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

Wiki: Media, Arms Dealers, Banks, Intelligence And Foreign Money Against Trump For HRC

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Blunt, and true. I like it




posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Again nice deflection.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 06:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
Spirit cooking Ick



In what is undoubtedly the most bizarre Wikileaks revelation to date, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was invited to a “spirit cooking dinner” by performance artist Marina Abramovic, to take part in an occult ritual founded by Satanist Aleister Crowley.

In an email dated June 28, 2015, Abramovic wrote, “I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining? All my love, Marina.”




www.infowars.com...



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Sources on the Internet are over rated. I own my own library, masters and mind...how bout you?


Art history treating you well?



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

I have no argument? I've outlined it for you twice.

You're lying. The argument is clear. And worse than merely lying, you have stated time and time again YOURSELF that the law was broken because of the server being private, because of the mishandling of information, because of the potential for the misuse of official material.

The law was clearly broken by fifty or sixty people (including the Vice President), and you have nothing to say, except to try to sidestep your own past statements.

Bush and company are either as guilty or more guilty than Clinton, and yet, your response is to deny what you've stated multiple times yourself. "Gross negligence" right? Isn't that your argument over and over and over?

I haven't lost anything here; the facts are clear. The fact that you're so desperately trying to "declare" victory for yourself is telling. You know, by your own arguments made here on this site multiple times that the Bush White House is guilty for MULTIPLE instances of the same offenses you want to cite Clinton with.

You just made it exceptionally clear that you don't' care anything about the law or even right and wrong ... you're merely a partisan hack who can't even keep their own arguments straight.

edit on 5-11-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Well, who can argue with infowars, eh?

Also, Crowley wasn't a Satanist.



posted on Nov, 5 2016 @ 11:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: RickinVa

I have no argument? I've outlined it for you twice.

You're lying. The argument is clear. And worse than merely lying, you have stated time and time again YOURSELF that the law was broken because of the server being private, because of the mishandling of information, because of the potential for the misuse of official material.

The law was clearly broken by fifty or sixty people (including the Vice President), and you have nothing to say, except to try to sidestep your own past statements.

Bush and company are either as guilty or more guilty than Clinton, and yet, your response is to deny what you've stated multiple times yourself. "Gross negligence" right? Isn't that your argument over and over and over?

I haven't lost anything here; the facts are clear. The fact that you're so desperately trying to "declare" victory for yourself is telling. You know, by your own arguments made here on this site multiple times that the Bush White House is guilty for MULTIPLE instances of the same offenses you want to cite Clinton with.

You just made it exceptionally clear that you don't' care anything about the law or even right and wrong ... you're merely a partisan hack who can't even keep their own arguments straight.


What a special snowflake.


1. Having classified information on an unclassified commercial private email server is illegal. FACT

2. Having classified information on an unclassified government email server is illegal. FACT

3. Having classified information on an unclassified private email server is illegal. FACT

4. Bush used a commercial private email server, owned by the RNC for the use of Republicans. FACT

5. Hillary used her own personal private unclassified email server, which at one time was located in her basement. FACT

6. Powell used a commercial private email provider, AOL. FACT

7. Powell's emails were RETROACTIVELY classified after being removed from the archives, where they had sat for years on GOVERNMENT computers as unclassified but were bumped after review because of the Clinton Scandal. FACT


None of this really matters anyways,,,, the only one under investigation for mishandling classified information is Hillary Clinton.

Not BUSH --- used commercial private RNC server

Not POWELL--used commercial private AOL server.

Not RICE--

Hillary Clinton is the one under investigation. --used personally owned private unclassified email server in her residence to store classified information... that is the bottom line.

I am so sorry you are so hurt that the FBI won't investigate those 22 million emails,..all they need is a referral... hop to it sparky.

I only care about the criminal HR Clinton. Soon as you show me 100% undeniable proof, and I have asked repeatedly, where Bush was caught with TS/SCI emails on an unclassified server the same as I can show you 100% undeniable proof that Hillary was caught with TS/SCI emails..then you got an argument.

Until you can do that one so little simple thing, you are only trying to blow a smokescreen and deflect as usual. Status quo.


edit on R192016-11-06T00:19:17-05:00k1911Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

You're tipping your hand ... why the personal attacks? I'm not hurt, scared, worried or any of the rest of that catalogue of silliness.

You, however, seem to be desperately trying to cover up the simple FACTS:

The server used by the Bush White House was NOT a classified government server and 22 million emails were allegedly lost at the time and many of these were under subpoena by Congress

That is not a smoke-screen or a distraction or anything except a blatant and obvious FACT.

Why has a simple FACT upset you so badly?



posted on Nov, 6 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Ok sparky...


once again:

I can prove 100% beyond a single doubt that Hillary Clinton had TS/SCI classified emails on an unclassified server.

YOU HAVE 0% proof that Bush had TS/SCI emails in those 22 million emails.


you lose..... again.


I only have to keep repeating this very very simple fact that a 5 year old can comprehend: you have 0% proof now and you will have 0% proof tomorrow that Bush had TS/SCI emails on a unclassified server. Repeat that: you have 0% proof, I have 100% proof.

Only assumptions and allegations.. deflection and smoke screens.

Once again, who is under a active FBI investigation investigation for mishandling classified information? Clinton or Bush?

Hint: The last name starts with a "C".


Start a damn petition to the White House to force them to refer the 22 million emails that are upsetting you to the FBI for investigation.

YOU have that power.... have you started that petition?? Link it to us.

Why do you spend hours arguing when you can start a petition to achieve your goals? You could spend those same hours getting the required signatures to force the White House to respond.

Where is your petition?

Hell you start it, I will sign it......... I just don't freaking care about Bush or anybody else unless you have 100% proof they had TS/SCI emails on a unclassified server.
edit on R402016-11-06T09:40:04-06:00k4011Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join