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

Let’s revisit the genesis of the Anthony Weiner investigation - Things may not be what they seem.

page: 2
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
Has it been proven that TDog is really 15 yrs. old, or that these messages were actually 100% for certain sent by her?

I ask this because I live in a world of 12 - 16 year olds, more or less! The texting is nothing like a 15 yr. old would text. I have never seen a 15 yr. old girl spell out a number (twelve as opposed to 12).


Weiner is 'T Dog.' All her info is redacted. Because she is a minor, there are no details about her, ALTHOUGH, there are some obscured photos of her at Daily Mail: Link

And a couple of pics she sent him that do not show her face.

I think the messages she wrote are interesting, too, for a few reasons...but writing out a number, like 'twelve,' is odd for 15. Other qualities don't seem to mesh with a 15 year old texting either.




posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Diisenchanted
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Sorry to burst your bubble but that is not how the current scandal started.

You didn't, so no reason to apologize.

The investigation DID begin with the Daily Mail story:

Washingto n Post - A British tabloid story is the reason for Hillary Clinton’s new FBI nightmare



This is the sentence, published in September by the Daily Mail, that led to Hillary Clinton's new FBI woes: "Anthony Weiner carried on a months-long online sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl during which she claims he asked her to dress up in 'school-girl' outfits for him on a video messaging application and pressed her to engage in 'rape fantasies.'"

By the time of that report, Weiner's sexting relapse had been exposed weeks earlier by the New York Post, which published messages that the former New York congressman exchanged with a "40-something divorcee." The New York Post story prompted Weiner's wife, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, to announce she was leaving her husband, but it did not suggest criminal behavior.

The Daily Mail's follow-up story, however, alleged that Weiner had traded sexually explicit messages with an underage girl and caught the FBI's attention. As The Washington Post noted Friday, in the process of investigating Weiner, the FBI examined a computer shared by Weiner and Abedin and happened upon emails deemed relevant to the agency's earlier probe of the way Clinton and aides handled classified information during Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.



I am sorry to burst your bubble.




edit on 30-10-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Have you guys given any thought to the fact that her name is...........

Huma Weiner ???

Obviously, some one is leaving behind a few clues.

Buck


edit on 30-10-2016 by flatbush71 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 01:40 PM
link   
In light of all recent events:

Theory:

There was too much pressure from Obama's DOJ and the Clinton Regime for Comey to safely indict without the media machine villianizing Comey and smothering the investigation.

The FBI knew there was another device with the telltale emails but couldn't risk it via subpoena for fears it will be destroyed.

So they create a sting on Weiner as an excuse to retrieve the laptop. Now safely under the jurisdiction of the FBI, the Administration, the DoJ and the Clinton's just got muzzled.

Oh my!



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

I have my own wild theory...

Hillary was always the intended "Chosen One."

Since 2000, those with the influence, wealth, and power -- for example George Soros -- began hijacking our election systems in key states, like Florida & Ohio. Influence with legislators have led to reforms that weakened the security of our election systems, making them vulnerable to 'rigging.' Funding of the necessary research to support passing those reforms came from people like Soros, and his Open Society Foundation, which gave grant money to The Brennan Center for Justice to develop reports that could be used for those purposes.

HOWEVER, there can only be so much fraud before the rigging is exposed...a threshold.

Anyway, back in August, I theorize that *internal* campaign polling was showing a much tighter race than the *slanted* polls the public are fed -- possibly they even showed Trump was leading consistently.

It became clear that there might be a situation where it would take TOO MUCH RIGGING, to make Hillary the winner.

'Plan B' had to be set up. 'Plan B' is that the second choice candidate, Trump, might have to win. And if he won, all the *slanted" polls the public have been fed need to be accounted for.

So, the Weiner scandal and ensuing investigation was put into the works. It was hoped it would not have to come into use, but once EARLY VOTING RESULTS were rolling in -- and were being fed to those with the right influence, wealth, and power, like Soros -- it became clear that it would take too much rigging to give Hillary the election. It would be too risky.

'Plan B' is just the October surprise that will make everything plausible when Hillary loses after all those months where she was leading in the *slanted* polls fed to the public.

***

In other words...I theorize they are ALL in on it: Hillary, Huma, Weiner, Trump, the FBI, everyone.




edit on 30-10-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler

I agree. How can supposedly "being set up" by the girl be more of an outrage than the act of pedophilia? I mean the guy sent cock pics that showed his baby sleeping in the bed next to him. SICK.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

It makes no sense to me that anyone from the current admin would gain anything by setting him up. Only one who would gain is Trump. I doubt he could pull it off...unless it's a distraction and a fall guy to prevent exposing someone bigger.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Here's my theory: Link

Mull it over and give me your thoughts...



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kalixi
a reply to: schuyler

I agree. How can supposedly "being set up" by the girl be more of an outrage than the act of pedophilia? I mean the guy sent cock pics that showed his baby sleeping in the bed next to him. SICK.


Good god, no one is claiming a set up is more outrageous. Please don't derail with strawman arguments.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I don't really have an opinion on your OP, but I have to chime in on the 15-year-old text stuff. It may not be common, but my 15-year-old daughter never uses "text speak" when she texts. She always types everything out in her texts. Not to brag on her too much, but she is a very bright and articulate teen - her vocabulary is much more impressive than the average 15-year-old. This girl might be the same way - just sayin'.

Carry on.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

I was thinking that too. That does not sound like a 15 year old.

Also - that part about the DMV, and getting a permit...
This is a classic, established way of reconfirming age during a sting.
For a prosecutable case, you must make it clear that the person knows full well they are chatting with a minor, especially if it goes over days or longer. You can't make it look like they might have forgotten.
You can't keep saying "I am 15" over and over.
So throwing in clever ways of establishing age, such as going for a permit, reestablishes clear statement that you are a minor.

But, the language was a little off, so it might not be a pro, or at least not someone who actually has skill.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Obviously, it is very possible she's just the kind of girl who doesn't use text-speak. It is merely somewhat 'out of the norm,' nothing more.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: queenofswords

I was thinking that too. That does not sound like a 15 year old.

Also - that part about the DMV, and getting a permit...
This is a classic, established way of reconfirming age during a sting.
For a prosecutable case, you must make it clear that the person knows full well they are chatting with a minor, especially if it goes over days or longer. You can't make it look like they might have forgotten.
You can't keep saying "I am 15" over and over.
So throwing in clever ways of establishing age, such as going for a permit, reestablishes clear statement that you are a minor.

But, the language was a little off, so it might not be a pro, or at least not someone who actually has skill.




Interesting thoughts.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Interesting theory. I myself also think that polls dictate who they want for the winner...and the votes are skewed to be the approximate of what polls show...+- margin of error.

Of course...this is not always possible to pull off...especially if the voter turnout is higher than the average.




In other words...I theorize they are ALL in on it: Hillary, Huma, Weiner, Trump, the FBI, everyone.


Well...that would be too much for me. Do you think the Weiner would agree to be the public fall guy...with sexting the 15-year old...he is ruined whatever this comes down to.

And how do you see Trump being in on it ?


FBI...maybe partly...i think they may be less to blame in all this.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

And, the article says that she was taking screen shots of the chat.
That is SOP for evidence collection.
What child thinks of doing that?

And saying that you are deleting the chat, to make the perp more confident?
Again, SOP.

The FBI would know that, as well as the age establishment requirement.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah




And, the article says that she was taking screen shots of the chat. That is SOP for evidence collection. What child thinks of doing that?


it is highly unusual to take screens unless you already have a plan...

There might be something to this.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
It should be obvious, but what's odd is she recorded the conversations. Why? Without doubt her intent is shown capturing his name constantly, more so than his photographs.

A 15 year-old is conscious of blackmailing congress? Doubtful. Her father 'she told later' is most likely the mastermind to the whole thing. The evidence looks contrived.
edit on 30-10-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Interesting theory. I myself also think that polls dictate who they want for the winner...and the votes are skewed to be the approximate of what polls show...+- margin of error.

Of course...this is not always possible to pull off...especially if the voter turnout is higher than the average.




In other words...I theorize they are ALL in on it: Hillary, Huma, Weiner, Trump, the FBI, everyone.


Well...that would be too much for me. Do you think the Weiner would agree to be the public fall guy...with sexting the 15-year old...he is ruined whatever this comes down to.

And how do you see Trump being in on it ?


FBI...maybe partly...i think they may be less to blame in all this.


Weiner is already disgraced and if the plan is that he is cleared of criminal wrongdoing...nothing really changes for him.

I think Trump is the second choice. I don't think he would have made it this far if "he would never do." He'll do.

I go back to Herman Cain to illustrate. The media made sure his hopes were dead and buried for far less than what's been reported about Trump.

I think Trump has done all he could to offset Hillary's HUGE unlikability problem. But, in the end...no matter how hard he and the media tried...they could not make him more unlikable than her.

Unlikability has always been Hillary's greatest weakness with trustworthiness being a close second. Trump tried to make them bigger problems for himself, but the feat was just too great.

I also find the timing very suspicious...early voting has been underway long enough to give a good picture of the final outcome...

...if someone was privy to the results, that is. Perhaps it would just take too much fraud to make it happen for Hillary.



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: BlueAjah




And, the article says that she was taking screen shots of the chat. That is SOP for evidence collection. What child thinks of doing that?


it is highly unusual to take screens unless you already have a plan...

There might be something to this.


She was taking screenshots and saving them..but also claimed to be concerned that her parents might find out she was communicating with him. That makes zero sense to me.

She had a second camera ready to take photos of her messaging him on Confide...before his name automatically deleted!



posted on Oct, 30 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
It could also have been someone from another country blackmailing him for information. Perhaps for emails from his wife's email account?

When someone has proclivities such as Weiner does, it becomes an addiction, as we all know. He surely did this with dozens of not hundreds of women online, over a long period time, as evidenced by the times he was caught. He may have been doing this for many years.

What if years ago he was contacted by someone even more nefarious. Perhaps someone from another country. This person might have blackmailed him, threatening to ruin his career and be an embarrassment to his wife. (of course this ended up happening anyway.) This blackmailer could have told him that in exchange for silence, he needed to get emails from his wife's devices and place it on this laptop with no security. Then they would take it from there.

This last bust could have been related.

Maybe the "sting" was because they had circumstantial evidence (perhaps NSA?) that there were foreign IPs hitting a device in Huma Abedin's home. So the FBI contrived this sting as a reason to search further?

The IP hits could even have been from Huma herself sending information to other countries.

They had to come up with a backstory so as not to give away their methods, so they leaked it to the press. Thus giving them a roundabout reason to launch an investigation, and reopen the Clinton case while saving face from not knowing about Huma's stash previously.

A few holes in that theory... but just thinking.

If Huma was not going to admit the laptop existed, they would need good cause to search. And with a hostile DOJ, even if they managed a search warrant, the evidence might have been destroyed from a DOJ leak before they could get there, much like the bleachbit/Clinton server purge.

And because Weimer committed a crime, they get access to the information without a warrant by offering him a deal.

Actually - it's kind of genius.




edit on 10/30/16 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)

edit on 10/30/16 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)







 
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join