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.

 

She tried to run out Gowdy's five minutes so not to answer his question.

page: 1
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   
youtu.be...
I posted this approx. two months ago. This explains what Trey is talking about for those who are not aware of what 'elements' are. This statute is in reference to her handling of classified materials:
"It was illegal. Take a read of the link provided in the first post. USMC 4421 Paralegal Specialist worked for the SAUSA Special Assistant U.S. Attorney's Office at Camp Lejeune under Major Kent. We would have prosecuted this.
In regards to Comey's 'intent', it is all bull#: INTENT, NO SUCH ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE EXISTS. All they needed to prove was GROSS NEGLIGENCE Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18 U.S. Code): "(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. THEY #ING LIED Any lawyer with sand could look at what Comey said about 'his interpretation' of the law and state... "There is no #ing interpretation to an Element of The Offense."
Elements describe what scenario, action etc... is required to charge and convict somebody. Some criminal offenses have one element, some may require that you have a few elements and that each one must be met in-order to charge and convict.
In this case, there are two Elements. (1) and (2)
NOTE: There is only one (1) Element of the Offense that needed to be proved here because of a simple little two letter word 'or' highlighted right before Element of the Offense (2). Different criminal Elements may use different conjunctions when more than one Element is needed to charge and convict." END OF COPY
Trey is sharp, super sharp. By her trying to run the clock out with pure BS, and unable to answer an immeasurably simple question, she had actually left the door open in the future for further investigation. Trey Gowdy knew there was no way she could answer this question before he even presented it to her. She was trapped! Trey knows the elements involved and so does she. NO WAY IN HELL SHE WAS EVEN CAPABLE OF CLOSING THIS DOOR. KEK KEK
Trey Gowdy Finds Out Loretta Lynch Is Lying About Hillary Clinton Right To His Face ---> youtu.be...]
edit on 18-12-2016 by MysteryTime1970 because: (no reason given)



(post by watchitburn removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Can you summarize what HRC supporters say as to why she shouldn't be prosecuted. The intent argument like is mentioned doesn't hold water especially considering all the "upper middle management" who get caught doing the same thing go to prison. Do they just not believe the facts?



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SgtEsquire

She's a good person and would never do anything wrong on purpose.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: SgtEsquire


Trump is Hitler and has a potty mouth.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Umm sorry but I can't tell if you both are being sarcastic or not. I wasn't asking the above question to be an a$$. I'm just curious to see what a true HRC supporter says about it.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I am not a fan of the witch hillary, even if what she did is really illegal, she will not do a day in jail, this would open pandoras box, and all politicians on both sides would probably end up in jail.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
I am not a fan of the witch hillary, even if what she did is really illegal, she will not do a day in jail, this would open pandoras box, and all politicians on both sides would probably end up in jail.



That sounds like a good start, except they hang horse thieves and traitors. ;-)

Cheers - Dave



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
I am not a fan of the witch hillary, even if what she did is really illegal, she will not do a day in jail, this would open pandoras box, and all politicians on both sides would probably end up in jail.



That sounds like a good start, except they hang horse thieves and traitors. ;-)

Cheers - Dave


Hey man if they could take out most lawyers and politicians i think we would have a way better time.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   
i have seen this before and she didnt answer one question

an example @ 12:53, i mean im not even American but frustrated from her answers


professional dodger, she should be a boxer



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   
What a bull# loaded questions, LOL. No matter how she answers Gowdy gets his partisan political sound bites. Gowdy is a partisan hack that should have been removed ages ago. He doesn't understand how the system works LOL. Screw this guy.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Its almost like you haven't watched any of the hearings and know nothing about Gowdy.
Almost like you had no real argument so you attacked Gowdy's character.

Hmmm...



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: SgtEsquire
Umm sorry but I can't tell if you both are being sarcastic or not. I wasn't asking the above question to be an a$$. I'm just curious to see what a true HRC supporter says about it.


if you were that curious, trump wouldn't have been elected



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Chickensalad

It is the same thing he does with everyone he questions, he tries to trap them in questions with no good answer that make great sound bites for the GOP.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: Chickensalad

It is the same thing he does with everyone he questions, he tries to trap them in questions with no good answer that make great sound bites for the GOP.


Only liars have no good answers. He got Hillary, Loretta, and then squeezed Comey, who had to admit that Hillary lied. The "intent' argument is complete bull; Hillary is guilty of violating security regulations and obstruction because she lied about it.
It will be interesting to see who Obama pardons. I'm betting Hillary and Lynch, at least. He only needs to pardon Lynch on corruption charges. Hillary will take a lot more paper.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

Noticed how you said "squeezed Comey" to get the answer he wanted? I wonder how much of those interviews you watched and if you actually understand how government communications work.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: pteridine

Noticed how you said "squeezed Comey" to get the answer he wanted? I wonder how much of those interviews you watched and if you actually understand how government communications work.


I'm sure you wonder about many things. Gowdy asked Comey specific questions. Comey answered but was a little uncomfortable when he was talking about the "intent" -- which he and everyone else who ever had a security clearance knows is complete nonsense. Intent is necessary to show espionage and Hillary was too busy selling influence to be a spy.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

at least then we will know for sure who is guilty because innocent people don`t need to be pardoned.

it will also show us who all were involved I suspect that people who weren`t in the limelight will receive pardons and then we`ll know that they were involved also.

Obama won`t be giving pardons to people who he believes are %100 innocent, that wouldn`t make any sense at all, he will be giving pardons to people who he believes are guilty of a crime.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pyle
What a bull# loaded questions, LOL. No matter how she answers Gowdy gets his partisan political sound bites. Gowdy is a partisan hack that should have been removed ages ago. He doesn't understand how the system works LOL. Screw this guy.


You have no clue what you're even talking about about. Remove head from sphincter, watch the video, then reply.



posted on Dec, 18 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

Yes. By their pardons we will know their guilt.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<<   2 >>

log in

join