russia, by any chance?


Still waiting on the link....the last one you posted had nothing. And now I can actually call you a liar justifiably here....intentionally misleading is almost as bad as....well you've been involved in this thread for a while.


Yep, you're trying hard to get off topic, I'll admit.

My basic question is the same it's always been: is there information that these emails have anything to do with Clinton?

There's still no answer, 139 pages later.

SPeculation is speculation, eh?



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Gryphon66


Investigators found 650,000 emails on a laptop that they believe was used by former Rep. Anthony Weiner and his estranged wife Huma Abedin, a close Clinton aide, and underlying metadata suggests thousands of those messages could have been sent to or from the private server that Mrs. Clinton used while she was secretary of state, according to people familiar with the matter.
...In their initial review of the laptop, the metadata showed many messages, apparently in the thousands, that were either sent to or from the private email server at Mrs. Clinton’s home that had been the focus of so much investigative effort for the FBI. Senior FBI officials decided to let the Weiner investigators proceed with a closer examination of the metadata on the computer, and report back to them.


www.wsj.com...


Do they have a warrant to investigate emails pertaining to the Clinton Email Server?

If they do, why don't they know what's in them?

If they don't, why did they make an announcement regarding something they don't know?

If Weiner gave them permission to look, and they looked, then why do they need a warrant in any case?

As to your link ...

Do you know what metadata is?

Do you know what the word "suggests" means?


You are better than this... I have read your posts... you have made me rethink some things I thought were rock solid...

I don't see that now.. Isn't it time to stop with the defense?

We have a tough couple of years ahead of us... shouldn't we grasp the opportunity to have a government that actually debates, and decides law based on the folks, instead of passing law to please corporations & banks?

I can see that you have passion for your beliefs, but I don't believe that YOU are part of the system...

Break free... we need you when the swamp is drained



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Riffrafter
a reply to: Gryphon66

Gryph - and I truly say this with love in my heart - not only is this poor horse dead, there is no longer even any flesh on it's bones. Can we stop beating it?

At this point you are certainly not helping the elect HRC campaign- that ship sailed a while ago. But you are damaging your own personal brand here by baiting, word sophistry just to prove a point, etc.

That should matter to you a little as this is one of the few sites where you can converse with intelligent knowledgeable people on a wide range of topics. But the best here will not engage if they believe you're not reasonably intelligent, open minded and not willfully blind - on any subject.

Politics aside and be damned...


What horse is dead?

I'm not trying to help the HRC campaign. I'm discussing the topic. I have provided speculation as to the significance of these emails under discussion, and linked numerous links to associated information.

I don't have a "brand" here ... and I'm not doing anything other than I've always done for the last 3.5 years.

Thanks for the advice. I imagine that most of my posts won't be an issue soon.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

They don't discuss on-going investigations, right?


Ah...so you did lie. If they don't discuss them then how do you have evidence of one?


The Senate Majority Leader requested the investigation was a good hint.

So no, I'm not lying, I'm speculating.

You know, like this entire thread?


The thread isn't about speculation at all.

And yes you did intentionally mislead and lie. And even sourced an article that had nothing to do with your lie and was from earlier today.

Here...since you seem to have missed this post I'll make it again...

Let me put it to you in a different manner that I hope you may be able to understand.

I will start with a question.

What and who was the original investigation about?



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'll search for it.

Also bears noting that I've found co-ownership term used. Huma might not agree to the search thus the warrant.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: queenofswords
This may have already been stated, but just in case it hasn't, Trey Gowdy said today that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin and even Anthony Weiner could hold a press conference tomorrow and tell the public exactly what is on that computer where 650,000 emails were found pertaining to the HRC investigation.

Nothing is keeping them from revealing what that computer holds. Huma? Spit it out. Inquiring minds want to know.


Could we get an update on the Bureau's investigation of Trump ties to Russia, by any chance?


Still waiting on the link....the last one you posted had nothing. And now I can actually call you a liar justifiably here....intentionally misleading is almost as bad as....well you've been involved in this thread for a while.


Yep, you're trying hard to get off topic, I'll admit.

My basic question is the same it's always been: is there information that these emails have anything to do with Clinton?

There's still no answer, 139 pages later.

SPeculation is speculation, eh?


Nope...I asked you to PM me a link....haven't gotten anything yet....you posted it to the thread and I quoted the entire thing with no mention of an FBI investigation into Trump at all....again...lies.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Mod Note:

Hi People,

You know those Terms and Conditions of ATS you all agreed to before getting a Membership here?
Yeah - they don't expire or anything.

SO...how about we at least make some token attempt to abide by them.

Such as:
- Stick to the topic
- Don't target the individual member - if you're doing that you're losing
- Hold off on the side-swipes
- If you have an issue with what someone may have posted towards you or anything...ALERT it for Staff to handle, don't jump in there and get all muddy yourself then wonder why YOU get cleaned up as well on Aisle Five...


Come on now people.



Cheers,
Alien



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

The problem is you are speculating that it is all a political stunt by suggesting the emails aren't even about Clinton. It is ludicrous to think that the Director of the FBI did what he did if he didn't already know the gist of what was in those emails. A lot of people know what was in those emails by now.

If it turns out in the next few days that the FBI director admits...oopsy my bad...nothing about Hillary after all... I will be the first one to say the words "well dammit you were right".

I think there is a 0% chance of that happening.



edit on R562016-10-30T23:56:24-05:00k5610Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R562016-10-30T23:56:56-05:00k5610Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: JacKatMtn

Jack ... just for a minute stop.

What am I doing that is so ... out of place?

Certainly, I don't believe the vast amount of right-wing conspiracy theories directed at Clinton, but you've all known that for some time.

The only thing I'm doing here is to keep going back to the FACTS of this matter, and that is, plainly, as I have linked, referenced, quoted, etc. NUMEROUS times ... the content and significance of these emails of interest IS NOT KNOWN.

Is this thread only available to CLinton-bashing? If so, could someone go in and change the title and I'll be glad to get on topic or get out.

I understand the topic to be these emails that Jim Comey has made such a stink over. That's the topic I've discussed (admittedly with a few tangents along the way that were tossed at me.)

So, what am I doing that is wrong here?

Do you all want to go completley unchallenged as if this was a prayer meeting?



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




Officials had to await a court order to begin reviewing the emails—which they received over the weekend, according to a person familiar with the matter—because they were uncovered in an unrelated probe of Mr. Weiner.


and




The FBI had searched the computer while looking for child pornography, people familiar with the matter said, but the warrant they used didn’t give them authority to search for matters related to Mrs. Clinton’s email arrangement at the State Department. Mr. Weiner has denied sending explicit or indecent messages to the minor.


from:
www.wsj.com...

To me this seems like they want to go by the book when acquiring (if any) evidence.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

The problem is you are speculating that it is all a political stunt by suggesting the emails aren't even about Clinton. It is ludicrous to think that the Director of the FBI did what he did if he didn't already know the gist of what was in those emails. A lot of people know what was in those emails by now.

If it turns out in the next few days that the FBI director admits...oopsy my bad...nothing about Hillary after all... I will be the first one to say the words "well dammit you were right".

I think there is a 0% chance of that happening.




I am NOT SUGGESTING THAT. In point of fact, for the most part, I have been suggesting that Director Comey had to act as he did. Yes, I admit I got irritated at the trivial silliness being directed at me and responded in like kind with the "Hatch Act" stuff ... mea culpa.

Comey stated in two letters (one to Congress, one to the FBI) that the content wasn't known. That they needed permission to review and discover. THOSE ARE NOT MY WORDS.

Yes, I speculated earlier that the emails would be revealed in short order to be focused on Huma Abedin. That's still the most reasonable conclusion I can come to taking in as many of the facts as I've found.

At this point ... however ... WE DO NOT KNOW.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: JacKatMtn

The only thing I'm doing here is to keep going back to the FACTS of this matter, and that is, plainly, as I have linked, referenced, quoted, etc. NUMEROUS times ... the content and significance of these emails of interest IS NOT KNOWN.


Who and what was the investigation opened about originally? These are facts that are readily available online everywhere.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:02 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I see what you are saying... at least for me it's the semantics...

the nit picky deals... I try not to get into those type debates, because I don't think it's objective..

Others may enjoy it... I voiced my thoughts to you because I do appreciate your opinions, not so much the semantics..

So, apologies, if I stepped over the line...


I can do that some times...



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

What we do know is that Huma used an @clintonemail.com email address which routes through Clinton's personal email server from her home.

That alone is reason to investigate the emails further, and Clinton's case reopened. What is in the emails didn't matter. However, they matter now, and that is why the FBI got a warrant.

So what argument do you have really?




top topics



 
284
<< 139  140  141    143  144  145 >>

log in

join