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: 143
285
<< 140  141  142    144  145  146 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
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.


Yes, we went over that earlier ... but the more times I see it posted (and post it myself) the more times it doesn't make sense ...

The FBI had the laptop and were reviewing it for evidence against Weiner in the sexting case.

In the course of that investigation, the matter of "the other emails" came up.

Apparently in analysis of the metadata (without directly accessing these other emails) they discovered that there was reason to believe that these regarded the previous CLinton Email Server investigation (I argued earlier this was because of Huma's email address ON the server, but apparently there are emails from state.gov on there too).

THerefore they needed a warrant to go after the emails themselves. (And/or Anthony Weiner gave them permission to look.)

They've asked for the warrant at some point in the last week. Comey announced that fact in general to Congress.

And Viola.

I see at least two "chicken-egg" issues there; do you?




posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66




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


Why would you say that?

My point was simply that many of the "issues" you brought up have been shown to be, well...non issues.

And I definitely sense a mind behind your posts - I'm just hoping it's not a hopelessly closed one.

That's all I was trying to communicate.

Live long and prosper...or whatever parting greeting you prefer.




posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I agree .. we do not know....


However, will you honestly admit that this is devastating to Hillarys Campaign and possibly the end of it all IF it turns out to have a lot of previously unseen work related Clinton emails?

The only point I agree with you on is that there was a insufficient amount of information on a subject of such great importance.

I think a lot more will be laid bare in the coming days in the form of more and more leaks, which some will deny until the day of the resignation of Hillary Clinton.


edit on R062016-10-31T00:06:19-05:00k0610Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R132016-10-31T00:13:11-05:00k1310Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

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.


The investigation of the CLinton Email Server?

As I remember it was a request from a couple of IGs ... one from State and one from the Intelligence Community.

Is that what you're going for? Do I need to look that up for you too?



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

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.


The investigation of the CLinton Email Server?

As I remember it was a request from a couple of IGs ... one from State and one from the Intelligence Community.

Is that what you're going for? Do I need to look that up for you too?


No need...I know the answer...just trying to ascertain if you do.

So...who was investigated?



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I see what your saying however from my (vague) knowledge of the law something sticks out. Just because they have the information legally doesn't mean it's admissible in court.

For instance, let's say there is classified information on the laptop owned by Weiner and Abadin. They have it but don't own it and certainly aren't classified to see it.

Once the FBI realized that they may infact need this for evidence in another case, they decided to get the warrant.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter

It is not a non-issue to point out that there is no information that these "emails of interest" are from, to or about Hillary Clinton.

The speculation has piled up here high and deep. I don't blame anyone per se for wanting to see their hated political enemy taken down.

But, here, we are supposed to dig and keep digging for the facts ... even when our peers shout us down.

It's not a "non-issue" at all that nothing has been proven regarding these emails and Hillary Clinton.

I do appreciate your words and the reluctant complement, LOL.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

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.


The investigation of the CLinton Email Server?

As I remember it was a request from a couple of IGs ... one from State and one from the Intelligence Community.

Is that what you're going for? Do I need to look that up for you too?


No need...I know the answer...just trying to ascertain if you do.

So...who was investigated?


Several people associated with the use of the server, as I understand it.

The FBI Director, however, has been quite careful to state that the investigation was of the server and of the emails (the contents of the server).



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:16 AM
link   
One point the Hillary defenders can not overcome.


Peoples opinions about Hillarys integrity, honesty are about 5 feet from the bottom already.

In a few days... she will be at rock bottom in the honesty department. Maybe even in the basement by that point.

Days before the election.
edit on R182016-10-31T00:18:27-05:00k1810Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R192016-10-31T00:19:07-05:00k1910Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:18 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Just a theory of why the FBI are reopening the Hillary email scandal:
1. Huma told the FBI that computer was her husband's so perhaps the FBI couldn't really get their hands on it because Weiner and his computer isn't part of the Hillary investigation.
2. Later someone within the FBI got to thinking or discovered that computer could be the treasure trove they are looking for and perhaps Huma was lying or misleading about the computer in question and who it really belonged to so they had to find something on Weiner to gain access to "this computer", they scored with this underage girl he had been grooming.
3. Huma might have been holding back this damaging info for a rainy day with Hillary..should the SHTF - to cover her own tail.
4. Once they got the computer they discovered they were right BAM all the 650K emails that could land Hillary and possibly Huma both in hot water/jail!
5. Hillary is sure all the emails were bleached which is why she is demanding the FBI shed light on what this investigation is about...not suspecting that Huma held all the emails as some sort of insurance for herself?
6. Huma is sure she could get away with this because she has been with Hillary since 1996 and she knows how to work the system and how untouchable the Clinton's are.
7. It makes sense as to why all these Hillary emails were found on this computer, the one supposedly belonging to Weiner.
*This is just something that came to mind as I was reading the latest news and the secrecy and ties to Weiner's computer. I was trying to find the connection and this is what I came up with. It's just a theory but it's very possible!
edit on 31-10-2016 by Staroth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

I agree .. we do not know....


However, will you honestly admit that this is devastating to Hillarys Campaign and possibly the end of it all IF it turns out to have a lot of previously unseen work related Clinton emails?

The only point I agree with you on is that there was a insufficient amount of information on a subject of such great importance.

I think a lot more will be laid bare in the coming days in the form of more and more leaks, which some will deny until the day of the resignation of Hillary Clinton.



IF these emails are the ones so many hope they are, the final nail in the coffin on the question of Hillary Clinton's intent to distribute and/or grossly mishandle classified info, then yes, I can see that. I would argue, as I imagine the DOJ did, that the investigation of the emails should happen FIRST and the results (when there actually ARE results) should be revealed.

If there is treason involved or some other high crime, appropriate actions can be taken WHEN THAT IS PROVEN.

Instead, what we have is the reaction that so many here in this very thread have had to the mere fact of Comey's letter.

Yes, the election has been affected by what can only be termed government interference.

That shouldn't make anyone happy.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
One point the Hillary defenders can not overcome.


Peoples opinions about Hillarys integrity, honesty are about 5 feet from the bottom already.

In a few days... she will be at rock bottom in the honesty department. Maybe even in the basement by that point.

Days before the election.


That's what you and others here are hoping for.

A few minds will be changed; most will not.

Now, one of us is wrong about what we just said ... and only time will tell.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

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.


The investigation of the CLinton Email Server?

As I remember it was a request from a couple of IGs ... one from State and one from the Intelligence Community.

Is that what you're going for? Do I need to look that up for you too?


No need...I know the answer...just trying to ascertain if you do.

So...who was investigated?


Several people associated with the use of the server, as I understand it.

The FBI Director, however, has been quite careful to state that the investigation was of the server and of the emails (the contents of the server).



So...this is a NEW investigation? Or the same investigation just with additional information?

And yes...several people...Hillary being one of those several.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


"Yes, the election has been affected by what can only be termed government interference."

But even you have to admit that you do not know the reason for that interference. Maybe the FBI felt they have something so compelling they felt the need to intervene prior to the election in an effort to be forthcoming with new evidence?

Everything is pure speculation at this point.... but going way way way out there on that branch all by yourself that this will turn out to be nothing to do with Clinton is a bit of a stretch.

edit on R252016-10-31T00:25:39-05:00k2510Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

I agree .. we do not know....


However, will you honestly admit that this is devastating to Hillarys Campaign and possibly the end of it all IF it turns out to have a lot of previously unseen work related Clinton emails?

The only point I agree with you on is that there was a insufficient amount of information on a subject of such great importance.

I think a lot more will be laid bare in the coming days in the form of more and more leaks, which some will deny until the day of the resignation of Hillary Clinton.



IF these emails are the ones so many hope they are, the final nail in the coffin on the question of Hillary Clinton's intent to distribute and/or grossly mishandle classified info, then yes, I can see that. I would argue, as I imagine the DOJ did, that the investigation of the emails should happen FIRST and the results (when there actually ARE results) should be revealed.

If there is treason involved or some other high crime, appropriate actions can be taken WHEN THAT IS PROVEN.

Instead, what we have is the reaction that so many here in this very thread have had to the mere fact of Comey's letter.

Yes, the election has been affected by what can only be termed government interference.

That shouldn't make anyone happy.


Holy crap!

Good points - all.

I completely agree with this post.

Will miracles never cease? Lol...



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

I see what your saying however from my (vague) knowledge of the law something sticks out. Just because they have the information legally doesn't mean it's admissible in court.

For instance, let's say there is classified information on the laptop owned by Weiner and Abadin. They have it but don't own it and certainly aren't classified to see it.

Once the FBI realized that they may infact need this for evidence in another case, they decided to get the warrant.


Well, the only things I know about the law are what I've taught myself, so don't feel rained on; I'm certainly not one of the self-proclaimed legal experts who chime in so often.

It all goes back to the Fourth Amendment.

I know what you're saying about the "hitch" ... the SCOTUS has ruled that LEOs can seize evidence that is "in plain sight" when no expectation of privacy is present.

WSJ reported that they became aware of the emails via "metadata." Which of course is held in the headers of emails. Does that count as "in plain sight" in this case? Apparently not; they went for a warrant.

So they had the right to access Weiner's device. Held on that device were emails that were the property of his wife (known via metadata). They need a warrant for that data, unless Huma agreed to allow them access.

Who knows?

All we know is what we've heard from Comey and associated reporting.

It's all speculation.

edit on 31-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Spelling

edit on 31-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted again.



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66


"Yes, the election has been affected by what can only be termed government interference."

But even you have to admit that you do not know the reason for that interference. Maybe the FBI felt they have something so compelling they felt the need to intervene prior to the election in an effort to be forthcoming with new evidence?

Everything is pure speculation at this point.... but going way way way out there on that branch all by yourself that this will turn out to be nothing to do with Clinton is a bit of a stretch.


I haven't claimed any knowledge, I have only pointed out that none of us have the knowledge that so many posts here are assuming.

I feel like that's my duty to the truth.

/shrug



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66


"Yes, the election has been affected by what can only be termed government interference."

But even you have to admit that you do not know the reason for that interference. Maybe the FBI felt they have something so compelling they felt the need to intervene prior to the election in an effort to be forthcoming with new evidence?

Everything is pure speculation at this point.... but going way way way out there on that branch all by yourself that this will turn out to be nothing to do with Clinton is a bit of a stretch.


I haven't claimed any knowledge, I have only pointed out that none of us have the knowledge that so many posts here are assuming.

I feel like that's my duty to the truth.

/shrug


"I feel like that's my duty to the truth.".... No you feel like it is your duty to YOUR version of the truth,,, the number of posts you have in this thread is ample proof of that fact.

You know what... you are on the wrong website. This is ATS.. a conspiracy website.

We have the FBI, Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner in the cross hairs of a renewed FBI investigation.

Pretty sure that makes it a conspiracy and ripe for discussion. You my friend are trying to play the Lone Ranger to keep people from discussing a conspiracy on a freaking conspiracy website and it is not working out very well for your credibility at all.
edit on R382016-10-31T00:38:10-05:00k3810Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R402016-10-31T00:40:18-05:00k4010Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Hm, I wonder if any of these people were investigated along with Hillary:

Cheryl Mills, Director – Clinton Foundation, BlackIvy Group - Founder and chief executive officer, BlackRock, Inc. - Director

Government Positions
White House Office Includes multiple levels of presidential advisory boards and...
deputy counsel (?→'99)
Department of State First U.S. federal agency
counselor and chief of staff to the Secretary ('09→)
Clinton Administration Transition Team
Deputy General Counsel (past)


Huma Abedin, Consultant – Clinton Foundation, Consultant – Teneo Holdings, Vice Chair – Hillary for America

Government Positions
Office of the Secretary of State The U.S. Secretary of State and direct staff
Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations (Jan '09→)
Business Positions
Teneo Holdings Consultancy founded in 2011 by Declan Kelly, Doug Band and Paul...
Consultant
Other Positions & Memberships
Clinton Foundation Now known as the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation
Consultant
Hillary for America Hillary Clinton's 2016 POTUS Campaign Committee
Vice Chair


I like collecting questions. Sometimes, questions can tell you more than answers by the shape of the holes they reveal.


For example:
What did Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills have in common while they were working in the office of the Secretary of State?

Oh, you mean they had the same boss?

Who was that?

Hillary Clinton?

Oh, I see.

What's that?

All of them answered "I don't know," or,"I don't recall," numerous times under oath in relation to the investigation?

What else?

Are you saying that Cheryl Mills' immunity was limited in scope to her laptop and any evidence found elsewhere can be used to convict her?

Does that also apply to anyone else who may have been granted limited immunity?

And Huma said she doesn't remember sending documents which were marked classified at the time to her person Yahoo email address, but they were found there anyway?

Did the emails send themselves?

Why would Yahoo resist complying with an investigation into whether or not anyone outside the U.S. accessed Huma's personal email account during the time it was in use to rely classified information?



posted on Oct, 31 2016 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66


"Yes, the election has been affected by what can only be termed government interference."

But even you have to admit that you do not know the reason for that interference. Maybe the FBI felt they have something so compelling they felt the need to intervene prior to the election in an effort to be forthcoming with new evidence?

Everything is pure speculation at this point.... but going way way way out there on that branch all by yourself that this will turn out to be nothing to do with Clinton is a bit of a stretch.


I haven't claimed any knowledge, I have only pointed out that none of us have the knowledge that so many posts here are assuming.

I feel like that's my duty to the truth.

/shrug


You know what... you are on the wrong website. This is ATS.. a conspiracy website.

We have the FBI, Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner in the cross hairs of a renewed FBI investigation.

Pretty sure that makes it a conspiracy and ripe for discussion. You my friend are trying to play the Lone Ranger to keep people from discussing a conspiracy on a freaking conspiracy website and it is not working out very well for your credibility at all.


Why am I on the wrong website? (And what does that have to do with the topic?)

This website has had much higher standards of evidence REQUIRED than most casual "what if this weird thing is true" sites. Conspiracies (real ones) are based on facts. Evidence. Yes, sometimes speculation but still ON THE FACTS.

We deny ignorance, after all.

You view the matter as "having HRC in the crosshairs." And you may be right.

But you don't' have any evidence of that today.

It's a conspiracy? Well, depends. Not much is hidden regarding this matter at the moment that has to be uncovered. ETA: Well, of course except what is actually in these damned emails. That may well prove conspiratorial in one way or another.

And, how am I trying to keep anyone from discussing ANYTHING? Again, do you only want to stack up the bashing on Clinton with no opposing voices based on evidence?

What credibility? The people who think well of me still do, those that don't, didn't anyway.

Respectfully, I disagree with most everything you just said.

Truth is truth. Let's find it rather than participating in a Halleluyah Corner, shall we?
edit on 31-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



new topics

top topics



 
285
<< 140  141  142    144  145  146 >>

log in

join